Pedagogy of Foundations of University Programs

Gilbert & Gibbs (1998) outline five theoretical frameworks or assumptions related to the purposes of foundations programs with the understanding that different frameworks produce very different outcomes.

• Behavioural Change models:
  The central purpose of these programs is to change classroom teaching behaviour.
• Developmental Change models:
  The central purpose of these programs is to change a teacher's focus of attention from self to subject, subject to student (passive), student (active) to student (independent).
• Conceptual Change models:
  The central purpose is for teachers to change their conceptions of teaching which are central to their teaching intentions and the strategies they use.
• Reflective Practice Models:
  The central purpose of programs is to develop dispositions of critical self-reflection on practice.
• Student Learning Models:
  The central purpose of these programs is to shift the focus from teaching to student learning: students' approaches to learning, students' perceptions of their learning environments and their learning outcomes.

Specific models of Foundations programs:

Developmental Model

Kugel (1993) outlines a theoretical reflection based on observations proposes a developmental scheme of changes in a teacher's conceptual framework of teaching. The stage of development influences what the new teacher will attended to in their role as teacher. 'Development' then refers to varying one's focus from teaching (either one's own teaching or the subject) to learning, including the type of learning. Students can be constituted as passive (receptive) learners, active learners, or independent learners. The inference is that programs need to attend to these stages in their design - supporting the teacher at whatever stage is salient to their current practice.

Boice(1991) also articulates a developmental approach to designing programs for new staff based on a study of the behaviours and needs of a group of new academic staff. He then isolated those who quickly develop effective teaching skills and identifies factors involved in their success. Boice found that those who adapt easily to their role as academics develop strategies that allow for "comfortable and efficient" practice. This occurs through satisfying 'First order needs', which are:

• personal survival and comfort,
• a need to be productive
• followed by concern for teaching
• followed by a concern for students' learning

Foundation programs need to ensure that first order needs are met before attending to issues of teaching innovation. Successfully meeting first order needs involves finding an appropriate balance between the amount of time spent in preparation for classes, collegial interactions, and scholarly activity (writing).

Struggling new teachers are encouraged to achieve similar outcomes to 'quick starters' by resolving first order issues through establishing the new strategies of "self-management", "task management", and "social management", and by setting aside other issues such as concerns with process or product (e.g. student complaints).

Discipline Focused Model

Wubbels, et al (1996) describes a process adopted by the University of Utrecht. The University utilises portfolios in a Faculty training program and assessment procedure. The critical factors are that :

• Each discipline is directed to develop a profile for competence/excellence in teaching for that domain (to complement criteria of excellence for evaluating research).
• New staff are appointed on the assumption that most will not be able to possess or demonstrate all criteria.
• Upon appointment new university teachers together with their supervisor review their profile in the light of the ideal criteria and devise and participate in in a tailor-made development program that addresses the identified areas of need.
• At the end of probation they are assessed based on their teaching competence via a portfolio that provides evidence of how they have met the gaps in their profile and compared with the discipline's criteria of competence.
• Portfolios used thus provide a focus for making teaching processes and decisions explicit for both trainees and tutors. The institution wide program adopts a developmental and ongoing approach and consider different needs at different points in academic careers. The review and achievement of the discipline based profiles are embedded in the university administrative structure and reward system.

These not only focus on initial appointment, but also the various new roles in an academic career.

Reflective Practitioner Approach

Elliot (1998) poses a theoretical argument about 'lecturing' (sic) in post-compulsory education. Elliot questions whether teaching in academia is a profession, an occupation or reflective practice? He argues for a model of Foundation programs for new University teachers that are designed to engender reflective practice. The rationale for this approach was that a grounding the theoretical underpinning of learning and teaching and a disposition towards critical reflection on practice was needed to assist academics to convert public theory to private and vice versa.

Technology Based Induction

Wood (1997) argued from a theoretical point of view for comprehensive academic staff development to fit academics for the new teaching and learning environments, principally, the evolution of a web-based teaching, learning and assessment. New academics need to teach on-line, but few have experienced learning on-line. Therefore, preparatory teaching programs for new academics that are on-line would provide then with the necessary on-line learning experience required to appreciate the learning challenges their students will face. This would prepare them to account for it more fully in their designs for web-based courses.

Whole of Career and Affective Hardiness Approach

Barkhuizen's (2002) study is grounded in observations of new academics in a single institution and poses a whole of career approach to preparing new academics to Lecture at University. This proposition argues that contemporary academics must function within a complex web of socialisation patterns. New academics, it is argued need to be prepared for instability and to be observant of the work context. Foundation programs, therefore, should pay particular attention to assisting new academic understanding the context they work in and to teach productive coping strategies.

'Learning to Teach the Discipline': a Component of Graduate Education

Shulman emphasises the value of integrating preparation for teaching the discipline into the Graduate education based on an assumption that the PhD is a professional degree. Shulman argues that such an approach will be the basis of widespread change because graduate education cannot be reshaped without engaging senior academics as mentors and models.

Shulman (1989) argues that what differentiates a teacher of history from an historian is their personal pedagogical knowledge of what it means to learn about history and how one assists a student to think like an historian. They have expertise in the problem of teaching history. But such discipline- based knowledge is largely tacit, unscrutinised pedagogical disciplinary knowledge that has not been subjected to critical scrutiny.

Britzman (1991) argues that to allow practice to generate risks embedding erroneous ideas and hegemonic practices in tradition.

An Ideal Model?

Shulman argues that it is a mistake to set out to establish a canonical form of preparation for teaching. Higher education will be much better off if there's lots of Darwinian variation: that have responded in different ways to local and discipline based contingencies and circumstances, but in a systematic and scholarly way. Furthermore, he argues that programs for developing teaching should not be seen as emergency rooms for teachers in pedagogical arrest.

Shulman contends that the core of engendering good teaching lies in:

• scholarly work,
• supporting enquiry,
• fostering intellectual colleagueship around teaching and learning
• embodies the vision of the institution
• engages in documentation to extend new learning beyond local concerns.

Rowland (2001) also argues against centralised, accredited training because he believes that generic training occurs at the expense of discipline based skills. One will not turn historians into history teachers merely by making them attend a course in teaching skills. Practice of teaching the discipline and mentorship by other experienced history teachers attends to the particular issues of learning in that discipline.