A MAJOR TURNING POINT – THE UK LEARNING AND TEACHING SUPPORT NETWORK (LTSN)

S GASKIN

LTSN National Subject Centre for Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Plymouth, UK.

Abstract

Over the last few years, UK Higher Education has witnessed several major commitments made

by the government to enhance learning and teaching in universities. Most notably, and most

recently, has been the development of the Learning and Teaching Support Network (LTSN),

which consists of 24 ‘Subject Centres’. The LTSN is a comprehensive, national network that

tackles learning and teaching issues and developments with a discipline-specific approach. This

paper describes the structure of the LTSN and focuses on one Subject Centre; the National

Subject Centre for Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences. The paper also critically

describes some of the key activities, developments and projects co-ordinated by the Centre and

describes the multi-scale partnership approach which it has adopted in attempt to enhance the

quality of the student learning experience across these disciplines. Finally, the paper discusses

the future of the LTSN and highlights the critical partnerships that need to be maintained if this

major new initiative is to be successful and long-term.

Context

The UK government’s agendas for quality assurance and for support of learning and teaching in

Higher Education have recently seen substantial change and development. Arguably, the

biggest catalyst for such change was the report produced by the National Committee for Higher

Education (generally known in the UK as the ‘Dearing Report’) (NCHE, 1997). This report

placed learning and teaching at the heart of its vision for a well-educated and informed society

and a knowledge-based economy.

In recognition of the importance of learning and teaching, the Higher Education Funding

Council for England (HEFCE), the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW),

the Scottish Higher Education Funding Council (SHEFC) and the Department for Education in

Northern Ireland (DENI) have established a Learning and Teaching Support Network (LTSN),

consisting of 24 ‘Subject Centres’, which are supported by a Generic Centre and a

Technologies Centre. The advent of the Subject Centres can be seen as part of a larger

movement that includes, for example, the formation of the UK Institute for Learning and

Teaching (ILT) and other activities, to be supported by the new national Teaching and Quality

Enhancement Fund (TQEF) (Gardner, 2000). The TQEF is an aggregated fund, and a number

of long-running learning and teaching initiatives (see below) have been merged into this single

programme. All in all, the UK government has placed learning and teaching development in a

more prominent place on the Higher Education (HE) agenda. In fact, the year 2000 marked a

new era for major HE strategic initiatives in the UK, all ultimately having the same aim; to

enhance the student’s learning experience.

The LTSN initiative in the UK is original and unique. It is also challenging and testing. This

paper reports on the emergence of the LTSN and provides an overview of the structure of the

network. Furthermore, the paper critically evaluates the operation of the UK’s National Subject

Centre for Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences as an example of a triple-community,

discipline-based learning partnership.

Introduction

The main aim of the UK LTSN is to identify, promote and disseminate examples of good

practice in learning and teaching within and across all subject disciplines. Indeed, Jenkins and

Healey (2000) and Rust (2000) assert that there has been a rise in the interest in discipline-based

educational developments in recent years. It is hoped that the LTSN will have something to

offer to all staff involved in learning and teaching in HE, including academic staff, senior

managers, technicians, learning technologists, educational development staff, and staff

developers. Ostensibly, it will offer these individuals the opportunity to share their good ideas

and develop them with like-minded colleagues in a discipline-specific context. However, this

supposition has yet to be evidenced, as the LTSN is still in the early stages of operation. This

discipline-specific context is important, because for most academic staff their primary allegiance

is to their subject or profession (Healey, 1998). Indeed, Becher (1994) regards disciplines “as

academic tribes each with their own set of intellectual values and their own patch of cognitive

territory”. This has been supported by Rice (1995) who states that “improvement of teaching

needs to be rooted in the intellectual substance of the field”. Thus, it is would seem that

divorcing the development of learning and teaching from the subject being taught is undesirable.

The LTSN started in January 2000, and initially has a life-span of five years. It is asserted that

the LTSN will become the primary information and advice resource on learning and teaching

matters for all academic and support staff in UK HE (LTSN, 2001). The Higher Education

Funding Council for England (HEFCE) has committed over £6M per annum of support for the

LTSN over the period 1999-2000. With the other UK funding bodies, the HEFCE intends to

build the programme into a long-term support structure (i.e. > greater than 5 years) for learning

and teaching in HE. Ultimately, it intends to use the network as a basis for co-ordinating and

providing an accessible focus for the many national, institutional and subject-related initiatives

in HE learning and teaching practice.

The LTSN consists of 24 Subject Centres. During 1998 the HEFCE decided upon the clusters

of disciplines that were to be grouped together. According to some, this grouping of disciplines

was conducted by the HEFCE with limited consultation and explanation (Gardner, 2000). The

Centres that emerged were considered to be large enough to permit a critical mass of staff, but

not so large that disciplines with little or nothing in common were unnecessarily married

together in unnatural associations. The HEFCs announced in early 1999 that Geography, Earth

and Environmental Sciences would be aggregated, and several other disciplines were also

grouped. However, previous discipline groupings, such as that between Geography, Geology

and Meteorology in another educational initiatives (the Computers in Teaching Initiative – see

below), did not always proceed smoothly (Gardner, 2000). In other words, for some, the

aggregation of the three disciplines was cause for concern due to discipline distinctiveness.

Notwithstanding, it is increasingly recognised that the task of addressing environmental

problems increasingly involves integrating learning, teaching and research by teams of

geographers, geologists and environmental scientists. Indeed, some would argue that the

boundaries between geography, geology and environmental science have been growing more

permeable over the last few years (e.g. McGibbon, 2001). In recognition of this, after a difficult

period of consultation between the three disciplines and the HEFCE, a triple-community unified

bid to host the Subject Centre for GEES was submitted to the HEFCE by the University of

Plymouth, in collaboration with the relevant professional bodies and committees of Heads of

Departments. The bid was prepared by senior academics drawn from across the three

disciplines and involved careful consultation with the three communities. Interdisciplinary

collaboration and networking was a central feature of the bid’s preparation, and continues to be

a hallmark of the Centre’s work and approach.

All 24 Subject Centres collaborate with the LTSN Generic Centre that was established to

provide focus, management strength and easier accountability to the Higher Education Funding

Councils (HEFCs). The Generic Centre also exists to ensure that Subject Centre staff are aware

of broader developments in learning, teaching and assessment. The Generic Centre plays an

important role in ensuring that none of the Subject Centres become too insular in their approach,

despite collectively forming a network of service providers. This requires all Subject Centres

being open to ideas from other disciplines and pedagogic developments in other subjects.

Where necessary, Subject Centres are expected to collaborate with other cognate Subject

Centres to support interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary learning partnerships. For example,

the National Subject Centre for Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences has established

links with the Subject Centres for Biosciences, the Built Environment, and Languages,

Linguistics and Area Studies (among others). While these links are further developed at LTSN

national events organised for staff, there is considerable scope for improvement in inter-Subject

Centre networking. The Subject Centres and the Generic Centre also liase with a centralised

Technology Centre that focuses on the development, rather than the subject-based application

and dissemination, of new learning and teaching technologies. A full list of all the Subject

Centres, together with further details of the Generic Centre and Technologies Centre, can be

found at: http://www.ltsn.ac.uk The LTSN as a whole also works closely with the Staff and

Educational Development Association (SEDA) and the newly established Institute for Learning

and Teaching (ILT).

Most Subject Centres are building on knowledge bases and networks built through many earlier

Higher Education learning and teaching initiatives. These include, the Computers in Teaching

Initiative (CTI) which spanned the last twenty years. CTI Centres witnessed discipline

marriages between Geography, Geology and Meteorology (http://www.geog.le.ac.uk/cti/) and

between Land Use and Environmental Sciences (http://www.clues.abdn.ac.uk) (plus others). In

addition, other learning and teaching projects have been funded through the Department for

Education and Employment (DfEE), the HEFCE Fund for the Development of Teaching and

Learning (FDTL) and the Teaching and Learning Technology Project (TLTP). Across the three

disciplines of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, these projects have included:

‘Disseminating good teaching, learning and assessment practices in Geography’ (http://

www.chelt.ac.uk/gdn/), ‘Interactive Mathematics and Geoscience Education’ (http://

www.ncl.ac.uk/geolsci/edu/ugrads/image.htm) and ‘Teaching and Learning at the Environment-

Society Interface’ (http://www.greenwich.ac.uk/-bj6l/talessi/), respectively. The notion of

building discipline-specific partnerships, together with an examination of the strengths and

weaknesses of such networks, is dealt with by Healey (2001a).

All of these former initiatives and projects have bestowed an important legacy of involvement,

commitment and good quality learning and teaching resources. However, the LTSN was set up

to try and effect a much needed co-ordinated approach between learning and teaching

developments at a national level. National (and international) co-operation on projects is a well-

established practice in research, and a need was perceived to develop this in learning and

teaching. Thus, the role of the LTSN was established.

In short, the LTSN core activities are therefore:

Setting up, supporting and developing learning and teaching networks;

Promoting and sharing good practices in learning, teaching and assessment;

Brokering the transfer of knowledge between users, experts, developers and innovators.

The LTSN National Subject Centre for Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences

(GEES)

The LTSN National Subject Centre for Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences (GEES)

is based at the University of Plymouth in south-west England. With a budget of around £300k

per annum, the National Subject Centre team for GEES consists of a Director (0.5 post), a

Manager, a Dissemination Co-ordinator, a C&IT Manager and an Administrative Assistant.

The Centre also benefits from four Senior Advisors who are based at their own institutions

around the UK. The Senior Advisors (0.2 posts) represent the three disciplines, and the field of

C&IT, and support the Centre in connecting directly into the existing subject-based and C&IT

networks. The senior advisors also link with staff who are already leading educational

initiatives and pioneering learning and teaching innovations.

The direction of the Subject Centre is overseen by a Steering Group which offers strategic

advice and guidance. Inclusivity and diversity from within and across the three discipline

communities is a hallmark of the Steering group and this is embodied in its membership. At

present there is a need to widen the expertise of the Steering Group to include an educational

developer, and a member of staff from the LTSN Generic Centre. To date, the Steering Group

has worked well, but the relationship between the Subject Centre staff and the Steering Group

will need continual careful handling if a healthy relationship is to be maintained. The Centre

also has an independent external evaluator, to ensure that it delivers on its key strategic aims.

In addition to working with the LTSN Generic, Technologies and cognate Subject Centres, the

Centre for GEES is also working in association with relevant professional bodies (including the

Royal Geographical Society with the Institute of British Geographers, and the Geological

Society), and with Committees of Heads of Departments across the three disciplines. It is

hoped that such collaboration will create a national and well-recognised inter-disciplinary

learning and teaching support environment. Support from well-established professional bodies

is important in order to give credibility and a critical mass to this new Higher Education

initiative.

In order for the Subject Centre to infiltrate the academic community and assert itself as a ‘major

support service’, it has effected links with all relevant university departments through the

identification of Subject Centre ‘representatives’. There are currently over 200 such

departments. In doing this, it is hoped that all Subject Centre activities, services and news items

will be effectively disseminated into the heart of the university system, namely, the academic

departments. The establishment of a discipline-specific network of people committed to

improving learning and teaching is of paramount importance to the success of the Subject

Centre for GEES.

As Healey (2001a) asserts, developing a core-group of interested individuals in the disciplines

is vital in developing discipline-based learning partnerships. So far, dialogue between the

Subject Centre and departmental contacts has been somewhat limited, and this has been an area

identified for improvement in the Subject Centre's communication strategy. It is necessary for

the Subject Centre to maintain regular contact with these important representatives, and to keep

them updated with Subject Centre activities, developments and projects, and other educational

developments. In time, it may be necessary to bring in new departmental members to improve

dialogue between this working group and Subject Centre staff. It may also transpire that some

departmental contacts have reluctantly been requested to act as an effective voice for their

department on learning and teaching issues.

As well as identifying departmental contact persons, the LTSN National Subject Centre for

GEES has also effected links with (non-discipline specific) educational/staff development units/

developers within each of the institutions under our remit. The Subject Centre considers such

units/individuals to play a key role in the strategic development of the Centre by identifying the

current state of play in learning and teaching developments in the academic community, and as

such, identifying the generic needs of the community to avoid insularity.

As well as establishing a national discipline-specific network of departmental contacts and

educational developers, the GEES Subject Centre also encourages individuals to contact the

Centre with questions or queries on any learning and teaching issue. This advisory and enquiry

service is important to maintain a personal and individualistic dimension to the Centre’s

activities.

In short, the operational framework of the GEES Subject Centre is synergistic and represents an

evolutionary step forward in effecting inter-disciplinary learning partnerships, which are

national and comprehensive.

This operational framework is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Operational framework within which the National Subject Centre for GEES functions.

Strategic Aims, Developments and Projects

The main aims of the National Subject Centre for GEES are:

To raise the level of staff awareness, development and expertise in learning and teaching across

the three disciplines;

To improve the quality and effectiveness of teaching in the three disciplines;

To enhance curriculum design, innovation and assessment;

To improve the quality of the students’ learning experience, and their preparation for the world

of work.

These key strategic aims are being carried forward by a variety of activities, developments and

projects which can be split into four main categories. These are:

conferences and workshops;

publications;

databases and registers;

an information gateway;

development projects.

Conferences and Workshops

The Subject Centre for GEES officially began its calendar of organising learning and teaching

conferences and workshops in the Autumn of 2000. Two conferences, entitled ‘Academic

Review: Supporting our Disciplines’ provided an introduction to the new system of subject

review overseen by the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) in the UK. The new system is to be

introduced in January 2002 in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and is already operating in

Scotland.

In running two conferences on the new process of Academic Review, the National Subject

Centre for GEES had the opportunity to establish itself as a supportive Centre on topical

learning and teaching issues in a community with high expectations of the Centre’s role. As

Academic Review is a major contemporary issue in UK HE at present, both conferences were

timely and well attended, demonstrating the need for a body to organise events of this nature.

Feedback from both conferences was positive, although attendance at one of the conferences

was rather poor.

The Subject Centre in collaboration with other educational projects, also organised a pilot

workshop for new and recently appointed staff in May 2000 (Clark et al. in submission). It

would appear that this type of discipline-based residential workshop is the first of its kind in the

UK. During the workshop, the delegates were given opportunities to learn about and evaluate a

range of approaches, methods and resources for learning, teaching and assessment in the three

disciplines of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences. In addition, they were given the

time to develop their own personal action plans to improve their teaching and extend their

continuing professional development (CPD).

The fourth main conference organised by the National Subject Centre in 2000 was on ‘Using C

& IT in fieldwork teaching’. It has been recognised for many years that fieldwork in the

disciplines of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences is an integral part of the degree

course and adds great value to the student learning experience (Kent et al. 1997). However,

due to the advent and availability of new technologies, the current issue is how to best use

technology to support field teaching. The conference aimed to demonstrate good practice and

provided a forum for some of the issues raised by the use of C & IT in fieldwork. A prevailing

theme throughout the day was that technology is a tool, which can be used as an important

enhancement for fieldwork teaching but should not be used as a substitute for the real thing.

As well as organising and running national events, the National Subject Centre for GEES is

also committed to enhancing learning and teaching in the disciplines of Geography, Earth and

Environmental Sciences, by supporting staff within their own institutions. To meet this

commitment, the GEES Subject Centre is currently co-ordinating a national programme of 50

departmental workshops over the next two years. Topics to be covered range from

‘dissertations in geography’ to ‘linking assessment and learning outcomes in environmental

sciences’. Departments choose topics that are most relevant to their needs and priorities. Take-

up of this service has been considerable, although the logistics of the exercise have at times been

problematic.

Publications

The National Subject Centre is also producing a learning and teaching publication ‘PLANET’.

The aims of PLANET are (i) to identify and disseminate good practice in learning and teaching

across the three disciplines and to present case studies and examples in a ‘magazine’ format, (ii)

to provide information for readers on Subject Centre activities and on related resources,

conferences and educational developments, and (iii) to provide a forum for the discussion of

ideas about learning and teaching in the three disciplines.

PLANET is available as a hard copy and is also obtainable from the Subject Centre’s website:

http://www.gees.ac.uk. Two editions have been produced as at July 2001.

Databases and Registers

In order for the Centre to offer such an enquiry/advisory service, several learning and teaching

databases have been compiled. Most significant is the register of expertise, which holds details

on individuals who have expertise in a wide array of learning and teaching issues, from small-

group teaching, to personal development profiling, and from computer-aided assessment to

pedagogic research. In addition, the Centre, through its web interface (see next section) is

developing a database of good practice. While this resource already exists in Geography in the

UK (the Geography Discipline Network, GDN – http://www.chelt.ac.uk/gdn/), the Centre,

through an external contract, is extending this existing resource to cover Earth Sciences and

Environmental Sciences. Both the register of expertise and the database(s) of good practice are

invaluable resources for individuals wanting to know more about specific learning and teaching

developments. For example, the GDN web pages regularly receive over 10,000 hits a week.

(Healey, 2001a). The Subject Centre anticipates the level of demand for this type of service to

be substantial over the next few years, as the profile of learning and teaching in HE is raised and

the pace of change accelerates.

Information Gateway

Another key activity of the National Subject Centre is the development of an ‘Information

Gateway’ (project TELLUS). Its aim is to provide a discipline-based Internet portal through

which quality learning and teaching materials can be accessed. The website will collate relevant

web-based material in a logical and searchable directory structure and will allow users to:

browse through the site;

search for resources;

customise the interface;

upload their own resources.

The URL for the project is http://www.tellus.ac.uk

Development Projects

Supporting good practice in learning and teaching is not only about sharing existing skills and

resources, it is also about facilitating the development of new ones. In recognition of this, the

Subject Centre supports various small-scale projects programmes, that are awarded funding on

a competitive basis. The funding programme aims to:

Support curriculum developments and other innovations which will enhance the quality of the

students’ learning experience;

Harness existing staff expertise and identify and encourage fresh talent;

Offer opportunities for continuing professional development of teaching and support staff in

the three disciplines;

Disseminate good practice to the wider communities;

Encourage collaboration and sharing of good practice between the three disciplines;

Widen participation in the Subject Centre’s work.

Details of those currently funded projects are available at: http://www.gees.ac.uk

What does the future hold for the LTSN?

Five main areas for consideration when planning for the future of the LTSN are (i) maintaining

sensitivity toward the mainstream academic community, (ii) understanding and integrating

C&IT-based approaches to learning and teaching, (iii) developing and internationalising the

LTSN, and (iv) promoting pedagogic research.

(i) Maintaining sensitivity to the mainstream academic community

The LTSN has considerable potential to make a difference to learning and teaching in UK HE

over the next five years. This is not an admission that the current quality of higher education is

poor, but it is part of a wider recognition that the pendulum may have swung too far towards

research and that it is important to raise the status and profile of teaching (Chalkley, 2000).

However, the network needs to recognise that there is a great deal of existing good practice and

innovation in learning, teaching and assessment, but greater support and effort to promote and

transfer such practices are required (Allan, 2000). It has already become transparent at the

GEES Subject Centre that there are concerns from some academics practising in universities that

newer learning and teaching agendas will replace more traditional styles and approaches long

practised and established within the system. However, continuing diversity is healthy and

should be welcomed, providing that it has clear ‘value-added’ benefits, that it is appropriate for

the course/topic and the recipients, and that any new methods are clearly shown to be effective.

In addition, it is the responsibility of the GEES Subject Centre to ensure that a balanced,

inclusive and equitable approach is adopted when dealing with the three discipline communities.

As Gardner (2000) highlights, a particular issue for geography within the triple-subject

grouping is the adequate provision for human geography with the Subject Centre’s remit.

Gardner states that “it is essential that in a grouping that is substantially physical science

weighted that human geography teaching remains strongly and actively supported”. On the

other hand, the Subject Centre Director, being a human geographer may be of equal concern to

those in other disciplines. Maintaining a politically equitable balance has not been easy since

inception. This has often been due to external mistakes being made in Subject Centre branding

which has, on occasion, led to the exclusion of some disciplines from the full and proper title of

the Subject Centre.

One issue that the Subject Centre must be very careful about is the relationship between itself

and the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA). The QAA is responsible for assessing standards in

all UK HE institutions. There has, anecdotally, been some confusion in the academic

community over this relationship, especially given that a new process of academic review is to

introduced shortly in England, Wales and Northern Ireland and is already in operation in

Scotland. The Subject Centre is not responsible for the design of the new QAA procedures, but

it can assist departments in understanding the procedures and preparing for the new teaching

assessment exercise. The roles of the facilitator and judge must be clearly distinguished. If not,

such uncertainty and confusion could have detrimental effects on the image of the Subject

Centre at a critical early stage in it’s operation.

(ii) Understanding and integrating C&IT-based approaches to learning and teaching

The further integration of C&IT-based approaches to learning and teaching is an element that

needs to be given high priority in all Subject Centres. The Centre for GEES has a particular

commitment to C&IT and to raising awareness of the opportunities created by the appropriate

use of the new technologies. It is considered by some that one of the biggest changes in HE

over the next ten years will be students who enter HE after several years of using and

developing expertise in communications and information technologies (Allan, 2001). These

students will expect to see the application of C&IT in the lecture room, the laboratory and in the

field. In recognition of this, the HE community needs to be adaptable and responsive to shifts

of this nature in student expectations and student expertise.

(iii) Developing and internationalising the LTSN

In order for the LTSN to be a major national and international hub in the exchange of ideas and

best practice in learning and teaching in HE, the network should internationalise. This will

ensure that it does not become insular and just focus on what goes on in the UK (Healey,

1998). International co-operation on projects is a well-established practice in research, and there

is a need to develop this for learning and teaching. After all, many of the issues that the

disciplines face in learning and teaching in HE transcend national boundaries; for example, how

to integrate C&IT into the curriculum or how to enhance student employability. To some extent,

such expansion into the international community is already a feature of the GEES Subject

Centre, but is something that could be, and should be, further developed. Recently, the

International Network for Learning and Teaching Geography in HE (INLT) convened at the

University of Plymouth in the UK, the home of the GEES Subject Centre. The Subject Centre

assisted in the co-ordination of the event. This enabled the Centre to tap into the international

expertise that had gathered on our doorstep. The meeting proved to be useful and insightful,

and further meetings are planned to which GEES representatives will contribute. In addition,

GEES members of staff were also present at the Geological Society of America Annual Summit

2000 where contacts were effected with key educational developers and academics in learning

and teaching Geosciences education in the USA.

(iv) Pedagogic research

Two key issues in UK HE at present are (i) how to raise the profile of research into learning

and teaching and (ii) understanding the link between teaching and research. The Subject Centre

can play a key role in addressing both of these issues.

Through promoting discipline-based pedagogic research, the Subject Centre (and the LTSN)

has the potential to become an influential body/network in developing synergies between

learning and teaching and research. Discipline-based pedagogic research is at an early stage in

its development in the UK, and if it is to be encouraged and nurtured not only should it be

valued, but steps should be taken to raise the capacity of staff in the disciplines to undertake

high quality research (Healey, 2001a). The Subject Centre can play a key role in achieving this

goal, through a variety of mechanisms. These might include the provision of pedagogic

research training through conferences and workshops, effecting links between inexperienced

pedagogic researchers and those with considerable expertise and a proven track record, funding

research, and the general promotion and awareness raising of this type of research at the

departmental level.

With respect to item (ii) above, HEFCE (1995) asserted in the Geography Subject Review

report that “there was clear evidence of scholarship and research activity having a beneficial

impact on teaching and learning in around half of the providers visited”. This has been

supported in J M Consulting which asserts that there is a strong relationship between good

teaching and research. Other evidence suggests that the relationship between teaching and

research is a complex one, and where it does exists, it takes place through elements which are

common to both processes (Healey, 2001b). As Jenkins (2000) states, “the strongest policy

claim that derives from this analysis….is that universities need to set as a mission goal the

improvement of the nexus between research and teaching”. This is where the LTSN can play a

key role by suggesting ways in which research and teaching can be married together. As Hattie

and Marsh (1996) state “the aim is to increase the circumstances in which teaching and research

have occasion to meet, and to provide rewards not only for better teaching or for better research

but for demonstrations of the integration between teaching and research”. If the learning and

teaching agenda is to be taken seriously, it is important to ensure that the mechanisms through

which the student learning experience are enhanced are well-researched and documented. If this

requires closer connection between research and teaching, then the Subject Centre needs to be

ready to offer support, advice and examples of how this marriage can be made more effective.

Summary in relation to Learning Partnerships

LTSN Partnerships at the International Level

The LTSN Subject Centre for GEES is effecting international links with global discipline-

specific networks. This is because issues and projects in learning and teaching in one country

are often directly transferable to other countries. The Centre has a global reach and is keen to

effect learning partnerships in the international arena.

LTSN Partnerships at the National Level

Twenty four Subject Centres, a Generic Centre, a Technologies Centre and the close liaison

between the LTSN, professional bodies, Committees of Heads of Departments, SEDA and the

ILT underpin this national and synergistic discipline-specific network. Most Subject Centres

are building on substantial knowledge bases and networks built through many earlier Higher

Education learning and teaching initiatives, thus adding a further collaborative dimension to the

network.

Discipline-Specific Partnerships at the Departmental Level

The National Subject Centre for Geography Earth and Environmental Sciences (GEES) is

working closely with over 200 university departments and 130 educational developers. Each

department has nominated a Subject Centre representative whose role it is to act as an effective

voice for the department, and to contact the Centre on behalf of the department with any learning

and teaching issue(s). This number is likely to grow, as more individuals become involved with

Subject Centre activities, developments and projects over the course of the next few years.

Regular contact between the Subject Centre and this important cohort of individuals is to be

maintained.

Partnerships at the Individual Level

The National Subject Centre for GEES also offers an individual enquiry and advisory service

on learning and teaching issues in HE. It is hoped that this service will facilitate effecting

individual partnerships between the Centre and various academics and support staff, collectively

all striving to enhance student learning. Provision of a service of this nature means that the

Centre is likely to be able to put academics with a problem in contact with other academics who

have relevant experience.

Conclusion

In short, the emergence of the LTSN in the UK represents an evolutionary step forward in

effecting learning partnerships that are wide-ranging and multi-layered. Synergy, coherence and

co-ordination are key features of the initiative. The Subject Centre for GEES is establishing

learning partnerships at four scales: the international level, the national level, the departmental

level and the individual level. This multi-scale approach to learning and teaching is considered

to be one way of dealing with the multi-scale learning and teaching issues that face Higher

Education in the UK. The paper has also highlighted some of the key development areas for

new Subject Centres. It has also described some of the weaknesses in the operation of a new

Subject Centre (for GEES), as well as some political sensitivities. It is possible that the LTSN

model in the UK will have a wider transferability to other countries. This raises an issue for

discussion.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Prof Brian Chalkey and Prof Mick Healey for commenting on

earlier drafts of this manuscript.

References

Allan, C. (2000). The learning and teaching support network (LTSN): the implications for

educational developers. Educational Developments, 1.2, 1 – 3.

Allan, C. (2001). ‘A word from the boss’. PLANET, 1, 1.

Becher, T. (1994). The significance of disciplinary differences. Studies in Higher Education, 19

(2), 151-161.

Chalkley, B. (1998). Geography and quality in Higher Education. Geography, 83(1), 53-62.

Chalkley, B. (2000). Introducing the new national subject centre for Geography, Earth and

Environmental Sciences, GeoCal, 21, 20-22.

Clark, G., Healey, M., Jenkins, A., Blumhof, J., Chalkley, B., Gravestock, P., Honeybone, A.,

King, H., & Thomas, N. (2001). A national discipline-based workshop for new lecturers

in higher education. In submission.

J M Consulting. (2000). Interactions between research and teaching and other academic

activities. Report for HEFCE, Bristol, UK.

Gardner, R. (2000). Establishment, role and relevance of a Subject Centre for UK Geography.

Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 24(2), 157-162.

Hattie, J. & Marsh, H. W. (1996). The relationship between research and teaching: a meta-

analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 507– 542.

Jenkins, A. (2000). Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 24(3), 325–351.

Jenkins, A. & Healey, M. (2000). Get disciplined: geographic perspectives. HERDSA News,

22, 11-13.

Healey, M. (1998). Developing and internationalising higher education networks in Geography.

Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 22(3), 277-282.

Healey, M. (2001a). Developing learning partnerships through the disciplines. Paper

submitted to the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia annual

conference on 'Learning Partnerships', The University of Newcastle, Australia, 8-11 July

2001.

Healey, M. (2001b). Teaching and the RAE. PLANET, 1, 4-6.

(HEFCE) (Higher Education Funding Council for England) (1995). Quality Assessment for

Geography, 1994– 5. Subject Overview Report. Bristol: HEFCE.

(HEFCE) (Higher Education Funding Council for England) (2000) Review of Research 00/37.

Bristol: HEFCE.

Kent, M., Gilbertson, D, & Hunt, O. (1997). Improving the preparation for fieldwork with ‘IT’:

two examples from physical geography. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 21

(3), 313-332.

QAA (Quality Assurance Agency) (2000). Handbook for Academic Review. Gloucester:

QAA.

LTSN (Learning and Teaching Support Network) (2001). http://www.ltsn.ac.uk (accessed 22

January 2001).

McGibbon, M. (2001). Synergy: The Greenwich experience. PLANET, 1, 14-16.

NCHE (National Committee for Higher Education) (1997). Higher Education in the Learning

Society. Report of the National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education. London:

HMSO.

Rice, E. R. (1995). Foreword. In R. M. Diamond & B. A. Adams (Eds.), The disciplines

speak: rewarding the scholarly, professional, and creative work of faculty (pp. v-vii).

Washington: American Association for Higher Education.

Rust, C. (Ed.) (2000). Improving student learning through the disciplines. Proceedings of the

7th international symposium. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development,

Oxford Brookes University.

Main Acronyms Used

HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England)

LTSN (Learning and Teaching Support Network)

GEES (Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences)