Directory UMM :Data Elmu:jurnal:I:International Journal of Educational Management:Vol11.Issue6.1997:
The Centre for Professional Development at the
University of Auckland: towards creating networks of
moral obligations
Reynold J.S. M acpherson
Unive rsity o f Auc kland, Auc kland, Ne w Z e aland
Addresses briefl y fi ve complex issues in higher education: professional development spanning all categories
of staff; the role of a centre of
professional development
(CPD) in context; the philosophical framework and
models within which a centre
might operate; the role of a
centre in strategic planning
and policy formation, and the
contribution that a CPD might
make in assessing and
enhancing quality. Develops
four main arguments with
regard to the CPD at the
University of Auckland. The
CPD should support continuous improvement, promote
organizational learning, and
provide policy and practical
advice regarding the management of quality. It should
conduct organizational
research and development,
primarily through international benchmarking. The
CPD also needs to research
the implications of information technology, especially in
the reconstruction of teaching, research and organization. Above all it needs to
understand its organizational
role of helping to construct
cultural networks of mutual
moral obligations.
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [ 1997] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
© MCB Unive rsity Pre ss
[ ISSN 0951-354X]
[ 260 ]
Introduction
Th e Un iver sity of Au ck la n d is N ew Zea la n d’s
la r gest a n d on e of its m ost pr estigiou s u n iver sities. It h a s a bou t 25,000 stu den ts a n d a bou t
2,500 a ca dem ic a n d gen er a l sta ff. Th e r epor t
of th e com m ittee esta blish ed to r eview th e
High er E du ca tion Resea r ch Office (HE RO)
(Un iver sity of Au ck la n d, 1995a )
r ecom m en ded th a t th e HE RO a n d th e Sta ff
Developm en t Office be a m a lga m a ted. Th e
r epor t w a s a ccepted a n d im plem en ta tion
sta r ted. Th e selection of a n ew dir ector a t
pr ofessor ia l level pr ovided a n oppor tu n ity to
r eview str a te gic dir ection s. I w a s a ppoin ted
dir ector a s fr om 1 Apr il 1997. Th is pa per
r eflects m y pr elim in a r y a n a lysis.
My exper ien ce a n d r esea r ch su ppor ts a t
lea st th r ee a ssu m ption s abou t pr ofession a l
developm en t (P D); it ca n be ver y effective in
cer ta in con dition s, it is a pr ofession a l en titlem en t a n d it h a s str a tegic im por ta n ce in
k n ow ledge-ba sed or ga n iza tion s. On th e oth er
h a n d, th e exten t to wh ich th is set of a ssu m ption s is still w a r r a n ted in New Zea la n d h igh er
edu ca tion (HE ) a ppea r s to la ck defin itive,
r ecen t a n d deta iled em pir ica l su ppor t. Kn ow ledge of th e effects of P D in HE m ay a lso h ave
becom e da ted in a con text of r a pid ch a n ge a n d
in ten sifyin g com petition . Th is im plies th at
th e cr edibility of th e Cen tr e of P r ofession a l
Developm en t (CP D) w ill be h eavily depen den t
on its r esea r ch a n d per for m a n ce.
In stitu tion a l policies a ppea r to coh er e w ith
m y a ssu m ption s a bou t P D. For exa m ple, th e
fir st goa l in T h e Un iv ersity of A u ck la n d 2001:
M ission , Goa ls a n d S tra tegies (Un iver sity of
Au ck la n d, 1995b) is con cer n ed w ith th e qu a lity of tea ch in g a n d lea r n in g. Th e fir st objective listed is to “cr ea te a n en vir on m en t
th r ou gh ou t th e Un iver sity in wh ich tea ch in g
of in ter n a tion a l qu a lity, in for m ed by r esea r ch
a n d, wh er e a ppr opr ia te, by pr ofession a l pr a ctice, is a ccepted a s a pr im a r y a ca dem ic
r espon sibility” (p. 14). With r e ga r d to h u m a n
r esou r ce developm en t (HRD), th e goa l is to
“h ave a n a ca dem ic a n d gen er a l sta ff m a tch in g th e best in ter n a tion a l sta n da r ds” (p. 24).
It a ppea r s th a t in ter n a tion a l ben ch m a r k in g
sh ou ld th er efor e be a r esea r ch a n d developm en t (R&D) pr ior ity for th e CP D.
A pr elim in a r y su r vey of in ter n a tion a l
r esea r ch fin din gs a n d CP D web sites a lso
su ggests th a t k n ow ledge of P D in HE is bein g
a dva n ced pr im a r ily by u sin g a du lt lea r n in g
a n d HRD r esea r ch . Sin ce P D is a lso bein g
u sed in cr ea sin gly to pr om ote qu a lity in bu dget gr ou ps, m or e eviden ce of r ecen t lea der sh ip a n d or ga n iza tion a l r esea r ch m igh t h ave
been expected.
Hen ce, th r ee ten ta tive pr oposa ls a ct a s
th em es in th is pa per. Th e CP D sh ou ld pr om ote con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t, play a pivota l
r ole in or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g, a n d
con tr ibu te to policy for m u la tion a n d th e
im pr ovem en t of pr a ctice in qu a lity m a n a gem en t. I wou ld str ess th a t th ese pr oposa ls offer
str on g su ppor t to th e ser vices cu r r en tly bein g
pr ovided by th e CP D a t th e Un iver sity of
Au ck la n d wh ile in dica tin g th e n eed for policy
r ea lign m en t a n d exten sion la r gely du e to th e
im pa ct of n ew in for m a tion tech n ology. A
u sefu l exa m ple of a n a ppa r en tly su ccessfu l
cu r r en t str a te gy is gen er ic P D.
Professional development for all
categories of staf f
In gr id Moses (1987) sh owed th a t effective P D
in HE sh ou ld ser ve th e gen er ic n eeds of a ll
m em ber s a s it pr om otes th e in ter ests of th e
in stitu tion . Th is a ppr oa ch va lu es th e da ily
r ea lity of co-oper a tive wor k tea m s th a t a r e
a lso r espon sive to th e br oa der policy con text.
Con ver sely, it a lso im plies th a t P D sh ou ld
h elp a ll sta ff m a k e a n optim a l a n d per son a lly
r ew a r din g con tr ibu tion to th e m ission a n d
oper a tion s of th eir u n iver sity.
Newcom er s, for exa m ple, n eed to be
in du cted ca r efu lly so th a t th ey feel va lu ed a n d
su ppor ted fr om th e ou tset. A u n iver sity h a s a n
obliga tion to expla in “wh er e it is goin g”, wh y,
h ow it w ill k n ow wh en it h a s got th er e, a n d
th en , h ow m em ber s ca n h elp set n ew ta r gets.
On th e oth er h a n d, sin ce ch a n ge is n ow a
con sta n t in HE , k n ow ledge itself is in tr in sica lly con testa ble, a n d con sta n t im pr ovem en t
is a con dition of su r viva l in th e sector, a ll sta ff
sh ou ld feel obliged to pa r ticipa te in r egu la r
oppor tu n ities to be r esocia lized a n d to h elp set
n ew ta r gets. I w ill com e ba ck to th e issu e of
r ecipr oca l m or a l obliga tion s.
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
Bein g va lu ed is a ba sic con dition of pr ofession a lism , a con dition th at m u st be in ten tion a lly su sta in ed (Th om a s, 1995). Sh a r in g power
a ppea r s to be on e of th e m or e effective str a tegies. It is lon g k n ow n th a t wh en collea gu es
solve pr oblem s in su ppor tive gr ou ps, h elp set
str a tegic option s a n d pr ior ities, a n d th en
n egotia te th e per son a l im plica tion s for th eir
per for m a n ce in a k n ow n policy con text, th eir
com m itm en t to qu a lity ten ds to r ise (Moses,
1989).
An oth er u sefu l str a te gy is to collect a n d
r eflect on eviden ce of best pr a ctices
elsewh er e (a bou t tu tor in g, su per visin g, lectu r in g, r esea r ch in g, pu blish in g). Th e High er
E du ca tion Resea r ch a n d Developm en t Sta ff
Associa tion (HE RDSA) Gr een Gu ides (Br u ce,
c1992; Ca n n on , 1992; Cr ook s, 1988; Kem ber
a n d Kelly, c1992; Kem ber a n d Mu r ph y, c1992;
Lu blin , 1987; Moses, 1989; McDon a ld, 1984;
Sa dler, c1984) a r e a u sefu l ea r ly exa m ple of
th is a ppr oa ch .
Today, I wou ld a r gu e, even m or e system a tic
r esea r ch is n eeded to r efin e th e ben ch m a r k s
u sed for eva lu a tion a n d developm en t in tea ch in g a n d lea r n in g. Sim ila r ly, r esea r ch n eeds to
u n der pin lea der sh ip a n d m a n a gem en t
ser vices, especia lly h ow str u ctu r es, per son n el
a n d r esou r ces a r e m a n a ged to lift pr odu ctivity
a n d to a cceler a te th e gr ow th of k n ow ledge.
Th is a pplies especia lly r esea r ch a bou t th e
com pa r a tive va lu e of pr ofession a l developm en t a ided by in for m a tion tech n ology.
In th e in ter im , gen er ic P D sh ou ld con tin u e
to pr ovide su ppor tive socia liza tion , r a ise
coh er en ce between effor t a n d or ga n iza tion a l
va lu es, a n d lin k th e for m a tive eva lu a tion of
per for m a n ce w ith pla n n in g for im pr ovem en t.
The role of the CPD within the
university
In a ddition to gen er ic P D, it is cr u cia l th a t th e
CP D h elp im pr ove th e pr odu ction a n d
dissem in a tion of r efi n ed k n ow ledge. Sveiby
(1992) dem on str a ted th a t pr im a r y pr odu ction
in a u n iver sity does n ot com pr ise goods a n d
ser vices bu t com plex pr oblem solvin g. Sch ön
(1987) sh owed th a t pr oblem solvin g in u n iver sities is n on -sta n da r dized, n on -r ecu r r en t,
cr ea tive a n d h igh ly depen den t on com m itted
in dividu a ls. E n cou r a gin g su ch pr odu ction
th r ou gh P D im plies pr ovidin g con tin u ou s
im pr ovem en t a n d or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g
a bou t pr oblem solvin g.
Som e defin ition s a r e w a r r a n ted a t th is
poin t. Con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t, a ccor din g to
th e Eu r opea n Lifelon g Lea r n in g In itia tive
(1994), is best a ch ieved by people a t wor k lea r n in g togeth er h ow to lift th eir per for m a n ce.
Th is r equ ir es in stitu tion a l investm en t, a n
eth os th a t va lu es th e gr ow th in or ga n iza tion a l
k n ow ledge, a n d edu ca tive lea der sh ip ser vices
(Du ign a n a n d Ma cph er son , 1992). It is a lso
k n ow n th a t con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t a cceler a tes wh en lea r n in g, wor k a n d im pr ovem en t
a r e in tegr a ted a n d wh en n ew tech n ology
m obilizes ta len t a n d lets people lea r n con tin u ou sly in th eir ow n pr efer r ed w ay (Hou le, 1980).
A lea r n in g or ga n iza tion is a n or ga n iza tion
w ith a lea r n in g str a te gy th a t is r e gu la r ly
im pr oved (Sen ge, 1990). Idea lly, th is lea r n in g
str a te gy wou ld en cou r a ge m em ber s to
r em a in flexible, sh a r e th eir idea s, seek ou t
a n d u se feedba ck , su ppor t ea ch oth er, w a tch
for oppor tu n ities, lea r n fr om oth er or ga n iza tion s, a n d en cou r a ge self-developm en t.
Wh eth er lea der s en cou r a ge collea gu es to
u se th e ava ila ble de gr ee str u ctu r es, stu den t
eva lu a tion da ta , tr a in in g days, sem in a r s or
depa r tm en ta l wor k sh ops, th e cr u cia l a im is
to su sta in a n edu ca tive cu ltu r e (Wa de et a l.,
1994). Su ch edu ca tive lea der sh ip n eeds to be
u biqu itou s a n d a u th en tic to tr a n sfor m
or ga n iza tion a l cu ltu r e. Th is a ppr oa ch sh ou ld
a lso be ch a r a cter istic wh en a n y CP D
disch a r ges r espon sibilities in w ider settin gs.
Role of a CPD in a wider context
Th e CP D a t Au ck la n d h a s a t lea st two m a jor
ch a llen ges in th e w ider con text. It m u st h elp
en h a n ce th e sta n din g of its h ost u n iver sity in
br oa der com m u n ities a n d h elp collea gu es
r espon d pr oa ctively to th e in for m a tion a ge. I
w ill com e ba ck to th e issu e of com m u n ity.
Th e fir st ch a llen ge is th a t th e CP D sh ou ld
h elp pr esen t th e Un iver sity of Au ck la n d a s a
pr em ier in ter n a tion a l r epositor y of tea ch in g,
r esea r ch a n d a dm in istr a tive best pr a ctices. A
pr a ctica l exa m ple is to h ave th e sh op fr on t of
th e CP D, its Web site, in tr odu ce collea gu es,
cla r ify th e Cen tr e’s vision , m ission a n d
ser vices, m a r k et spa r e ca pa city, fa cilita te
lin k s w ith oth er P D cen tr es, a n d pr esen t th e
CP D a s a n a tion a l policy r esea r ch cen tr e w ith
a n str on g in ter n a tion a l pr ofile.
Th e CP D a t th e Un iver sity of Au ck la n d
sh ou ld a lso pr esen t itself a s a lea din g HE
R&D cen tr e on th e P a cific Rim con cer n ed
w ith th e r ela tion sh ip between P D a n d qu a lity.
Its pr im a r y peer r efer en ce gr ou p sh ou ld be
th e Un iv ersita s 21 n etwor k , a n in ter n a tion a l
n etwor k of pr em ier u n iver sities. Su ch a
vision w ill h ave to be r ea lized th r ou gh
collea gu e n etwor k in g, con sta n tly r efr esh in g
th e cu r r icu lu m th r ou gh doctor a l a n d sta ff
r esea r ch , collectin g feedba ck fr om life-lon g
lea r n er s (N a tion a l Boa r d of E m ploym en t,
E du ca tion a n d Tr a in in g, 1996), or ga n izin g
con fer en ces a n d exch a n ges, a n d seek in g ou t
policy r esea r ch a n d R&D con tr a cts r ela ted to
th e qu a lity a gen da .
[ 261 ]
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
Th e secon d ch a llen ge is to h elp u n iver sity
sta ff exploit n ew in for m a tion tech n ology (IT),
a s it u n folds. Th is im plies colla bor a tive
r esea r ch in to th e im plica tion s of ch a n ges in
socia l, econ om ic, politica l a n d le ga l ter m s,
a n d a pplyin g th e epistem ologica l, tech n ologica l a n d edu ca tion a l a dva n ta ges discover ed. In
a pplied r esea r ch ter m s it w ill m ea n h elpin g
collea gu es to u se em er gen t IT to r eview a n d
develop per for m a n ce, globa lize th eir m a r k etin g, tea ch in g a n d r esea r ch , a n d design n ew
deliver y system s. As Lu n din (1993) a r gu ed,
th e r a ce is on in HE to offer a u tom a ted tea ch in g a n d on lin e con tr a ct r esea r ch ; to in dividu a ls, to n ich e m a r k ets a n d to m a ss coh or ts.
Sin ce P D w ill be cen tr a l to th e IT-dr iven
tr a n sfor m a tion of HE , it n eeds a sou n d ph ilosoph ica l ju stifi ca tion for th e r ole it w ill play.
It is often a ssu m ed, w r on gly in m y view, th a t
tech n ology itself is va lu e fr ee. Sin ce P D is a
socia l tech n ology, its a pplica tion w ith r e ga r d
to IT r equ ir es m or a l ch oices, a n d th er efor e,
ph ilosoph ica l ju stifica tion . On e a ppr oa ch is
to con sider th e m or a l obliga tion s in volved.
Moral obligations
Th e cor por a te pla n of th e Un iver sity of
Au ck la n d defi n es P D a s a m or a l obliga tion :
“to en cou r a ge a n d a ssist sta ff to r ea ch th eir
poten tia l” (Un iver sity of Au ck la n d, 1995b, p.
24). Sim u lta n eou sly, th e u n iver sity m a in ta in s
a ccou n ta bility pr ocesses so th a t per son n el
ca n disch a r ge th e obliga tion s en ta iled by
em ploym en t a n d so th a t bu dget gr ou ps ca n
a ccou n t for a n d im pr ove th eir u se of pr eciou s
r esou r ces. Accou n ta bility a n d P D a r e two
sides of th e sa m e qu a lity m a n a gem en t coin .
Th is is to a r gu e th a t a ph ilosoph ica l ju stifica tion for P D m u st coh er e w ith a ccou n tability
policy a n d th a t th ey sh ou ld be developed a s
r ecipr oca l m or a l obliga tion s. If P D a n d
a ccou n ta bility a r e a ccepted a s two sides of th e
sa m e qu a lity coin , th ey m u st both be in tr in sica lly eth ica l a n d edu cative in or der to r em a in
r espected a n d to gen er a te im pr ovem en t.
Th e m or a l obliga tion s a ssocia ted w ith th e
CP D ca n be ju stified by r efer en ce to con sequ en ces (Ma cph er son a n d Cu sa ck , 1996). For
exa m ple, th e obliga tion to pr ovide con tin u ou s lea r n in g m ay be ju stifi ed by th e w ay it
h elps a ll sta ff r ea ch th eir poten tia l. Th e obliga tion to pr om ote or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g m ay
be ju stified by th e a dva n ta ges of in dividu a ls
a n d gr ou ps r eview in g a n d r epr ofi lin g th eir
ser vices. Th e obliga tion to pr ovide policy a n d
pr a ctica l a dvice on qu a lity m a n a gem en t m ay
be ju stified by a ppea l to collective str a te gic
fu tu r es.
My policy r esea r ch over th e la st five yea r s
(Ma cph er son , 1997) h a s sh ow n th a t P D
[ 262 ]
ph ilosoph ies in la r ge or ga n iza tion s a n d
system s n eed to exten d th e u se of h yper in dividu a listic m odels (e.g. extr a ction P D a n d
sk ill-focu sed in str u ction ) w ith h u m a n ist
colle gia l m odels (e.g. tea m -ba sed lea r n in g) to
bu ild a sh a r ed sen se of pr ofession a lism a n d
to a ch ieve cu ltu r a l ch a n ge.
Sim ila r ly, th ese two m odels n eed to be
su pplem en ted w ith epistem ica lly cr itica l
for m s of P D (e.g. sta k eh older -sen sitive
pr ogr a m m e eva lu a tion ) th a t pr om ote com m u n ita r ia n per spectives. Th ese m odels a r e
expla in ed in th e n ext section .
Philosophical framework for CPD
operations
Th r ee P D ph ilosoph ies ca n be con tr a sted in
ter m s of m a in pu r poses, a ppr opr ia te str a tegies, sou r ce of eva lu a tion cr iter ia , a ppr opr ia te a ccou n ta bility pr ocesses, str en gth s, wea k n esses, a ppr opr ia te for m s of pr ofession a l
developm en t, a n d th e dom in a n t system s of
k n ow ledge ea ch u se (see Ta ble I).
An im por ta n t im plica tion of a com m u n ita r ia n ph ilosoph y of P D is th a t it wou ld m ea n
th e CP D h elpin g collea gu es to r econ str u ct
th eir th eor ies of pr ofession a lism in a su ppor tive peer gr ou p, a n d th en in a w ider com m u n ity con text, th r ou gh edu ca tive a n d for m a tive pr ocesses r a th er th a n su m m a tive a n d
pu n itive for m s of a ccou n ta bility. Wh a t do I
m ea n by com m u n ity?
Depen din g on th e ta sk , com m u n ity in HE
ca n be in ter pr eted a s th e u n iver sity,
pr ogr a m m e sta k e h older s, w ider peer or
clien t a u dien ces, th e P a cific Rim or Un iv ersita s 21. Deter m in in g th e n a tu r e of a wor k
gr ou p’s com m u n ity is a n im por ta n t developm en ta l exer cise in itself for th e w ay it r eiter a tes obliga tion s a n d pr ior com m itm en ts. Th is
is a cr u cia l issu e in N ew Zea la n d, given th e
Tr ea ty of Wa ita n gi a n d equ a l em ploym en t
oppor tu n ities policies. In volvin g Ma or i
ph ilosoph er s a n d equ ity policy r esea r ch er s in
th e wor k of a CP D wou ld a ppea r to be essen tia l. It h a s been m y exper ien ce th a t m ost
in ter n a tion a l u n iver sities a r e yet to display
su ch r espect for su ch in digen ou s per spectives.
I n oted ea r lier th a t P D a n d a ccou n ta bility
a r e two sides of th e sa m e qu a lity m a n a gem en t coin . Seein g th em a s m u tu a lly con tin gen t tigh ten s r ecipr oca l m or a l obliga tion s
between th e per son a n d th e collective. On e
r esu lt of m ovin g tow a r ds com m u n ita r ia n P D
is th a t th e le gitim a cy of pr a ctice w ill be m or e
secu r ely a n ch or ed in th r ee con stitu en cies:
pr ofession a l self, peer s a n d com m u n ity.
An oth er is th a t collea gu es a r e system a tica lly
exposed to for m s of da ta a n d cr itiqu e th a t
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
Table I
Philo so phic al frame wo rks fo r CPD o pe ratio ns in highe r e duc atio n
M odel
Purpose
Appropriate
strategies
Evaluate criteria
Appropriate
processes
Strengths
Weaknesses
Epistemology
Appropriate PD
Hyperindividualism
Humanist
collegialism
Critical
communitarianism
Report and c ompare
outc omes
Professional self-evaluation
Report outc omes, improve
proc esses and programme
Peer-based formative
evaluation
A c ollegial professional
projec t
Peer c ollec tive methods
Report outc omes, improve
programme and governanc e
Stakeholder-based formative
evaluation
A c ommunity polic y projec t
Supportive relationships
Closed interc ollegiate norms
Organizational learning
Norms c an be too c ontestable
Humanist subjec tivism
Internal-external
c onsultanc ies
Norms c an be too c ontestable
Stakeholder ac tion researc h
An empiric al and rational
projec t
Confidential c onsultation
Foc us on student progress
No feedbac k and
unc ontestable norms
Logic al positivism
Team teac hing
gen er a te a n even m or e soph istica ted k n ow ledge of th eir ser vice.
An im m edia te im plica tion for th e CP D is
th a t edu ca tive for m s of lea der sh ip a r e n eeded
to h elp collea gu es m ove fr om th e som etim es
fer a l n or m s of u n con testa ble h yper -in dividu a lism tow a r ds m or e colle gia l n or m s, a n d th en
to m ove fr om th e often closed peer cu ltu r es of
colle gia lism tow a r ds com m u n ita r ia n a ction .
Th e CP D w ill n eed to ta k e a n even m or e pr oa ctive r ole in im pr ovin g lea der sh ip ser vices
a cr oss its h ost u n iver sity.
In su m , iden tifyin g a n d disch a r gin g r ecipr oca l obliga tion s r equ ir es P D th a t bu ilds a
cr itica l aw a r en ess of th e n a tu r e of a ssu m ption s, va lu es a n d k n ow ledge em bedded in
a im s a n d objectives. Of h yper -in dividu a list,
colle gia l a n d com m u n ita r ia n ph ilosoph ies, it
is on ly th e com m u n ita r ia n per spective th a t
exten ds P D fr om sk ill developm en t in to
deeper r eflection on th e con sequ en ces of
a ction s, a n d th en to th e ga in in g of w isdom
a bou t ser vices in sta k eh older gr ou ps.
Th r ee m odels w ill n ow be in tr odu ced
br iefly to illu str a te h ow th is com m u n ita r ia n
ph ilosoph y for P D ca n be oper a tion a lized in
HE .
Career and action research models
I sh a r e Ca n dy’s (1995) view th a t ba se-lin e P D
in HE sh ou ld h elp a ll collea gu es to stay fl exible a n d r espon sive by pr ovidin g ca r efu l
in du ction , feedba ck on per for m a n ce a n d
r e gu la r ly r efr esh in g expecta tion s. An d a s
people m ove th r ou gh th e sea son s of th eir
ca r eer s, a n d r epr ofi le th eir ser vice, th ey a lso
n eed r e gu la r a ccess to ch a n gin g or ga n iza tion a l va lu es a n d pr ior ities. Th is a ccess is
ver y im por ta n t in la r ge su ccessfu l or ga n iza tion s given th eir pr on en ess to a h a r den in g of
Stakeholder-sensitive projec t
th e a r ter ies, to sm u gn ess a n d to h u br is.
Ca n dy’s CARE E R m odel is su m m a r ized in
Ta ble II.
To expla in , a n ticipa tor y lea r n in g ca n h elp
collea gu es a ctively con str u ct sm a r t fu tu r es.
For exa m ple, a ssocia tes of th e CP D in bu dget
gr ou ps m igh t tr y to em bed su ch a n ticipa tor y
lea r n in g du r in g pla n n in g. Th e poin t is th a t it
h a s to be em bedded in to th e ta k en -for -gr a n ted
stock of k n ow ledge of th a t cu ltu r e for it to
h ave la stin g effect. Wh en k n ow ledge of best
pr a ctice is cr ea ted in a su ppor tive pr ofession a l gr ou p, it h a s a gen etic effect. In m y
exper ien ce, a n n u a l tea m pr ogr a m m e bu dgetin g gr a du a lly deepen s u n der sta n din gs a n d
cr ea tes for m s of fin a n cia l disciplin e th a t a r e
u n im a gin a ble a t, a n d qu ite u n en for cea ble
fr om , cor por a te levels.
Given th e im por ta n ce of m eth odology in a ll
gr ou ps w ith a r esea r ch fu n ction , th e r efin em en t of su ch best pr a ctice w ill n eed to be a s
system a tic a s th e pr odu ction of k n ow ledge
elsewh er e, for it to be tr u sted. Or ga n iza tion a l
h a bits, lea der sh ip tr a dition s a n d a n ecdota l
th eor y w ill a ll h ave to be ch a llen ged in ter m s
of per for m a n ce, lea r n in g a n d th e qu a lity of
ou tcom es.
Old m on ey pr ogr a m m es, for in sta n ce, w ill
h ave to be eva lu a ted ea ch yea r ju st a s r igor ou sly a s n ew m on ey pr oposa ls. Sim ila r ly, in
th e collective in ter est, efficien cy ga in s w ill be
n eeded to h elp cr ea te in stitu tion a l r isk ca pita l a n d su bsidize in n ova tion . An d to en su r e
th a t ea ch bu dget gr ou p or pr ogr a m m e is
stayin g w ith or a h ea d of th e best, policies a n d
ou tcom es n eed to be com pa r ed a ga in st specia list in ter n a tion a l ben ch m a r k s.
Th is for m of r igou r n eeds to be a fea tu r e of
th e m or a l econ om y of th e u n iver sity. To r ea ssu r e sta ff, a n d gu a r a n tee pr efer r ed a n d
pr efer a ble collective fu tu r es, th is m or a l
[ 263 ]
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
econ om y n eeds to be eviden t wh en r eview in g
pr om otion cr iter ia a n d pr ocesses, cou r se
offer in gs, m a n a gem en t in for m a tion system s
a n d power str u ctu r es. Th is exem plifi es th e
Ar istotelia n idea l of pr a xis; th r ou gh cr itica l
r eflection on th e qu a lity of pr a ctice a n d on
th e va lu e of su ch ser vice.
An a ction r esea r ch m odel is pa r ticu la r ly
u sefu l in pr ofession a l wor k gr ou ps a n d in stitu tion s w a n tin g to solve pr a ctica l pr oblem s
(Bu r n s, 1994). It h a n dles em pir ica l, su bjective
a n d n or m a tive da ta in com plex socia l system s
a n d u ses n a tu r a listic coh er en tism to iden tify
tou ch ston es (E ver s a n d La kom sk i, 1991). It ca n
be su m m a r ized a s a seven -ph a se r ecu r r en t
cycle w ith ea ch ph a se h avin g specific ta sk s,
pu r poses a n d k ey issu es to be con sider ed.
Th e fir st ph a se of a ction r esea r ch is devoted
to collective con cept m a ppin g so th a t a ll pa r ticipa n ts, sta keh older s if you w ish , becom e
aw a r e of th e r ela tivity of th eir ow n view s,
in ter ests a n d va lu es. P h a se two is to specify
th e pr oblem m or e a ccu r a tely in con text.
P h a se th r ee involves r esea r ch in g pr ior k n ow ledge. P h a se fou r is to collect data a n d specify
option a l sets of expla n a tion s a n d solu tion s.
P h a se five involves m a k in g decision s a n d
pla n s. P h a se six is a ction in tea m s in ten ded to
a ch ieve specific objectives. P h a se seven is
u sed to com pa r e ou tcom es to objectives a n d to
r epor t to sta keh older s. Th e r epea ted fir st
ph a se r edefin es th e pr oblem to r evea l h ow
pa r ticipa n ts n ow feel a bou t th eir view s, in ter ests a n d va lu es, a n d so on . Ta ble III su m m a r izes th e pr ocesses, pu r poses a n d key issu es.
Wh ile a ction r esea r ch ca n be over -r elia n t on
su bjectivism , th is pr ocess does wor k well in
pr ofession a l cu ltu r es th a t va lu e in dividu a lity,
collegia lism a n d pr oblem solvin g (Kem ber
a n d Kelly, c1992). It ten ds to capita lize on th e
exper tise, r igou r a n d cr ea tivity in th e gr ou p.
It u su a lly celebr a tes th e con tin u ou s gr ow th of
k n ow ledge in com m u n ities, especia lly k n ow ledge a bou t self-m a n a ged im pr ovem en t.
Table II
Candy’ s CAREER mo de l
Quality audit and development cycle
Principals
Characteristics
Comprehensive
All aspec ts of ac ademic and general staff work integrates
c areer and organizational reprofiling
Anticipatory
Strategic , responsive and c ultural impac ts
Research based
Data driven and rigorous
builds theory from c onsequenc es
Exemplary
Researc h-based international benc hmarks
Embedded
Ubiquitous and devolved
in c ontext
Reflective
Lifelong, personal development
praxis revises the moral ec onomy
Th e th ir d m odel con sisten t w ith com m u n ita r ia n P D r espon ds to a m a jor ch a llen ge in qu a lity m a n a gem en t; h ow to r econ cile th e a n n u a l
pr ocess of m eldin g exter n a l pr essu r es a n d
cor por a te pr ior ities w ith developin g ea ch
bu dget gr ou p’s ch a n ge m a n a gem en t ca pa cities. Cen tr a liza tion ca n pr ovide decision s
m or e qu ick ly bu t r eta r d su ch ca pa city bu ildin g a n d th e gr ow th of com m itm en t.
Un iver sities a lso n eed to su sta in r ea son a ble
coh er en ce between in ter n a l policies a n d
exter n a l con stitu en cies, pr ovide su ppor tive
Table III
Ac tio n re se arc h and pro fe ssio nal de ve lo pme nt in highe r e duc atio n
[ 264 ]
Phase
Purpose
Key issues
Define professional development
together
Collec tive map of the situation
Stakeholder interests and values
Describe PD in context
Jointly spec ify key aspec ts
Antec endents, c auses, effec ts, terms
Review wider knowledge of policies
and practices
Researc h teams c ommissioned and
report
Alternative ideas, polic ies, trials and
findings
Gather and evaluate consequences
of options
Co-operative evaluation of the
relative merits of options
Competing explanations and solutions
Deciding PD policies and planning
practices
Selec t strategies and joint planning
Feasible? Benefic ial? Plausible?
Educ ational?
Action
Teams are organized to ac c omplish
spec ific tasks
What? Why? Who? When? With?
How? Evaluation?
Evaluate outcomes
Collec tive review and report
History of ideas, intended and
unintended effec ts
Redefine the problem together…
Joint formative evaluation and
remap the situation
Newly revealed c hallenges, views,
interests and values
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
a n d con dition a l pr ivile ges to u n der -per for m in g gr ou ps, collect r elia ble qu a lity a ssu r a n ce
da ta for com pa r ison s a ga in st in ter n a tion a l
ben ch m a r k s, su sta in in cen tive r e gim es a n d
m a k e str a te gic a n d in vestm en t decision s. A
m a jor difficu lty is th a t th ese in ter sectin g
decision cycles often wor k a t differ en t speeds
a n d to differ en t va lu es.
In m y ow n system ic policy r esea r ch
(Ma cph er son , 1997), a n ew a u dit a n d developm en t cycle w a s design ed to a ccom m oda te a
sim ila r ly com plex a r r ay of con dition s. In th e
Yea r 1, 1997, th e fi r st coh or t of bu dget cen tr es
(in th is ca se a system of pu blic sch ools, n ot
u n lik e in cr ea sin gly self-m a n a gin g fa cu lties)
w ill be a sk ed to r ea lign th eir vision a n d pla n s
w ith system ic a im s a n d pr ior ities a n d to
n e gotia te ch a r ter s, lon g-ter m goa ls, sh or tter m objectives a n d sch ool im pr ovem en t
pla n s. Th ey w ill be expected to u se va r iou s
types of da ta , a n d th en h ave th eir pla n s a n d
per for m a n ce in dica tor s a ppr oved a n d fu n ded.
Th e im plem en ta tion of ea ch sch ool’s
im pr ovem en t pla n w ill follow in Yea r 2, 1998,
a n d be followed u p w ith a ction r esea r ch eva lu a tion to solve pr oblem s a n d boost self-m a n a gem en t ca pa cities. Th ese pr ocesses wou ld be
r epea ted in Yea r 3, 1998. In Yea r 4, 1999, th e
cycle be gin s a ga in for th e fir st coh or t w ith
exter n a lly a ssisted self-r eview. Th e m odel is
pr esen ted in Ta ble IV.
I a m n ot su ggest in g t h a t t h is m odel wou ld
be a ppr opr ia t e for t h e bu dget a ct ivit y gr ou ps
a t t h e Un iver sit y of Au ck la n d. Wh a t I a m
su ggest in g is t h a t su ch a m odel ca n be
design ed t o be sen sit ive t o in t er n a l a n d ext er n a l st a k e-h older per spect ives. It wou ld, for
exa m ple, bu ild on cu r r en t a ca dem ic a n d
gen er a l st a ff per for m a n ce r eview pr ocesses,
a ck n ow ledge bu dget gr ou p cu lt u r es a n d
lea der sh ip ca pa cit ies, coh er e w it h t h e
n a t ion a l Qu a lit y Au dit cycle, a n d so on . At
t h e sa m e t im e it wou ld a dd a n edu ca t ive
dim en sion by pr oposin g a dva n ces in pr ogr a m m e eva lu a t ion , r esou r ce pla n n in g a n d
ch a n ge m a n a gem en t .
Th e k ey im plica tion of su ch str a te gic m odellin g is th a t th e ser vices of a CP D n eed to be
em bedded in , a n d to in for m th e evolu tion of,
in stitu tion a l qu a lity m a n a gem en t policy a n d
pr a ctices. It is to th is m a tter I n ow tu r n .
The CPD in strategic planning and policy
formation
In a ddition to th e th r ee m odels ju st in tr odu ced, r ecen t lea der sh ip th eor ies str ess th e
con n ection s between a ffilia tion , m ea n in g,
pu r poses, str u ctu r es, a ction a n d m or a lity
(Hodgk in son , 1996). Th ey h igh ligh t h ow
sh a r ed vision bu ildin g a n d co-oper a tive pla n n in g bin ds lea der s a n d follower s in to
coven a n ts th a t le gitim a te th e cu ltu r e of th e
or ga n iza tion . Wh a tever else it is, I com e ba ck
to th e view th a t in stitu tion a l or ga n iza tion is
su sta in ed by a n etwor k of coven a n ts expr essin g r ecipr oca l m or a l obliga tion s.
Th is im plies th e CP D offer in g lea der sh ip
su ppor t ser vices in ten ded to im pr ove
oper a tion s a n d oper a tion a l n or m s, wh ile a lso
pr om otin g edu cative for m s of pla n n in g a n d
policy for m u la tion . Associates of th e CP D
wou ld, it follow s, be th ose offer in g edu ca tive
lea der sh ip ser vices a t both th e oper a tion a l
a n d policy-m a k in g levels. Idea lly, th e CP D
sh ou ld wor k dir ectly w ith th ose r espon sible
for tea m per for m a n ce, depa r tm en ta l per for m a n ce, fa cu lty per for m a n ce a n d u n iver sity
per for m a n ce. Th e pr a ctica l r ea lity is m or e
Table IV
An audit, ac c o untability and de ve lo pme nt c yc le
Year Activity
1
2
3
4
Processes, data and criteria
Assisted sc ool
review
Empiric al best prac tic e indic ators data on teac hing and learning, leadership and
management and professonal and staff development
Perc eptions: evaluate feedbac k from parents, students and staff
Empiric al data; examination results, DART sc ores, key intended numerac y and literac y
outc omes data, retention rates and student outc omes
Rec ommendations for ac tion embedded in the Sc hool Improvement Plan whic h is to be
approved by the distric t superintendent
Under-performing sc hools may be subjec ted to next-year audit
Implement sc hool Provide sc hool c harter, a statement of vision and intent, long-term plan of priorities,
improvement
ac tivities and sc hedules, short-term plan of programmes and objec tives and an annual
plant
report to the distric t offic e and sc hool c ounc il, parents and friends or other representative
body
Ac tion researc h
Define evaluation together, define evaluation in c ontext, review wider knowledge, evaluate
evaluation
c onsequenc es of options, selec t polic ies and strategies, ac tion, evaluation of outc omes,
redefine evaluation
Repeat Year 2
Repeat Year 1
[ 265 ]
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
lik ely to focu s on su ppor tin g fa cu lty lea der sh ip, pla n n in g a n d per for m a n ce m a n a gem en t.
Two m eth ods cou ld be im m edia tely u sefu l.
F ir st, bu dget a ctivity gr ou p execu tives m igh t
r eview th eir pla n n in g pr ocesses a n d m a p
th eir decision system s, m a in pa r ticipa n ts a n d
k ey issu es. It is n ot u n u su a l for execu tives
pa r ticipa tin g in su ch a r eview to r eth in k
th eir pla n n in g m eth ods, r estr u ctu r e th eir
in for m a tion a n d decision system s, a n d to
develop a m or e str a te gic per spective. Th e
secon d m eth od is to u se su r veys to iden tify
r ole-specific ch a llen ges th a t ca n th en be followed-u p a n d a ddr essed by r ole-set P D. In
both ca ses th e focu s of P D is n ot on a n in dividu a l sk ill bu t on gr ou p ca pa cities a n d th e
con sequ en ces of tea m a ction s in difficu lt
br oa der con texts.
A n u m ber of pr a ctica l im plica tion s follow.
F ir st, th e CP D itself w ill n eed to r eview its
pr ior ities a n d pr a ctices. A r etr ea t w a s h eld in
ea r ly J u n e. Th e pr oposed exten sion s to CP D
ser vices w ill en ta il a ddition a l fu n din g a n d
extr a a ppoin tm en ts or a r ea lign m en t of pr ior ities. Th e CP D w ill a lso n eed to r econ str u ct its
r ela tion sh ips w ith k ey con stitu en ces. To
illu str a te, given th e poten tia l im pa ct of IT on
th e qu a lity a n d com petitiven ess of tea ch in g
a n d lea r n in g, th e CP D w ill n eed to br ok er
n ew a llia n ces between con ten t exper ts,
in str u ction a l design er s, softw a r e specia lists
a n d th ose well ver sed in in tellectu a l pr oper ty
r igh ts, a ll a s pa r t of its n ew R&D pr ogr a m m e.
Th e a ddition a l a ppoin tm en ts r ecom m en ded
by th e HE RO Review a ppea r to be w a r r a n ted.
The contribution the CPD can make
in assessing and enhancing quality
in the university
Given th e de gr ee to wh ich I h ave a lr ea dy
em ph a sized th e im por ta n ce of th e qu a lity
a gen da , th e th r ee th em es offer ed a t th e ou tset
ca n n ow a ct a s a su m m a r y.
Th e pr oposed r oles for th e CP D a r e th a t it
su ppor ts con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t in tea ch in g, r esea r ch a n d a dm in istr a tion , pr om otes
or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g th r ou gh edu ca tive
lea der sh ip a n d com m u n ita r ia n P D in bu dget
gr ou ps, a n d pr ovides policy a n d pr a ctica l
a dvice on th e m a n a gem en t of qu a lity.
Th ese pr oposa ls wou ld both a ffir m th e
va lu e of, a n d exten d th e ser vices cu r r en tly
pr ovided by, th e CP D. Oppor tu n ities h ave a lso
been fou n d to a dva n ce th e qu a lity of ser vices.
For exa m ple, th e Stu den t E va lu a tion of
Cou r ses a n d Tea ch in g (SE CAT) pr ocess h a s
been fou n d to be m eth odolica lly ch a llen ged
a n d w ill be r epla ced by a m or e soph istica ted
set of policies a n d pr a ctices. Th er e a r e lik ely
to be a n u m ber of stu den t eva lu a tion m eth ods
[ 266 ]
u sed th a t a r e m or e a u tom a ted, a n d th en
exten ded in to th e for m a tive eva lu a tion of
cu r r icu lu m , su ppor t ser vices, pr ogr a m m e
m a n a gem en t a n d lea der sh ip. Th e pr ior ity
given to su ch pr oposa ls w ill, of cou r se,
depen d on th e qu a lity of th e policy pr oposa ls
a n d on th e developm en t of th e br oa der
in stitu tion a l policy con text.
Com m en su r a te fu n din g wou ld im ply n ew
per for m a n ce in dica tor s bein g developed for
th e CP D itself. For exa m ple, eviden ce of
con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t sh ou ld be ava ila ble
in th e for m a tive eva lu a tion of ser vices,
in cr ea sin gly soph istica ted u se of th e for m s of
stu den t eva lu a tion da ta , th e r esea r ch a n d
a pplica tion of in ter n a tion a l ben ch m a r k s, a n d
r isin g CP D r esea r ch pr odu ctivity.
Th e pr om otion of or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g
sh ou ld be seen in th e developm en t of a
n etwor k of a ssocia tes a n d by em pir ica l
eviden ce of a ction r esea r ch a n d bu dget gr ou p
a u dits a n d developm en ta l pla n n in g.
P r ovidin g policy a n d pr a ctica l a dvice wou ld
be eviden t in deeper con su lta tion s w ith oth er
cor por a te ser vice u n its, in volvem en t in
qu a lity m a n a gem en t policy r eview s,
im pr oved su ppor t to bu dget a ctivity gr ou p
execu tives, a n d HRD policy n etwor k in g
a cr oss th e Un iv ersita s 21.
Concluding note
Th is pr elim in a r y a n a lysis cu lm in a tes in a
vision of a n in ter n a tion a l R&D cen tr e th a t:
• m odels best pr a ctice in th e P D of gen er a l
a n d a ca dem ic sta ff;
• ju stifi es its ser vices u sin g a ph ilosoph y of
com m u n ita r ia n pr ofession a lism ;
• en h a n ces th e sta n din g of th e u n iver sity in
Un iv ersita s 21; a n d
• h elps boost th e pr odu ctivity of tea ch er s,
r esea r ch er s a n d or ga n iza tion a l lea der s.
It pr oposes th r ee r oles for th e CP D in th e
Un iver sity of Au ck la n d:
1 en h a n cin g th e con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t of
tea ch in g a n d lea r n in g;
2 pr om otin g or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g; a n d
3 pr ovidin g policy a n d pr a ctica l a dvice on
th e m a n a gem en t of qu a lity.
References
Br u ce, B. (c1992), Dev elopin g S tu d en ts’ L ib ra r y
R esea rch S k ills, HE RDSA, Ca m pbelltow n ,
N SW.
Bu r n s, R. (1994), In trod u ction to R esea rch
M eth od s, Lon gm a n , Melbou r n e.
Ca n dy, P. (1995), “P r om otin g life-lon g lea r n in g:
a ca dem ic developer s a n d th e u n iver sity a s a
lea r n in g or ga n isa tion ”, k eyn ote pa per given
to th e SE DA Con fer en ce, Un iver sity of Su n der la n d, 18-19 Decem ber.
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
Ca n n on , R. (1992), L ectu r in g, (2n d ed.), HE RDSA,
Ca m pbelltow n , N SW.
Cr ook s, T.J . (1988), A ssessin g S tu d en t Per for m a n ce,
HE RDSA, Ken sin gton , N SW.
Du ign a n , P.A. a n d Ma cph er son , R.J .S. (1992),
Ed u ca tiv e L ea d ersh ip, F a lm er P r ess, Lon don .
E u r opea n Lifelon g Lea r n in g In itia tive (E LLI)
(1994), L ife-lon g L ea r n in g: A S u r viva l Con cept
for th e 21st Cen tu r y, E LLI, Br u ssels.
E ver s, C.W. a n d La kom sk i, G. (1991), Kn ow in g
Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion : Con tem pora r y
M eth od ologica l Con trov ersies in Ed u ca tion a l
A d m in istra tion R esea rch , Per ga m on P r ess,
Oxfor d.
Hodgk in son , C. (1996), A d m in istra tiv e Ph ilosoph y:
Va lu es a n d M otiva tion s in A d m in istra tiv e L ife,
Per ga m on P r ess, Oxfor d.
Hou le, C.O. (1980), Con tin u in g L ea r n in g in th e
Profession s, J ossey-Ba ss, Sa n F r a n cisco, CA.
Kem ber, D. a n d Kelly, M.E . (c1992), Im provin g
T ea ch in g th rou gh A ction R esea rch , HE RDSA,
Ca m pbelltow n , N SW.
Kem ber, D. a n d Mu r ph y, D. (c1992), T u tor in g:
Dista n ce Ed u ca tion a n d Open L ea r n in g
Cou rses, HE RDSA, Ken sin gton , N SW.
Lu blin , J . (1987), Con d u ctin g T u tor ia ls, HE RDSA,
Ken sin gton , N SW.
Lu n din , R. (1993), Ov ersea s Ex per ien ce in N on tra d ition a l M od es of Deliv er y in High er Ed u ca tion Usin g S ta te-of-th e-a r t T ech n ologies,
Depa r tm en t of E m ploym en t E du ca tion a n d
Tr a in in g, AGP S, Ca n ber r a .
McDon a ld, R. (1984), R eview in g Depa r tm en ts,
HE RDSA, Ken sin gton , N SW.
Ma cph er son , R.J .S. (1997), Ed u ca tiv e A ccou n tab ility: T h eor y, R esea rch , Policy a n d Pra ctice,
Per ga m on P r ess, Oxfor d.
Ma cph er son , R.J .S. a n d Cu sa ck , B. (1996), “J oh n
Dewey a n d edu ca tive lea der sh ip”, L ea d in g
a n d M a n a gin g, Vol. 2 N o. 4.
Moses, I. (1987), “E du ca tion a l developm en t u n its:
a cr oss-cu ltu r a l per spective”, High er Ed u ca tion , Vol. 16, pp. 449-79.
Moses, I. (1989), Hea d in g a Depa r tm en t: A Gu id e
for Hea d s a n d Ch a irs of Depa r tm en ts a n d
S ch ools, HE RDSA, Ken sin gton , N SW.
N a tion a l Boa r d of E m ploym en t, E du ca tion a n d
Tr a in in g (1996), L ifelon g L ea r n in g – Key
Issu es, Au str a lia n Gover n m en t P u blish in g
Ser vice, Ca n ber r a .
Sa dler, D.R. (c1984), Up th e Pu blica tion R oa d : A
Gu id e to Pu blish in g in S ch ola rly J ou r n a ls for
A ca d em ics, R esea rch ers, a n d Gra d u a te S tu d en ts in Ed u ca tion a n d th e S ocia l S cien ces,
HE RDSA, Ken sin gton , N SW.
Sch ön , D.A. (1987), Ed u ca tin g th e R efl ectiv e Pra ctition er: T ow a rd a N ew Design for T ea ch in g a n d
L ea r n in g in th e Profession s, J ossey-Ba ss,Sa n
F r a n cisco, CA.
Sen ge, P. (1990), T h e Fifth Disciplin e: T h e A r t a n d
Pra ctice of th e L ea r n in g Orga n isa tion , Dou bleday, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Sveiby, K.E . (1992), “Th e k n owh ow com pa n y:
str a te gy for m u la tion in k n ow ledge-in ten sive
in du str ies”, in Hu ssey, D.E . (E d.), In ter n a tion a l R eview of S tra tegic M a n a gem en t, J oh n
Wiley, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Th om a s, D. (1995), Flex ible L ea r n in g S tra tegies in
High er a n d Fu r th er Ed u ca tion , Ca ssell, Lon don .
Un iver sity of Au ck la n d (1995a ), R epor t of th e
Com m ittee Establish ed to Con d u ct a R eview of
th e High er Ed u ca tion R esea rch Office,
Un iver sity of Au ck la n d, Au ck la n d, May.
Un iver sity of Au ck la n d (1995b), Un iv ersity of
A u ck la n d 2001: M ission , Goa ls a n d S tra tegies,
Un iver sity of Au ck la n d, Au ck la n d.
Wa de, W., Hodgk in son , K., Sm ith , A. a n d Ar field,
J . (E ds) (1994), Flex ible L ea r n in g in High er
Ed u ca tion , Koga n P a ge, Lon don .
[ 267 ]
University of Auckland: towards creating networks of
moral obligations
Reynold J.S. M acpherson
Unive rsity o f Auc kland, Auc kland, Ne w Z e aland
Addresses briefl y fi ve complex issues in higher education: professional development spanning all categories
of staff; the role of a centre of
professional development
(CPD) in context; the philosophical framework and
models within which a centre
might operate; the role of a
centre in strategic planning
and policy formation, and the
contribution that a CPD might
make in assessing and
enhancing quality. Develops
four main arguments with
regard to the CPD at the
University of Auckland. The
CPD should support continuous improvement, promote
organizational learning, and
provide policy and practical
advice regarding the management of quality. It should
conduct organizational
research and development,
primarily through international benchmarking. The
CPD also needs to research
the implications of information technology, especially in
the reconstruction of teaching, research and organization. Above all it needs to
understand its organizational
role of helping to construct
cultural networks of mutual
moral obligations.
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [ 1997] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
© MCB Unive rsity Pre ss
[ ISSN 0951-354X]
[ 260 ]
Introduction
Th e Un iver sity of Au ck la n d is N ew Zea la n d’s
la r gest a n d on e of its m ost pr estigiou s u n iver sities. It h a s a bou t 25,000 stu den ts a n d a bou t
2,500 a ca dem ic a n d gen er a l sta ff. Th e r epor t
of th e com m ittee esta blish ed to r eview th e
High er E du ca tion Resea r ch Office (HE RO)
(Un iver sity of Au ck la n d, 1995a )
r ecom m en ded th a t th e HE RO a n d th e Sta ff
Developm en t Office be a m a lga m a ted. Th e
r epor t w a s a ccepted a n d im plem en ta tion
sta r ted. Th e selection of a n ew dir ector a t
pr ofessor ia l level pr ovided a n oppor tu n ity to
r eview str a te gic dir ection s. I w a s a ppoin ted
dir ector a s fr om 1 Apr il 1997. Th is pa per
r eflects m y pr elim in a r y a n a lysis.
My exper ien ce a n d r esea r ch su ppor ts a t
lea st th r ee a ssu m ption s abou t pr ofession a l
developm en t (P D); it ca n be ver y effective in
cer ta in con dition s, it is a pr ofession a l en titlem en t a n d it h a s str a tegic im por ta n ce in
k n ow ledge-ba sed or ga n iza tion s. On th e oth er
h a n d, th e exten t to wh ich th is set of a ssu m ption s is still w a r r a n ted in New Zea la n d h igh er
edu ca tion (HE ) a ppea r s to la ck defin itive,
r ecen t a n d deta iled em pir ica l su ppor t. Kn ow ledge of th e effects of P D in HE m ay a lso h ave
becom e da ted in a con text of r a pid ch a n ge a n d
in ten sifyin g com petition . Th is im plies th at
th e cr edibility of th e Cen tr e of P r ofession a l
Developm en t (CP D) w ill be h eavily depen den t
on its r esea r ch a n d per for m a n ce.
In stitu tion a l policies a ppea r to coh er e w ith
m y a ssu m ption s a bou t P D. For exa m ple, th e
fir st goa l in T h e Un iv ersity of A u ck la n d 2001:
M ission , Goa ls a n d S tra tegies (Un iver sity of
Au ck la n d, 1995b) is con cer n ed w ith th e qu a lity of tea ch in g a n d lea r n in g. Th e fir st objective listed is to “cr ea te a n en vir on m en t
th r ou gh ou t th e Un iver sity in wh ich tea ch in g
of in ter n a tion a l qu a lity, in for m ed by r esea r ch
a n d, wh er e a ppr opr ia te, by pr ofession a l pr a ctice, is a ccepted a s a pr im a r y a ca dem ic
r espon sibility” (p. 14). With r e ga r d to h u m a n
r esou r ce developm en t (HRD), th e goa l is to
“h ave a n a ca dem ic a n d gen er a l sta ff m a tch in g th e best in ter n a tion a l sta n da r ds” (p. 24).
It a ppea r s th a t in ter n a tion a l ben ch m a r k in g
sh ou ld th er efor e be a r esea r ch a n d developm en t (R&D) pr ior ity for th e CP D.
A pr elim in a r y su r vey of in ter n a tion a l
r esea r ch fin din gs a n d CP D web sites a lso
su ggests th a t k n ow ledge of P D in HE is bein g
a dva n ced pr im a r ily by u sin g a du lt lea r n in g
a n d HRD r esea r ch . Sin ce P D is a lso bein g
u sed in cr ea sin gly to pr om ote qu a lity in bu dget gr ou ps, m or e eviden ce of r ecen t lea der sh ip a n d or ga n iza tion a l r esea r ch m igh t h ave
been expected.
Hen ce, th r ee ten ta tive pr oposa ls a ct a s
th em es in th is pa per. Th e CP D sh ou ld pr om ote con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t, play a pivota l
r ole in or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g, a n d
con tr ibu te to policy for m u la tion a n d th e
im pr ovem en t of pr a ctice in qu a lity m a n a gem en t. I wou ld str ess th a t th ese pr oposa ls offer
str on g su ppor t to th e ser vices cu r r en tly bein g
pr ovided by th e CP D a t th e Un iver sity of
Au ck la n d wh ile in dica tin g th e n eed for policy
r ea lign m en t a n d exten sion la r gely du e to th e
im pa ct of n ew in for m a tion tech n ology. A
u sefu l exa m ple of a n a ppa r en tly su ccessfu l
cu r r en t str a te gy is gen er ic P D.
Professional development for all
categories of staf f
In gr id Moses (1987) sh owed th a t effective P D
in HE sh ou ld ser ve th e gen er ic n eeds of a ll
m em ber s a s it pr om otes th e in ter ests of th e
in stitu tion . Th is a ppr oa ch va lu es th e da ily
r ea lity of co-oper a tive wor k tea m s th a t a r e
a lso r espon sive to th e br oa der policy con text.
Con ver sely, it a lso im plies th a t P D sh ou ld
h elp a ll sta ff m a k e a n optim a l a n d per son a lly
r ew a r din g con tr ibu tion to th e m ission a n d
oper a tion s of th eir u n iver sity.
Newcom er s, for exa m ple, n eed to be
in du cted ca r efu lly so th a t th ey feel va lu ed a n d
su ppor ted fr om th e ou tset. A u n iver sity h a s a n
obliga tion to expla in “wh er e it is goin g”, wh y,
h ow it w ill k n ow wh en it h a s got th er e, a n d
th en , h ow m em ber s ca n h elp set n ew ta r gets.
On th e oth er h a n d, sin ce ch a n ge is n ow a
con sta n t in HE , k n ow ledge itself is in tr in sica lly con testa ble, a n d con sta n t im pr ovem en t
is a con dition of su r viva l in th e sector, a ll sta ff
sh ou ld feel obliged to pa r ticipa te in r egu la r
oppor tu n ities to be r esocia lized a n d to h elp set
n ew ta r gets. I w ill com e ba ck to th e issu e of
r ecipr oca l m or a l obliga tion s.
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
Bein g va lu ed is a ba sic con dition of pr ofession a lism , a con dition th at m u st be in ten tion a lly su sta in ed (Th om a s, 1995). Sh a r in g power
a ppea r s to be on e of th e m or e effective str a tegies. It is lon g k n ow n th a t wh en collea gu es
solve pr oblem s in su ppor tive gr ou ps, h elp set
str a tegic option s a n d pr ior ities, a n d th en
n egotia te th e per son a l im plica tion s for th eir
per for m a n ce in a k n ow n policy con text, th eir
com m itm en t to qu a lity ten ds to r ise (Moses,
1989).
An oth er u sefu l str a te gy is to collect a n d
r eflect on eviden ce of best pr a ctices
elsewh er e (a bou t tu tor in g, su per visin g, lectu r in g, r esea r ch in g, pu blish in g). Th e High er
E du ca tion Resea r ch a n d Developm en t Sta ff
Associa tion (HE RDSA) Gr een Gu ides (Br u ce,
c1992; Ca n n on , 1992; Cr ook s, 1988; Kem ber
a n d Kelly, c1992; Kem ber a n d Mu r ph y, c1992;
Lu blin , 1987; Moses, 1989; McDon a ld, 1984;
Sa dler, c1984) a r e a u sefu l ea r ly exa m ple of
th is a ppr oa ch .
Today, I wou ld a r gu e, even m or e system a tic
r esea r ch is n eeded to r efin e th e ben ch m a r k s
u sed for eva lu a tion a n d developm en t in tea ch in g a n d lea r n in g. Sim ila r ly, r esea r ch n eeds to
u n der pin lea der sh ip a n d m a n a gem en t
ser vices, especia lly h ow str u ctu r es, per son n el
a n d r esou r ces a r e m a n a ged to lift pr odu ctivity
a n d to a cceler a te th e gr ow th of k n ow ledge.
Th is a pplies especia lly r esea r ch a bou t th e
com pa r a tive va lu e of pr ofession a l developm en t a ided by in for m a tion tech n ology.
In th e in ter im , gen er ic P D sh ou ld con tin u e
to pr ovide su ppor tive socia liza tion , r a ise
coh er en ce between effor t a n d or ga n iza tion a l
va lu es, a n d lin k th e for m a tive eva lu a tion of
per for m a n ce w ith pla n n in g for im pr ovem en t.
The role of the CPD within the
university
In a ddition to gen er ic P D, it is cr u cia l th a t th e
CP D h elp im pr ove th e pr odu ction a n d
dissem in a tion of r efi n ed k n ow ledge. Sveiby
(1992) dem on str a ted th a t pr im a r y pr odu ction
in a u n iver sity does n ot com pr ise goods a n d
ser vices bu t com plex pr oblem solvin g. Sch ön
(1987) sh owed th a t pr oblem solvin g in u n iver sities is n on -sta n da r dized, n on -r ecu r r en t,
cr ea tive a n d h igh ly depen den t on com m itted
in dividu a ls. E n cou r a gin g su ch pr odu ction
th r ou gh P D im plies pr ovidin g con tin u ou s
im pr ovem en t a n d or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g
a bou t pr oblem solvin g.
Som e defin ition s a r e w a r r a n ted a t th is
poin t. Con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t, a ccor din g to
th e Eu r opea n Lifelon g Lea r n in g In itia tive
(1994), is best a ch ieved by people a t wor k lea r n in g togeth er h ow to lift th eir per for m a n ce.
Th is r equ ir es in stitu tion a l investm en t, a n
eth os th a t va lu es th e gr ow th in or ga n iza tion a l
k n ow ledge, a n d edu ca tive lea der sh ip ser vices
(Du ign a n a n d Ma cph er son , 1992). It is a lso
k n ow n th a t con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t a cceler a tes wh en lea r n in g, wor k a n d im pr ovem en t
a r e in tegr a ted a n d wh en n ew tech n ology
m obilizes ta len t a n d lets people lea r n con tin u ou sly in th eir ow n pr efer r ed w ay (Hou le, 1980).
A lea r n in g or ga n iza tion is a n or ga n iza tion
w ith a lea r n in g str a te gy th a t is r e gu la r ly
im pr oved (Sen ge, 1990). Idea lly, th is lea r n in g
str a te gy wou ld en cou r a ge m em ber s to
r em a in flexible, sh a r e th eir idea s, seek ou t
a n d u se feedba ck , su ppor t ea ch oth er, w a tch
for oppor tu n ities, lea r n fr om oth er or ga n iza tion s, a n d en cou r a ge self-developm en t.
Wh eth er lea der s en cou r a ge collea gu es to
u se th e ava ila ble de gr ee str u ctu r es, stu den t
eva lu a tion da ta , tr a in in g days, sem in a r s or
depa r tm en ta l wor k sh ops, th e cr u cia l a im is
to su sta in a n edu ca tive cu ltu r e (Wa de et a l.,
1994). Su ch edu ca tive lea der sh ip n eeds to be
u biqu itou s a n d a u th en tic to tr a n sfor m
or ga n iza tion a l cu ltu r e. Th is a ppr oa ch sh ou ld
a lso be ch a r a cter istic wh en a n y CP D
disch a r ges r espon sibilities in w ider settin gs.
Role of a CPD in a wider context
Th e CP D a t Au ck la n d h a s a t lea st two m a jor
ch a llen ges in th e w ider con text. It m u st h elp
en h a n ce th e sta n din g of its h ost u n iver sity in
br oa der com m u n ities a n d h elp collea gu es
r espon d pr oa ctively to th e in for m a tion a ge. I
w ill com e ba ck to th e issu e of com m u n ity.
Th e fir st ch a llen ge is th a t th e CP D sh ou ld
h elp pr esen t th e Un iver sity of Au ck la n d a s a
pr em ier in ter n a tion a l r epositor y of tea ch in g,
r esea r ch a n d a dm in istr a tive best pr a ctices. A
pr a ctica l exa m ple is to h ave th e sh op fr on t of
th e CP D, its Web site, in tr odu ce collea gu es,
cla r ify th e Cen tr e’s vision , m ission a n d
ser vices, m a r k et spa r e ca pa city, fa cilita te
lin k s w ith oth er P D cen tr es, a n d pr esen t th e
CP D a s a n a tion a l policy r esea r ch cen tr e w ith
a n str on g in ter n a tion a l pr ofile.
Th e CP D a t th e Un iver sity of Au ck la n d
sh ou ld a lso pr esen t itself a s a lea din g HE
R&D cen tr e on th e P a cific Rim con cer n ed
w ith th e r ela tion sh ip between P D a n d qu a lity.
Its pr im a r y peer r efer en ce gr ou p sh ou ld be
th e Un iv ersita s 21 n etwor k , a n in ter n a tion a l
n etwor k of pr em ier u n iver sities. Su ch a
vision w ill h ave to be r ea lized th r ou gh
collea gu e n etwor k in g, con sta n tly r efr esh in g
th e cu r r icu lu m th r ou gh doctor a l a n d sta ff
r esea r ch , collectin g feedba ck fr om life-lon g
lea r n er s (N a tion a l Boa r d of E m ploym en t,
E du ca tion a n d Tr a in in g, 1996), or ga n izin g
con fer en ces a n d exch a n ges, a n d seek in g ou t
policy r esea r ch a n d R&D con tr a cts r ela ted to
th e qu a lity a gen da .
[ 261 ]
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
Th e secon d ch a llen ge is to h elp u n iver sity
sta ff exploit n ew in for m a tion tech n ology (IT),
a s it u n folds. Th is im plies colla bor a tive
r esea r ch in to th e im plica tion s of ch a n ges in
socia l, econ om ic, politica l a n d le ga l ter m s,
a n d a pplyin g th e epistem ologica l, tech n ologica l a n d edu ca tion a l a dva n ta ges discover ed. In
a pplied r esea r ch ter m s it w ill m ea n h elpin g
collea gu es to u se em er gen t IT to r eview a n d
develop per for m a n ce, globa lize th eir m a r k etin g, tea ch in g a n d r esea r ch , a n d design n ew
deliver y system s. As Lu n din (1993) a r gu ed,
th e r a ce is on in HE to offer a u tom a ted tea ch in g a n d on lin e con tr a ct r esea r ch ; to in dividu a ls, to n ich e m a r k ets a n d to m a ss coh or ts.
Sin ce P D w ill be cen tr a l to th e IT-dr iven
tr a n sfor m a tion of HE , it n eeds a sou n d ph ilosoph ica l ju stifi ca tion for th e r ole it w ill play.
It is often a ssu m ed, w r on gly in m y view, th a t
tech n ology itself is va lu e fr ee. Sin ce P D is a
socia l tech n ology, its a pplica tion w ith r e ga r d
to IT r equ ir es m or a l ch oices, a n d th er efor e,
ph ilosoph ica l ju stifica tion . On e a ppr oa ch is
to con sider th e m or a l obliga tion s in volved.
Moral obligations
Th e cor por a te pla n of th e Un iver sity of
Au ck la n d defi n es P D a s a m or a l obliga tion :
“to en cou r a ge a n d a ssist sta ff to r ea ch th eir
poten tia l” (Un iver sity of Au ck la n d, 1995b, p.
24). Sim u lta n eou sly, th e u n iver sity m a in ta in s
a ccou n ta bility pr ocesses so th a t per son n el
ca n disch a r ge th e obliga tion s en ta iled by
em ploym en t a n d so th a t bu dget gr ou ps ca n
a ccou n t for a n d im pr ove th eir u se of pr eciou s
r esou r ces. Accou n ta bility a n d P D a r e two
sides of th e sa m e qu a lity m a n a gem en t coin .
Th is is to a r gu e th a t a ph ilosoph ica l ju stifica tion for P D m u st coh er e w ith a ccou n tability
policy a n d th a t th ey sh ou ld be developed a s
r ecipr oca l m or a l obliga tion s. If P D a n d
a ccou n ta bility a r e a ccepted a s two sides of th e
sa m e qu a lity coin , th ey m u st both be in tr in sica lly eth ica l a n d edu cative in or der to r em a in
r espected a n d to gen er a te im pr ovem en t.
Th e m or a l obliga tion s a ssocia ted w ith th e
CP D ca n be ju stified by r efer en ce to con sequ en ces (Ma cph er son a n d Cu sa ck , 1996). For
exa m ple, th e obliga tion to pr ovide con tin u ou s lea r n in g m ay be ju stifi ed by th e w ay it
h elps a ll sta ff r ea ch th eir poten tia l. Th e obliga tion to pr om ote or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g m ay
be ju stified by th e a dva n ta ges of in dividu a ls
a n d gr ou ps r eview in g a n d r epr ofi lin g th eir
ser vices. Th e obliga tion to pr ovide policy a n d
pr a ctica l a dvice on qu a lity m a n a gem en t m ay
be ju stified by a ppea l to collective str a te gic
fu tu r es.
My policy r esea r ch over th e la st five yea r s
(Ma cph er son , 1997) h a s sh ow n th a t P D
[ 262 ]
ph ilosoph ies in la r ge or ga n iza tion s a n d
system s n eed to exten d th e u se of h yper in dividu a listic m odels (e.g. extr a ction P D a n d
sk ill-focu sed in str u ction ) w ith h u m a n ist
colle gia l m odels (e.g. tea m -ba sed lea r n in g) to
bu ild a sh a r ed sen se of pr ofession a lism a n d
to a ch ieve cu ltu r a l ch a n ge.
Sim ila r ly, th ese two m odels n eed to be
su pplem en ted w ith epistem ica lly cr itica l
for m s of P D (e.g. sta k eh older -sen sitive
pr ogr a m m e eva lu a tion ) th a t pr om ote com m u n ita r ia n per spectives. Th ese m odels a r e
expla in ed in th e n ext section .
Philosophical framework for CPD
operations
Th r ee P D ph ilosoph ies ca n be con tr a sted in
ter m s of m a in pu r poses, a ppr opr ia te str a tegies, sou r ce of eva lu a tion cr iter ia , a ppr opr ia te a ccou n ta bility pr ocesses, str en gth s, wea k n esses, a ppr opr ia te for m s of pr ofession a l
developm en t, a n d th e dom in a n t system s of
k n ow ledge ea ch u se (see Ta ble I).
An im por ta n t im plica tion of a com m u n ita r ia n ph ilosoph y of P D is th a t it wou ld m ea n
th e CP D h elpin g collea gu es to r econ str u ct
th eir th eor ies of pr ofession a lism in a su ppor tive peer gr ou p, a n d th en in a w ider com m u n ity con text, th r ou gh edu ca tive a n d for m a tive pr ocesses r a th er th a n su m m a tive a n d
pu n itive for m s of a ccou n ta bility. Wh a t do I
m ea n by com m u n ity?
Depen din g on th e ta sk , com m u n ity in HE
ca n be in ter pr eted a s th e u n iver sity,
pr ogr a m m e sta k e h older s, w ider peer or
clien t a u dien ces, th e P a cific Rim or Un iv ersita s 21. Deter m in in g th e n a tu r e of a wor k
gr ou p’s com m u n ity is a n im por ta n t developm en ta l exer cise in itself for th e w ay it r eiter a tes obliga tion s a n d pr ior com m itm en ts. Th is
is a cr u cia l issu e in N ew Zea la n d, given th e
Tr ea ty of Wa ita n gi a n d equ a l em ploym en t
oppor tu n ities policies. In volvin g Ma or i
ph ilosoph er s a n d equ ity policy r esea r ch er s in
th e wor k of a CP D wou ld a ppea r to be essen tia l. It h a s been m y exper ien ce th a t m ost
in ter n a tion a l u n iver sities a r e yet to display
su ch r espect for su ch in digen ou s per spectives.
I n oted ea r lier th a t P D a n d a ccou n ta bility
a r e two sides of th e sa m e qu a lity m a n a gem en t coin . Seein g th em a s m u tu a lly con tin gen t tigh ten s r ecipr oca l m or a l obliga tion s
between th e per son a n d th e collective. On e
r esu lt of m ovin g tow a r ds com m u n ita r ia n P D
is th a t th e le gitim a cy of pr a ctice w ill be m or e
secu r ely a n ch or ed in th r ee con stitu en cies:
pr ofession a l self, peer s a n d com m u n ity.
An oth er is th a t collea gu es a r e system a tica lly
exposed to for m s of da ta a n d cr itiqu e th a t
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
Table I
Philo so phic al frame wo rks fo r CPD o pe ratio ns in highe r e duc atio n
M odel
Purpose
Appropriate
strategies
Evaluate criteria
Appropriate
processes
Strengths
Weaknesses
Epistemology
Appropriate PD
Hyperindividualism
Humanist
collegialism
Critical
communitarianism
Report and c ompare
outc omes
Professional self-evaluation
Report outc omes, improve
proc esses and programme
Peer-based formative
evaluation
A c ollegial professional
projec t
Peer c ollec tive methods
Report outc omes, improve
programme and governanc e
Stakeholder-based formative
evaluation
A c ommunity polic y projec t
Supportive relationships
Closed interc ollegiate norms
Organizational learning
Norms c an be too c ontestable
Humanist subjec tivism
Internal-external
c onsultanc ies
Norms c an be too c ontestable
Stakeholder ac tion researc h
An empiric al and rational
projec t
Confidential c onsultation
Foc us on student progress
No feedbac k and
unc ontestable norms
Logic al positivism
Team teac hing
gen er a te a n even m or e soph istica ted k n ow ledge of th eir ser vice.
An im m edia te im plica tion for th e CP D is
th a t edu ca tive for m s of lea der sh ip a r e n eeded
to h elp collea gu es m ove fr om th e som etim es
fer a l n or m s of u n con testa ble h yper -in dividu a lism tow a r ds m or e colle gia l n or m s, a n d th en
to m ove fr om th e often closed peer cu ltu r es of
colle gia lism tow a r ds com m u n ita r ia n a ction .
Th e CP D w ill n eed to ta k e a n even m or e pr oa ctive r ole in im pr ovin g lea der sh ip ser vices
a cr oss its h ost u n iver sity.
In su m , iden tifyin g a n d disch a r gin g r ecipr oca l obliga tion s r equ ir es P D th a t bu ilds a
cr itica l aw a r en ess of th e n a tu r e of a ssu m ption s, va lu es a n d k n ow ledge em bedded in
a im s a n d objectives. Of h yper -in dividu a list,
colle gia l a n d com m u n ita r ia n ph ilosoph ies, it
is on ly th e com m u n ita r ia n per spective th a t
exten ds P D fr om sk ill developm en t in to
deeper r eflection on th e con sequ en ces of
a ction s, a n d th en to th e ga in in g of w isdom
a bou t ser vices in sta k eh older gr ou ps.
Th r ee m odels w ill n ow be in tr odu ced
br iefly to illu str a te h ow th is com m u n ita r ia n
ph ilosoph y for P D ca n be oper a tion a lized in
HE .
Career and action research models
I sh a r e Ca n dy’s (1995) view th a t ba se-lin e P D
in HE sh ou ld h elp a ll collea gu es to stay fl exible a n d r espon sive by pr ovidin g ca r efu l
in du ction , feedba ck on per for m a n ce a n d
r e gu la r ly r efr esh in g expecta tion s. An d a s
people m ove th r ou gh th e sea son s of th eir
ca r eer s, a n d r epr ofi le th eir ser vice, th ey a lso
n eed r e gu la r a ccess to ch a n gin g or ga n iza tion a l va lu es a n d pr ior ities. Th is a ccess is
ver y im por ta n t in la r ge su ccessfu l or ga n iza tion s given th eir pr on en ess to a h a r den in g of
Stakeholder-sensitive projec t
th e a r ter ies, to sm u gn ess a n d to h u br is.
Ca n dy’s CARE E R m odel is su m m a r ized in
Ta ble II.
To expla in , a n ticipa tor y lea r n in g ca n h elp
collea gu es a ctively con str u ct sm a r t fu tu r es.
For exa m ple, a ssocia tes of th e CP D in bu dget
gr ou ps m igh t tr y to em bed su ch a n ticipa tor y
lea r n in g du r in g pla n n in g. Th e poin t is th a t it
h a s to be em bedded in to th e ta k en -for -gr a n ted
stock of k n ow ledge of th a t cu ltu r e for it to
h ave la stin g effect. Wh en k n ow ledge of best
pr a ctice is cr ea ted in a su ppor tive pr ofession a l gr ou p, it h a s a gen etic effect. In m y
exper ien ce, a n n u a l tea m pr ogr a m m e bu dgetin g gr a du a lly deepen s u n der sta n din gs a n d
cr ea tes for m s of fin a n cia l disciplin e th a t a r e
u n im a gin a ble a t, a n d qu ite u n en for cea ble
fr om , cor por a te levels.
Given th e im por ta n ce of m eth odology in a ll
gr ou ps w ith a r esea r ch fu n ction , th e r efin em en t of su ch best pr a ctice w ill n eed to be a s
system a tic a s th e pr odu ction of k n ow ledge
elsewh er e, for it to be tr u sted. Or ga n iza tion a l
h a bits, lea der sh ip tr a dition s a n d a n ecdota l
th eor y w ill a ll h ave to be ch a llen ged in ter m s
of per for m a n ce, lea r n in g a n d th e qu a lity of
ou tcom es.
Old m on ey pr ogr a m m es, for in sta n ce, w ill
h ave to be eva lu a ted ea ch yea r ju st a s r igor ou sly a s n ew m on ey pr oposa ls. Sim ila r ly, in
th e collective in ter est, efficien cy ga in s w ill be
n eeded to h elp cr ea te in stitu tion a l r isk ca pita l a n d su bsidize in n ova tion . An d to en su r e
th a t ea ch bu dget gr ou p or pr ogr a m m e is
stayin g w ith or a h ea d of th e best, policies a n d
ou tcom es n eed to be com pa r ed a ga in st specia list in ter n a tion a l ben ch m a r k s.
Th is for m of r igou r n eeds to be a fea tu r e of
th e m or a l econ om y of th e u n iver sity. To r ea ssu r e sta ff, a n d gu a r a n tee pr efer r ed a n d
pr efer a ble collective fu tu r es, th is m or a l
[ 263 ]
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
econ om y n eeds to be eviden t wh en r eview in g
pr om otion cr iter ia a n d pr ocesses, cou r se
offer in gs, m a n a gem en t in for m a tion system s
a n d power str u ctu r es. Th is exem plifi es th e
Ar istotelia n idea l of pr a xis; th r ou gh cr itica l
r eflection on th e qu a lity of pr a ctice a n d on
th e va lu e of su ch ser vice.
An a ction r esea r ch m odel is pa r ticu la r ly
u sefu l in pr ofession a l wor k gr ou ps a n d in stitu tion s w a n tin g to solve pr a ctica l pr oblem s
(Bu r n s, 1994). It h a n dles em pir ica l, su bjective
a n d n or m a tive da ta in com plex socia l system s
a n d u ses n a tu r a listic coh er en tism to iden tify
tou ch ston es (E ver s a n d La kom sk i, 1991). It ca n
be su m m a r ized a s a seven -ph a se r ecu r r en t
cycle w ith ea ch ph a se h avin g specific ta sk s,
pu r poses a n d k ey issu es to be con sider ed.
Th e fir st ph a se of a ction r esea r ch is devoted
to collective con cept m a ppin g so th a t a ll pa r ticipa n ts, sta keh older s if you w ish , becom e
aw a r e of th e r ela tivity of th eir ow n view s,
in ter ests a n d va lu es. P h a se two is to specify
th e pr oblem m or e a ccu r a tely in con text.
P h a se th r ee involves r esea r ch in g pr ior k n ow ledge. P h a se fou r is to collect data a n d specify
option a l sets of expla n a tion s a n d solu tion s.
P h a se five involves m a k in g decision s a n d
pla n s. P h a se six is a ction in tea m s in ten ded to
a ch ieve specific objectives. P h a se seven is
u sed to com pa r e ou tcom es to objectives a n d to
r epor t to sta keh older s. Th e r epea ted fir st
ph a se r edefin es th e pr oblem to r evea l h ow
pa r ticipa n ts n ow feel a bou t th eir view s, in ter ests a n d va lu es, a n d so on . Ta ble III su m m a r izes th e pr ocesses, pu r poses a n d key issu es.
Wh ile a ction r esea r ch ca n be over -r elia n t on
su bjectivism , th is pr ocess does wor k well in
pr ofession a l cu ltu r es th a t va lu e in dividu a lity,
collegia lism a n d pr oblem solvin g (Kem ber
a n d Kelly, c1992). It ten ds to capita lize on th e
exper tise, r igou r a n d cr ea tivity in th e gr ou p.
It u su a lly celebr a tes th e con tin u ou s gr ow th of
k n ow ledge in com m u n ities, especia lly k n ow ledge a bou t self-m a n a ged im pr ovem en t.
Table II
Candy’ s CAREER mo de l
Quality audit and development cycle
Principals
Characteristics
Comprehensive
All aspec ts of ac ademic and general staff work integrates
c areer and organizational reprofiling
Anticipatory
Strategic , responsive and c ultural impac ts
Research based
Data driven and rigorous
builds theory from c onsequenc es
Exemplary
Researc h-based international benc hmarks
Embedded
Ubiquitous and devolved
in c ontext
Reflective
Lifelong, personal development
praxis revises the moral ec onomy
Th e th ir d m odel con sisten t w ith com m u n ita r ia n P D r espon ds to a m a jor ch a llen ge in qu a lity m a n a gem en t; h ow to r econ cile th e a n n u a l
pr ocess of m eldin g exter n a l pr essu r es a n d
cor por a te pr ior ities w ith developin g ea ch
bu dget gr ou p’s ch a n ge m a n a gem en t ca pa cities. Cen tr a liza tion ca n pr ovide decision s
m or e qu ick ly bu t r eta r d su ch ca pa city bu ildin g a n d th e gr ow th of com m itm en t.
Un iver sities a lso n eed to su sta in r ea son a ble
coh er en ce between in ter n a l policies a n d
exter n a l con stitu en cies, pr ovide su ppor tive
Table III
Ac tio n re se arc h and pro fe ssio nal de ve lo pme nt in highe r e duc atio n
[ 264 ]
Phase
Purpose
Key issues
Define professional development
together
Collec tive map of the situation
Stakeholder interests and values
Describe PD in context
Jointly spec ify key aspec ts
Antec endents, c auses, effec ts, terms
Review wider knowledge of policies
and practices
Researc h teams c ommissioned and
report
Alternative ideas, polic ies, trials and
findings
Gather and evaluate consequences
of options
Co-operative evaluation of the
relative merits of options
Competing explanations and solutions
Deciding PD policies and planning
practices
Selec t strategies and joint planning
Feasible? Benefic ial? Plausible?
Educ ational?
Action
Teams are organized to ac c omplish
spec ific tasks
What? Why? Who? When? With?
How? Evaluation?
Evaluate outcomes
Collec tive review and report
History of ideas, intended and
unintended effec ts
Redefine the problem together…
Joint formative evaluation and
remap the situation
Newly revealed c hallenges, views,
interests and values
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
a n d con dition a l pr ivile ges to u n der -per for m in g gr ou ps, collect r elia ble qu a lity a ssu r a n ce
da ta for com pa r ison s a ga in st in ter n a tion a l
ben ch m a r k s, su sta in in cen tive r e gim es a n d
m a k e str a te gic a n d in vestm en t decision s. A
m a jor difficu lty is th a t th ese in ter sectin g
decision cycles often wor k a t differ en t speeds
a n d to differ en t va lu es.
In m y ow n system ic policy r esea r ch
(Ma cph er son , 1997), a n ew a u dit a n d developm en t cycle w a s design ed to a ccom m oda te a
sim ila r ly com plex a r r ay of con dition s. In th e
Yea r 1, 1997, th e fi r st coh or t of bu dget cen tr es
(in th is ca se a system of pu blic sch ools, n ot
u n lik e in cr ea sin gly self-m a n a gin g fa cu lties)
w ill be a sk ed to r ea lign th eir vision a n d pla n s
w ith system ic a im s a n d pr ior ities a n d to
n e gotia te ch a r ter s, lon g-ter m goa ls, sh or tter m objectives a n d sch ool im pr ovem en t
pla n s. Th ey w ill be expected to u se va r iou s
types of da ta , a n d th en h ave th eir pla n s a n d
per for m a n ce in dica tor s a ppr oved a n d fu n ded.
Th e im plem en ta tion of ea ch sch ool’s
im pr ovem en t pla n w ill follow in Yea r 2, 1998,
a n d be followed u p w ith a ction r esea r ch eva lu a tion to solve pr oblem s a n d boost self-m a n a gem en t ca pa cities. Th ese pr ocesses wou ld be
r epea ted in Yea r 3, 1998. In Yea r 4, 1999, th e
cycle be gin s a ga in for th e fir st coh or t w ith
exter n a lly a ssisted self-r eview. Th e m odel is
pr esen ted in Ta ble IV.
I a m n ot su ggest in g t h a t t h is m odel wou ld
be a ppr opr ia t e for t h e bu dget a ct ivit y gr ou ps
a t t h e Un iver sit y of Au ck la n d. Wh a t I a m
su ggest in g is t h a t su ch a m odel ca n be
design ed t o be sen sit ive t o in t er n a l a n d ext er n a l st a k e-h older per spect ives. It wou ld, for
exa m ple, bu ild on cu r r en t a ca dem ic a n d
gen er a l st a ff per for m a n ce r eview pr ocesses,
a ck n ow ledge bu dget gr ou p cu lt u r es a n d
lea der sh ip ca pa cit ies, coh er e w it h t h e
n a t ion a l Qu a lit y Au dit cycle, a n d so on . At
t h e sa m e t im e it wou ld a dd a n edu ca t ive
dim en sion by pr oposin g a dva n ces in pr ogr a m m e eva lu a t ion , r esou r ce pla n n in g a n d
ch a n ge m a n a gem en t .
Th e k ey im plica tion of su ch str a te gic m odellin g is th a t th e ser vices of a CP D n eed to be
em bedded in , a n d to in for m th e evolu tion of,
in stitu tion a l qu a lity m a n a gem en t policy a n d
pr a ctices. It is to th is m a tter I n ow tu r n .
The CPD in strategic planning and policy
formation
In a ddition to th e th r ee m odels ju st in tr odu ced, r ecen t lea der sh ip th eor ies str ess th e
con n ection s between a ffilia tion , m ea n in g,
pu r poses, str u ctu r es, a ction a n d m or a lity
(Hodgk in son , 1996). Th ey h igh ligh t h ow
sh a r ed vision bu ildin g a n d co-oper a tive pla n n in g bin ds lea der s a n d follower s in to
coven a n ts th a t le gitim a te th e cu ltu r e of th e
or ga n iza tion . Wh a tever else it is, I com e ba ck
to th e view th a t in stitu tion a l or ga n iza tion is
su sta in ed by a n etwor k of coven a n ts expr essin g r ecipr oca l m or a l obliga tion s.
Th is im plies th e CP D offer in g lea der sh ip
su ppor t ser vices in ten ded to im pr ove
oper a tion s a n d oper a tion a l n or m s, wh ile a lso
pr om otin g edu cative for m s of pla n n in g a n d
policy for m u la tion . Associates of th e CP D
wou ld, it follow s, be th ose offer in g edu ca tive
lea der sh ip ser vices a t both th e oper a tion a l
a n d policy-m a k in g levels. Idea lly, th e CP D
sh ou ld wor k dir ectly w ith th ose r espon sible
for tea m per for m a n ce, depa r tm en ta l per for m a n ce, fa cu lty per for m a n ce a n d u n iver sity
per for m a n ce. Th e pr a ctica l r ea lity is m or e
Table IV
An audit, ac c o untability and de ve lo pme nt c yc le
Year Activity
1
2
3
4
Processes, data and criteria
Assisted sc ool
review
Empiric al best prac tic e indic ators data on teac hing and learning, leadership and
management and professonal and staff development
Perc eptions: evaluate feedbac k from parents, students and staff
Empiric al data; examination results, DART sc ores, key intended numerac y and literac y
outc omes data, retention rates and student outc omes
Rec ommendations for ac tion embedded in the Sc hool Improvement Plan whic h is to be
approved by the distric t superintendent
Under-performing sc hools may be subjec ted to next-year audit
Implement sc hool Provide sc hool c harter, a statement of vision and intent, long-term plan of priorities,
improvement
ac tivities and sc hedules, short-term plan of programmes and objec tives and an annual
plant
report to the distric t offic e and sc hool c ounc il, parents and friends or other representative
body
Ac tion researc h
Define evaluation together, define evaluation in c ontext, review wider knowledge, evaluate
evaluation
c onsequenc es of options, selec t polic ies and strategies, ac tion, evaluation of outc omes,
redefine evaluation
Repeat Year 2
Repeat Year 1
[ 265 ]
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
lik ely to focu s on su ppor tin g fa cu lty lea der sh ip, pla n n in g a n d per for m a n ce m a n a gem en t.
Two m eth ods cou ld be im m edia tely u sefu l.
F ir st, bu dget a ctivity gr ou p execu tives m igh t
r eview th eir pla n n in g pr ocesses a n d m a p
th eir decision system s, m a in pa r ticipa n ts a n d
k ey issu es. It is n ot u n u su a l for execu tives
pa r ticipa tin g in su ch a r eview to r eth in k
th eir pla n n in g m eth ods, r estr u ctu r e th eir
in for m a tion a n d decision system s, a n d to
develop a m or e str a te gic per spective. Th e
secon d m eth od is to u se su r veys to iden tify
r ole-specific ch a llen ges th a t ca n th en be followed-u p a n d a ddr essed by r ole-set P D. In
both ca ses th e focu s of P D is n ot on a n in dividu a l sk ill bu t on gr ou p ca pa cities a n d th e
con sequ en ces of tea m a ction s in difficu lt
br oa der con texts.
A n u m ber of pr a ctica l im plica tion s follow.
F ir st, th e CP D itself w ill n eed to r eview its
pr ior ities a n d pr a ctices. A r etr ea t w a s h eld in
ea r ly J u n e. Th e pr oposed exten sion s to CP D
ser vices w ill en ta il a ddition a l fu n din g a n d
extr a a ppoin tm en ts or a r ea lign m en t of pr ior ities. Th e CP D w ill a lso n eed to r econ str u ct its
r ela tion sh ips w ith k ey con stitu en ces. To
illu str a te, given th e poten tia l im pa ct of IT on
th e qu a lity a n d com petitiven ess of tea ch in g
a n d lea r n in g, th e CP D w ill n eed to br ok er
n ew a llia n ces between con ten t exper ts,
in str u ction a l design er s, softw a r e specia lists
a n d th ose well ver sed in in tellectu a l pr oper ty
r igh ts, a ll a s pa r t of its n ew R&D pr ogr a m m e.
Th e a ddition a l a ppoin tm en ts r ecom m en ded
by th e HE RO Review a ppea r to be w a r r a n ted.
The contribution the CPD can make
in assessing and enhancing quality
in the university
Given th e de gr ee to wh ich I h ave a lr ea dy
em ph a sized th e im por ta n ce of th e qu a lity
a gen da , th e th r ee th em es offer ed a t th e ou tset
ca n n ow a ct a s a su m m a r y.
Th e pr oposed r oles for th e CP D a r e th a t it
su ppor ts con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t in tea ch in g, r esea r ch a n d a dm in istr a tion , pr om otes
or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g th r ou gh edu ca tive
lea der sh ip a n d com m u n ita r ia n P D in bu dget
gr ou ps, a n d pr ovides policy a n d pr a ctica l
a dvice on th e m a n a gem en t of qu a lity.
Th ese pr oposa ls wou ld both a ffir m th e
va lu e of, a n d exten d th e ser vices cu r r en tly
pr ovided by, th e CP D. Oppor tu n ities h ave a lso
been fou n d to a dva n ce th e qu a lity of ser vices.
For exa m ple, th e Stu den t E va lu a tion of
Cou r ses a n d Tea ch in g (SE CAT) pr ocess h a s
been fou n d to be m eth odolica lly ch a llen ged
a n d w ill be r epla ced by a m or e soph istica ted
set of policies a n d pr a ctices. Th er e a r e lik ely
to be a n u m ber of stu den t eva lu a tion m eth ods
[ 266 ]
u sed th a t a r e m or e a u tom a ted, a n d th en
exten ded in to th e for m a tive eva lu a tion of
cu r r icu lu m , su ppor t ser vices, pr ogr a m m e
m a n a gem en t a n d lea der sh ip. Th e pr ior ity
given to su ch pr oposa ls w ill, of cou r se,
depen d on th e qu a lity of th e policy pr oposa ls
a n d on th e developm en t of th e br oa der
in stitu tion a l policy con text.
Com m en su r a te fu n din g wou ld im ply n ew
per for m a n ce in dica tor s bein g developed for
th e CP D itself. For exa m ple, eviden ce of
con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t sh ou ld be ava ila ble
in th e for m a tive eva lu a tion of ser vices,
in cr ea sin gly soph istica ted u se of th e for m s of
stu den t eva lu a tion da ta , th e r esea r ch a n d
a pplica tion of in ter n a tion a l ben ch m a r k s, a n d
r isin g CP D r esea r ch pr odu ctivity.
Th e pr om otion of or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g
sh ou ld be seen in th e developm en t of a
n etwor k of a ssocia tes a n d by em pir ica l
eviden ce of a ction r esea r ch a n d bu dget gr ou p
a u dits a n d developm en ta l pla n n in g.
P r ovidin g policy a n d pr a ctica l a dvice wou ld
be eviden t in deeper con su lta tion s w ith oth er
cor por a te ser vice u n its, in volvem en t in
qu a lity m a n a gem en t policy r eview s,
im pr oved su ppor t to bu dget a ctivity gr ou p
execu tives, a n d HRD policy n etwor k in g
a cr oss th e Un iv ersita s 21.
Concluding note
Th is pr elim in a r y a n a lysis cu lm in a tes in a
vision of a n in ter n a tion a l R&D cen tr e th a t:
• m odels best pr a ctice in th e P D of gen er a l
a n d a ca dem ic sta ff;
• ju stifi es its ser vices u sin g a ph ilosoph y of
com m u n ita r ia n pr ofession a lism ;
• en h a n ces th e sta n din g of th e u n iver sity in
Un iv ersita s 21; a n d
• h elps boost th e pr odu ctivity of tea ch er s,
r esea r ch er s a n d or ga n iza tion a l lea der s.
It pr oposes th r ee r oles for th e CP D in th e
Un iver sity of Au ck la n d:
1 en h a n cin g th e con tin u ou s im pr ovem en t of
tea ch in g a n d lea r n in g;
2 pr om otin g or ga n iza tion a l lea r n in g; a n d
3 pr ovidin g policy a n d pr a ctica l a dvice on
th e m a n a gem en t of qu a lity.
References
Br u ce, B. (c1992), Dev elopin g S tu d en ts’ L ib ra r y
R esea rch S k ills, HE RDSA, Ca m pbelltow n ,
N SW.
Bu r n s, R. (1994), In trod u ction to R esea rch
M eth od s, Lon gm a n , Melbou r n e.
Ca n dy, P. (1995), “P r om otin g life-lon g lea r n in g:
a ca dem ic developer s a n d th e u n iver sity a s a
lea r n in g or ga n isa tion ”, k eyn ote pa per given
to th e SE DA Con fer en ce, Un iver sity of Su n der la n d, 18-19 Decem ber.
Re yno ld J.S. Mac phe rso n
The Ce ntre fo r Pro fe ssio nal
De ve lo pme nt at the Unive rsity
o f Aukland: to wards c re ating
ne two rks o f mo ral o bligatio ns
Inte rnatio nal Jo urnal o f
Educ atio nal Manage me nt
1 1 / 6 [1 9 9 7 ] 2 6 0 –2 6 7
Ca n n on , R. (1992), L ectu r in g, (2n d ed.), HE RDSA,
Ca m pbelltow n , N SW.
Cr ook s, T.J . (1988), A ssessin g S tu d en t Per for m a n ce,
HE RDSA, Ken sin gton , N SW.
Du ign a n , P.A. a n d Ma cph er son , R.J .S. (1992),
Ed u ca tiv e L ea d ersh ip, F a lm er P r ess, Lon don .
E u r opea n Lifelon g Lea r n in g In itia tive (E LLI)
(1994), L ife-lon g L ea r n in g: A S u r viva l Con cept
for th e 21st Cen tu r y, E LLI, Br u ssels.
E ver s, C.W. a n d La kom sk i, G. (1991), Kn ow in g
Ed u ca tion a l A d m in istra tion : Con tem pora r y
M eth od ologica l Con trov ersies in Ed u ca tion a l
A d m in istra tion R esea rch , Per ga m on P r ess,
Oxfor d.
Hodgk in son , C. (1996), A d m in istra tiv e Ph ilosoph y:
Va lu es a n d M otiva tion s in A d m in istra tiv e L ife,
Per ga m on P r ess, Oxfor d.
Hou le, C.O. (1980), Con tin u in g L ea r n in g in th e
Profession s, J ossey-Ba ss, Sa n F r a n cisco, CA.
Kem ber, D. a n d Kelly, M.E . (c1992), Im provin g
T ea ch in g th rou gh A ction R esea rch , HE RDSA,
Ca m pbelltow n , N SW.
Kem ber, D. a n d Mu r ph y, D. (c1992), T u tor in g:
Dista n ce Ed u ca tion a n d Open L ea r n in g
Cou rses, HE RDSA, Ken sin gton , N SW.
Lu blin , J . (1987), Con d u ctin g T u tor ia ls, HE RDSA,
Ken sin gton , N SW.
Lu n din , R. (1993), Ov ersea s Ex per ien ce in N on tra d ition a l M od es of Deliv er y in High er Ed u ca tion Usin g S ta te-of-th e-a r t T ech n ologies,
Depa r tm en t of E m ploym en t E du ca tion a n d
Tr a in in g, AGP S, Ca n ber r a .
McDon a ld, R. (1984), R eview in g Depa r tm en ts,
HE RDSA, Ken sin gton , N SW.
Ma cph er son , R.J .S. (1997), Ed u ca tiv e A ccou n tab ility: T h eor y, R esea rch , Policy a n d Pra ctice,
Per ga m on P r ess, Oxfor d.
Ma cph er son , R.J .S. a n d Cu sa ck , B. (1996), “J oh n
Dewey a n d edu ca tive lea der sh ip”, L ea d in g
a n d M a n a gin g, Vol. 2 N o. 4.
Moses, I. (1987), “E du ca tion a l developm en t u n its:
a cr oss-cu ltu r a l per spective”, High er Ed u ca tion , Vol. 16, pp. 449-79.
Moses, I. (1989), Hea d in g a Depa r tm en t: A Gu id e
for Hea d s a n d Ch a irs of Depa r tm en ts a n d
S ch ools, HE RDSA, Ken sin gton , N SW.
N a tion a l Boa r d of E m ploym en t, E du ca tion a n d
Tr a in in g (1996), L ifelon g L ea r n in g – Key
Issu es, Au str a lia n Gover n m en t P u blish in g
Ser vice, Ca n ber r a .
Sa dler, D.R. (c1984), Up th e Pu blica tion R oa d : A
Gu id e to Pu blish in g in S ch ola rly J ou r n a ls for
A ca d em ics, R esea rch ers, a n d Gra d u a te S tu d en ts in Ed u ca tion a n d th e S ocia l S cien ces,
HE RDSA, Ken sin gton , N SW.
Sch ön , D.A. (1987), Ed u ca tin g th e R efl ectiv e Pra ctition er: T ow a rd a N ew Design for T ea ch in g a n d
L ea r n in g in th e Profession s, J ossey-Ba ss,Sa n
F r a n cisco, CA.
Sen ge, P. (1990), T h e Fifth Disciplin e: T h e A r t a n d
Pra ctice of th e L ea r n in g Orga n isa tion , Dou bleday, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Sveiby, K.E . (1992), “Th e k n owh ow com pa n y:
str a te gy for m u la tion in k n ow ledge-in ten sive
in du str ies”, in Hu ssey, D.E . (E d.), In ter n a tion a l R eview of S tra tegic M a n a gem en t, J oh n
Wiley, N ew Yor k , N Y.
Th om a s, D. (1995), Flex ible L ea r n in g S tra tegies in
High er a n d Fu r th er Ed u ca tion , Ca ssell, Lon don .
Un iver sity of Au ck la n d (1995a ), R epor t of th e
Com m ittee Establish ed to Con d u ct a R eview of
th e High er Ed u ca tion R esea rch Office,
Un iver sity of Au ck la n d, Au ck la n d, May.
Un iver sity of Au ck la n d (1995b), Un iv ersity of
A u ck la n d 2001: M ission , Goa ls a n d S tra tegies,
Un iver sity of Au ck la n d, Au ck la n d.
Wa de, W., Hodgk in son , K., Sm ith , A. a n d Ar field,
J . (E ds) (1994), Flex ible L ea r n in g in High er
Ed u ca tion , Koga n P a ge, Lon don .
[ 267 ]