Case study tables discussions

To discuss the main theme of the conference "Educational Technologists: Identities of a new Profession" (see Keynote of C. Whitchurch) there were case study tables within the interactive discussion sessions. The aim was:

• to analyze and discuss the present status of educational technologists at Swiss universities
• their role within the organization
• their involvement into faculty development programs and educational development in general
• and to identify good practice and educational technologists' needs.

 Results of case study table 1 & 2

Professional role(s): The role of the educational technologist within the organization

Organizational structure(s): The role of educational technology units within the organization

The leading question "How can organizations support individuals to work in third space" led to the following key insights.

(1) The growth of the "third space" seems to compensate for shortcomings of the academic system in times of mass education. It is a highly flexible and adaptive space and it remains a question to be discussed how it can (if at all) be best managed.

(2) Various reasons led people to enter the "third space". Among the most common are the following:

• attractiveness of jobs (high degree of flexibility, room for creativity, "interface"job)
• idealist reasons: meaningfulness of contributing to education
• personal live reasons/stability
• opportunity

For many entering "third space" was a conscious step.

(3) Accordingly, the following competences/characteristics are mentioned to be key beyond a profound disciplinary expertise.

• Basic interpersonal skills
• Innovation drive
• Ability for translation
• Ability for abstraction
• Tolerance and work with ambiguous situations
• Pragmatism

Results of Case Discussion Table 3

Faculty Development: The Role of E-Competence-Training with Academic Training Programs

(1) With our e-competence trainings we either reach the right people (academic staff/teachers) with the wrong problems ("How can I design my own webpage?") or the wrong people (technical/administrative staff) with the right problems ("How can I develop good e-learning?").

(2) At most universities there are no "positive" incentives for faculty to improve their teaching through professional development. One identified motivation for teachers to attend trainigs or consultation are bad results in course evaluation. This approach focuses on the weakness of teachers rather than on strength.

(3) A good strategy to reach faculty members could be the integration of e-competence development into programs for "young" professionals.

(4) First small and easy to realize step to an integrated strategy for faculty development should be a common communication platform for all courses offered - one searchable platform for all providers and all target groups to allow faculty an overview over the whole offering.