Constructing the professional identity of Digital Education Specialists in UK higher education: perceptions, networks, and the value of CPD

Join us on Bluesky for #LTHEchat on Wednesday 24th June at 8pm BST with guest Abbi Shaw (@abbis.bsky.social) to discuss professional identity, recognition, and collaboration in higher education. Together, we will explore how Digital Education Specialists understand and communicate their contribution, the role of professional development and networks in shaping professional identity, and how colleagues across academic and professional services roles perceive and work alongside digital education professionals in supporting the student experience.


Introduction

In 2022, as a Digital Education Specialist (DES) studying for an MA Education: Leading Innovation and Practice, I conducted a research study into the professional identity of DES during 2021/22. The study focused on the period in which universities were returning to campus after Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) had required teaching, learning and assessment to take place almost entirely online. More than 40 UK DES participated in a survey and 12 took part in follow-up interviews.

My findings suggested that this period exacerbated many existing complexities around DES professional identity. Participants reported challenges around visibility, recognition and influence, while the return to campus appeared to heighten some of the barriers to institutional integration that had developed during the pandemic period.

Four years on, digital education is no longer viewed as an emergency response. Blended, online and digitally enhanced learning have, in most institutions, become expected features of higher education. Yet questions remain about how the expertise of those supporting this work is recognised, understood and valued.

For this week’s #LTHEchat, I want to revisit some of the themes from that research and explore how DES professional identity is understood today, both by those who work in digital education and by colleagues across higher education. I am particularly interested in the role that continuing professional development (CPD), professional accreditation and sector networks play in helping DES articulate and communicate their contribution.

I started my research from the idea that DES often experience challenges to the formation, visibility, and perception of their identities, whether personally, institutionally, or both (Akerman, 2020; White, White & Borthwick, 2021). Whether it’s differences in the language used, or power dynamics between academic, and professional roles, it is difficult for institutions to reach, and sustain, blended learning maturity without actively ensuring DES are fully-embedded into the everyday academic space (Mihai, Questier & Zhu, 2021). A clear understanding of DES’ professional identity – both amongst DES themselves, and in their institutional context – and the ability to communicate the possibilities that identity and practice have to offer is therefore key in fostering a positive environment in which DES can best perform.

The need for DES’ professional identity to be constructed: how are we doing?

DES’ professional identity necessitates construction: it is rarely inherent (Altena et al., 2019; Scott et al., 2019; Lawrence, 2022). The work itself is often unseen, or is not perceived as actively being work: DES perform not only the production of resource and support, but also act as a translation, education, and development role which must take place between colleagues. An individual’s sense of professional identity is thus inevitably influenced by the nature and context of these interactions with colleagues (Beaton & Hope, 2022). It’s too easy for DES to be labelled “techy people”, whose indefinable work, which may or may not take place solely in binary code, is perceived as relevant only to the organisation of files and folders, and the removal of the irritating error message, rather than relevant to the classroom, the design of the assessment, and the structure and delivery of the course as a whole. The pedagogic legitimacy and inclusion afforded DES by both colleagues, and institutional structures and approaches truly matters (Watermeyer et al., 2021).

As a consequence, the need for DES to be in the committee, the steering group, the procurement panel, the many, many meetings in which the work of the modern university is done, has, previously, been difficult to evidence if an institution’s clear understanding of the nature and purpose of the role of DES has yet to be developed. Historically, whether in the literature, or my own research, the message from DES themselves has been that, either institutionally, or locally, they have found themselves critically underestimated or misunderstood by those whose understanding matters most. If it is the case that blended, online and digitally-enhanced learning are fully-established parts of normal UK Higher Education offerings, have we also fully established the purpose, presence and fullness of the DES this learning necessitates?

The potential for CPD and collegiality to support the development and projection of DES’ professional identity

A notable dimension to DES’ professional identity is its inherent connectedness (Walker & Macneill, 2015). DES’ work is fundamentally similar across UK higher education, resulting in a multitude of sector-wide networks, such as ALT and the advisory agency Jisc, as well as many regional and disciplinary networks, not to mention, of course, the online networks that events such as this very #LTHEchat develop. Engagement with such networks enhances the capacity of DES to understand themselves, and communicate in more personalised, contextual terms (Beaton & Hope, 2022), consequently fostering individual and collective professional identities (Walker & MacNeill, 2015;  Arnold, 2022).

Moving on from networks to objective, and transferable accreditations, that most commonly identified as being of benefit to DES is CMALT (Certified Membership of the Association for Learning Technology), awarded following peer assessment of a reflective portfolio of work. ALT recently introduced Associate, Senior, and Principal levels to facilitate career development of DES. Similarly, fellowships of the Higher Education Academy (FHEA – also available in Associate, Senior and Principal) can be useful for DES. Ostensibly designed for academic roles in UK HE, these accreditations focus on approaches to teaching, allowing DES to consider themselves and their practice academically, improving their ability to communicate in academic language (Nutt, 2022). Completing such frameworks is one of the few ways DES and other third space professionals can evidence career development in the pursuit of promotion (Shotts & Shaw, 2022). 

To access professional development, however, DES must exist in an environment that recognises the existence of relevant opportunities, and is willing to finance and accommodate them (McIntosh & Nutt, 2022). Further, DES and other third space roles often need to create their own opportunities to participate in projects and clear examples of their individual practice, as, where their possible contribution to academic work and the student experience is not understood,  they are more likely to encounter “glass walls” (Campbell-Perry, 2022:118) which prevent their collaboration with academic colleagues. 

Whilst professional portfolios and connections with the wider DES networks support the development of professional identity (White et al., 2021), the fact perception of DES relies upon the projection of a constructed identity suggests to me such engagement with professional development ought to be a priority for DES at all levels, as well as for their institutions. 

My findings were in line with the literature, in that professional development did support the development of professional identity, and, in turn, that this developed identity allowed DES to advocate for themselves, and ensure their work was more highly visible within their institution. Participants who had completed professional portfolios often appeared more confident in discussing their work, leadership and impact. They were generally better able to explain their contribution in ways that colleagues could understand. By contrast, some participants who had not engaged with these frameworks expressed frustration about how their work was perceived, while simultaneously finding it more difficult to articulate the nature of that work themselves.

This raises an interesting possibility. Professional development may not simply enhance expertise; it may also help DES communicate that expertise more effectively.

Looking ahead

My research corroborated the idea that professional identity is not something DES automatically possess. Rather, it is something they continually construct, communicate and negotiate within their institutional context. Professional networks, accreditation and reflective CPD appear to play an important role in supporting that process.

If that remains true today, investment in DES development is not simply beneficial for individuals. It may also help institutions better understand, recognise and make use of digital education expertise.

I’m keen to continue to explore whether DES have grown any closer to feeling fully situated and understood in their roles, whether CPD has played a clear role in this, and whether non-DES participants feel, themselves, clear around their DES’ colleagues role, and their overall ability to contribute, ultimately, to the student experience.

References


Akerman, K., (2020). ‘Invisible imposter: identity in institutions’, Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 24:4, 126-130, DOI: 10.1080/13603108.2020.1734683.

Altena, Sharon, Ng, Rebecca, Hinze, Meredith, Poulsen, Simone, & Parrish, Dominique Rene (2019) ‘’Many hats one heart’: A scoping review on the professional identity of learning designers.’ In Yi Wei S, Chew, Mun C, Kah, & Alphonso, A (Eds.) Personalised Learning. 

Diverse Goals. One Heart: Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE 2019) Conference Proceedings. Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Australia, pp. 359-364.

Arnold, D., (2022). ‘Inside out and outside in: an exploration of peripheral third space.’ Third Space Perspectives. Blog. Posted 10th October 2022. https://www.thirdspaceperspectives.com/blog/inside-out-and-outside-in-an-exploration-of-peripheral-third-space.

Beaton, F. & Hope, J. (2022) ‘Exploring the Identities of Blended Professionals in Higher Education’. The Impact of the Integrated Practitioner in Higher Education: Studies in Third Space Professionalism. Ed. Emily McIntosh & Diane Nutt. Routledge, London.

Campbell-Perry, S. (2022) ‘The blended professional: barriers and boundaries to collaborative institutional cultures’, in McIntosh, E. and Nutt, D. (eds.) The Impact of the Integrated Practitioner in Higher Education: Studies in Third Space Professionalism. London: Routledge.

Denney, F. (2021). ‘A glass classroom? The experiences and identities of third space women leading educational change in research-intensive universities in the UK.’ Educational Management Administration & Leadership. doi:10.1177/17411432211042882.

Lawrence, J., (2022). ‘Career Trajectories in the Third Space.’ The Impact of the Integrated Practitioner in Higher Education: Studies in Third Space Professionalism. Ed. Emily McIntosh & Diane Nutt. Routledge, London.

McIntosh, E. & Nutt, D., (2022). ‘Introduction and literature review.’ The Impact of the Integrated Practitioner in Higher Education: Studies in Third Space Professionalism. Ed. Emily McIntosh & Diane Nutt. Routledge, London.

Nutt, D., (2022). ‘Rewarding Blended Working and Integrated Practice.’ The Impact of the Integrated Practitioner in Higher Education: Studies in Third Space Professionalism. Ed. Emily McIntosh & Diane Nutt. Routledge, London.

Quinsee, S., (2022). ‘Leadership in the Third Space.’ The Impact of the Integrated Practitioner in Higher Education: Studies in Third Space Professionalism. Ed. McIntosh, E. & D. Nutt. Routledge, London.

Shotts, J. & Shaw, M., (2022). ‘Recognising and Developing Talent.’ The Impact of the Integrated Practitioner in Higher Education: Studies in Third Space Professionalism. Ed. Emily McIntosh & Diane Nutt. Routledge, London.

Walker, D. & MacNeill, S., (2015), Learning Technologist as Digital Pedagogue, The Really Useful Ed Tech Book, 91-106.

Watermeyer, R., Crick, T., Knight, C. & Goodall, J., (2020). ‘COVID-19 and Digital Disruption in UK Universities: Afflictions and Affordances of Emergency Online Migration.’ Higher Education 81(3):623–41. doi: 10.1007/s10734-020-00561-y.

Watermeyer, R., Crick, T. & Knight, C., (2021). Digital disruption in the time of COVID-19: learning technologists’ accounts of institutional barriers to online learning, teaching and assessment in UK universities, International Journal for Academic Development, DOI:10.1080/1360144X.2021.1990064.

White, S, White, S and Borthwick, K. (2021) Blended professionals, technology and online learning: Identifying a socio-technical third space in higher education. Higher Education Quarterly. 75: 161– 174. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12252.

Guest bio

Abbi Shaw

Abbi Shaw is the Faculty Digital Education Manager for UCL Arts and Humanities, responsible for the strategic and good pedagogical use of teaching, learning, and assessment technologies across the Faculty’s broad range of disciplines. Abbi’s research interests include the professional identity of digital education specialists, and methods of effecting digital education change in UK higher education. Prior to joining UCL in 2020, Abbi, with an extensive background in vintage bookselling and digital commerce, worked in the Library and as a Learning Technologist at St. Mary’s University Twickenham. 

This entry was posted in announcement. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a comment