The Higher Education Ordinance requires that teachers are able to demonstrate pedagogical competence for employment as a university teacher (4 Chapter HF, SFS 1993). It is however up the each institution to judge whether or not that requirement has been met in connection with cases of employment or promotion.
In conversations I have had for the purpose of understanding how pedagogical competence can be built up at Kalmar University many teachers and department heads have talked about how they are concerned about pedagogical questions and that they are endeavouring to increase pedagogical competence and proficiency. Many are struggling with different pedagogical challenges and are trying to find solutions and innovative ways to deal with different teaching situations. But conversations and encountering questions about pedagogy for higher education seem to have a relatively low priority in practice compared to other questions when it comes to practical action. Unfortunately pedagogical competence is neither an important part nor a decisive factor for academic careers at most Swedish institutions.
Maybe that is due to the fact that pedagogical competence is understood to be a concept that is difficult to grasp? The concept is not found in the Swedish Agency for Higher Education’s evaluations and quality audits. In 2007 the agency introduced an award for outstanding educational environments. In the description of the guidelines regarding the quality aspects one can find formulations similar to those we have used to define pedagogical competence, but the Swedish Agency for Higher Education does not itself use that concept. In the Agency’s proposal for a new system for evaluating courses that comes into effect in 2010, pedagogical competence is not mentioned (the Swedish Agency for Higher Education 2009). According to the proposal evaluations shall be constructed with three quality level indicators: learning
goals and examination, learning outcomes and the students’ experiences and influence. It is possible that behind these indicators there is the basic assumption that
pedagogical competence is a fundamental precondition that is valued indirectly when the results of the students are measured.
Definition and description of pedagogical competence
At the beginning of the project “Strategic Development of Pedagogical competence” there was the vision of reaching a common view of the notion of pedagogical competence. During the course of the project it became apparent that even if pedagogical competence is defined with different words at different institutions there
is a basic understanding that is shared by everyone, namely that pedagogical competence comprises much more than teaching skills, which is also evident in Olsson’s model (Antman & Olsson 2007). The participants in the project have united on the understanding that pedagogical competence can be assessed – presupposing the existence of a suitable foundation for such an assessment. That is why it is important that a definition of pedagogical competence is followed by a description or instructions on which type of documentation is expected.
In connection with the discussions that have taken place at Kalmar University about pedagogical competence – for example, within the framework of the courses on pedagogy for higher education – the model for Lund University’s Faculty of Engineering (Antman & Olsson, ibid) has been used in combination with the formulations from Uppsala University (Giertz 2003) and the definition that has been developed in the Mälardalen University project regarding the Pedagogical Career Ladder (Ryegård 2008). This material was also used in connection with the inspiration day that was held in November 2008 at Kalmar University within the framework of the project “Strategic Development of Pedagogical competence”. The experiences from the discussions that took place on such occasions show that teachers become very involved when they get a chance to reflect over their roles and discuss with colleagues what pedagogical competence means to them. Something that perhaps was an unreflected matter of course or a problematic dilemma for individual teachers becomes a source of dynamic pedagogical development. Teachers who previously only focused on the didactical aspects of teaching become aware of a greater context and many more factors that influence student learning. My experience is that new and important insights, “aha experiences” and curiosity to continue developing one’s profession are usually the result of conversations that focus on pedagogical competence among teachers in higher education.
There has however been a shortage of forums and platforms for continued discussions about the concept of pedagogical competence and its implications for the activities at Kalmar University. That is often due to a lack of time – teachers have heavily loaded schedules and it is difficult for them not to give priority to teaching to the benefit of pedagogical discussions. The boards, the department heads, senior officers and other people in leadership positions have also had difficulties finding time for discussions about pedagogical competence and its relationship to their tasks as leaders. Undoubtedly, the conversation on the subject takes place in different more or less formal contexts, but there has not been a systematic way to work with these issues. Teaching excellence
Internationally teaching excellence is often used to describe what we call pedagogical competence (Skelton 2007, Dunkin 1995, Kreber 2002). I have sometimes met scepticism about using the word excellence in pedagogical contexts in Sweden. In my opinion that is unfortunate because the word implies aiming at lofty goals and high quality.
There are however examples of how the idea of pedagogical excellence has taken root in Sweden and how different forms for rewarding such quality have been developed and applied at a number of Swedish institutions. An inspiring example is the Pedagogical Academy at Lund University’s Faculty of Engineering where teachers
who are accepted obtain the pedagogical competency grade of Excellent Teaching
Practitioner (ETP) and an immediate salary increase. In addition, the institutions
where these teachers work obtain an increased allocation of funds (Olsson & Roxå 2008). The authors think that a clear connection between the teachers’ award and the quality of the study results can be ascertained.
It remains to be seen if Linnaeus University is going to adopt or develop some form of pedagogical distinction for teachers who distinguish themselves pedagogically, but most critical in my opinion is that work to increase knowledge about the importance of pedagogical competence and its significance in higher education in Sweden is intensified.