An interview with John Lea.
1. What do you think are current challenges of PGCert-like courses?
To my mind, one of the big challenges relates to whether educational development teams are really enhancing the quality of teaching and learning or merely enhancing the institution’s image. There’s a fundamental difference between looking good and being good. Many institutions strive to appear commendable by claiming all their staff are teacher trained, but this can involve minimal engagement and lack depth in professional development. Naturally, the two forces are not necessarily diametrically opposed, but it’s important to recognise the tension here. It would be of particular concern to me to see comprehensive PGCert programmes being watered down in a chase towards mere credentialism and ticking the right metric boxes.
The Covid pandemic appears to have forced a shift to more isolated, online formats that risk diluting the collaborative and rich learning that PGCerts traditionally promote. This is another big challenge. I often found it difficult to persuade colleagues from different disciplines of the merits of coming together to discuss aspects of HE pedagogy. But, usually, after a few months, people began recognising the value of this type of interaction. Our challenge, therefore, is produce a happy hybrid, in the process exploring how a full range of learning environments can enhance not just the learning of the PGCert participants, but in turn, their own students’ learning. But there is also a particular danger here that the metric challenge and the online challenge combine to conspire against us, so we must be on guard, and be ready with robust evaluative data of the merits of a comprehensive PGCert experience.
There is also the perennial challenge of trying to marry the tension between teaching and research in universities. PGCert programmes have often been seen as a means of pushing academics towards an interest in teaching, when they know that the real kudos lies in research. This can produce recalcitrant participants, and, ultimately, academics who are caught, rabbit-like, in an institution’s headlights, not knowing which way to turn. This is another big challenge, but one which can be met, I believe, by using a PGCert course to look at all the possible ways in which research and teaching could be united. For example, how to get undergraduate students interested in undertaking research; how academics might use their research in the classroom; and how to conduct research (possibly with students) on pedagogy itself – aimed at enhancing student learning.
Ultimately, the future of PGCerts will hinge on our ability to reaffirm their value not just as credentials but as pivotal professional development experiences that genuinely enhance teaching quality and student learning. Additionally, they might also be pivotal in helping to provide parity of esteem to all forms of scholarly activity, and to produce a more healthy equilibrium between research and teaching, in the von Humboldt tradition.
2. What would an ideal PGCert look like?
For me, it’s vital that it provides a safe space. I’ve always emphasised that the classroom should be a place where everyone should feel able to share their experiences and challenge ideas openly. When I ran a PGCert course, I would literally close the door and tell participants, “This is our space, our time”. I included myself in that: “I’m not representing management; I am one of you.” I would also emphasise to participants that HE pedagogy, indeed the whole idea of higher education, is contested territory, and here we have an opportunity to explore that territory; to think, to experiment and to evaluate our practice.
Academia can be a tough place; ruthless at times. And because of that academics can often fear admitting difficulties, worrying about the potential repercussions. A PGCert should be a supportive community where we discuss this and help each other overcome difficulties. For example, if someone struggles with first-year teaching, we should be able to discuss and tackle it together. From my experience, this type of supportive dialogue was something that participants valued greatly, often reflecting years later that it was one of their best experiences at the institution.
An ideal PGCert should also enable participants to engage in research into their own pedagogic and wider professional practice. The PGCert curriculum should not just impart pedagogical knowledge but also encourage participants to conduct their own action research. This approach allows them to produce hypotheses and solve problems within their own teaching practices using research tools. It’s about moving beyond simply being taught, to actively researching and providing evidence for the effectiveness of one’s teaching methods.
Lastly, it’s essential to consider the broader role of a university in society within the PGCert framework. Discussions should not be limited to teaching techniques but also encompass what a university is for—is it to produce good citizens, skilled professionals, or something else? These philosophical discussions about the purpose of higher education and the moral dimensions of teaching and learning are what make a PGCert truly comprehensive and reflective of the depth and breadth of academic practice.
3. What do you think PGCert provisions will look like in 20 years from now?
Predicting what PGCert programmes will look like in 20 years is almost a false challenge, especially given the rapid pace of change we see in education today. Artificial intelligence is currently a game-changer, raising questions about the future roles of teachers and how we might need to adapt the whole idea of pedagogy. It’s hard to predict; things can shift dramatically in just a short period. For example, I’ve been to workshops one week where I’m told to tell my students to turn off their phones at the beginning of a session, only to find in another workshop a week later that I should be telling my students to make sure their phones are on, ready to use them as learning tools throughout the session.
Reflecting on my own teacher education, a mentor once advised my peer group never to discard old notes, methods or ideas because they often come back around. This cyclical nature suggests that while we’re all focused on AI now, there’s a possibility it could fall out of favour, and traditional teaching methods might regain prominence. Just like fashion trends, educational methods can be surprisingly recurrent.
That said, certain aspects of education, I believe, will endure. The need for reflective spaces where educators can discuss, research, and collaborate will likely remain essential. The format may change—we might move away from formal certificates or structured courses due to financial constraints or evolving educational models—but the core need for collaborative and reflective educational spaces will persist.
I envision a future where, regardless of the type of formal professional development for academics, mentors or champions of teaching within their institutions will play an ever-increasing role. This will include universities formally recognising individuals internally who have shown exceptional dedication to pedagogical research and mentorship, alongside on-going workshops and conferences dedicated to the full range of scholarly activity, including students as partners in learning and research with staff. This would truly make universities institutions that are continually investing in what Ernest Boyer referred to as the fully-rounded academic; in the process helping to unite research and teaching, and, wherever possible, including students in these activities. Whatever happens to formal PGCert programmes, I would like to see them acting in some way as a platform or springboard for new academics into this idea of a university.
4. Any words of wisdom for PGCert leaders and conveners?
I think it’s important for PGCert leaders to understand the inherent tensions in educational development. It’s crucial not to get overwhelmed or disheartened by these tensions, but rather to work with them. Vice-Chancellors face immense pressures to make their institutions look good, even if they might personally disagree with the approaches being taken. This is particularly the case when the stakes are high and perceived reputational damage is to the fore. To work with these tensions, you first need to understand them.
The conflict between teaching and research is particularly significant. If someone excels in research, the expectation to also excel in teaching and learning can create enormous stress for an individual. More likely, excelling in research may find academics being removed from direct student interaction. Recognising and managing the tensions here are essential; it’s about finding balance and understanding the broader institutional pressures.
I would caution against taking any single narrative as the absolute truth in higher education. Personally, I think there is more merit in viewing everything as contentious and contingent; what is accepted as best practice today can be disproven tomorrow. My PhD supervisor once told me that whatever I discover is likely to be proven wrong in five years, and that’s okay. It’s about contributing to the ongoing dialogue in education, not finding ultimate answers.
As I mentioned before, I think PGCert leaders should encourage programme participants to see themselves not just as educators but as mentors and champions of learning; fostering a community of educators who support each other and champion teaching and learning within their own professional contexts.
Understanding the student perspective is fundamental. Creating empathy with the student experience can help educators design more thoughtful and practical assignments. We must remember what it’s like to be a student, to balance multiple demands, and to learn under pressure. This empathy can guide more compassionate and effective teaching practices. A formal PGCert programme is surely an ideal place to remember what it’s like to be a student, including the pressures to do the required reading and meet assignment deadlines.
The role of a PGCert leader is multifaceted and challenging. It requires a deep understanding of educational dynamics – within society and within a classroom – and a commitment to genuine improvement, with a readiness to adapt and embrace new perspectives. Ultimately, it’s about enthusing academics to become part of an on-going conversation about improving student learning and embracing all aspects of scholarly activity. When I ran a PGCert programme (for ten years) I was continually thinking about the relationship between research and teaching, encouraging participants to explore how each can inform the other; looking for ways to unite them and resisting the temptation to separate them.