A systematic review protocol on the use of teaching portfolios for educators in further and higher education.

portfolio and undergraduate students have suggested that a teachingportfolio may have a benefit for educators in higher education as a means to providerelevancy and focus to their teaching.Design. The objectives of the review are to evaluate how a teaching portfolio assistseducators in teaching and learning; to evaluate the effects of maintaining a teachingportfolio for educators in relation to personal development; to explore the type ofportfolio used; to determine whether a teaching portfolio is perceived more beneficialfor various grades and professional types; and to determine any motivatingfactors or workplace incentives behind its implementation and completion. A searchof the following databases will be made MEDLINE, CINAHL, BREI, ERIC andAUEI. The review will follow the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance for systematicreviews of quantitative and qualitative research.Conclusion. The review will offer clarity and direction on the use of teachingportfolios, for educators, policymakers, supervisory managers and researchers involvedin further and higher education.

Research ethics committees: values and power in higher education

The rise of research governance structures in universities has created huge disquiet amongst academic researchers. The unquestioning adoption of a medical model of ethical review based upon positivist methodological assumptions has created for many a mismatch between their own ongoing ethical research practice and the process of obtaining clearance from Research Ethics Committees (REC). This paper examines the issues that have contributed to dissatisfaction with the ethical review model that is prevalent within the modern university. Using examples from the authors’ own experiences, the dynamics of values, interests and power in research governance is examined from multiple perspectives including that of REC member and applicant; lecturer/student supervisor; researcher; and
university administrator. The paper reveals a rift between the values and objectives of the key players in research governance within the modern university and concludes by asking whether differences can be resolved so that a collaborative approach to ethical review may be incorporated into a renewed academic research culture. It is suggested that the alternative is increasing alienation from anything to do with ‘ethics’, with potentially serious consequences for the ethical standards of social research.