Doing educational development ambivalently: Applying post-colonial metaphors to educational development?

Post‐colonial theories about liminality, hybridity, unhomeliness, and identity form a novel lens through which to re‐theorise educational development work. Applying these conceptual frameworks allows practitioners and the academics they work with the opportunity to problematise some of educational development’s colonial underpinnings and assumptions. They also enable an exploration of the states of betweenness that form educational developers’ identities and impact implicitly and explicitly upon the nature of their changing practices. This paper seeks to read educational development and research supervisor development in particular “against the grain”. It also seeks to illustrate these concepts through some vignettes of my academic development practice.

The risky business of doctoral management

Universities are under no less pressure to adopt risk management strategies than other public and private organisations. The risk management of doctoral education is a particularly important issue given that a doctorate is the highest academic qualification a university offers and stakes are high in terms of assuring its quality. However, intense risk management can interfere with the intellectual and pedagogical work which are essentially part of doctoral education. This paper seeks to understand how the culture of risk meets the culture of doctoral education and with what effect. The authors draw on sociological understandings of risk in the work of Anthony Giddens (2002) and Ulrich Beck (1992), the anthropological focus on liminality in the work of Mary Douglas (1990), and the psychological theorising of human error in the work of James Reason (1990). The paper concludes that risk consciousness brings its own risks—in particular, the potential transformation of a culture based on intellect into a culture based on compliance.