Search

Academic writing is a contested area, even more so in times of large language models and artificial intelligence (AI). This writing is tricky to navigate and master especially for newcomers – staff and students. Learning Developers almost uniquely play with writing as a practice of emergence and discovery. Academic writing is a process: we write to become academic. Students write to join their epistemic communities, and Learning Developers write to give birth to an emergent field. Drawing on recent work by Syska and Buckley (2022) and Abegglen, Burns and Sinfield (2022; 2023), we argue that academic writing is an initiation into and participation in wider professional and academic discourses. We ‘write to learn’ rather than ‘learn to write’. In our practice with students, we know that we need to move beyond the ‘mechanics’ of writing and make the process meaningful, engaging, interactive, and fun. Similarly, Syska and Buckley (2022) have explored what makes Learning Developers ‘tick’ with respect to academic writing – revealing how, counterintuitively perhaps, academic writing can become an inclusive Learning Development space: our ‘happy place’. With this presentation, we opened the discussion on academic writing for building the Learning Development community.

With the precipitous changes of the platform formerly known as Twitter, brought on by the change of ownership in late 2022, many networked educators sought, and continue to seek, new digital spaces to continue fostering and developing their digital practice. The authors of this article had all been actively networked on Twitter, and wanted to explore these changes in their professional worlds. As we sought out these spaces we critically began to interrogate our own practices on this platform to gain a deeper understanding of our practice going forward. We’ve approached this exploration through three vectors: an examination of the terms we use to describe movement from platform to platform, digital identity formation and disruption, and building human connection in digital spaces. The findings from our exploration yielded the following conclusions: (1) With regard to metaphors of movement (i.e., “migration”) we leave space open as to which metaphor to use as no metaphor is a perfect fit to explain the complexity of this phenomenon. (2) Digital identity/ies are multifaceted and sometimes place-specific, but some networked affordances seemed to encourage an ever-evolving digital identity more than other spaces. (3) Finally, digital spaces afford us the ability to carve out our own communities from the wider academic community, in the process developing a more owned and voiced identity. However as social media platforms are fleeting, those connections – and identities – are in danger of getting co-opted or deleted as platforms rise and fall.

We live in times of certain uncertainty with Higher Education in constant need of reflexive adaptation. The Reimagining Higher Education project, funded by the Association for Learning Development in Higher Education (ALDinHE), explored creatively and playfully the future of education. It invited the academic community to participate in workshops to reflect on the current status of Higher Education and, at the same time, to conceptualise what form a humane and integrated Learning Development, the holistic and sustainable fostering of academic literacies and practices, would take within that Higher Education system. The outcome is an open-source guide of Higher Education models, real and idealised, that potentially have the power to change perspectives and attitudes. In this short presentation, we (the project team) will showcase the guide, outlining what a more inclusive, empowering, and creative academia would look like. Our research participants have imaged the unimaginable: universities open, accessible, full of trust, care and laughter. Please join us to further reflect on the future of academia, with hope and positivity.

Academic writing in Higher Education (HE) is contested practice freighted with meaning, never more so than for widening participation students, still placed as ‘outsiders’ and often left feeling unwelcome and ‘un-voiced’. Ironically, as Molinari (2022) argues, universities were originally more diverse in form and content, not heavily ‘literate’ but oral, discursive and creative. As HE has become ostensibly more ‘open’ the system has become more normative, more formally rule-bound, more ‘written’ – and hence more exclusive. A recent example in the UK is the Office for Students’ attack on inclusive assessment, pushing instead for more emphasis on spelling, punctuation and grammar. Alongside this tension, many in the Learning Development (LD) community feel that discipline academics do not see the ‘teaching’ of academic writing as part of their pedagogic and assessment repertoire, preferring to send students to LD ‘to be fixed’. However, academics and LDs engaged in discussion and free writing (Elbow 1998, 1999) on this topic at a LondonMet L&T Conference presented views that were more nuanced and sympathetic. There was a deep appreciation of the ‘real’ work that academic writing does with and for students; but also a sense that they did not know how to build writing into their practice(s). And so was born this staff Guide: a playful, creative and yet intensely practical guide for academic staff who want to empower their students to write – often, playfully, experimentally – on their way to ‘becoming’, and becoming academic. Presenting the Guide in the resource showcase allowed us to highlight the continuing centrality of writing. Lecturers and university staff can use it to engage students in ‘writing to learn’ rather than ‘learning to write’.

There is a feeling in the Learning Development community – and in academia more generally – that discipline staff see the academic writing of students as a problem better ‘fixed’ by others. However, staff at a writing workshop held within a learning and teaching conference revealed positions that were more nuanced, inflected, compassionate and ‘responsible’ than this. Writing collaboratively around the words produced by staff at our workshop, led to new insights into ways that staff could support student writing as an emergent practice. We decided to collect and share the many ways that discipline staff might be encouraged to harness writing in their own curriculum spaces: a staff guide on supporting writing and other forms of learning and assessment emerged. In this paper we discuss collaborative writing as a method of inquiry as we explore the contested terrain of academic writing, challenge the notion of ‘writing skills’, and model a more emergent form of exploratory writing.

The global pandemic has led to an explosion of open learning opportunities for academics to connect, share and develop ideas together. This paper presents a collaborative autoethnographic case study on the educational leadership approaches enacted and experienced in the voluntary Creativity for Learning in Higher Education (#creativeHE) community. The authors reflect, critically analyse and review the leadership of this open peer support community as it is experienced by them using visual metaphors and paired conversations. Insights gained through this inquiry seem to suggest that the leadership within this community is characterised by and experienced as communityship, a highly participatory and democratic way of leading that brings harmony, offers refuge and stretches the leadership team. Their humane and affective bonds as a collective provide a safe and calm working space in which everybody can flourish.