Cultivating Educational Excellence: A Framework for Staff Development in Creative Arts Higher Education

1. Introduction and background

In the realm of higher education, particularly within the vibrant field of creative arts, the identification of a skills gap among students signals a pressing call to action for institutions. This challenge arises not merely from the static curriculum but from the rapid pace of technological advancement and evolving industry standards that outpace current educational frameworks. Such a scenario magnifies the essential task facing higher education: the imperative to dynamically update curriculum content and staff development strategies, ensuring they are in lockstep with the relentless march of innovation and new technological developments.

The shift towards embracing new technology underscores the dynamic evolution of technological advancements and highlights the paramount importance of faculty development in navigating these changes. The swift pace at which technology advances, exemplified by frequent software updates and the introduction of new tools, requires educators to not only be proficient with current technologies but also be flexible and eager to assimilate emerging innovations into their teaching. This need exposes a glaring lack of systematic support for faculty development—a challenge that cuts across disciplinary and geographical lines in the realm of higher education.

As we delve into the creation of a framework for staff development, we broaden the conversation to acknowledge the global imperative for higher education institutions to create an ecosystem wherein both faculty and students are well-prepared to meet future demands. Viewing faculty members as invaluable institutional assets underlines the essential nature of investments in staff training and wellness initiatives. Furthermore, inviting industry professionals to transition into academic roles brings forth unique opportunities and challenges. It necessitates a paradigm shift from being practitioners to becoming educators and mentors for the next generation.

Internationally, educational governance bodies stress the significance of developing initiatives for both staff and students that are attuned to their needs. This ethos is integral to the accreditation criteria for higher education qualifications, advocating for a comprehensive approach to staff development. Through an exploration of both theoretical underpinnings and practical implementations of such a framework, we endeavour to create a model that not only bridges current skill gaps but also cultivates an environment of perpetual learning and adaptation. This approach is designed to meet the immediate needs of creative arts departments and establish a benchmark for staff development across the full spectrum of higher education disciplines

2. Conceptualisation of ‘staff development’

Sparks and Loucks-Horsley (1989) articulate staff development as processes that cultivate the expertise, skills, or attitudes of educators in higher education in relation to their professional responsibilities. Drawing on insights from Jooste (2015:55) and Killion (2007:5), staff development is understood for this discussion as a structured process entailing:

• Identification of staff problems or needs for effective mentoring or teaching;
• Planning of workforce development programs;
• Development and implementation of educational programs to tackle workplace challenges and staff issues; and
• Evaluation of the effectiveness of these staff development programs.

The subsequent table outlines the phases of staff development, synthesizing criteria from Jooste (2015:255) and Killion (2007:5), to present a comprehensive framework incorporating the following steps:

Table 1: The phases of staff development (Sources: Jooste, 2015:255; Killion, 2007:5)

In the broader context of faculty development across higher education, the integration of 21st-century technology into teaching and learning is a universal challenge. Studies, such as one by Clark and Boyer, reveal that faculty members perceive significant benefits from development programs that enhance their technological proficiency, leading to more effective teaching methodologies (Clark & Boyer, 2016). Schneckenberg and Wildt's research further underscores the pivotal role of academic staff in fostering innovation within education, highlighting the necessity for educators to be both initiators and adaptors of digital tools within their pedagogical practices (Schneckenberg & Wildt, 2006). The embrace of digital tools, coupled with creative pedagogical principles, requires the development of new academic skills, fostering a teaching environment that is both innovative and responsive to technological advancements.

The responsibility of identifying the need for new or updated technological resources and training falls on the faculty, a dynamic that underscores the importance of proactive communication within educational institutions. The subsequent implementation of additional training, often facilitated through e-learning platforms, necessitates access to the latest software and internet technologies. This process not only equips the staff with necessary tools but also empowers them to creatively integrate these technologies into their curricula, enhancing the learning experience for students.

Promoting an environment of mentoring and constructive peer interaction is critical for fostering a collegial atmosphere conducive to academic growth and innovation. This environment encourages cross-disciplinary collaboration and the sharing of best practices among faculty members, ensuring that teaching methodologies remain relevant and impactful. The emphasis on peer interaction and the sharing of workload highlight the importance of recognizing and leveraging the diverse strengths within the faculty (Ferman, 2002; Vorster & Quinn, 2015).

Moreover, Van Schalkwyk et al. (2015) articulate the nuanced and complex nature of technical learning within higher education, challenging the simplistic approaches often proposed for educational reform. They advocate for a deep engagement with the processes of change, acknowledging the difficulties inherent in altering established practices and beliefs within academic settings. This perspective is crucial for understanding the multifaceted nature of professional learning and its potential to drive meaningful improvements in teaching and learning across disciplines.

By adopting a holistic approach to faculty development that encompasses technological proficiency, collaborative learning environments, and a readiness to embrace change, higher education institutions can better prepare their faculty to meet the evolving demands of the educational landscape. This comprehensive model not only addresses the immediate needs of faculty members but also sets a foundation for continuous adaptation and growth, ensuring that higher education remains at the forefront of innovation and excellence.

3.??? Global Perspectives on Staff Development in Higher Education

Novkovska (2013:39) emphasizes that human resource development within higher education is a multifaceted challenge, requiring dedicated attention from institutions aiming for efficiency and productivity. This assertion holds true across the globe, as universities and colleges confront the need for continual faculty development to keep pace with academic and technological advancements.

3.1 Faculty Qualifications and Professional Development

Globally, higher education institutions grapple with the balance between academic qualifications and practical teaching skills among their faculty. The expectation for faculty members to possess qualifications surpassing those they teach is a standard practice, necessitating ongoing professional and academic development. This requirement underscores the commitment to maintaining high teaching standards and adapting to curriculum advancements, reflecting a significant investment in both time and resources by educators.

Professional development is recognized universally as a critical component of an educator's career progression (Johnston, 1997). It is intricately linked to quality teaching and, consequently, to student success, as highlighted by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (2008). As universities navigate the complexities of the modern world, the role of staff development as a catalyst for institutional change becomes increasingly evident (Brew, 2010). Meeting the multifaceted needs of students—ranging from learning experiences to the broader campus environment—remains a priority, reinforcing the importance of a well-developed, responsive faculty.

3.2 Bridging the Pedagogy Gap

Across the globe, many faculty members excel as subject matter experts yet lack formal training in pedagogy, a gap that can lead to challenges in effectively delivering curriculum and engaging students (Buckley, 1999). Addressing this gap through targeted staff development programs, including workshops on modern assessment methods and pedagogical techniques, is essential for enhancing teaching effectiveness and student learning outcomes.

3.3 Continuous Professional Learning

The rapid evolution of technology and its integration into the curriculum necessitates ongoing professional learning for educators. As new tools and software become integral to various disciplines, faculty must not only master these technologies but also incorporate them creatively into their teaching practices to enrich student learning (Daniels, 2017). This dynamic environment highlights the need for continuous adaptation and growth among educators to remain at the forefront of their fields.

3.4 Identifying Development Needs

A multi-faceted approach is crucial for identifying staff development needs within higher education institutions. This approach includes monitoring policy changes, observing faculty in their teaching environments, engaging with key stakeholders, and responding to the evolving goals of the institution (Jooste, 2015). Historical perspectives on teaching as a secondary priority to disciplinary knowledge underscore the shifting paradigm towards valuing pedagogical skills alongside academic expertise (Kreber, 2001).

In various national contexts, including South Africa, the emphasis on the importance of teaching and the development of faculty to meet these standards remains a critical challenge (Van Schalkwyk et al., 2015). Addressing this challenge requires concerted efforts to elevate the status of teaching within the academic community and ensure that faculty development programs are aligned with both institutional objectives and the broader educational landscape.

4. The purpose of staff development

A comprehensive study by Ruth (2006) involving multiple universities revealed that the primary objective of staff development was to 'Increase capacity to do the current job', with 'Fulfilling criteria for promotion' ranking as the least significant. This insight underscores the broader aim of staff development initiatives: to enhance the competencies and capabilities of faculty members, thereby ensuring they are well-prepared to meet the demands of their roles and contribute to the institution's overall success.

Across the spectrum of higher education, the focus of staff development policies is to establish a foundation for institutional growth through the continuous improvement of educational quality and service delivery. These policies typically emphasize the creation of opportunities for all faculty members to engage in professional growth and development, reflecting a commitment to maintaining high standards of teaching and learning.

Daniels (2017) points out that the formation of these policies, grounded in broad participation and diverse input, aims to cultivate a shared value system while accommodating the unique needs and contexts of individual staff members. However, achieving this balance requires thoughtful implementation strategies that respect the diversity and specific requirements of the academic community.

Brew (1995) highlights the dual focus of staff development practices: they must address the needs of individual faculty members and support the strategic objectives of the institution. Effective workforce development initiatives, therefore, combine creativity with strategic planning to enhance both individual competencies and organizational capabilities.

In cases where specific needs arise, such as the integration of new technologies into the curriculum, it becomes evident that staff development must also include targeted training to equip faculty members with the necessary skills and knowledge. This ensures that educators are not only proficient in their disciplines but also adept at employing the latest educational tools and methodologies.

Reflecting on the experiences of academic staff at the University of Canberra, Johnston (1997) challenges the notion that professional development serves merely as a corrective measure. Instead, many educators view these opportunities as a means to further refine and enhance their existing teaching practices, demonstrating a proactive and self-assured approach to professional growth.

In summary, the essence of staff development within higher education lies in fostering a culture of continuous learning and improvement among faculty members. By prioritizing the development of educators' abilities to excel in their teaching roles, institutions can assure the delivery of high-quality education that meets the evolving needs of students and the broader academic community.

5. The outcome of a needs assessment

Yousif, Ahmed, and Osman (2019:31) define 'training needs assessment' (TNA) as a critical process that triangulates training, needs, and assessment. This process involves identifying the gap between current competencies and those required to achieve optimal performance. Training encompasses any activity aimed at acquiring new information and skills or altering attitudes. Needs refer to the discrepancy between existing and necessary knowledge and skills, while assessment denotes the method used to identify and prioritize these needs.

McNamara (2006) elaborates that a training analysis aims to pinpoint the specific skills or practices that educators need to effectively impart knowledge to students. This involves assessing the desired outcomes for the organization, the current capabilities of the staff, and concluding with the identification of the 'performance gap'—the skills and knowledge the educators need to acquire.

5.1 Global Application of Training Needs Assessment

In the context of global higher education, the process of staff development encompasses ensuring faculty qualifications meet institutional standards and addressing specific training needs related to curricular and technological advancements. This dual focus necessitates a comprehensive approach to assessing training needs that accommodates both institutional requirements and the dynamic landscape of higher education disciplines.

To facilitate this assessment, a universally applicable questionnaire can be deployed across departments. This tool not only evaluates faculty progress towards meeting institutional standards but also provides a platform for staff to express their needs for further support or specialized training. Emphasizing mentoring and peer interaction, as Ferman (2002) suggests, enriches this process by fostering a collaborative learning environment. This approach aligns with long-term objectives for faculty development, emphasizing the role of human resources in facilitating annual performance reviews to maintain and enhance staff productivity and quality of education.

Particularly with the integration of new technologies into teaching and learning, the questionnaire should also address the need for software training and skills development. By identifying specific knowledge gaps and prioritizing them, institutions can develop targeted training strategies. This not only ensures that faculty members are equipped with the latest technological tools but also enhances their ability to integrate these resources into their pedagogical practices effectively.

6. Approaches and strategies for implementation

The implementation of staff development initiatives across higher education institutions requires a framework that integrates various phases of faculty growth. Drawing from the comprehensive models of Jooste (2015) and Killion (2007), we propose a holistic approach that encompasses the essential components depicted in Figure 1.

(Figure 1 illustrates the cyclical nature of staff development, starting with determining the need, developing the plan, implementing the plan, evaluating and modifying the plan, and sustaining the plan to ensure continuous professional growth.)

In a global context, faculty often require periodic updates to their existing knowledge base—ranging from minor refreshers to more substantive training. An effective knowledge transfer process is critical for implementation success, particularly when new methodologies, such as simulation-based learning, are introduced. Simulations, which allow students to engage with real-world scenarios, are widely recognized for their effectiveness in various disciplines. They bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application, preparing students for the complexities of their future professions (Lane & Mitchell, 2013).

The train-the-trainer model, rooted in Mezirow’s transformative learning theory, is universally applicable as it fosters the development of educators through reflective practice and engagement with new content, methods, and concepts (Taylor, 2017). This model equips faculty members with the necessary tools to not only develop simulations but to seamlessly weave them into the curriculum.

Lane and Mitchell (2013) highlight the global demand for skilled staff development trainers capable of cultivating highly qualified educators across diverse learning environments. Real-world simulations are a pivotal technique for enhancing the pedagogical repertoire of educators, enabling them to create immersive learning experiences that mirror professional realities.

In essence, as faculty members worldwide design and update curricula, the ability to integrate innovative teaching methods such as simulations is increasingly vital. This capability ensures that educators can provide students with a robust, applied learning experience that effectively prepares them for their future careers.

7. Implementation of the plan

Across the spectrum of higher education disciplines, implementing a training plan to address faculty knowledge gaps is a pivotal step. Creating an immersive and distraction-free environment is key for faculty to fully engage with new pedagogical approaches and content. One effective method is to conduct intensive workshops, which are recommended to take place in settings removed from the usual demands of academic life. This model, as proposed by Lane and Mitchell (2013), suggests that such workshops enable educators to deeply engage with and apply their new knowledge and skills in a focused manner, free from the pressures of their routine academic responsibilities.

At the conclusion of such workshops, educators should aim to achieve several key outcomes, including:

• The identification of practical educational activities, potentially including real-world simulations;
• The development of scenarios that model real-world challenges and situations;
• The application of simulation activities to reinforce learning;
• Practice using any new technology or techniques in scenarios reflective of real-world applications; and
• The determination of resources necessary to support these realistic educational scenarios.

In a global context, it is essential that professional development is not viewed as an isolated event but is integrated into the daily practices of educators. Such an approach ensures that professional learning is consistently aligned with and reinforces the core values of academic excellence and innovation (Rienties, Brouwer, & Lygo-Baker, 2013). By doing so, professional development becomes a continuous, embedded process that contributes to the evolution of teaching and enhances the quality of education provided.

8. Assessment and evaluation of the framework

The assessment and evaluation of staff development programs are critical components of higher education institutions' strategic planning worldwide. Determining the effectiveness of these programs involves asking key questions: Was the training effective? Did participants meet the training objectives? And how can the impact of the training be quantified?

The effectiveness of academic development initiatives must be regularly monitored, with feedback mechanisms in place to facilitate continuous improvement, highlighting the necessity of ongoing evaluation to maintain high-quality teaching methods.

The aphorism "Feedback is the breakfast of champions," popularized by Blanchard and Johnson’s popular management book, The One Minute Manager (1982:38), underscores the importance of constructive feedback in performance improvement. Yet, it is a global concern that many educators lack adequate feedback on their teaching efficacy. To address this, comprehensive evaluation and feedback sessions are essential following any professional development activity. Such evaluations can include direct assessments, such as class tests, to gauge students' understanding immediately after teaching, and indirect measures, such as student surveys, to evaluate the perceived value and engagement with new teaching methods, including the effectiveness of real-world simulations and problem-based learning.

Lane and Mitchell (2013) suggest the creation of a detailed assessment plan to track the outcomes of staff development processes. This plan should outline the specific intentions of the program and set clear objectives to be achieved. By incorporating both formative and summative assessments at each phase of implementation, institutions can ensure that faculty development efforts are effectively enhancing teaching practices.

Empirical studies, such as the one conducted by Monyatsi (2006) in Botswana, affirm that well-structured appraisal and feedback processes can significantly motivate educators to enhance their performance. Blackwell and McLean (1996) further emphasize the value of showcasing exemplary practices and providing opportunities for mentoring as catalysts for active participation in professional development.

Considering the rapid pace of change in academia, continuous learning is imperative for lecturers. Institutions that invest in their faculty, treating them as invaluable assets, recognize the substantial value of trained employees. This investment acknowledges the considerable costs associated with training staff and the challenges of replacing highly skilled educators. As such, staff wellness and support structures must be integral to faculty development programs. This is particularly relevant when industry experts transition into teaching roles in higher education, requiring a shift in their mindset to become role models for the practitioners of the future.

Ultimately, the commitment to lifelong learning and the adoption of one-to-one mentoring align with the ethos of continuous education. By fostering an environment that values and supports continuous professional development, higher education institutions not only enhance the capabilities of their staff but also contribute to the institution's resilience and adaptability in an ever-evolving educational landscape.

9. Sustaining the plan

The principle of reinforcement through repetition is foundational to the sustainability of any skills acquired through staff development programs. Recognizing that skill retention can diminish over time, particularly with complex tasks, higher education institutions globally should prioritize ongoing refresher courses. These courses help to maintain and reinforce the knowledge and skills that faculty have gained, ensuring that the investment in staff training continues to yield benefits.

The critical challenge, as identified by Lane and Mitchell (2013), lies in maintaining the momentum of professional development initiatives post-training. Continuous engagement with applied learning exercises, such as simulations, is imperative to encourage ongoing staff involvement and development. In a landscape where technology evolves rapidly, consistent support for educational innovation and the cultivation of professional networks are essential.

In a global context, faculty across various disciplines should be encouraged to engage in continuous learning activities, such as maintaining a portfolio of their work, whether it is research, artistic, or professional practice. This practice not only showcases their expertise but also encourages a regular re-engagement with the evolving skill sets of their fields.

Sustainability remains the cornerstone of any staff development plan. Without it, the initial efforts and resources invested in professional development are at risk of becoming ineffectual over time. Therefore, institutions must commit to providing ongoing support for their faculty, recognizing the high costs associated with training and the challenges of recruiting and training new staff. Faculty members are valuable assets to an institution; investing in their wellness and growth not only benefits them individually but also enhances the institution's overall educational quality.

Furthermore, the integration of industry experts into academic roles presents unique opportunities for innovation in teaching and research. However, it also requires a strategic approach to help these professionals transition into educators who can serve as role models and mentors for future practitioners. By addressing these challenges head-on and prioritizing the sustainability of development efforts, higher education institutions can ensure that their faculty remain equipped to provide high-quality education and contribute to the institution's long-term success.

10. Conclusion

Throughout this discourse, the necessity of consistent evaluation of academic development programs has been underscored, not just as a statutory mandate but as a fundamental component of educational excellence. Quality teaching methods are the bedrock of high-caliber education, and regular assessments ensure these methods meet the evolving standards of higher education.

It is imperative to recognize that staff development transcends mere obligation; it is a strategic investment in educators' professional growth and, by extension, in the caliber of education they provide. Across disciplines and institutions worldwide, the integration of professional development into daily academic life is essential. This ongoing process fosters the creation of robust curricula and the effective translation of those curricula into enriching educational experiences.

As we consider the global landscape of higher education, we must emphasize that sustainability is not simply one element of staff development—it is the linchpin. Without it, even the most comprehensive development strategies are at risk of becoming obsolete. The continuity of faculty growth initiatives is vital for enduring success and adaptability in the face of rapid technological and pedagogical changes.

In conclusion, this essay serves as a call to action for higher education institutions globally to prioritize sustainable faculty development. By doing so, they commit to the long-term prosperity of their educators and the academic futures of their students. Further research is encouraged in the areas of measuring the long-term impact of faculty development, exploring innovative models of continuous professional learning, and examining the integration of industry expertise into academic settings. Such endeavors will contribute to an ongoing dialogue that seeks to elevate the practice and perception of teaching within the sphere of higher education, ensuring that it keeps pace with the demands of the future.

References

Blackwell, R., & McLean, M. 1996. Mentoring new university teachers. The International Journal for Academic Development, 1(2), 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144960010211

Blanchard, K. & Johnson, S. (1982).?The One Minute Manager. New York: William Morrow and Company. 38.

Brew, A. 1995.?Directions in Staff Development. Buckingham: SRHE. 95 - 97.

Brew, A. 2010. Transforming academic practice through scholarship, International Journal for Academic Development, 15(2): 105 - 116. https://doi.org/10.1080/13601441003737618

Buckley, F. J. 1999.?Team Teaching: What, Why, and How? Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications. 8.

Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. 2008. Basic skills for complex lives: Designs for learning in the community college. A report from strengthening pre-collegiate education in community colleges (SPECC). Stanford, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Clark, C., Boyer, D.D. 2016. Twenty-first-century technology integration staff development: a phenomenology.?Journal of Computers in Education, 3(1), 1 - 20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-015-0053-y

Daniels, J.? 2017.? Professional learning in higher education: making good practice relevant.? International Journal for Academic Development,? 22(2):? 170 - 181. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2016.1261352

Ferman, T. 2002. Academic professional development practice: What lecturers find valuable.?The International Journal for Academic Development, 7(2), 156. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144032000071305

Johnston, S. 1997. Academics Hard at Work: the place of teaching and professional development related to teaching. Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice. 3 (2), 257 - 272. https://doi.org/10.1080/1354060970030207

Jooste, K. 2015.?Leadership in Health Services Management. 2nd ed. Cape Town: Juta. 255.

Killion, J. S. 2007.?Assessing Impact: Evaluating Staff Development. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. 5.

Kreber, C. 2001. The Scholarship of Teaching and Its Implementation in Faculty Development and Graduate Education. In: Stabile, C & Mendelson, R. A?New Directions for Teaching and Learning. New Jersey: Wiley & Sons. 79 - 88 https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.18 .

Lane, A. J & Mitchell, C. 2013. Using a Train-the-Trainer Model to Prepare Educators for Simulation Instruction.?The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 44(7), 313-7. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20130515-33

McNamara, C. 2006.?Assessing Your Training Needs: Needs Assessment to Training Goals.?Available: https://managementhelp.org/training/systematic/needs-assessment.htm . [Last accessed 2020, March 12].

Monyatsi, P. P. 2006. Motivating the Motivators with Developmental Teacher Appraisal.?Journal of Social Sciences, 13(2), 101. https://doi.org/10.1080/09718923.2006.11892538

Novkovska, B. 2013. MANAGING HUMAN RESOURCES IN A SMALL STATISTICAL OFFICE. In: Giovannini, E?Human Resources Management and Training - Compilation of Good Practices in Statistical Offices. Geneva: United Nations. 39.

Quinn, L. & Vorster, J. 2014. ‘Isn’t it time to start thinking about ‘developing’ academic developers in a more systematic way?’ International Journal for Academic Development, 19(3), 255-258. https://dx.doi.org/10.10 80/1360144X.2013.879719 .

Rienties, B., Brouwer, N. & Lygo-Baker, S. 2013. The effects of online professional development on higher education teachers’ beliefs and intentions towards learning facilitation and technology.?Teaching and Teacher Education, 29(1), 122-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2012.09.002

RSA (Republic of South Africa).? 2004.? Criteria for Programme Accreditation, Council on Higher Education. 16. Available: https://nr-online.che.ac.za/html_documents/CHE_accreditation_criteria_Nov2004.pdf

Ruth, D. 2006. Identity, Institutions and Systemic Change.?Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 34(4), 487–510. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1741143206068213

Schneckenberg, D., &Wildt, J.? 2006.? Understanding the concept of ecompetence for academic staff.? In: Blackwell, R., & McLean, M.? The challenge of eCompetence in academic staff development.? 1st ed.? Galway: Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching.? 29.

Smyth, R. 2003. Concepts of Change: Enhancing the Practice of Academic Staff Development in Higher Education.?International Journal for Academic Development, 8(1), 51 – 60.? https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144042000277937

Sparks, D., & Loucks-Horsley, S.? 1989.? Five Models of Staff Development.? Journal of Staff Development,? 10(4):? 41. Available: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ414183

Taylor, E. W. 2017. Transformative Learning Theory. In: Laros, A., Fuhr, T., & Taylor, E. W.?Transformative Learning Meets Bildung. Leiden: Brill - Sense. 17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-797-9

Van Schalkwyk, S., Leibowitz, B., Herman, N. & Farmer, J. 2015. Reflections on professional learning: Choices, context and culture.?Studies in Educational Evaluation, 46(1), 4 - 10. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.stueduc.2015.03.002

Vorster, J., & Quinn, L. 2015. Towards shaping the field: theorising the knowledge in a formal course for academic developers.?Higher Education Research and Development, 34(5), 1031 1044. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2015.1070126

Webster-Wright, A. 2017 Reframing Professional Development Through Understanding Authentic Professional Learning.?Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 702, 707. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F0034654308330970

Yousif, A. K., Ahmed, O Y. & Osman, W. N. 2019. Training needs assessment of academic teaching staff in Faculty of Dentistry, University of Gezira, Sudan 2018.?Education in Medicine Journal, 11(1), 31. https://doi.org/10.21315/eimj2019.11.1.4