What is a Learning Developer?

‘I’m a Learning Developer’.

It’s not easy explaining what you do. Friends and acquaintances will gain only a hazy idea from this term, teachers and lecturers may feel that they, too, develop learning, don’t they? and colleagues in other student services such as English for Academic Purposes or Librarians may be on the defensive, as you describe in more detail what you offer: ‘but we teach that!’.

I’m fascinated by and enjoy interprofessional working – I love finding out how other colleagues work and how they conceptualise what they do – those glimpses into the arcane knowledge of another profession. Since Learning Development in large part arose from those professions – counselling, disability support, English for Academic Purposes, librarian information literacy teaching, subject teaching – it’s hard to situate what we do as distinct, which can muddy waters for staff and students, and lead to tensions in interprofessional working.

But I think it is distinct. My gut reaction is that what I do as a Learning Developer is different to what I did when I was a subject lecturer who took an interest in developing my students’ study skills alongside their discipline knowledge. It’s different from the approach I observe in other professions even when they’re teaching topics which ostensibly also fall on ‘our patch’, such as writing or referencing. My view is that these approaches and the different professional perspectives that they emerge from are valuable, complementary and holistic, and the more we work together and understand what we can each bring, the better. However, to really make the best use of this collaboration, we need to have a clearer articulation of what each role brings. If we reduce it, discipline-style, to study skills topics, and carve it up between us as a curriculum, we’re going to lose so much. Better, I think, to try to capture what it is about the approach characteristic of a Learning Developer, alongside those of other professions, so we can see what lens each brings to bear on our shared central goal of helping our students learn effectively.

For me, Learning Development is what can occur in the space which opens up when we step away from formal assessment. I’ve been a subject teacher- albeit one very interested in developing her students’ study skills, but when I took on a learning development role outside subject teaching, even when discussing the same study skills, often with students from the same discipline as my former one, I realised that students were interacting with me differently, we were able to achieve something a little bit different that I couldn’t have done in my former role.

For me, the key difference was this: students knew I wasn’t formally assessing them. I wasn’t giving them grades or marks, passes or fails; telling them what was correct and what was incorrect. I was simply working with them to explore their learning, not my subject discipline. I was encouraging them to explore their own goals and standards, not meet mine. I didn’t hold the curriculum; the students held the agenda. Learning development is intrinsically non-judgemental. As a subject lecturer, my teaching was by definition judgemental (in the most supportive and well-intentioned way!). We do assess as Learning Developers, of course, all the time – it’s one of our tools to see if students’ learning is developing, to gauge their progress and the effectiveness of the strategies they’re using, but this is formative, informal and ungraded. We’re also an outsider to the discipline. We don’t prescribe, we help students describe what they see in their discipline’s study conventions, and make their own decisions based on those observations. We can of course suggest what may be more or less effective, but we’re then acting as mentors, not teachers. It’s not our role to hold the answers, and that can liberate both us and the students.

One to one work with students is, as Murray and Glass (2011) note, central to learning development work. However, I don’t think that this is because one to one tutorials are the definitive format for that work; Learning development isn’t one to one work. Lecturers, pastoral tutors, counsellors, librarians, all see students one to one in some developmental capacity, and we also offer group sessions, online learning, any format that helps us achieve the purpose. Instead, I think one to one work is at the core of Learning Development work as that is the space where we can most clearly step away from formal assessment, outside the long-established norms of the lecture hall, or seminar room, the academic’s office surrounded by their books. Embedded learning development is effective and important, but I think even there, we bring a little of that outside, non-judgemental space with us into that context, and that’s what makes it learning development even when we teach as part of a subject module. That’s what we bring that the subject lecturer can’t.

To me, then, a defining characteristic of the learning developer is that we do not formally mark student work. Learning development is a very loosely defined and diverse role, and many of us are based in faculties, closely involved in subject teaching, indeed may have dual roles as lecturers and learning developers. Many of us who identify as learning developers may then find themselves disagreeing with this definition. I would absolutely not want my understanding of the role to be exclusive or divisive however – that would be completely counterproductive.  I think the resolution of this tension lies in a return to the question, posed by Murray and Glass (2011) of whether we are a community of practice or a profession.

My response is that we are primarily a profession, for reasons I’ll explore in another blog post. A Learning Developer in this sense would be the one I outline above. However, I think learning development can at the same time be a community of practice – the distinct perspective, expertise and skills of the learning developer can of course be adopted and brought to bear by those in other roles to a greater or lesser extent by carefully managing that switching between assessing and non-assessing roles. But when you formally assess, that learning development space is closed off, and it can be tricky to open up again when needed, as you’re changing the relationship you have with the students, from learning developer to lecturer and back. Fully embodying that characteristic non-judgemental value is hard in this circumstance.

Operating outside formal assessment, and as an outsider to the curriculum has opened that space up for me and my students, and the really interesting thing is – I’d say that’s where a great deal of my expertise as a Learning Developer has come from. Students have shared their insights and concerns with me in that space in a way they never felt able to when I was a subject lecturer, and I’ve learned an awful lot from them that my teacher training never gave me access to. That’s a distinct and valuable expertise I can bring to interprofessional work with colleagues in other roles, and enables me to work in a different and characteristically learning development way.


Murray, Linda and Glass, Bob, 2011. ‘Learning Development in Higher Education: Community of Practice or Profession?’ in Peter Hartley, John Hilsdon, Christine Keenan, Sandra Sinfield and Michelle Verity, eds. Learning Development in Higher Education Basingstoke, Palgrave MacMillan. 28-39.


5 thoughts on “What is a Learning Developer?

  1. I loved this post – thank you! I agree with all that you say… and then… When we developed and delivered – and assessed – our Becoming an Educationalist module, I think that the fact that we developed and delivered it as emancipatory practitioners, we were, whilst assessing student learning, still (acting as) learning developers and still creating a learning development space. Our goal as learning developers was that we created a nomos space for our students to navigate on their own terms as they became the academics that they wanted to be -and this is what makes the difference – rather than assessment per se.
    My hope for our profession is that we can persuade more discipline academics to be learning developers within their disciplines – and that is facilitated by the existence of our discipline and our academic spaces.

    1. I fear we’re in danger of losing our academic space if we fully equate an LDer as profession with LDer as community of practice! A subject lecturer can assert that they are an LDer, and that only enhances their practice and also their reputation for excellence in teaching – but I can’t conversely state that I am a lecturer. I’m not. I’m not on an academic contract, I don’t have a ‘subject’ discipline, I don’t have a formal research remit, no academic would accept me as a lecturer. They can be what I am, but I can’t be what they are. I’m therefore ‘less’. And if we can therefore foist even more duties onto academics (and I think institutionally, if this did take off more widely, it will be framed as an additional duty, rather than a mindset shaping lecturers’ subject teaching practice), then I am expendable. I think there is a need for a separate function, for students, but also – if we want to keep our jobs – for us!

  2. Reblogged this on Becoming An Educationalist and commented:
    #becomingeducational W23 Becoming learning developers

    What is a learning developer?

    Can a discipline academic create a learning development space in their curriculum or classes – to facilitate emancptory education – that allows the student to become the professional that they want to be?

    Or does the fact of assessment – and the judgement and power that that confers obviate learning development in the curriculum?

    Great questions – I hope – and many thanks to Helen Webster for posing them on her blog in the first place!!

  3. I certainly think a subject lecturer can draw on the mindset, expertise and skills of an LDer in their lecturing. But the minute you formally assess, you’re judging (that sounds bad, but you have to judge student work as a lecturer, it’s your job!), and I’m struggling to see how a lecturer could fully inhabit the LD role and perform that function of non-judgmental curriculum outsider. Partially, perhaps, but I can’t see how one minute you could assess their work and the next, have the students working with you in a capacity free of judgement – they won’t trust you with all that switching!

    There’s another issue here tho, raised by the centrality of the subject lecturer in higher education. It’s one I was certainly guilty of when I was a subject lecturer. They were MY students. I was possessive about them. I wanted to be all things to them. I wanted their successes to be my successes. I wanted to be that inspirational, extra-mile, devoted teacher. I was very reluctant to accept that actually there were other colleagues in other roles who could supply something I wasn’t in a position to, that there was a need for more than one role in a student’s education, and that this wasn’t a reflection on me – it was just different functions, and there was in fact a good purpose to them being separate. Do lecturers *need* to be LDers? especially if there is a tension or conflict between those roles?

    You certainly see this attitude from another side when you work in student services – that motherly lecturer who hung onto a student’s problems too long, got both them and her in a mess, and really, really should have referred to counselling ages ago. That well-meaning lecturer who tries to help a student with dyslexia or a health issue, when actually someone in a medical or advisory capacity would be much better placed to do so and have access to more resources and funding. The crusading lecturer who tries to advocate on behalf of an international student regarding their visa, when actually, legally qualified advice was essential.

    I’ve learned from working with counsellors and have adopted some of their approach, but I’m not a counsellor. That would negate my LD work and do no one any favours. I think it’s entirely possible for a lecturer to adopt some LD practice, and I think that would be very positive, but not try to be an LDer – we have people who are better placed to do that, as they’re outside the curriculum and can offer something a lecturer can’t. And that’s ok. If you’re too much the LDer in your role as subject lecturer, you’re not fully able to be the subject lecturer for them – they need you to assess their work against your subject expertise! Us LDers can’t do it! Right tool for the right job.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s