The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Teaching and Learning Regimes: Implicit theories and recurrent practices in the enhancement of teaching and learning through educational development programmes
Abstract
This paper uses the concept of teaching and learning regimes (TLRs) to help explore a set of questions about why some academic staff in universities thrive on and benefit from accredited programmes designed to improve HE learning and teaching practices ("educational development programmes") whilst others experience periods of resistance or some drop out altogether. "TLR" is a shorthand term for a constellation of rules, assumptions, practices and relationships related to teaching and learning issues in higher education. These include aspects of the following salient to teaching and learning, each of which we elaborate and illustrate in the paper: identities in interaction, power relations, codes of signification, tacit assumptions, rules of appropriateness, recurrent practices, discursive repertoires, implicit theories of learning and of teaching. The argument presented here is that academic staff on educational development programmes ("participants") bring to programmes sets of assumptions and practices rooted in TLRs. Educational development programmes themselves instantiate TLRs which may be more, or less, compatible with those of individual participants. Where there are incongruities between the two they need not be fatal if participants are able to, or are encouraged to, surface and reflect on previously tacit assumptions embedded in their TLRs. Similarly, there may not be a problem if participants are able to exercise discretion over the application of aspects of different regimes; applying them in different contexts as appropriate. Evidence from participants' writing, participant observation, secondary sources and data from eight interviews inform the paper and form the basis for illustrative vignettes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Promoting reflection in professional courses: The challenge of context
Boud, D., & Walker, D. (1998) · Studies in Higher Education · doi:10.1080/03075079812331380384 · Cited by 980 · cited 1×
“Bleakley (1999) points out that there are a number of alternative epistemologies underpinning the idea of re ective practice while Boud and Walker (1998) identify a number of fatal problems with the concept, especially the fact that the nature and use of re ective practice is highly…”
Background
Cited by
Developing a quality culture through the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
Mårtensson, K., Roxå, T., & Olsson, T. (2011) · Higher Education Research & Development · doi:10.1080/07294360.2011.536972 · Cited by 132
Credibility in educational development: trustworthiness, expertise, and identification
Little, D., & Green, D. A. (2022) · Higher Education Research & Development · doi:10.1080/07294360.2020.1871325 · Cited by 44
On learning in the clinical environment
Liljedahl, M. (2018) · Perspectives on Medical Education · doi:10.1007/s40037-018-0441-x · Cited by 37
Metadata
- Authors
- Trowler, P., & Cooper, A.
- Venue
- Higher Education Research & Development
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2002-11
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 221-240
- ISSN
- 0729-4360 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8366
- OpenAlex
- W2032932301
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 32.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Teaching and Learning Regimes: Implicit theories and recurrent practices in the enhancement of teaching and learning through educational development programmes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/0729436022000020742
- The paper
- Trowler, P., & Cooper, A. (2002). Teaching and Learning Regimes: Implicit theories and recurrent practices in the enhancement of teaching and learning through educational development programmes. Higher Education Research & Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436022000020742
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.