Editorial

Abstract

Academics throughout the world are increasingly under pressure to demonstrate the quality of their teaching and, by extension, the quality of their pedagogical understandings (Ory, 1991; Wiers- Jenssen, Stensaker, & Grogaard, 2002). Within institutional frameworks designed to support stu- dent learning, emphasis is commonly placed on the importance of improving 'overall student satisfac- tion'. Such an outcome, it is often claimed, is most likely to be experienced in learning environments that are student centered; technologically medi- ated; socially, culturally and emotionally support- ive; conceptually and pedagogically innovative; engaging, inspiring, motivating; and, of course, responsive to both local and global imperatives (Appleton-Knapp & Krentler, 2006; Bedggood & Donovan, 2012; Teichler, 1996).While each of these claims appear, on the sur- face, to be logical and, perhaps, even self-evident, every one of the terms at the heart of the discussion - quality, pedagogy, innovation, technology and so on - are open to multiple and competing inter- pretations. Something that is regarded as a qual- ity learning experience in one context may not be held in the same regard in a different location (Ory, 1991; Ramsden, 1991). Similarly, the extent to which any educational environment is seen to be 'student centered' may be directly dependent upon what students we are talking about in the first place and how we go about measuring the phenomenon of 'centredness'. In addition to this, even where an experience is rated as high quality by students, the experiences of the staff members involved in its delivery may raise questions about whether it has been, overall, a quality (and desirable) experience. The key point here is that any claims made about 'quality' pedagogy, educational innovation, or stu- dent satisfaction in any university environment need to be carefully examined in order to highlight the key definitions (implicit or explicit) they are underpinned by.This special edition proceeds from the belief that opening up debates about terms that are often used uncritically - quality, pedagogy, learning - is necessary if universities are going to respond in any meaningful way to the diverse range of staff, students, and environments that they are com- posed of (McWilliam, 2004).The papers in this special issue work together to ask a range of questions:* What counts as quality pedagogy in universities of the 21st century, and which voices feature most prominently in related efforts to 'measure' or determine quality?* To what extent do dominant discourses about quality pedagogies or innovation recognize and respond to diversity in student and staff popula- tions, and the range and variety of higher edu- cation institutions?* How does the increasing pressure to develop new modes of delivery (intensive, flexible, online) complicate attempts to define 'quality pedagogies' for diverse cohorts?* How do debates about, and scrutiny of peda- gogical quality and teaching performance impact upon academic identity?The papers in this special edition explore these questions - and the debates and opportunities they highlight - through reference to a variety of national and international activities within diverse higher education contexts. Together they provide a range of conceptual frameworks to support reflec- tion upon what 'quality pedagogy' might, can or should mean for academics and for students in contemporary higher educational environments.The special edition begins with various explo- rations of the broad issue of pedagogy and what counts as good, valuable or effective pedagogy in diverse educational environments.In the opening paper, Sharn Donnison and Margaret Marshman (pp. 58-65) explore the often overlooked relationship between curriculum and pedagogy making explicit the ways in which different curriculum models impact upon a student's learning journey. …