Leadership for teaching and learning: Exploring a department-level educational leadership role at a Swedish comprehensive university

As excellence in teaching and learning, in combination with a focus on student performance rates, are guiding the demands placed on higher education institutions, modern universities are attributing strategic importance to leadership of teaching and learning. Previous studies on educational leadership have, nevertheless, identified significant challenges to such leadership due to lack of clear role descriptions, lack of recognition, and lack of access to professional development and support. Using empirical data from a Swedish comprehensive university, we explore the experiences of an appointed leadership role for teaching and learning, that is, the Education Leader, at the department level. Our findings show that a university-wide policy establishing the role and a support structure around it has resulted in a clearly visible and valued role across the university. Furthermore, Education Leaders experience being positioned at the heart of the department’s educational activities, performing hub-like work in relation to those they lead. However, some challenges related to the complexity of the department contexts are also identified.


Introduction
Educational leadership is rarely a sought-after role in contemporary, excellence-driven universities.De-valued in relation to research leadership, a hindrance to research careers, it may, in fact, be one of the most undesirable roles within academia.Yet, educational leadership is increasingly identified as indispensable for the development of modern universities' essential activities, teaching and learning.As values such as effectiveness in terms of student performance rates in combination with quality/excellence in teaching and learning are guiding the demands placed on higher education institutions, universities are attributing strategic importance to leadership for teaching and learning.Hence, the past decade has seen universities implement new leadership roles and structures with the specific aim of enhancing teaching and learning.
Strategic development of leadership roles for teaching and learning has, in some cases, had a national scope.Role titles such as "Learning and Teaching Coordinator" and "Teaching Fellow" have, for example, been widely introduced in the UK higher education context (Irving, 2015: 186), and, in Australia, the role of Associate Dean for teaching and learning has been implemented on a nation-wide scale as a way to support the implementation of a student-centered learning paradigm (Mason and de la Harpe, 2020).A more local example is given by Vithal (2016) who discusses the introduction of a university-wide structure of leadership roles for teaching and learning from the institutional to the department level as part of a strategy to support the development of scholarship of teaching and learning at a South-African university.
This study explores an empirical case in point from the Swedish higher education context: the implementation of an appointed leadership role for teaching and learning at the departmental level, which, in tandem with the development of a pedagogical ideas program and the establishment of an excellence in teaching qualification, was part of a broad university-wide strategy from 2012 to 2020 to enhance teaching and learning and upgrade these activities in relation to research at the university.In particular, the study thus offers an empirical case where some of the key obstacles for an effective leadership of teaching and learning identified in earlier research, that is, lack of clear role descriptions and mandate, lack of recognition and lack of professional development and support, were obviated in the implementation of the role.By focusing on how this role is experienced and practiced by those who have performed the role during the first 8 years since its' implementation, we hope to contribute to the growing field of studies on leadership roles designated for the enhancement of teaching and learning in higher education.

Leadership in higher education
Academic leadership in higher education is an extensive research area populated by a variety of perspectives and approaches.Attempts to identify effective leadership in higher education with a focus on leadership behavior or competence (e.g.Bryman, 2007;Ramsden, 1998) co-exist with ambitions to theorize the nature of academic leadership as models of distributed leadership (e.g.Bolden et al., 2008;Jones et al., 2012) or "hybrid" leadership (Gronn, 2011).Such models emphasize relational, collaborative and shared aspects and move away from understandings of leadership practices as functions of the individual's character, skill, or qualities to an understanding of leadership practice as distributed over a large number of individuals who are interacting with each other in various configurations horizontally and vertically across activities and organizational levels.Within this field, special attention is given to the challenges, and tensions, experienced by individuals performing middle-level academic leadership at the department level.One such challenge concerns how they experience their place within the organization, as "sandwiched between" managers and colleagues (Marshall, 2012: 503) with expectations from senior management to deliver, but without formal power in relation to those they lead.The multi-faceted and multidirectional character of the relations in which middle leadership typically engage in their everyday leadership activities suggests that it has to be "… understood as located in and framed by a specific context, while also serving to actively shape that context" (Branson et al., 2016: 131).

Leadership of teaching and learning
A limited, but increasing, amount of research on both formal and informal academic leadership roles suggest that we should take into account the specific responsibility for teaching and learning at the department level, thus expanding the focus on the nature of academic leadership to include consideration of the content of the leadership roles (e.g.Cardno, 2013;Grunefeld et al., 2015;Quinlan, 2014;Verwoord and Poole, 2016).In this literature, terms like "educational leadership" or "leadership for teaching and learning" are commonly and interchangeably used for the higher education context.Quinlan (2014) discusses educational leadership in higher education as a "leadership of teaching for student learning."Verwoord and Poole (2016) argue that leadership for teaching and learning is of importance for the institutional embedding of a scholarship for teaching and learning (SoTL).
Some empirical studies of academic leadership for teaching and learning on department level focus on program leaders (e.g.Cahill et al., 2015;Mårtensson and Roxå, 2016;Murphy and Curtis, 2013;van Veggel and Howlett, 2017;Vilkinas and Ladyshewsky, 2011).In their review of literature on academic leadership at the department level in small, specialist higher education institutions in the UK, van Veggel and Howlett (2017) outline a leadership role generally characterized as being excluded from formal staff management, but responsible for "course management, staff and student timetabling, curriculum development, quality assurance at course level, marketing, admissions, student pastoral support and mentoring new academic staff" (van Veggel andHowlett, 2017: 1175).The review identifies four main barriers to the effectiveness of such roles.Course/ program leaders (1) hold a paradoxical position at the department with responsibility and accountability for the management of the quality of courses/programs, but without authority/line management responsibilities; (2) carry a heavy workload and administrative burdens but lack recognition for it; (3) are overlooked when it comes to leadership training; (4) lack administrative support.Based on these challenges, three general strategies for supporting and strengthening the course/ program leadership role in the UK are suggested.The first is to provide clear role descriptions and transparent communication of responsibilities attached to the role.Secondly, the need for training and mentoring support for course/program leaders must be determined in order to provide relevant professional development programs/networks/support for this group.Finally, with the aim of recognizing and rewarding this particular leadership role in relation to leadership of research, the authors call for more research on course/program leaders' motivations and decision-making processes.Irving's (2015) and Cahill et al.'s (2015) studies on program leaders in the UK were not included in van Veggel and Howlett's (2017) literature review, but their results resonate with the latter on several counts.Both studies find that program leaders commonly experience challenges related to having responsibility without formal power and are in need of professional development.Cahill et al. (2015: 274) stress opportunities for "self-reflection, debriefing, the sharing of experiences with peers in a non-threatening environment" in order to support program leaders in their roles.In addition, Irving (2015) suggests more research on the interplay between these two significant factors-recognition and leadership development.
A small number of studies on the role of Associate Dean can be added to the growing field of research investigating leadership for teaching and learning in higher education (e.g.Floyd and Preston, 2018;Mason and de la Harpe, 2020;Pepper and Giles, 2015).Although Associate Deans hold a more senior role than program leaders and lead "cross-curricular and inter-disciplinary" (Floyd and Preston, 2018: 925) contexts, there are parallels in how they experience their role compared to program leaders.They share experiences of holding positions located between the senior management and the academic staff, they carry heavy responsibilities coupled with little power and they lack access to professional development and collegial networks (Pepper and Giles, 2015).Clear and transparent definitions of the Associate Dean role within institutions, ongoing professional development, and, in contrast to the literature on program leaders, line management, and budgetary responsibilities, are some of the recommendations for a more successful role as Associate Dean (Floyd and Preston, 2018; Mason and de la Harpe, 2020).Mason and de la Harpe (2020) also stress the need for formal teaching and learning recognitions in the form of awards or fellowships in order to increase the credibility of the role as well as for Associate Deans to see themselves as leaders of teaching and learning.The ability to demonstrate pedagogical content knowledge in addition to their disciplinary expertise is, thus, identified as important for Associated Deans in this context.
In this study, we investigate an appointed leadership role as Education Leader (EL) with responsibility for pedagogical development and the quality of courses and programs at the department level, implemented in 2013, at University of Gothenburg, one of Sweden's largest comprehensive universities.This role has a university-uniform role description, an established support structure for professional development in the form of a leadership program and a network for those who occupy it.In other words, key recommendations about how to strengthen leadership of teaching and learning made in earlier research were implemented.We suggest that the implementation of the EL role thus offers an opportunity to study the effects of such strategies.Drawing primarily on data from a survey distributed to all ELs appointed since 2013 we ask two questions: How do ELs understand their leadership role?What leadership practices are they performing and what challenges do they articulate in relation to them?

Data and method
Data was generated using a combination of a survey and the extraction of web-based information.An anonymous survey was distributed to individuals who were, or had been, ELs since 2013.Additional information about the constitution of the group in 2019, as well as data about the university's organization and policy related to and trajectory of the role of the EL, was collected from the university website as well as from the authors' own experiences as leaders in the university organization from 2012 to 2020.

Researching from within
It is no surprise that research about higher education is practiced by researchers who themselves are deeply embedded in the academic community and its practices.In this study, the university used as an empirical example also serves as the academic home of the three authors and we consider ourselves to be "natives" in that context.As teachers, researchers and leaders, we have multi-faceted experiences of the organization.While not part of the community of ELs, the authors share extensive personal experience of academic leadership roles focusing on education at all levels of the university.Our situatedness within the organization gives us in-depth knowledge and understanding of the context in which the role of EL has emerged.
In a continuum of closeness to our survey respondents (Trowler, 2011) we hold relatively distant positions.Respondents are not our immediate colleagues, but in our leadership capacities, we come into contact with most of them in various contexts on different organizational levels.The first author, for example, holds a position as Deputy Dean of Education at one of the faculties and was, in collaboration with the pedagogical support unit and the unit for staff training, part of the development of the professional support structure for ELs.Author two has previously held the position as Pro-Dean of Education at another faculty, which means regular engagement with ELs at the faculty level.Author three plays the role of Deputy Vice-Chancellor of Education, and as such, leads the work in the University Board of Education, which significantly affected the implementation of the role of EL and development of the role description.This means that the authors, in some situations, occupy a hierarchical, but not managerial, relationship to the respondents, and in other situations have a collegial relationship to them.As "natives," we have continuously strived to make visible pre-conceived understandings or pre-established "truths" that we bring into this research.At the same time, we acknowledge that our insider positions have provided some advantages in this project.These include (1) an initial understanding of the context in which the EL's role has been developed, and (2) easy access to data and networks that could help us with practical matters such as compiling the list of individuals having performed the role as EL from as early as 2013.

The survey
In December 2019, 89 individuals were identified as former or current ELs.This constitutes the total population of those who were, or had been, EL at some time during the period of six and a half years from 2013, when the role was implemented, to late 2019.The anonymous survey was distributed to the respondents' university e-mail addresses.We received 58 responses, which makes a response rate of 65%.A few of the respondents turned out to have retired since 2013 and their surveys consequently bounced back.
The survey began with background questions focused on the role of EL, for example, if and when the respondent had participated in the professional and collegial support activities, how long they had/have had the role of EL, and if the respondent was/had been part of the leadership group at department level.In addition to this, respondents stated how long they had been employed at the university.Because of the limited size of the group, personal background questions were avoided to preserve anonymity.
The major part of the survey consisted of questions with free text answers.The aim was to provide an opportunity for respondents to express freely, and in their own words, their experiences of their role as EL.They were asked to list the most central responsibilities for them as EL, describe what aspects of the leadership role they felt the most and the least confident with, which daily activities they experienced as the most time-consuming, and finally if they saw a need for changes to the role of EL or to the conditions for performing the role.They were also asked to comment on how they experienced the relevance of the leadership program and the network for their role as EL.Based on the free-text answers, a qualitative content analysis was performed.Authors one and two first read the survey responses separately, looking for frequent words and expressions.The two authors compared the keywords and expressions found and discussed them with the third author.Author one re-read the data several times and organized the data thematically.Each respondent was given a code number and each citation used in the presentation of data below will be followed by the respondent's code number in brackets.

The EL role
The empirical example used here is a comprehensive university with around 50,000 students and 6400 staff out of which about 40% are academic staff.It has eight faculties ranging from humanities and social sciences to natural sciences and medicine and some 40 departments.The university has a line management organization with a Vice-Chancellor, Deans and Heads of Department.Generally, departments are big enough to host more than one discipline and offer a large number and broad range of courses and programs, which means that a majority of the ELs lead complex and crossdisciplinary contexts, in similar ways as the role as Associate Dean has been described in the UK context (Floyd and Preston, 2018).
The role of EL was implemented in 2013 and is governed by a university-wide policy, which stipulates that the EL is appointed by the Head of Department and has the overall responsibility for pedagogical development and the quality of courses and programs, and serves as the link between the central level and the department level in educational matters.Line management and budget responsibilities are not included.The policy emphasizes the importance of appointing an EL for a minimum period of three years as well as allowing for a substantial share of full-time for the assignment.Given the variation in size and complexity of departments, which characterizes the university, the policy further states that EL's may be complemented by other leadership roles such as program leaders, course leaders, or disciplinary coordinators depending on the complexity of the departments.The overall responsibility for educational operations stays with the EL, but the tasks performed in relation to those responsibilities may be shared by a number of people.The distribution of such tasks as well as the creation of complementary leadership roles are formulated at the local level.

The institutional development of the role as EL
The designation of a university-wide leadership role at the departmental level with a specific responsibility for education took place in a context where the university had explicitly expressed an ambition to advance teaching and learning.The relatively low value placed on education compared to the high status of research activities was identified as an impediment for necessary pedagogical development to take place.Supporting the development of SoTL was identified as an important strategy to counter this, in combination with a need to strengthen and make visible the leadership for teaching and learning generally on all levels, and at the department level in particular.From 2012 and onwards, several agreements and processes were implemented on the university level with this aim in mind.
The first action was to establish a university board of education, led by a Deputy Vice-Chancellor, with representation from all faculties and key support units such as the university library and the unit for pedagogical development.Once established, the board formulated a university-wide description commissioning the role of EL.The role of EL was further supported through the establishment of a university-wide network and a leadership program.
An eight-day leadership program was launched in 2014.The program runs every other year and attendance is required for all appointed ELs.The leadership program integrates professional leadership skills, such as feedback, communication, group development, and conflict resolution with the university's pedagogical ideas program.The program has an alternating thematic focus related to the development of pedagogy and the quality of education that supports the development of the university's comprehensive policies and practices.Participants are also introduced to peer support groups where they are provided an opportunity to reflect on and share experiences of everyday situations that they find difficult or challenging.They are also offered individual professional mentoring support as part of the program.
The network for ELs meets regularly, 2-3 times per semester, and provides an opportunity for them to share experiences, learn from each other across department/faculty boundaries and give input on issues affecting the university as a whole.The Deputy Vice-Chancellor and the Director of the central pedagogical support unit alternate their presence in the network.
In combination with these actions to strengthen educational leadership at the university, the university Board of Education identified a need to formulate some common ideas to guide pedagogical development for the university.In 2014, a process to develop a university comprehensive pedagogical ideas program started with the newly appointed ELs as main agents.The result was a policy and a guiding document emphasizing student-centered learning, the importance of SoTL, the need for reflection and collegial discussion around teaching and learning as well as the leadership's responsibility for their implementation on all levels.Parallel to the work on policy documents for pedagogical development, "Excellent Teacher" was created as a form of promotion at the institutional level.
The establishment of the leadership role as EL was thus part of a broader strategy to support pedagogical development at the department level as well as aligned with policy documents and support structures.

Survey results
The results from the survey provide data about the constitution of the group of ELs and how they experience the support structures.The results show how ELs understand the main responsibilities of their role, the relationship to other leadership and managerial roles at the department level as well as their views on how the role should be developed in the future.

About the group
ELs commonly hold positions as senior lecturers or academic professors, and some have received the title Excellent Teacher.The survey shows that a large majority of the respondents have experienced other leadership roles at the department level, for example, program leader, before becoming EL.An equally large majority declare being employed at the university for more than 10 years.The appointment as EL thus generally seems to require some degree of contextual experience, knowledge and seniority.Almost half of the respondents have performed the role as EL for 3 years or more.Others are new to the role or have performed the role for shorter periods than 3 years.

Responsibilities
When respondents state what, in their experience, are the most central areas of responsibility for the role as EL, three overarching categories emerge, relating to (1) quality and the enhancement of teaching and learning, (2) planning, staffing and resource allocation, and (3) relational work.
The first category includes a focus on the quality of courses and programs and the enhancement of the teaching and learning often mentioned as "pedagogical development work."The quality of study programs and courses at the department occurs as the most frequently mentioned responsibility.The answers, however, show variation in understandings of what this means.Expressions such as "quality assurance" and "quality work/development" are equally used.Some refer to responsibilities related to quality assurance through external and internal evaluations of programs and courses, while others emphasize a responsibility to "make sure that we follow rules and regulations, policy and such from above" (47).One respondent describes this aspect of the role as being similar to a "compliance officer" (48).Others point to responsibilities of producing and implementing policy, indicating a more strategic approach.They tend to emphasize process-oriented aspects.The verb "drive" is often used: "to drive the education forward, through the development of quality and visionary work" (46).This respondent also added "I feel happy to be able to write that!" indicating that this approach is a desired one.
The second category of responsibilities cover planning of what courses and programs to offer, follow-up of student registrations and performances, resource allocation, and staffing/recruitment. Respondents use expressions such as "overall," "strategic," or "long-term" when talking about the planning of courses/programs.When "planning and follow-up" is mentioned, it is often done so with reference to the aim of keeping the budget for education in balance.For example, one respondent writes, "It is my responsibility to plan for what courses to offer as well as to allocate resources to them" (40).Another explains the task as "… to plan for courses and programs so that we register and put through the right number of students" (36).
Responsibility for staffing is often mentioned when respondents describe their responsibilities and to an even larger extent when they describe the tasks they spend the most time on as EL.The survey results show that ELs connect staffing and recruiting to their responsibilities for planning, quality and development of courses and programs.Some respondents emphasize long-term recruiting/staffing, linking it strategically to the quality of education when describing their work with matching teacher competencies to course contents.Others refer to teacher shortages (due to either the department's vulnerable financial situation or a relaxed policy on teaching loads for teachers with external research funding) resulting in the need to find teaching staff on very short notice.
The third category of recurrent responsibilities mentioned by the respondents can be described as relational work.The broadness of the responsibilities included in the first two categories is mirrored by the wide range of people with whom ELs engage: teachers, course or discipline coordinators, program leaders, study and career officers, as well as education administrators.Relational work also includes representing the department internally and externally.
When referring to relational work, respondents describe activities such as "supervising," "guiding," "supporting," and "coordinating" different categories of staff at the department.For example, writes one: I am trying to demonstrate leadership of educational matters without too much direct interference.Trusting my co-workers, but providing structure and guidance when it is asked for (or when manifestly needed without being asked for).( 52) Relational work is experienced by respondents as necessary for the quality and development work that they lead, but also as one of the most time-consuming activities in their role as ELs.As one respondent put it, I want to involve all colleagues in various groups and activities.To prepare for interactive activities and give feedback to colleagues demands engagement and is time consuming.(31) Relational work also includes dealing with conflicts between teachers or between teachers and students.Conflict resolution, but also trying to engage "… teachers who are stuck in old routines and are unwilling to cooperate" (21) or dealing with teachers who resist doing work assigned to them are situations that respondents describe as difficult or challenging.For example, one wrote, … since many of my colleagues regard teaching a necessary evil it's impossible to "get them onboard"-and hence all I can do is offer a range of structures, procedures, and opportunities that my colleagues CAN take advantage of if they so wish.( 18) When describing what they understand as their key responsibilities, respondents recurrently use adjectives such as "strategic," "long term," and "overall," indicating that they have a bird's eye view of educational matters at the department.At the same time, when respondents describe their everyday and most time-consuming activities there is a shift to more hands-on expressions such as "problem solving," "conflict resolution," "putting out fires," "damage control," "meetings," and "responding to questions."This is concisely expressed by one respondent, who says: "There seems to be a need to involve my role in almost everything."(39).The experience of occupying a position to which both teaching and administrative staff turn with questions, and the task of supporting and problem solving all kinds of matters relating to education, teaching and students, is described by some respondents using images of "sounding board" and "hub."The EL's relational work is like "being a sounding board for colleagues in issues related to regulations and routines that govern education … a hub preventing things from falling through the cracks" (48).

Position within the organization
ELs are appointed by the Head of Department and work closely with the line management.All but six respondents state that they are included, together with administrative managers and other leadership roles for research, internationalization, collaboration, or other duties, in the leadership group at their departments.This means that they have access to spaces where they can influence strategic decisions at the department.
As mentioned earlier, leadership practices and responsibilities concerning education are usually shared between a number of individuals and roles, formal as well as informal, at the department level.ELs share leadership responsibilities around education with program and subject leaders as well as course coordinators.While some respondents experience such complexity as a problem for their role and express "a need to clarify the mandate of the respective roles in order to prevent duplication and making sure that things are being done" (4), others understand the responsibility for dealing with such organizational challenges to be included in the EL role: There seems to be uncertainty about responsibilities and mandates [at the department], which most probably is due to lack of clarity from the Head of Department.My job is therefore to create clarity in order to make the program leaders and Directors of Studies feel confident.(39) Although the role of EL is implemented with the support of a university-wide role description, ELs are appointed by Heads of Department who may distribute tasks that exceed those included in the policy.In the survey responses, this surfaces most often in descriptions of responsibilities that include management of teachers' duty plans or the performance of salary-and development dialogues with staff, and is mirrored by the fact that ELs commonly combine their role with a role as Deputy or Associate Head of Department.Respondents generally identify these two roles as separate, yet at the same time, they express that, in practice, the boundary between the two roles is blurry.Explained one respondent, … to handle colleagues who resisted doing the work assigned to them.This was possibly not my responsibility formally, but in reality, I spent a lot of time dealing with such things.( 56) Uncertainty about responsibilities, blurred boundaries concerning their role, and a lack of clear mandate from the Head of Department are also some of the challenges emphasized when respondents suggest ways for the role as EL to develop in the future.

Development of the EL role
As the survey was distributed to all those having performed the role of EL since 2013, some respondents were able to comment on the trajectory of the EL's role over time.Looking back at a time when the role was new, they note some progress.One respondent reflects on the experience of being the first to perform the role in his/her department.Understanding what the role meant, as well as the conditions for performing the role, was a challenge: I had very little time allocated for doing the assignment, 10% of my time if I remember correctly.Today the mandate is much clearer and the person who is EL now can devote more time to it.( 27) Such reflections indicate the development of the role over time, from being unclear and marginal in the department context to a more defined and valued role.
When given the opportunity to reflect on how the role as EL should develop in the future, respondents touch on issues concerning content, scope and mandate of the role.Some respondents express a need for more extended boundaries around the ELs' mandate: [I would like] a clearer mandate and responsibility for the education budget.Lack of influence over the budget may exclude ELs from decisions that affect their possibilities to do their work.(34) Others, on the contrary, would prefer limitations: The role would gain from being more limited, as everything that has to do with education in some way or another ends up on the EL's table.( 25) The most recurrent theme, however, is a desire to work more intensively and strategically to enhance teaching and learning and the quality of education.The respondents here express a discrepancy between what they perceive to be their key responsibilities and the possibility to fully engage with these things.The enhancement of teaching and learning is recurrently identified as something that ELs wish to devote more time to.The desire to practice a leadership of teaching and learning is to a large extent understood to compete with the administrative responsibilities that they perform daily.Explains one, The ideal would be for the EL to transform into a leadership of teaching and learning and be given the responsibility for the teachers' pedagogical competence with the purpose of forming and implementing competence enhancing activities.All administrative aspects of education can be left to other roles.(56) Administration is here described as preventing the EL from fully taking on the desired role of leading pedagogical development at the department.However other respondents, while emphasizing the importance of leading teaching and learning, express a more accepting attitude towards administrative tasks.For example: … the role as EL is definitely a leadership for the enhancement of teaching and learning and so should it be, but it also includes things that have to do with the structure and conditions for education.( 49) Some of these reflections on how the role could develop over time signal the emergence of leadership for SoTL.To quote one respondent, I am hoping that the role will include more work for enhancement of teaching and learning at the department level, to involve colleagues in that work, to seek inspiration (conferences, articles, books) and to share that with colleagues, to be able to have a scientific approach to the practice [of teaching and learning]-through writing and publishing within the field of higher education.( 31)

Professional development and collegial support
Two-thirds of the respondents declare that they have participated in the Leadership program for ELs, and some state that they have participated in other, similar, programs for professional development of academic leadership.The relatively high number is not surprising as participation in the leadership program is mandatory for ELs.Respondents who comment on the leadership program do so in positive terms.For example: It was a very good and rewarding program that provided me with tools and impelled me to drive the pedagogical work at the department forward.(5) An equally large majority of respondents said that they participate/d regularly in the university-wide network for ELs.Some state that a lack of time has prevented them from participating as much as they would have liked to and those who declare never having participated in the network list lack of time as the main reason.Those who have been active in the network emphasize that the opportunity to exchange experiences and ideas with colleagues in the same position across department and faculty boundaries is particularly valuable, enabling them to put the department context of which they are part, as well as their role within it, in perspective.One of them remembers being new to the role when the network was introduced at the university and says that it was helpful in forming the role, for clarifying its content and boundaries as well as expectations from the university management.Further comments on the network meetings are that they provide ELs with links to relevant support units at the university as well as an opportunity to access information about, and give their views, on new policies at the university level.
The respondents also state that, in addition to the university-wide network, they have local networks that are of importance and relevance to them, most commonly in the form of regular meetings at the faculty level with other ELs.Such groups are typically led by a Deputy/Associate Dean responsible for teaching and learning and occur monthly.
None of the respondents express a need for more, or other, networks to support them in their role as ELs.When commenting on the content, kind of information and themes for discussion in the university-wide network, the respondents show more divergence.Differences in approach, quality assurance or quality development, and the meaning of quality emerge when respondents talk about these issues.Some would like more focus on how to comply with, and understand, the rules and regulations of relevance for education.Writes one, The importance of understanding the public administrative regulations in relation to the higher education ordinance and other policies became clear to me.It is important to discuss the interpretation of the policy document.(24) Others emphasized more opportunities to participate in discussions about more strategic issues concerning the development of quality: I would like the network for ELs to develop with more content concerning development work as opposed to receiving information.That ELs (who hold key roles at the departments) are used in a constructive way by the university.We can, for example, act as a deferral instance, also in smaller constellations.(46) Although most respondents declare they are content with the content of the network meetings, the response above indicates a view that the network is an untapped resource for the university.

Discussion
The implementation of dedicated leadership roles devoted to teaching and learning, for example, as EL, is emerging as an important strategy used by universities to meet increased demands from stakeholders for quality assurance and student satisfaction.The implementation of the role as EL at one of Sweden's largest, comprehensive universities, focused in this article, forms part of this trend.Using data from a survey distributed to all those appointed as EL since 2013, we have explored how occupants of this position understand their leadership role, what leadership practices they are performing, and what challenges they experience in relation to them.
The context in which the implementation of the role as EL was embedded, including a university-wide policy with a designated professional development program and network support, is of importance.The survey results show that the support structures are experienced as valuable for the professional development of ELs, help them put their own local context in perspective, and provide a link to the university's broader processes.While departmental variations in the form of additional tasks or duties delegated by the Head of Department are common, and sometimes cause ambiguity, or "blurriness," in relation to other leadership roles in the departmental context, the university-wide role description makes the role and its scope clearly recognizable across the university.Our results show that ELs manifest an awareness of, and general compliance with, the university policy.They describe the strategic, long term and overall development of their department's study programs and courses, including quality work and the enhancement of teaching and learning, as their main responsibilities.While ELs experience that, in their everyday life, different tasks compete for time, they express a clear desire, willingness, and ability to enact a leadership of teaching and learning.
The survey shows that those who perform the role as ELs are, typically, senior academic staff with former leadership experience of some kind at the department level.In their everyday life, ELs perform a substantial amount of relational work across activities and organizational levels and boundaries.They assist, support and guide others, deal with conflicts, solve problems, transmit information, and interpret institutional policies.The metaphor of being a "a hub" or a "sounding board" in educational matters emphasizes their experience of having a key role recognized by the department-level produces ambiguities that may be resolved with clearer descriptions of the various leadership roles and their relationships at the departments.
The relational work that ELs perform correspond to the important role as intermediator discussed by Cahill et al. (2015).In our data, this emerges when respondents describe their role as interpreters of information and policies that are of importance for teachers, program leaders/coordinators, professional staff as well as Heads of Department.While some respondents stress that relational work is time consuming, it also means that the EL performs a leadership that others recognize and actively seek out for assistance, support, and guidance.Relational work shows that their position holds together educational activities and matters at the department and that the knowledge and expertise attached to the EL role is recognized by colleagues.
The images of hub or sounding board used by some ELs to describe their position in relation to other staff and colleagues at the department are significant.Rather than being "squeezed," as the image of the sandwich refers to, these images signal a position at the center, or heart, of the department.The reference to a hub also indicates that the ELs do not emphasize a hierarchical relationship with those they lead, but rather an intersecting position.The hub is where different actors involved in educational matters come for guidance and support, from where information in different directions are spread and where links between actors and activities are made.There may be other hubs at the department level, such as program leaders or discipline coordinators, who link people and activities to each other around a course or a study program.This resonates with Verwoord and Poole's (2016) suggestion that "appointed leaders with a good knowledge of the larger micro-level landscape" can support the growth of scholarship for teaching and learning by "doing hub-like work, helping small networks form valuable connections" (Verwoord and Poole, 2016: 83).
The role of EL, developed over a period of 8 years as part of an explicit and long-term universitywide strategy to enhance teaching and learning, emerges as one that performs strategic work around education and the enhancement of teaching and learning in contexts where the complexity of content and department leadership structures is high.In contrast to a common understanding that educational leaders in higher education lack recognition for the work they do and are less valued than leaders of research, the university-wide strategy employed here has made leadership of teaching and learning visible and recognized on all levels of the university.As is the case for research leadership, a certain degree of academic seniority, knowledge and experience prove to be important for occupying the role of EL.Challenges related to positioning within the organization are similar in character to those described in earlier research on leadership roles of teaching and learning in higher education, but are here experienced and expressed in terms of blurriness produced by local leadership configurations rather than in terms of being sandwiched between the line management and the teaching and administrative staff.

Concluding remarks
This case study suggests that a university-wide role description can significantly improve the visibility and recognition of this type of academic leader across the university.A leadership program in combination with a network for ELs that provides professional development and collegial support significantly affect how the role is understood and practiced.While departmental variations in terms of content and mandate exist as the role is implemented in particular departments, it is clear that ELs have a strong impact on strategic matters concerning education and the enhancement of teaching and learning at the department and are positioned at the heart of the department, performing hub-like work in relation to those they lead.
While this study has highlighted a university-wide initiative to strengthen teaching and learning through a designated leadership role, there are of course limitations on what can be said about the impact on everyday practices of teaching and learning at the department level.Transforming practices of, and attitudes towards, teaching and learning cannot be achieved solely by implementing change from above.Hence, further exploration of how new leadership roles and structures are understood and received by other actors at the department level (i.e.colleagues, students, and department leaders) is one significant area for future studies.A pertinent question to explore further is: How and in what way is a leadership role for teaching and learning allowed to be formed in particular department contexts?Department cultures, in the sense of the social practices, attitudes and values towards research and teaching no doubt play a significant role in how initiatives from above are implemented at the local level.In-depth interviews with a variety of actors in combination with participant observation in different departments is suggested as a way to study the importance of department cultures when trying to transform two of the key activities for universities: teaching and learning.
has participated in several large-scale empirical research projects involving studies of teaching and assessment, content and language integrated learning, and the Swedish national assessment of English.Her main research fields concern teacher cognition and language teaching and learning.Recent research is related to language policy, doctoral studies, and leadership in higher education.
Mette Sandoff is a Professor in Public Administration.Since August 2021, Sandoff is Acting Pro-Vice-Chancellor at the University of Gothenburg.Between 2012 and 2021, she had the position as the Deputy Vice-Chancellor, strategically responsible for education and Head of the University's Board of Education.Sandoff has extensive teaching and research experience, conducting research within the fields of leadership and HRM, especially in the service and public sectors.