ABSTRACT
This conclusion presents some closing thoughts on key concepts covered in the preceding chapters of this book. It suggests that an appropriate model for higher education would combine the strengths of the pay forward model and the flexibility and political sense of the responsive approach to evaluation. Each institution should seek to develop its own model, based on its own definition of what staff development comprises, but there will clearly be areas of commonality. Encouragement by senior staff to undertake such development on a voluntary basis is evidently rare. There is a scheme developed by the staff and educational development association (SEDA) offering accreditation to 'new' higher education teachers. Evaluation of the individual's development in the professional sense is therefore subject in some degree to the type and level of scrutiny argued. There are clear messages for all stakeholders in UK higher education, but perhaps especially for those charged with its management.
