Purpose

The article explores the current as well as the future concepts of university teaching by the academics/the “leaders of educational sciences” in the context of the changes of the academia that have affected the academic professionalization.

Design/methodology/approach

The Delphi method was implemented to answer a research question dealing with the possible change in academics' concept of teaching as part of their current and future work. In this study, the experienced academics in the area of educational science are seen as the “leaders” since through their intensive teaching activities on all three levels (bachelor, master and doctoral) as well as through the high-quality research, they “lead” the concept of a particular science as well as the educational policy. Four rounds were used for consensus building among “leaders” based on a multiple interaction in an anonymous setting.

Findings

The research points out that academic professionalization in research is at its maximum. The currently perceived concept of teaching is content-oriented. However, the results also indicate the need for a gradual change in training Czech academics, should they accept their role also as university teachers in the future and be able to highlight the predicted change of teaching to support learning. Whether the strategy of a particular university will or will not accept all the academics' diverse roles seems to become the crucial factor.

Research limitations/implications

Several rounds with the same group of experts, which is the principle of Delphi method, is at the same time a limitation of the study, as in most of the research based on this method. The participation in the expert panel dropped throughout the rounds; however, geographic (in terms of university) dispersion of participating experts remained. The final fourth round confirmed the collective judgments of academics.

Practical implications

The article broadens the understanding of changes in the content of academics' professionalization with respect to changes in the academia. It emphasizes the role of an academic as an educator and concludes with the need of institutional reform in the context of a single university in a decentralized system.

Social implications

The article questions the trends of (national) educational policy in the sense that academics at universities are not only scientists but also teachers. However, the study also shows that the acceptance of their teaching abilities remains mainly on the organizational level.

Originality/value

A less common method of data collection among rather rarely involved group of experts in educational sciences brings a different view of the profession of academics, who (not only in the Czech context) are seen mainly as researchers and not as teachers. Humboldt's ideal regarding the unity of diverse roles is, thus, threatened due to narrower focus on academics' professionalization.

中文翻译：

---

教学作为学者专业化的一部分：捷克教育科学的案例

目的

本文在影响学术专业化的学术变化的背景下，探讨了学者/“教育科学的领导者”当前和未来的大学教学理念。

设计/方法/方法

Delphi 方法用于回答一个研究问题，该问题涉及作为他们当前和未来工作的一部分的学术界教学概念的可能变化。在这项研究中，教育科学领域经验丰富的学者被视为“领导者”，因为他们通过三个层次（学士、硕士和博士）的密集教学活动以及高质量的研究，“引领” ”特定科学的概念以及教育政策。四轮用于基于匿名环境中的多重交互在“领导者”之间建立共识。

发现

研究指出，学术研究的专业化程度最高。当前感知的教学概念是面向内容的。然而，结果也表明，捷克学者的培训需要逐渐改变，如果他们将来也接受自己作为大学教师的角色，并能够突出教学的预测变化以支持学习。特定大学的战略是否接受所有学者的不同角色似乎成为关键因素。

研究限制/影响

同一个专家组的几轮，这是德尔菲法的原理，同时也是研究的局限性，因为在大多数基于这种方法的研究中。专家小组的参与度在整个回合中下降；然而，参与专家的地理（就大学而言）分散仍然存在。最后的第四轮确认了学术界的集体判断。

实际影响

文章拓宽了对学术专业化内容变化相对于学术界变化的理解。它强调学者作为教育者的作用，并以在分散系统中的单一大学的背景下进行机构改革的必要性作为结论。

社会影响

文章质疑（国家）教育政策的趋势，因为大学的学者不仅是科学家，也是教师。然而，研究也表明，他们对教学能力的接受程度主要还是停留在组织层面。

原创性/价值

在教育科学领域很少参与的专家组中，一种不太常见的数据收集方法带来了对学者职业的不同看法，他们（不仅在捷克语背景下）主要被视为研究人员而不是教师。因此，洪堡关于不同角色统一的理想受到了对学术专业化的狭隘关注的威胁。