{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02039274924471299, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.1342592592592595, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
‘Practice architectures’, ‘scholarship’ and ‘middle leaders’ within an established community of HE practitioners in FE

Abstract This research draws on the concepts of practice architecture, middle leader and scholarship and uses narrative analysis drawn from a ‘community of practice’ of HE in FE practitioners. Whilst being an existing ‘community of practice’, the university concerned changed the collaborative framework of support and this provided a platform for the research, particularly in terms of their scholarship. Tutors at local colleges were interviewed regarding their journey into HE in FE and HE Managers were interviewed to present an alternative perspective of the management of HE in FE. Data indicate that the tutors are firstly early years practitioners but with very different journeys into FE and hence HE in FE teachers. Scholarship was defined as an ‘intellectual gym’ and all noted the ‘lack of understanding of HE’ by their FE managers. HE Managers reinforced this notion and made comments that related to the longevity of provision. Conclusions are that the arrangement set up by the university is useful in allowing the HE in FE staff time and space to reflect on their work and to ‘scholarship’ within a professional learning space that is vital to their development as HE in FE practitioners.