This paper is notable for several reasons. It draws attention to the poor and variable understanding of LD within HE institutions (e.g. often as a non-scholarly field), and the consequent effects on the value it is held in and therefore on its practitioners. It also suggests a road-map for how LD can move forward, drawing upon learnings from related but more advanced fields such as Educational Development. It emphasises the needs for the LD movement to take a more joined up scholarly position, to resist being inward looking, and to claim its own territory within HE. While Samuels’ argument that LD should be advanced as an academic discipline may not resonate with everyone, the paper has certainly sparked necessary conversations and actions from which the LD movement has advanced and gained more of a role in scholarly conversations.
Association for Learning Development in Higher Education