Introducing the proceedings of the Third Space Symposium 2024
Introducing the proceedings of the Third Space Symposium 2024
Penny Wheeler and Colin Simpson
The idea of the ‘third space’ was popularised by Homi K. Bhabha (1994), a scholar in postcolonial studies. In simple terms, it describes the hybrid area that emerges when two cultures or identities interact. This idea has been picked up in many areas of scholarship and was adopted in the 2000s by Celia Whitchurch to describe the complex and overlapping relationships between academic and professional staff in her seminal article “Shifting identities and blurring boundaries: The emergence of Third Space Professionals in UK Higher Education” (2008).
Over time, additional terms for third space professionals have emerged including third space practitioners (Arumugam, 2024; Behari-Leak & le Roux, 2018; McIntosh & Nutt, 2022), a useful distinction for contexts where the term third space “professional” excludes “academic” staff, and the term represents a wide array of people working in both academic and professional/ administrative roles with responsibilities in both academic and professional domains in higher education. These roles include, but are not limited to, learning/instructional designers, educational technologists, academic developers, research support staff, curriculum officers, academic skills developers and more.
The proliferation of third space roles has happened over a period when universities have needed to adapt operations and structure in response to contextual challenges such as massification; inadequate funding; interdisciplinary approaches; increased international mobility for students; and the ubiquity and growth of educational technologies and digital environments. Third space practitioners have been deeply engaged with these challenges, given their core responsibilities for devising and implementing changes for better student experience and organisational development and have also been keen to support people with the same mission in other institutions.
At the end of 2023, observing the rapid growth in the number of sessions at the ASCILITE (Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education) conference which centred the experiences and contributions of third space practitioners, members of the ASCILITE TELedvisors Network special interest group decided to hold a third space symposium. This was initially envisaged as a one-day, in-person event linked to the 2024 ASCILITE conference but the surge of interest from third space practitioners quickly saw us extend this to include an online asynchronous ‘slowposium’ in the two weeks leading up to this event. We connected with colleagues in the UK and Ireland who had held a small third space online event earlier in the year to help make this a truly international event.
Over the 16 days of the online Slowposium, more than 500 participants from Australasia, Europe, Asia, and North America read, watched, discussed, created and engaged with 52 contributions from more than 100 third space practitioners. On Sunday 1 December 2024 more than 70 participants attended our in-person symposium, enjoying 19 presentations and workshops from 30 practitioners. This strong participation highlighted both the diversity of voices in this community and the desire to share our experiences and perspectives on a vital but sometimes poorly understood part of the education sector. Both the Slowposium and the in-person symposium program presented the practitioners’ contributions organised under eight categories that represent some themes for third space work: the contributions in these proceedings are summarised via these themes, below.
Connecting: how we communicate with each other and build community in the third space.
A key task for all third space practitioners is to provide the places where the different subgroups of a university or college can exchange ideas, processes, and values. It is no wonder then, when it comes to supporting connections within our own community, that we bring our strengths as “collaboration champions”, as Veles et al. (2019) characterise us, to build a family (Harland & Staniforth, 2008) from scattered individuals. The symposia programs provided for synchronous networking as well as exploring some of the platforms where third space practitioners can find each other, whether in regional or transnational communities (Kirberg, in these proceedings) or using different educational technologies and professional platforms such as LinkedIn (Addanki, Cook, Cosgrove, Ngo & Tyrell) and the successors to Twitter (Hinze, Altena & Ng).
Identity: who third space practitioners are: our roles, titles and values.
Embracing the label “third space” and its genealogy and implications (Abblitt, in these proceedings) was only the start of the exploration of professional identity which symposium participants undertook. While accounts of identity in third space literature can be individualised and introspective (Simpson, 2025, p. 262, on academic developers in particular), we saw in the symposium many thoroughly community centred approaches to considering identity. Contributors reflected on close working partnerships (Arumugam & Jayawardena; Kan & Yeo, who work to “creatively creolise boundaries between the centre and the periphery”; Toogood & Hale) that support personal and professional resilience and development; they invited collective responses to third space experiences (Allman; Taleo); and they longed for change to “make our way of working the gold standard in academic life” (Murray). Roles within the third space ecosystem were examined (Greenway, McGrath & Slade) and framework designs for these roles were shared (Sharpe, Boreland & Henry, for learning designers; Tregloan & Iftikhar, for academic developers). The question of third space identity was approached head-on (Simpson, “let's solve the question of third space titles”), and more obliquely, through the counterculture of zine-making (Molloy). We also heard the call to be more inclusive in scoping the third space identity (Butters-Stabb).
Practice: the things we do working in the third space.
Professional identities are formed “within specific discursive formations and practices” (Hall, 1996, quoted in Caldwell, 2022, p. 141), and contributors were keen to share details of their practices: "there is an appetite for building structures of recognition, not only in terms of professional development, but in terms of shared identity formation” (Heggart, Mitchell & Simpson, in these proceedings). Participants explored “some of the gnarlier issues of working in the third space” (Verney, Vere & Webster-Deakin) and highlighted the importance of underpinning practice with theory (Stothers; Turnip, Cai & Khan).
A key takeaway was the value for the practitioner of evidencing their practice (Bui; Hook et al.).
Recognition: demonstrating our value and raising understanding of our contributions.
While formal recognition programs are useful for some third space practitioners (Brogt, 2021), contributors considered other pathways as well, taking the opportunity of the symposium to outline their achievements (Turnip, Macaulay et al.) and to discuss how to establish better visibility (Bartlett & Derrington; Hosseini) and credibility (Altena, Hinze & Ng). The ambiguity of third space practice was discussed by Simpson (in “Cover to cover”) and in detail by Kan & Yeo, and it emerged at the centre of the debate that Laurence and Hinze conducted on defining one third space role, that of learning designer, indicating the difficulty of recognising “a maturing profession grappling with fundamental questions about identity, quality, and inclusivity".
Relationships: building better collaborations with the people that we work with.
Alongside “ambiguity”, “tension” was another term which made frequent appearances throughout the symposium, and contributors did not hesitate to detail the multiple strategies and mindsets they adopt when dealing with the tensions of third space practice and of the university and college workplace in general. Veles and Simpson took participants on a four-phase journey from contestation to transformation; Cosmos and Reynoldson made the case for equity through allyship. Sensemaking was the key for Nguyen’s examples of third space-to- academic relationships, and Kiddell and Quirk saw third space participation as inherently relational and collaborative, reminding us of the role of trust in our working relationships. Through a narrative of his professional history, and under what is perhaps the best title of all our contributions, “I am not a chicken farmer”, Parry argued that establishing a fruitful relationship with the subject matter expert, in whatever educational context you are working, is an essential for effective learning design: “Together we create what’s best / Respect and collaboration – our true test.”
Research: developing better understanding of the third space and people who work in it.
We have been aware in compiling these proceedings of the strong ethical boundaries of the research space, as it has governed what we can and could not include in the symposium proceedings, given the symposium was not designed as a research project, and we did not seek ethical clearance to document participant contributions. Some of the sessions were ‘of the moment’ and not suited to publication, but, from the sessions we were able to include, there is, despite these constraints, a valuable overview of key ideas and aspects of third space practice in tertiary education in the 2020s. Furthermore, the symposium program did include some of the formal research on third space practice and practitioners currently being conducted, and we have included two contributions that reflect on the role of research and researchers in the third space, from Inwood (“Research for all”) and Simpson (“Cover to cover”).
Technology: the tools we use and the ways we use them.
As described above, the symposium was conceived as running alongside the annual ASCILITE conference, and, as we expected, presentations focussed on technology for learning had their natural home in that conference program. In these proceedings, however, we have two discussions of technology as part of third space practice. Hodgins and Millgate probe the issue (perhaps, the ambiguity or tension) of the third spacers’ role in trialling new technologies: are we “invading others’ space”?; and Huynh, Van Den Berg, Lilje, Pozza, and Van Ogtrop provide a case that exemplifies how third space work spans technology, policy and partnerships with their session on the integral partnership of educational designers and academics in navigating AI in education.
Workplace: the practicalities of being a third space practitioner.
The tagline for the in-person symposium day was “Working well in higher education”, and this final theme of “workplace” attracted many contributions, all of which sought in some way to reimagine the current place. Caldwell, well published in this field, asked us to rethink contractual boundaries between professional and academic domains, while McIntosh and Nutt, whose book on the integrated practitioner was also highly cited by symposium contributors, looked to chart institutional boundaries as a journey. Practitioners in the TELT team at Australian National University (Freund, Dickens & Li) looked at workplace change, its uncertainty and stressors. Then there were the contributions that offered a complete re-think of university structures, each worth serious consideration: these are the final contributions in these proceedings, from Mihai and Simpson; Reynoldson; and Vallis and Taleo.
Following a call for expressions of interest, the authors of 42 of the contributions to the third space symposium agreed to having their work published in a symposium proceedings. This has now been published and provides an invaluable overview of the myriad perspectives and experiences of third space practitioners in higher education across these themes. The link is here: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17677327
As organisers of this event, it wildly exceeded our expectations in terms of engagement and the insights shared by everyone who contributed and participated. It was exhausting but vital in shining a light on the essential work of everyone working in third space roles.
Maybe we will even do it again someday.
References
Arumugam, P. P. (2024). Negotiating the assumptions and identity tensions surrounding third space academics/professionals. In K. Heggart & M. Fatayer (Eds.), Designing learning experiences for inclusivity and diversity: Advice for learning designers. UTS ePress.
Behari-Leak, K. & le Roux, N. (2018). Between a rock and a hard place, third space practitioners exercise agency. Perspectives in Education, 36(1), 30–43. https://journals.ufs.ac.za/index.php/pie/article/view/3582
Bhabha, H. K. (1994). The location of culture. Routledge.
Brogt, E. (2021). Engaging with different professional recognition and development opportunities for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 26(4), 477–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2020.1840380
Caldwell, J. (2022). Professional identity and professional services staff: Understanding and impact. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 26(4), 140–147. https://doi.org /10.1080/13603108.2022.2073288
Harland, T., & Staniforth, D. (2008). A family of strangers: The fragmented nature of academic development. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(6), 669–678. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802452392
McIntosh, E., & Nutt, D. (2022). The impact of the integrated practitioner in higher education: Studies in third space professionalism. Routledge.
Simpson, C. (2025). Educator advisors in Australian higher education: Their roles, purpose and contribution to learning and teaching. The University of Sydney, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Sydney School of Education and Social Work. https://hdl.handle.net/2123/34308
Veles, N., Carter, M.-A., & Boon, H. (2019). Complex collaboration champions: University third space professionals working together across borders. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 23(2–3), 75–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603108.2018.1428694
Whitchurch, C. (2008). Shifting identities and blurring boundaries: The emergence of third space professionals in UK higher education. Higher Education Quarterly, 62(4), 377–96.
About the authors
Penny Wheeler
University of Technology Sydney
Penny is a convenor of the TELedvisors Network and a student of learning design at UTS.
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7856-5093
Colin Simpson
Deakin University
Colin is a convenor of the TELedvisors Network and Lecturer in Learning Futures at Deakin University.
