Teaching and Learning

Getting to the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Professional Development in University Faculty

Scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) refers to an active, conscious and continuous act of research in teaching by lecturers with specific aims to share it with other fellow lecturers later on through scholarly writing or publication [24]. It is proposed that scholarship of teaching and learning is fundamental to improve the teaching practice of lecturers which will influence students' learning [1]. The scholarship of teaching and learning is highly contextualised because it involves the culture of disciplines in which it is applied [25]. Therefore, it is important to investigate the conceptions of scholarship of teaching and learning that lecturers held in which it might influence their effort in engaging in any activity related to the scholarship of teaching and learning such as research in teaching which can be done through action research. Findings from a study showed that unfamiliarity with the concept of scholarship of teaching and learning by lecturers might lead to their indifference attitude toward the practice of scholarship of teaching and learning [26]. Therefore, this study aims to examine the conceptions and practice in scholarship of teaching and learning in various institutions of higher education in Malaysia especially in the scientific and technological based faculties. This article describes a preliminary study using a case study approach in which two lecturers from an engineering faculty will be selected as the respondents. Purposive sampling will be used as sampling design to investigate the conceptions and practice of teaching and learning that Malaysian lecturers held in which it might influence their effort and engagement in any activity related to the scholarship of teaching and learning such as by two lecturers of a scientific and technological based faculty i.e. engineering faculty. They will be selected based on the different experiences that they have in teaching and also working in the industry. For data analysis, the researchers will use thematic analysis to analyse qualitative data. The findings of this study might uncover the perceived importance of the practice of teaching and learning that Malaysian lecturers held in which it might influence their efforts and engagements in any activity related to the scholarship of teaching and learning such as by two engineering lecturers. In addition, the findings of this study will be used to prompt future research in which the emerging themes could be used as constructs in constructing questionnaire items that explore the practice of teaching and learning that Malaysian lecturers held in which it might influence their efforts and engagements in any activity related to the scholarship of teaching and learning such as using quantitative method.

The rise in technology-rich learning environments is reflective of a global trend in higher education (HE), recently accelerated because of necessary digital teaching and assessment practices embraced during the Covid-19 pandemic. This qualitative study facilitated through focus groups and an interview explores the teaching and learning experiences of tertiary level students in the Covid-19 era. Data from 24 students based within a UK Higher Education Institution highlights how an expanded digital environment can optimise conditions for some students to independently practise and apply what they are learning at their own pace. Digitally enhanced opportunities to interact with teaching staff and learning resources also increased the options for these students to experience themselves as competent members of the HE community. This was particularly relevant for first-year students new to the processes and practices of tertiary education. In contrast, third year students with more experience of HE appeared less reliant on the provision of online learning resources. Participants also identified some potential problems associated with the enhanced flexibility of online teaching and learning resources in relation to students’ ability to be self-regulated. This paper rationalises the need for educators and educational and learning developers who teach and undertake scholarship in teaching and learning to consider the sociocultural context of the student and their learning environment when designing teaching activities and curricula. The data presented here highlight the need for a clearly defined framework to underpin the integration of digital technologies with on-campus activities.

Professor Holbrook's piece in this issue of Marketing Education Review debates whether it is appropriate for students and/or administration to drive course content, and the implications of such a practice with regard to the management of the educational system of our nation. Placing Dr. Holbrook's provocative essay into the larger framework of the priorities of the professoriate, the issue appears to be a manifestation of conflicting priorities between two opposing paradigms operating simultaneously within higher education: “the scholarship of teaching” and “students as customers.” A review of research findings since Boyer's (1990) seminal report indicates that a significant paradigm shift has taken place in academia, with a greater focus on all aspects of academic life (i.e., the scholarship of discovery, integration, teaching and application). Although the synthesis of the readings cited herein and a review of recent environmental trends in higher education provide a solid foundational understanding of the issues involved in this debate, further study and discussion is warranted among all members of the academy. This article attempts to lay the foundation for further discussion, and it is hoped that all members of the academic community, regardless of career stage, will engage in “impassioned” debate of the issues outlined herein.

My doctoral research studies Australian PLT practitioners’ engagement with scholarship of teaching and learning. I argue that many PLT practitioners are motivated to engage with scholarship of teaching and learning in their work. There are, however, individual and extra-individual impediments. PLT practitioners are lawyers that teach in institutional practical legal training (“PLT”). Satisfactory completion of mandatory PLT is an eligibility requirement for admission to the Australian legal profession. The PLT requirement is additional to academic legal qualifications. PLT is undertaken at a post-graduate level with, or after, the academic law degree. My study investigates PLT practitioners’ motivations and capabilities to engage with scholarship of teaching and learning (“SoTL”). I study organisational symbolic support for SoTL in PLT, and organisational allocation of resources to SoTL in PLT. The study involves individual and extra-individual domains of PLT practitioners’ work. It considers how social structures (e.g. “the juridical”) are inscribed into individuals’ practices (“teaching”) and, conversely, whether practices influence social structures. My research adopts qualitative methodologies. These involve inter-disciplinary exchanges between law, legal education, practice research, sociology of law, cultural theory, and theory and practice of teaching and learning. My theoretical framework draws on Pierre Bourdieu’s “reflexive sociology”, and Michel de Certeau’s “heterological science”. I sourced data from documents, and semi-structured interviews with 36 Australian PLT practitioners. Documentary sources include statutory instruments, speeches, reports, practice directions, histories, and scholarly publications. To analyse the data I adopted Kelle’s characterisation of “theoretical sensitivity”, drawing on “explicit” and “emergent” analysis strategies derived from “grounded theory”. The explicit strategies were based on my theoretical framework. The emergent strategy involved sensitivity to non-explicit concepts and theories that emerged from the data. Computer-aided qualitative data analysis software expedited these methods. My findings to date question dominant legal structures’ readiness for change, the implications of this for teaching and learning in PLT, and in particular for PLT practitioners’ engagement with SoTL in PLT. The espoused rationale for mandatory PLT (in statutes) is improvement for the protection of clients, the administration of justice, and to assure quality legal services. The tacit rationale is improved quality of legal education, and experiences, for lawyers-to-be. My thesis argues dominant structures in legal education impede the espoused and tacit objectives, and impede PLT practitioners’ engagement with scholarship of teaching and learning.

In this paper the researchers sought to examine the role of academic developers in universities in the promotion of scholarly teaching (ST) and scholarship of learning and teaching (SOLT). The concepts scholarly teaching and scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education are explained and their differences outlined. The researchers further discuss the significance of SOL T in the enhancement of teaching and learning in higher education. In the paper the researchers also examine the role academic developers should play in ensuring the nurturing and development of SOL T among academics by suggesting practical activities academic developers should engage in ensuring the promotion of SOL T. Possible hindrances and challenges in academic developers' role in promoting SOLT are also evaluated and solutions suggested.

Recognition of teaching excellence has become a global trend in higher education as various schemes and awards are established as a way to assure stakeholders of the quality of teaching in universities. At present, there is a lack of research into what teaching excellence means from an institutional perspective. This study explores the conceptualisation of teaching excellence in 95 award documents from research-intensive and non-research-intensive higher education institutions as well as national and regional-level teaching excellence schemes. Data were collected from official institution websites and analysed using thematic analysis. The findings show that teaching excellence is defined by five dimensions of excellence (impact, innovation, inclusivity, scholarship of teaching and learning, and student-centredness) in six aspects of teaching (pedagogy, curriculum planning and design, assessment, student support, service to communities and professional development). A matrix is constructed based on the findings to explicate the concept of teaching excellence, and potential contradictions and tensions concerning the values emphasised in the dimensions of excellence are highlighted. The findings of this study have theoretical and practical implications for researchers, policy makers, staff development personnel and practitioners.

The Joy and Responsibility of Teaching Well

The Scholarship of Learning and Teaching (SoLT) has the chief goal of improving student learning, which can be achieved through scholarly inquiry, reflection, and dissemination of research findings on learning and teaching. The idea originates from the report written by Boyer (1990), who suggested that teaching in higher education should be regarded as a serious intellectual work similar to research. Researchers after Boyer have further elaborated and clarified the concept, no matter in the names of Scholarship of Teaching (SoT), Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL), or, less frequently, SoLT, with more emphasis on learning. The concept has been implemented in higher education institutions around the world, and there are research reports exploring the different aspects related to its implementation. In this chapter, building on previous models of SoLT as well as empirical studies, we put forward a holistic conceptual framework that takes into consideration the higher education institution, teaching staff and students altogether. Our framework highlights four important themes: (1) staff professional development; (2) enhanced student learning experience; (3) assessment; and (4) digital technology. Digital technology is especially a theme less studied in the literature on SoLT, but should be included in the framework of SoLT in a digital technology era.

The article examines the current stage of forming online content in higher education worldwide and in Ukraine. The main goal of this paper is to develop patterns for creating educational content to improve the learning process at universities despite the full-scale war, including flexibility. To achieve these, the author used bibliometric, trends and cluster analysis. As analytical tools, Google Trends and VosViewer were chosen. The investigation is divided into three parts: study patterns of online content in higher education (HE) based on a literature review, identify trends in HE, and examine online educational content in the context of the flexible learning process at universities. The investigation stage of key trends in the development of higher education in Ukraine is initial because it demonstrates up-to-date theoretical background worldwide, and particularly in Ukraine, especially publication after 2019. The main approaches to renovating the educational system included improving distance or blended learning as a modern study pattern. The key stakeholders are students and teachers. However, teachers transform into facilitators who prepare educational content and support learners in self-directed learning based on their inquiries. As for Ukraine, the tendency was intensified because students affected by full-scale war cannot study in the traditional (in-person) way. To find how trends in HE in Ukraine during key political changes were modified in Ukraine, the author used Google Trends to search inquiries of main consumers of educational services in Ukraine concerning higher education through the keywords “university” in three languages. The customizing periods showed the reactions of the young to critical political changes in Ukraine. In such a way, attitudes towards higher education during the beginning of the Orange Revolution, the Revolution of Dignity, the war in the east of Ukraine and the full-scale war were investigated. The significant changes were noticed after February 24, 2022, compared to November 30, 2013. There was an increasing popularity of inquiries based on universities abroad and learning as a tool to get employment. The most relevant inquiries in forming online content are “distance learning” and “дистанційна освіта”. Moreover, the tendency of increasing inquiries in the Ukrainian language compared with russian inquiries of approximately 10% was found. It was confirmed that trends could be used as a tool of formation patterns of educational content. That is why the paper aims to explore terms across years such as “educational content trends”, “educational trends” (205 articles), “online content trends” (305 articles), and “educational online content trends” (25 articles) at the Web of Science (WOS) platform. Key sectors of educational online content include Education, Educational Research, Economics, Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary, Multidisciplinary Sciences, and Management categories. In addition, Ukraine leads in publishing articles in forming online educational patterns with Poland, russia, the USA, Bulgaria and others. Furthermore, “educational content trends” and “online content trends”were compared to measure theoretical gaps by cluster analysis, where the main clusters are teacher, content analysis, development, quality, educational progress, and social media. The findings of this study hold valuable implications and recommendations for the formation of online content in higher education, particularly during times of war and in post-war periods.

Today, changes in political and economic conditions, epidemiological and sociological developments, and the advancement of science and technology have necessitated the health and medical education systems to change. Therefore, we conducted a study entitled “Global perspectives on trends in higher education in healthcare,” to improve the quality of healthcare so that it can be used as a model for predicting future events related to medical education. This futures study applied the social, technological, economical, ecological, political, values (STEEPV) model to identify and analyze the trends that affect medical education at different levels. To collect and analyze the data, a scoping review of the articles published from the year 2000 was conducted on the World Health Organization (WHO), Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Direct, Google Scholar, EBSCO, and Cochrane databases. The review process was performed in five stages: 1- Determining the research question, 2- Identifying relevant studies, 3- Selecting the studies, 4- Charting the data, and 5- Analyzing data. The preferred reporting item for systematic review and meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement was used in the selection and screening of articles. A total of 213 articles were included in the study for qualitative synthesis. A total of 154 trends were identified using the STEEPV model at seven levels of health behaviors and patients, diseases and health problems, healthcare system, medical education system, medical education institutions, medical curricula, and teaching and learning. Considering the results of this study, it is possible to formulate proper and efficient future scenarios for the higher health education system. Also, it will be helpful for medical education policymaking.

Background and Purpose. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the emerging field of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL); an historic overview of SoTL tracing back to Boyer's landmark book, Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate6; a survey of approaches for doing scholarly inquiries into teaching and learning; and an analysis of the scholarship of teaching and learning in physical therapy education from both an historical and an institutional perspective. Position and Rationale. This article provides a theoretical framework with examples from the literature that help conceptualize and contextualize the scholarship of teaching and learning. Describing what SoTL is and is not, distinguishing between scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching, discussing a variety of approaches to the scholarship of teaching and learning, and providing future directions for this critical area of scholarship, the authors unveil the breadth and depth of SoTL as a valued and accepted form of critical inquiry. This article also provides a brief historical view of the field in general, and also as it has been unfolding in physical therapist education. Results from a survey distributed to all physical therapist education programs provide insight into how the scholarship of teaching and learning is perceived and valued at institutions across all relevant Carnegie Endowment for the Advancement of Teaching classifications. Discussion and Conclusion. The short history of SoTL in physical therapist education parallels that of other disciplines. There remains confusion about the distinction between scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching as well as an inherent lack of understanding or respect for this discipline of inquiry. Physical therapist educators must work with their colleagues across disciplines to advance the important science of teaching and learning. Keywords: Scholarship of teaching and learning, Education, Physical therapy. THE SCHOLARSHIP OF TEACHING AND LEARNING: CHARACTERIZING THE FIELD Introduction Pat Hutchings, vice president of the Carnegie Foundation, gave a talk1 at the 2004 Rockhurst Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) Summer Institute, and stated that the scholarship of teaching and learning is not new, is not only for improving our own teaching, is not the exclusive domain of education, is not dependent on a single method of inquiry, is not a publication machine, is not all figured out, and is not for everyone. She went on to say that SoTL is about bringing the values, habits, and skills of scholarship to the work of teaching and learning. It is about asking questions that we care about regarding what our students are learning. It is about designing a method for researching these questions, and it is about sharing what we learn with our colleagues.1 It is reasonable to ask why we might want to take a more scholarly look into what is occurring in our classrooms. As you might imagine, there is more than 1 answer. Hutchings proposed that we do this work because we want to explore new lines of scholarly work and make a contribution. We do this work because we'd like to find colleagues with whom we can explore questions about our teaching. But primarily, we do this work because teaching is hard and we have questions about our students' learning.1 Lee Shulman suggested that we do this work because it is inherently part of what it means to be a teacher and helps us ensure that, as educators, we are constantly improving and meeting our responsibilities to our students, and as professionals, it helps us address the legitimate questions of our stakeholders in the legislature and on our governing boards.2 This article will provide: (1) an overview of the emerging field of the scholarship of teaching and learning; (2) an historic overview tracing back to Ernest Boyer's landmark book Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate6; (3) a survey of approaches for doing scholarly inquiries into teaching and learning; and (4) an analysis of SoTL in physical therapist education from both an historical and institutional perspective. …

Market trends in Spanish higher education

In this chapter, understandings of the scholarship of teaching and learning and of education research are reviewed, exploring the boundaries of each and the possibilities for overlap. Distinguishing these concepts has practical value in defining the components of academic work, and the form of credit given for academic activities. The conclusion reached is that an academic activity may involve both scholarship of teaching and learning and education research, provided that, inter alia, it involves systematically investigating a contentious issue or a gap in current understandings of education, in a form sufficient to warrant conclusions that have the potential to contribute to current understandings of pedagogy or other aspects of education. A sample of current publications concerning scholarship of teaching and learning is reviewed to illustrate possible relationships between writing related to the scholarship of learning and teaching and education research.

All faculties who have teaching responsibilities should endeavour to teach effectively. Some elements of effective teaching include conveying information to students in an organised manner, engaging students in the learning process, and sharing a sense of enthusiasm for the material being covered. However, it takes work to become an excellent teacher. Those who make the effort to become informed about teaching practices by attending seminars and workshops, or by reading articles on the teaching process, can be called scholarly teachers. Faculty members who endeavour to investigate the effectiveness of their teaching practices using accepted research methods and then make the results of those investigations public are practitioners of the scholarship of teaching and learning. In this chapter we will provide some history and justification for the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) movement. We will describe three examples of SoTL projects that we have conducted in our undergraduate course, ‘Plants, Pathogens, and People’, and we will provide our opinion on why we think it is important for plant pathology teachers to become involved in the scholarship of teaching and learning.