Abstract
Scoping reviews offer a rigorous and systematic approach to examining the range and nature of literature in a particular field, identifying the existing literature and highlighting gaps where further exploration is required (Arksey & 0'Malley, 2005; Levac, Colquhoun, & O'Brien, 2010). In this article, we share our scoping review protocol—the explicit, step-by-step description of the plan for conducting the review, published separately and before completing the review. This genre of public documentation of our process is essential in scoping reviews to support careful planning and documentation, enable others to compare the protocol and completed review, support others in evaluating and/or replicating its methods, and encourage collaboration and development of follow-up research on the field (Shamseer et al, 2015).
Highlights
Scoping reviews are “a form of knowledge synthesis that addresses an exploratory research question aimed at mapping key concepts, types of evidence, and gaps in research related to a defined area or field by systematically searching, selecting, and synthesizing existing knowledge”(Colquhoun et al, 2014, pp. 1292, 1294)
In establishing a rigorous method for identifying scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL)-focused literature, including key terms and sources, we provide a resource for others who may wish to replicate our search strategy or conduct their own SoTL-focused literature reviews for their specific projects
We have identified five keywords that will help limit our search to self-identified SoTL literature: 1. SoTL 2. scholarship of teaching and learning 3. scholarship of teaching & learning 4. scholarship of learning and teaching 5. scholarship of learning & teaching The search will be limited to literature pertaining to higher education, excluding literature focusing on primary and secondary educational contexts
Summary
Boyer’s Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate challenged traditional conceptions of faculty work, often envisioned as three distinct and hierarchical activities of research, teaching, and service, with an inherent tension between research and teaching He instead identified four domains of scholarship: “the scholarship of discovery; the scholarship of integration; the scholarship of application; and the scholarship of teaching” They wrote to further define it, describe its adjacencies with other forms of scholarship, situate it as a multidisciplinary field marked by internal diversity, wrestle over the outer boundaries between what is SoTL and what it is not, and identify standards of quality Boyer and those who explicitly followed him forged a new identity available to those who do this work, whether they are new to looking at their teaching and their students’ learning in a scholarly way or they have been doing it as part of their disciplines for years. In addition to this field building, many implemented the ideas by doing the work itself—conducting SoTL projects typically (but not always) by drawing on their disciplinary expertise to investigate their own students’ learning and sharing their findings, often through publication
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
