# data[].attributes.headline
The Future of the University: Speculative Design for Innovation in Higher Education

# data[].attributes.subject
The Future of the University: Speculative Design for Innovation in Higher Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This essay proposes five models of innovation in higher education that expand our "Ideas of the University," envisioning educational start-ups in the spirit of entrepreneurial experimentation. The author seeks to realize each of these feasible utopias as a way to disrupt higher education.

As I write this, the university reportedly is in crisis. Depending on who you listen to, the crisis results from inequality between the administration and faculty, students required to shoulder more and more of the financial burden of their education, decisions made on the basis of profit-seeking, students driven by vocationalism - or universities gone academically adrift. Whatever the causes, "disruption" is the most commonly recommended solution to the university's ills, probably involving technology. Philosopher of higher education Ronald Barnett observed:

Ideas of the university in the public domain are hopelessly impoverished. "Impoverished" because they are unduly confined to a small range of possible conceptions of the university; and "hopelessly" because they are too often without hope, taking the form of either hand-wringing over the current state of the university or merely offering a defense of the emerging nature of "the entrepreneurial university." ¹

On the one hand, our ideas about innovation in higher education focus too narrowly on technological disruption. On the other hand, those resistant to innovation and disruptive change in higher education long for a return to a perceived Golden Age of the University as imagined by Wilhelm von Humboldt or John Henry Newman. Our visions for the future of higher education thus fall between Luddism and technological disruption.

This essay proposes five models of innovation in higher education that expand our "Ideas of the University." I am inspired by the 1920s and 1930s, when there was a general spirit of experimentation in higher education in the air, with the founding of Black Mountain College, Bennington, the Great Books at St. John's, the Experimental College at Wisconsin. The founders of these experimental colleges, such as John Andrew Rice and Alexander Meiklejohn, had a "start-up mentality." These educational entrepreneurs imagined a university different from what currently existed, grounded in a deep philosophy of higher education. I do not believe in one singular "Idea of the University," but rather a multitude of ideas. This article envisions five such educational start-ups in the spirit of entrepreneurial experimentation.

Speculative Design

To design means "to give form." Usually the term "design" in relation to the University writ large describes the campus's physical/architectural design. While what follows has a physical dimension, I am looking instead at the institutional and pedagogical form the University's design might take. The nature of those designs shapes the behaviors of the students, faculty, and leadership; the curriculum; movement of knowledge, and kind of knowledge exchanged.

This exercise in speculative design - "speculating how things could be" ² - considers designs that critique our current moment but also suggest possibilities for what might be. Not all these designs are practical, but only in the sense that they challenge existing norms or would never pass regulatory muster, since they operate outside of and challenge those norms. But these designs also provide blueprints for new institutional forms (in at least one case, I am working to develop the design into an actual university), and there is no reason these speculative designs could not also be actualized.

Polymath University

As a condition of matriculation, every student at Polymath University commits to three disparate majors. Faculty at Polymath University all possess competency in three distinct disciplines and teach, research, create, and think in the areas between those disciplines. Polymath University is built on the educational philosophy that creativity and innovative thinking emerge from the mashing-up of disparate ideas, from the ability to make connections between what appear to be different concepts.

Students choose one each from a "menu" of three majors: the professions, the sciences and social sciences, and the arts and humanities (table 1).
Table 1. Polymath University triple majors
Students could not major in English, History, and Philosophy, or Finance, Marketing, and Accounting. Instead, they would choose triple majors in History, Accounting, and Biology, for example, or Finance, English, and Chemistry. To ensure that students can obtain 40 credit hours in each major, Polymath University offers no general education courses; students learn writing, mathematics, and other general education skills as part of the major concentrations. Nevertheless, students develop a breadth of knowledge unattainable in a typical general education program. As Derek Bok conceded, taking an introductory course in one of the sciences is insufficient to develop any kind of deep knowledge of that subject. ³ Polymath University models transdisciplinarity that places the disciplines at the center of the enterprise. The disciplines are like atomic elements or prime numbers: the roots from which all else is created.

Disciplines are types of ideas-spaces. An idea-space is "a domain or world viewed from the perspective of the intelligence embedded in it, intelligence that we can use...both to solve our everyday problems and to make the creative leaps that lead to breakthrough." ⁴ Academic disciplines are idea-spaces in that they "embed collective intelligence about the most effective way to carry out research, typically providing an overarching framework of established theory, principles, practices, heuristics, methodological assumptions, lab techniques, and so forth." ⁵ Thus, the majors at Polymath University are designed such that in 40 credit hours of instruction, students can demonstrate mastery of this collective intelligence. As Richard Ogle observed, "Creative leaps arise from the imaginative and insightful transfer of powerful, externally embedded intelligence from one idea-space to another." ⁶ He detailed the experiences of scientists, artists, and other creative people who developed new ideas or solved intractable problems because they could "leap from one-idea-space to another without getting trapped in a single one." ⁷ Polymath University induces such creative potential in students by inviting them to explore three different idea-spaces in depth.

Real-world support exists for this approach: As a recent report from Vanderbilt University noted, "Many students report that their double major combination helps them think differently, solve intellectual puzzles, and approach assignments more creatively. These gains are greatest when students major in two disparate domains of knowledge, especially combining science with art and humanities." ⁸ Indeed, some learning theorists contend that this "transfer of knowledge" is the very definition of learning. "Such transfer occurs in its most cognitively valuable forms when students draw on something they learned in one context, ideally by generalizing its core principles, and apply it appropriately to a situation that is far different from the original." 9 Because they will be asked to transfer concepts and ideas from three disparate areas of knowledge, students at Polymath University learn to become flexible and creative interdisciplinary thinkers. ¹⁰

Nomad University

Educational futurist John Moravec observed that:

Industrial society is giving way to knowledge and innovation work. Whereas industrialization required people to settle in one place to perform a very specific role or function, the jobs associated with knowledge and information workers have become much less specific concerning task and place.... A nomadic knowledge worker...is a creative, imaginative, and innovative person who can work with almost anybody, anytime, and anywhere. ¹¹

To educate these nomadic knowledge workers, Nomad University has no fixed physical location. ¹² The spot where learning occurs shifts around the globe, with professors and students seeking out problems and experiences anywhere in the world. Perhaps they seek to solve an engineering problem in sub-Saharan Africa, mediate clashes between the police and the community in an American urban core, or design a software solution for a global multinational. "Why work with case studies in books," argued Pieter Spinder, "when one can learn from real challenges, real-life assignments, with companies, interactions with governments, and work with non-governmental organizations?" 13 Students might travel to Monticello to read Thomas Jefferson's works and to Oxford, Mississippi, to read William Faulkner, rooting the study of literature in place. ¹⁴

Each "course" at Nomad University is organized around a specific problem. The faculty mentor identifies the problem, likely grounded in a specific research question. Then via a virtual network, the students and the professor decide on the nature of the problem and the outcomes for completion (success). They assemble at a location determined by the professor, where they will work together on the problem for a specified period of time. When the participants and their clients are satisfied that some equilibrium solution has been achieved, the student-faculty ensemble disassembles until they meet again in another location to work on a new and different problem.

Students can choose either to arrive or not arrive to work on a problem, and the "class" might look different each time the group assembles; like the production of a motion picture, the class brings together "free agents." Students matriculate from Nomad University once they have participated in 12 such classes and developed a portfolio of their work. Clearly, the registrar's office is critically important to this university's successful operation. Technology plays a key role in identifying and tracking students' location in the world and maintaining a portfolio of their accomplishments.

Nomad University operates rather like a many-sided study abroad program, although here "study abroad" defines the entire educational experience. At one time, aristocratic Europeans ventured off on the "Grand Tour" as a kind of educational experience, travelling to encounter the cultural riches of Europe. Nomad University uses a similar idea, except that each student's tour meanders unpredictably across the globe, wherever problems and challenges might be found. As Mary Catherine Bateson observed, important, meaningful learning often occurs outside of formal educational environments through travel and the encounter with the unfamiliar. ¹⁵

Interface University

In 2005, amateur chess players Steven Cramton and Zackary Stephen won the PAL/CSS Freestyle Chess Tournament, defeating both the best human and computer chess players in the world. The tournament, based on "hybrid chess," permitted human players to team with computers. Less than a decade after IBM's Big Blue computer defeated chess champion Garry Kasparov, humans and computers working together attained extraordinary results. Cramton and Stephen succeeded because they "were expert at collaborating with computers." ¹⁶

Many worry that computers and algorithms will replace human beings in a whole range of cognitive tasks once thought impervious to automation. ¹⁷ The legal and accounting professions, for example, have been disrupted by Legal Zoom and Turbo Tax. Erik Brynjolfsson, Andrew McAfee, and Taylor Cowen, among other commentators, speak of a near-term future where computer skill has replaced human skill, in the same way that mechanical labor supplanted human labor during the First Industrial Revolution. ¹⁸

Interface University focuses on the idea that machines will not - indeed cannot - supplant human cognition. The curriculum presumes that humans and computers thinking together are better than humans or computers thinking alone, and that thinking with machines allows students to engage in a level of cognition not possible with the human brain alone. Thus, at Interface University students will learn how to "think with computers."

This means more than simply giving students iPads during their freshman year. The curriculum aims to enhance the quality of the interface between computer and individual brain. Branden Hookway defines an interface as

a form of relation that obtains between two or more distinct entities, conditions, or states such that it only comes into being as these distinct entities enter into an active relation with one another...and such that its overall activity brings about the production of a unified condition or system that is mutually defined through the regulated and specified interrelations of these distinct entities. ¹⁹

Students indicate their readiness to matriculate when they have demonstrated this unified condition or system, this "state of interface." The pedagogical and epistemological philosophy of Interface University asserts that the highest goal of education is achieving the kind of symbiosis between human and computer intelligences as exists between a horse and rider. ²⁰

At Interface University, faculty and students treat the computer not as a tool but as a "third hemisphere" of the brain, and higher learning means developing a metaphorical "corpus callosum" with this digital hemisphere. ²¹ Howard Gardner imagined a future where "those hooked on creative activity will also use computers as intellectual prosthetics.... [M]ost innovations today - from the architectural designs of Frank Gehry to the decoding of genomes by the company Celera - would not be possible without powerful computers." ²²

No mere tool, the computer is an equal partner in creativity, in thinking, in cognition. On matriculation, students will identify the computer/algorithm/artificial intelligence with which they "interfaced" throughout their university studies. That specific computer's identification would accompany the student's records in any official transcripts, portfolios, or certifications.

Humans have always had "hybrid minds." ²³ Long before the invention of the computer, human beings engaged in cognition coupled with external tools. The development of writing, for example, was not a mere tool: humans-coupled-with-writing could engage in a level of cognition unattainable for pre-literate humans. Thinking and cognition do not occur within the wetware of the brain alone; our cognition is equally a function of the external technological prosthesis we employ. The networked computer represents the next great cognitive prosthesis. ²⁴

Education has always involved developing an interface with our cognitive prostheses. Alexander Mieklejohn's "Experimental College" at Wisconsin was a liberal arts institution where students worked with books. "The intention of the college," he wrote, "is that...minds shall be fed, and trained, and strengthened, and directed by the use of books." ²⁵ Interface University also revolves around an intimacy with tools while assuring students that they cannot be replaced by computers and other machines, only enhanced.

The Neo-Liberal Arts College

Studies by Northeastern University ²⁶ and the American Association of Colleges and Universities ²⁷ found that a large majority of employers look for college graduates with broadly applicable skills like oral and written communications and a capacity to think critically, solve complex problems, take responsibility, and innovate, as well as people who demonstrate ethical judgment and integrity. Specific industry experience ranks much lower according to these surveys. ²⁸ The Institute of the Future has identified 10 work skills for the future: "Rather than focusing on future jobs, this report looks at future work skills - proficiencies and abilities required across different jobs and work settings."

Sense-making: the ability to determine the deeper meaning or significance of what is being expressed

Social intelligence: the ability to connect to others in a deep and direct way, to sense and stimulate reactions and desired interactions

Novel and adaptive thinking: proficiency at thinking and coming up with solutions and responses beyond that which is rote or rule-based

Cross-cultural competency: the ability to operate in different cultural settings

Computational thinking: the ability to translate vast amounts of data into abstract concepts and to understand data-based reasoning

New-media literacy: the ability to critically assess and develop content that uses new media forms, and to leverage these media for persuasive communication

Transdisciplinarity: literacy in and ability to understand concepts across multiple disciplines

Design mindset: the ability to represent and develop tasks and work processes for desired outcomes

Cognitive load management: the ability to discriminate and filter information for importance, and to understand how to maximize cognitive functioning using a variety of tools and techniques

Virtual collaboration: the ability to work productively, drive engagement, and demonstrate presence as a member of a virtual team²⁹

The Neo-Liberal Arts College teaches broad, practical intellective skills that are ready-made for action in the world, and students develop fluency in these skills. The college has no majors or electives: a degree from the Neo-Liberal Arts College signals competence in each of these 10 skills.

When considering these skills, it would seem that employers look for those characteristics long considered central to a liberal-arts education: communication and critical thinking, innovation and collaboration, integrity and responsibility. But liberal arts colleges do not really teach these skills: they teach subjects/disciplines (history, psychology, English, chemistry). Or, perhaps more correctly, if students acquire these skills, they do so as a byproduct of this subject-based education. Further, even at liberal arts colleges, students major in or concentrate on only one or two subjects.

At the Neo-Liberal Arts College, the broad-based skills of the liberal arts experience align with workforce development needs: the skills identified by employers become the subjects of a liberal arts education. Thus, rather than history or chemistry, students study sense-making, communication, complex problem solving, and other such skills, with formal courses organized around each skill. This college also requires a new type of faculty, one knowledgeable in skills rather than academic disciplines.

Ludic University (or the University of Play)

Play, typically associated with the activities of children, makes "adult play" seem a contradiction - or an arrested state of development. As a consequence, adults have few formal venues to develop and exercise advanced play. Nevertheless, Douglas Thomas and John Seely Brown claim that "the ability to play may be the single most important skill to develop for the twenty-first century." They define play as "the tension between the rules of the game and the freedom to act within those rules." In a state of play, we have "unlimited agency to build and experiment with things within those boundaries." ³⁰ Play is a state or way of operating in the world, a disposition. Ludic University facilitates this disposition for adults.

Ludic University makes play the highest form of learning, well above the acquisition and production of knowledge. Engaging in play turns out to be related to the processes used by artists, ³¹ so the activities within Ludic University look much like the kinds of activities artists engage in. If the seminar room and the laboratory define the modern research university, then the studio defines Ludic University. The university has no set curriculum, no prescribed set of courses to follow. Students follow their curiosity, exploring those subjects necessary to satisfy that curiosity on an as-needed basis. ³²

Ludic University students explore novelty and engage in generative creation: imagining that which does not exist, bringing the new into being. Howard Gardner observed that all children reach a stage in their intellectual development when "they are able to envision a state of affairs contrary to the one that is apprehended by their senses, to capture that imaginative activity in public symbolic form, and to continue to elaborate upon that imaginative capacity." ³³ Capturing imaginative activity in public symbolic form defines the central activity of Ludic University.

As Gardner noted with children, play and imagination are closely linked. A key epistemological tenet of Ludic University is that play and imagination define higher learning, and so the university cultivates the imagination. The ontological terrain on which Ludic University operates is that of the subjunctive, the "adjacent possible," and the future. That is, students enact play not within the actual world but in possible worlds. "The most fundamental characteristic of the imagination," wrote Richard Ogle, "is its ability to let us free ourselves from the grip of present reality.... [T]his characteristic enables us to construct and play with alternative ways of seeing, understanding, and acting in the world that allow something new, interesting, and useful to emerge.... The imagination frees us from the mesmerizing grip of reality, allowing us to invent, play with, and even try out alternative worlds." ³⁴ To play means to imagine that which would not otherwise exist. ³⁵

Miguel Sicart observed that "Play happens mostly in contexts designed for that activity [and] context is the network of things, people, and places needed for play to take place." ³⁶ One reason we might not associate play with the actions of adults is that there are so few spaces, so few contexts, for such play. Ludic University provides that context for serious play, being designed as a playground, a space for the imagination - as through the manipulation of props or other objects - and open to any and all who wish to appropriate and hack. ³⁷ Indeed, this university exists to be hacked: teachers and students play with/appropriate the very space and organization of the university. The permeable boundaries around Ludic University let students enter and leave the playspace/university when curiosity strikes or when play beckons. The university becomes a platform "for experimentation, speculation, and the reimagining of everyday life." ³⁸
Students of the University-as-Playground engage in world-making, with players building pretend worlds, inhabiting them, playing in them, and role playing within these imaginary environments. Students and faculty also transgress the rules, invent new rules, and play games based on these new rules. The exploration of "what if?" is one of the highest forms of inquiry: Students wonder, "What if work were separated from employment?" or "What if the dirtiest, grungiest jobs were paid the highest?" Students/players explore these worlds through virtual simulations and also through the construction of actual physical worlds. For example, someone might ask, "What if the University were designed to facilitate serious play?" and build such a world not only through words but as an actual structure and organization, wherein players perform roles in this imagined world.
Ludic University values and encourages experimentation and tinkering with no end goal: play is a process of aimless curiosity. Indeed, "play is autolelic," asserted Sicart, "an activity with its own goals and purposes, with its own marked duration and spaces and its own conditions for ending." ³⁹ There may be "real-world applications" of the results of play, such as a new way to organize the economy, but creations that act upon the world are not the outcomes sought at Ludic University. Its motto? Ludite ut sibi fin. (Play as an end unto itself.)

Unlimited Disruption

The university is indeed ripe for disruption, but that disruption need not be limited to the MOOC-ization of higher education. Too many of our ideas about the future of the university involve technological solutions alone, which divert our attention from other equally efficacious forms of disruption. "We desperately need more imagination to be brought to bear in identifying new ideas for the development of the university," concluded Ronald Barnett. Barnett imagined what he terms "feasible utopias":

[Feasible utopias] are precisely not the present situation, and probably are unlikely ever to be fully realized, given the structures of power and ideology at work. However...these utopias are not entirely fanciful, for the depictions that I have conjured can already be glimpsed in our daily practices in universities and higher education. They are, therefore, feasible utopias. In the best of all possible worlds, they could just be realized even if it is unlikely that they will be. ⁴⁰

This essay similarly imagines the University of the Future as feasible utopias. 41 I see each of the five models for future universities as the beginnings of a blueprint, of actual universities we might design and build. I hope others will join me in seeking to realize each of these feasible utopias as a way to disrupt higher education.

Notes

1. Ronald Barnett, Imagining the University (London: Routledge, 2013), 1.

2. Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby, Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2013), 2.

3. Derek Bok, Our Underachieving Colleges (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2006), 45-46.

4. Richard Ogle, Smart World: Breakthrough Creativity and the New Science of Ideas (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2007), 13.

5. Ibid., 15.

6. Ibid., 4.

7. Ibid., 30.

8. Richard N. Pitt and Steven Tepper "Double Majors: Influences, Identities, & Impacts," A Curb Center Report, September 2012, 12.

9. Dan Berrett, "Students Can Transfer Knowledge if Taught How," Chronicle of Higher Education, April 7, 2014.

10. Paula Krebs, "Step Outside the Major, Please," The Chronicle of Higher Education, July 28, 2015.

11. John W. Moravec, ed., Knowmad Society (Minneapolis: Education Futures, 2013), 18.

12. I first encountered the idea of a Nomad University by working with colleagues at the Stir conference in October 2011, where we designed a design education program around the idea of apprentice designers travelling the globe to work on problems.

13. Something like this can be found at at Knowmads Business School in Amsterdam. See Moravec, Knowmad Society, 163-174.

14. Douglas Brinkley taught an American history and literature course by travelling around the country and reading history and literature in place. See The Majic Bus: An American Odyssey (New York: Anchor Books, 1993).

15. Mary Catherine Bateson, Peripheral Visions: Learning Along the Way (New York: Harper Collins, 1994).

16. Clive Thompson, Smarter Than You Think (New York: Penguin Press, 2013), 4.

17. Derek Thompson, "A World Without Work," The Atlantic July/August 2015.

18. Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee , The Second Machine Age: Work, Progress, and Prosperity in a Time of Brilliant Technologies (New York: W.W. Norton, 2014); and Tyler Cowen, Average is Over: Powering America Beyond the Age of the Great Stagnation (New York: Dutton, 2013).

19. Branden Hookway, Interface (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2014), 4.

20. This idea comes from the designer Donald Norman, who described our relationship with intelligent machines as like that between a horse and rider: two intelligences that work together. See The Design of Future Things (New York: Basic Books, 2007), 9-10.

21. On the idea of a "corpus callosum" between brain and machine, see Michael Chorost, World Wide Mind: The Coming Integration of Humanity, Machines and the Internet (New York: Free Press, 2011), 8-9.

22. Howard Gardner, Five Minds for the Future (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2006), 101.

23. See especially Andy Clark and David J. Chalmers. "The Extended Mind," in Richard Menary, ed., The Extended Mind (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2010).

24. This is the thesis of my book, Brain, Mind and Internet: A Deep History and Future (Palgrave, 2014).

25. Quoted in Adam R. Nelson, Education and Democracy: The Meaning of Alexander Meiklejohn, 1872-1964 (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2001), 153.

26. "Innovation Imperative: Enhancing Higher Education Outcomes, Public Opinion Survey Results," Northeastern University 2nd Annual Innovation Poll, September 17, 2013.

27. The Association of American Colleges and Universities and Hart Research Associates, "It Takes More Than a Major: Employer Priorities for College Learning and Student Success," April 10, 2013.

28. Nick DeSantis, "Business Leaders See U.S. Colleges as Lagging in Readying Students for Jobs," Chronicle of Higher Education, April 29, 2014.

29. The Institute for the Future, "Future Work Skills 2020," 1.

30. Douglas Thomas and John Seely Brown, A New Culture of Learning: Cultivating the Imagination for a World of Constant Change (CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform , 2011), 114, 18-19.

31. See George Szekely, From Play to Art (Portsmouth, N.H. Heinemann, 1991).

32. Cindy Foley, "Teaching art or teaching to think like an artist?" TEDxColumbus, November 2014.

33. Howard Gardner, The Unschooled Mind: How Children Think and How Schools Should Teach (New York: Basic Books, 1991), 71.

34. Ogle, Smart World, 69, 73.

35. See Peter Murphy, Michael A. Peters, and Simon Marginson, Imagination: Three Models of Imagination in the Age of the Knowledge Economy (New York: Peter Lang, 2010), 28. "The work of the imagination does not represent 'what is absent.' It also posits objects that otherwise would not exist."

36. Miguel Sicart, Play Matters (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2014), 7.

37. See Pamela Meyer, From Workplace to Playspace: Innovating, Learning and Changing Through Dynamic Engagement (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2010).

38. Dunne and Raby, Speculative Everything, 31.

39. Sicart, Play Matters, 16.

40. Ronald Barnett, Being a University (London: Routledge, 2011), 5, 4.

41. For other such exercise in imagining feasible utopias, see Brian Mathews, "No Classrooms, Just Experiences: 'Free Thinking' the Future of Higher Ed," Chronicle of Higher Education, April 9, 2014. For other speculative models for universities, see Steven Mintz, "Four Emergent Higher Education Models," InsideHigherEd, April 2, 2014; and Jeff Selingo, "Reimagining the Undergraduate Experience: 4 Provocative Ideas," Chronicle of Higher Education, June 22, 2014.

David J. Staley, PhD, is an associate professor of History and an Adjunct Associate Professor of Design at the Ohio State University, where he also serves as Director of the Harvey Goldberg Center for Excellence in Teaching. He is the author of Computers, Visualization and History; History and Future: Using Historical Thinking to Imagine the Future; and Brain, Mind and Internet: A Deep History and Future. For the past three years, he has led a working group at Ohio State on "The Future of the University." He serves as President of Columbus Futurists, the local chapter of the World Future Society, consulting with organizations and lecturing frequently on future trends.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
the future of the university: speculative design for innovation in higher education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Future of the University: Speculative Design for Innovation in Higher Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This essay proposes five models of innovation in higher education that expand our "Ideas of the University," envisioning educational start-ups in the spirit of entrepreneurial experimentation. The author seeks to realize each of these feasible utopias as a way to disrupt higher education. As I write this, the university reportedly is in crisis.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Propelling education through a COVID-19 world - Episode 01

# data[].attributes.headline
Getting Started in SoTL: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Annotated Literature Database

# data[].attributes.subject
Getting Started in SoTL: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Annotated Literature Database

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
These postsecondary practitioners and researchers are not always familiar with the research literature about learning and may have no point of entry for their investigations (Weimer, 2010). A frequent challenge is finding 'point of entry' literature around a particular topic that will provide a starting point for further inquiry. In addition, it can be challenging to grasp the ongoing scholarly debates in literature with which one is not yet familiar. Further, as Christensen Hughes and Mighty (2010) note, "researchers have discovered much about teaching and learning in higher education, but ... dissemination and uptake of this information have been limited. As such, the impact of educational research on faculty-teaching practice and the student-learning experience has been negligible" (p. 4). Disseminating teaching and learning research in ways that connect it to practice continues to be a challenge (Poole, 2009).

These assertions are supported by my own experiences: For many years I worked with faculty members on their SoTL projects, and now work with both colleagues and graduate students. These consultations made me realize that finding point-of-entry literature in a field not one's own is both difficult and daunting.

The release of the open-access website https://researchsotl.wordpress.com/ aims to address that challenge. The website compiles key literature on SoTL topics to support postsecondary scholars and students from across all disciplines to improve their practice or conduct research pertaining to these topics. Each entry comprises a topic heading, a brief overview of the topic, and a short list of annotated key literature, highlighting ongoing debates in the literature.

A SoTL resources page provides a number of websites, books, articles, and videos that provide excellent background for those engaging in SoTL. While both they and the annotations are geared towards those entering SoTL, feedback thus far has suggested that SoTL scholars at any stage will find the site a useful place to begin or extend their literature searches.
Want to get involved?
The website is a work in progress (you will see a limited number of entries have been completed - though a team of dedicated graduate students is working on more as I write). I invite you to not only use it, but to consider whether:

You could contribute an entry or two based on your work in progress

You could ask a graduate pedagogy class to contribute annotations for a class assignment

All entries will be attributed to the contributing author. Contact Nicola Simmons at nsimmons@brocku.ca. Please see the annotation process tab for further details.
References

Christensen Hughes, J., & Mighty, J. (2010). Taking stock: Research on teaching and learning in higher education. Kingston, ON: McGill-Queen's University Press.

Poole, G. (2009). The pursuit of the scholarship of teaching and learning in Canada: Good, but not good enough. Keynote presentation at the Canadian Society for Studies in Higher Education annual conference, Ottawa, Ontario, May 25-27.

Weimer, M. (2008). Positioning scholarly work on teaching and learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(1).

Author Bio
Nicola was the SoTL Canada Founding Chair and previously served as VP (Canada) for ISSoTL, VP (SoTL) for the Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, and Chair of the Canadian Educational Developers Caucus. She is the author of the SoTL annotations website and the editor of special issue #146 of New Directions for Teaching and Learning, "The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Canada: Institutional Impact" (released summer 2016).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Getting Started in SoTL: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Annotated Literature Database

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
These postsecondary practitioners and researchers are not always familiar with the research literature about learning and may have no point of entry for their investigations (Weimer, 2010). A frequent challenge is finding 'point of entry' literature around a particular topic that will provide a starting point for further inquiry.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Propelling education through a COVID-19 world - Episode 03

# data[].attributes.body
Are you interested in gaining international accreditation for your experience and expertise in integrating technology in teaching and learning?

The Certified Member of the Association for Learning Technology (CMALT) provides peer-reviewed recognition aligned with the UK higher education professional standards framework.

The Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education at The University of Melbourne is hosting a cMOOC (connectivist Massive Open Online Course) to support academics and allied staff to develop portfolios for CMALT accreditation and facilitate an experience of participating in a global network of higher education professionals.

Suitable for

The cMOOC is open to anyone wanting to explore CMALT accreditation and is not restricted to University of Melbourne staff.

Applicants must have some teaching with technology experience to complete a CMALT portfolio: less than 5 years for Associate CMALT, 5-10 years for CMALT, more than 10 years for Senior CMALT (plus evidence of either leadership or research expertise in technology-enhanced learning for SCMALT).

Program schedule

The CMALT cMOOC launches with an introductory webinar on Monday 14 September, 9:30am AEST (Monday 14 September, 11:30am NZST; Sunday 13 September, 10:30pm BST) and will run for 7 weeks.

Participants will be emailed the webinar link after signing up.

Put the event in your calendar.

Fees and charges

There are no fees or charges to participate in the cMOOC.

Registration

Click the link below to register.

Sign up

More information

What is CMALT?

cMOOC HUB

cMOOC Discussion Forum

Get involved

Download Flyer

cMOOC social media hashtag: #CMALTcMOOC

Enquiries

Associate Professor Thomas Cochrane
Email: cochrane.t@unimelb.edu.au

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
About

Are you interested in gaining international accreditation for your experience and expertise in integrating technology in teaching and learning?

The Certified Member of the Association for Learning Technology (CMALT) provides peer-reviewed recognition aligned with the UK higher education professional standards framework.

The Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education at The University of Melbourne is hosting a cMOOC (connectivist Massive Open Online Course) to support academics and allied staff to develop portfolios for CMALT accreditation and facilitate an experience of participating in a global network of higher education professionals.

Suitable for

The cMOOC is open to anyone wanting to explore CMALT accreditation and is not restricted to University of Melbourne staff.

Applicants must have some teaching with technology experience to complete a CMALT portfolio: less than 5 years for Associate CMALT, 5-10 years for CMALT, more than 10 years for Senior CMALT (plus evidence of either leadership or research expertise in technology-enhanced learning for SCMALT).

Program schedule

The CMALT cMOOC launches with an introductory webinar on Monday 14 September, 9:30am AEST (Monday 14 September, 11:30am NZST; Sunday 13 September, 10:30pm BST) and will run for 7 weeks.

Participants will be emailed the webinar link after signing up.

Put the event in your calendar.

Fees and charges

There are no fees or charges to participate in the cMOOC.

Registration

Click the link below to register.

More information

Enquiries

Associate Professor Thomas Cochrane
Email: cochrane.t@unimelb.edu.au

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Are you interested in gaining international accreditation for your experience and expertise in integrating technology in teaching and learning? The Certified Member of the Association for Learning Technology (CMALT) provides peer-reviewed recognition aligned with the UK higher education professional standards framework.

# data[].attributes.body
The Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, also known as ASCILITE is an incorporated not-for-profit professional association for those engaged in the educational use of technologies in tertiary education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ASCILITE shaping the future of tertiary education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Propelling education through a COVID-19 world - Episode 02

# data[].attributes.body
Affordance 1: Ubiquitous Learning - New Learning Online

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gamification and Game Based Learning- Jeffrey Woo From Print Textbooks to e-Textbooks-Stephen Dunn Mobile Learning with Online Databses-Kristyn Giles Expresso Elementary-Rebecca Kruske One Learner's Experience in Scholar-Bogdan Oprica Ubiqutous Learning in Scholar-Heather Ochman NetSupport School Classroom Management System-Karen Kelly Teaching and Learning though Blogging-Brian Cann Shipboard Bridge Team Management Training-Patrick

# data[].attributes.headline
The Melbourne Academy is a Melbourne CSHE initiative for Early Career Academics (ECAs). 

# data[].attributes.subject
The Melbourne Academy is a Melbourne CSHE initiative for Early Career Academics (ECAs). 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
About

The Melbourne Academy is a Melbourne CSHE initiative for Early Career Academics (ECAs). It provides a dedicated program of professional development which includes knowledge and skills that are important for developing academic careers. In 2020 there will be a particular focus on teaching specialists.

Availability

The Melbourne Academy program will be offered in September 2020.

Intended learning outcomes

The Melbourne Academy program is designed to offer opportunities for ECAs to:

build their knowledge and skills related to the primary areas of the University: research, teaching and learning, and engagement

develop their understanding and appreciation of critical skills required in complex academic institutions

provide opportunities to establish peer networks across the University

Participants who attend all sessions will receive a certificate of participation and become a Fellow of the Melbourne Academy.

Eligibility

Early career academics who fulfil the following criteria:

are employed at the University of Melbourne

have less than five years' full-time equivalent post PhD academic experience at university level

are currently in a continuing or fixed term position.

Teaching specialists are encouraged to apply.
Fees and charges

There are no fees or direct charges to departments, schools or faculties.

Program outline

Expressions of interest

Interested staff are asked to complete the expression of interest form below. The program coordinator will then assess applicants' eligibility for the program.

Expression of Interest form

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Melbourne Academy is a Melbourne CSHE initiative for Early Career Academics (ECAs). It provides a dedicated program of professional development which includes knowledge and skills that are important for developing academic careers. In 2020 there will be a particular focus on teaching specialists. The Melbourne Academy program will be offered in September 2020.

# data[].attributes.body
Revisiting ‘A “teaching excellence” for the times we live in’: posthuman possibilities: Teaching in Higher Education: Vol 0, No 0

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article proposes a rethinking of the contested concept of teaching excellence within higher education. In order to do, so we engage posthumanist theory to reconsider teaching excellence from a new perspective that shifts the gaze beyond the measured individual to explore our intra-actions within a wider context. Taking Skelton's original conception of teaching excellence as a starting point, we explore what a values-based concept of excellence might look like, re-imagined for the present times we live in, and we ask whether there is room for a more expansive perspective of teaching excellence which reconsiders the relationality and fluidity of our practice.

Additional information

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Revisiting 'A "teaching excellence" for the times we live in': posthuman possibilities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article proposes a rethinking of the contested concept of teaching excellence within higher education. In order to do, so we engage posthumanist theory to reconsider teaching excellence from a new perspective that shifts the gaze beyond the measured individual to explore our intra-actions within a wider context.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chapter 6 The Practice of Hope Across the University

# data[].attributes.subject
Chapter 6 The Practice of Hope Across the University

# data[].attributes.body
Iorio, J. M., & Tanabe, C. S. (2019). Higher education and the practice of hope. Springer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Practice of Hope Across the University

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Jeanne Marie Iorio Clifton S. Tanabe Part of the Rethinking Higher Education book series (RHE) The practice of hope, and in particular students, academics, and administrators acting as public intellectuals has relevance beyond schools of education. How do we move our ideas to a large scale?

# data[].attributes.headline
Becoming entangled in SoTL and research through supercomplexity: Looking back, forward, in, out . . . and shaking it about! 

# data[].attributes.subject
Becoming entangled in SoTL and research through supercomplexity: Looking back, forward, in, out . . . and shaking it about! 

# data[].attributes.body
Selkrig, M. & Keamy, R. (2019). Emerging Methods and Paradigms in Scholarship and Education Research (1st ed., pp. 244-262) IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-1001-8.ch014 https://www-igi-global-com.ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/gateway/chapter/236534

# data[].attributes.headline
Reading Recommendations for New SoTL Scholars

# data[].attributes.subject
Reading Recommendations for New SoTL Scholars

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reading Recommendations for New SoTL Scholars

# data[].attributes.body
After COVID-19: The coming upheaval in higher education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Three years ago, Clayton Christensen, who developed the theory of "disruptive innovation," predicted that half of colleges and universities in the United States would be bankrupt in 10 to 15 years. His prediction may be hastened by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has dealt a financial blow to universities across the US and globally. Seismic changes are on the way.

Beginning in March, enforced social distancing sent faculty scrambling to their computers to download Zoom. Millions of students, forced to decamp from shuttered campuses, spent much of the Spring term logging on to classes from their parents' homes.

In recent weeks, universities have been grappling with the decision of whether to welcome students back to campus, or continue teaching remotely for the rest of 2020. One of Asia's top-ranked universities, the National University of Singapore, will re-open all three of its campuses on 10 August, with a blend of online and on-campus classes, a formula expected to be followed by many universities worldwide for the coming academic year.

The pandemic's budgetary toll on universities has already been enormous. Income has been lost and will continue to be lost in many areas, including on ancillary activities such as student accommodation and meal programs. Educational institutions that are heavily dependent on international students will be hard hit in the short term; a British Council survey suggests that only 39% of Chinese students (the largest group of overseas students by far) plan to continue their applications to British universities for the coming academic year.

Australia is trialing a program to fly in overseas students in a bid to avoid more than AU$40 billion in potential losses by 2023 due to reduced numbers of international students. Management consultancy McKinsey & Company projects that eventual revenue losses of US universities could reach $19 billion from lost tuition and fee revenues alone.

More generally, the pandemic could reduce incoming student enrollment at US universities by up to 20%, according to Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education. A gap year may well be an attractive option to teenagers who would rather not be guinea-pigs as higher education re-invents itself.

Universities are laying off staff, merging or closing programs and departments, and questioning the tenure system. There will be pressure to raise tuition to cover costs, yet a strong argument is also being made that tuition fees should move in the opposite direction, since students will no longer be receiving traditional face-to-face teaching and other benefits of campus life.

The pandemic will leave strong institutions stronger, and weak ones weaker, continuing the sector consolidation predicted by Christensen. Universities with resources and elite standing will remain intact, but others are already facing a cash crunch.

In the United Kingdom, SOAS, a university with strong links to Asia, has already sent out distress signals. Mergers between universities seem inevitable and those unable to find partners may simply disappear (as in the case of tiny Pine Manor College, which in May announced that it will be taken over by Boston College). Publicly funded universities in continental Europe will have to tighten their belts as well, even if they are able to stave off dramatic restructuring.

International students, mostly from countries in Asia, will be key to the survival of many institutions in anglophone OECD member countries. But will they return in force when travel restrictions are lifted, visas are granted, and economies recover?

COVID-19 has thrown higher education into an age of upheaval.

Universities situated in countries like Canada that are seen as welcoming to foreign students, charge reasonable tuition, and allow graduates to remain and work, should continue to benefit. More Western universities will teach international students in their home countries, through improved online instruction and increased partnerships on the ground.

With the world tilting to Asia, many international students may conclude that they can obtain a quality education in or near their own country. In the People's Republic of China, students are increasingly learning online, with institutions like Tsinghua University, creator of the XuetangX learning platform, leading the way. The number of Asian universities in the top 100 of the QS World University Rankings has soared over the past decade.

Through trial and error, online teaching will continue to become more engaging as technology, design, and professors improve. To tackle screen fatigue, programs will feature dynamically curated course content, interactive exercises, online peer collaboration, and a role for students in shaping their own learning adventure. Demonstrated competence in leading virtual classes will become a prerequisite for teaching faculty.

Universities with leadership that embraces change, and that possess the will to adopt bold reforms, have a chance to reinvent themselves. Some are already showing the way, like Arizona State University, which was named most innovative US university five years in a row. It is now launching a PhD Program in Innovation for Global Development where students spend no more than 18 months in residence to complete core classroom requirements. The rest of the time they hold down jobs and use digital platforms. More universities will partner with major corporations, which have an incentive to tap into R&D capacity on campuses, and to nurture pipelines of work-ready grads.

The full "college experience" and sense of community, with its range of human interactions and activities will not die, but may be restricted to the rich and status-conscious. Greater use of online and hybrid competitors could democratize education at the world's elite universities, which have been criticized by Yale law professor Daniel Markovits and others as a way of passing on privilege in the guise of meritocracy.

Moving forward, most students seem likely to be offered a hybrid model, with pandemic-induced online instruction continuing for basic courses for large numbers, complemented by smaller in-person classes for more advanced courses and subjects harder to teach online (think lab work). Across the board, individual classes will offer more online components.

COVID-19 has been a boom to "massive open online courses", which have seen a sharp rise in enrolment since mid-March. Demand will continue to grow for short programs that provide certification leading to jobs in the technology sector and other technical areas. Recovery from the economic crisis will take years, causing many to search out practical, low-cost educational options.

This could boost the fortunes of community colleges and technical and vocational schools, as well as a growing number of serious online degree programs offered by major universities (such as the University of Illinois, which offers an MBA or master's degree in data science for under $22,000).

In short, COVID-19 has thrown higher education into an age of upheaval. Circumstances have never been riper for re-imagining how a university operates. Those universities that seize the moment to adopt more quality online learning, forge significant partnerships, and demonstrate results in preparing students of all ages for work in a technology-driven economy, stand a chance of not only surviving, but thriving.
This blog is the second in a series exploring how the COVID-19 pandemic could alter our expectations, change established norms and practices, and reshape the ways in which business is carried out, jobs are performed, government regulates, and society orders itself.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
азиатский банк развития

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
After COVID-19: The coming upheaval in higher education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Three years ago, Clayton Christensen, who developed the theory of "disruptive innovation," predicted that half of colleges and universities in the United States would be bankrupt in 10 to 15 years. His prediction may be hastened by the COVID-19 pandemic, which has dealt a financial blow to universities across the US and globally.

# data[].attributes.body
How might we work more collaboratively on research as teachers? How do we make time and connect on priority research areas?
It’s so much easier and more motivating to write as a team. It would be great to have intergenerational teams of early-career, mid-career and senior academics.
Need opportunities to talk about practices around teaching. A lot of our conversations are predominantly focused on admin/technical topics. How can we stimulate more critical discussions around teaching?
Are there research focused people within the MGSE or Melbourne CSHE who can be a driver for getting teaching staff together to do research? They could identify priority areas for research collaboration (e.g., online pedagogies are topical right now).
There could be surveys of teaching staff which asks them about their practices in priority areas, and this could be turned into research findings.
The ethics that’s involved in getting research up and going is prohibitive. One way to get around it is by sharing stories around teaching practice as a small group and working on a publication together (autoethnography).

# data[].attributes.body
UNESCO invites you to share your thoughts about how education can be used to shape the future of humanity and the planet.

We are looking forward to learn more about your perspectives on what should be remembered and held central in discussions about the futures of education. Statements can be narrow or broad. Please feel free to speak from your particular experience.

UNESCO will review all submitted contributions and present a synthesis of major messages to the International Commission that steers the work of the Futures of Education initiative.

Individual submissions may also be excerpted or published in their entirety on the Futures of Education website.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Victoria University | Melbourne Australia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find a range of SoTL resources and research outlets.

# data[].attributes.body
Uni SA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The scholarship of teaching and learning is conceptualised by Kreber (2005) as "the practical, intellectual and critical work done by university teachers that facilitates student development toward significant educational goals."

At the University of South Australia, successful engagement in the scholarship of teaching involves the following elements:

Being a reflective teacher Gathering data about your teaching activity, analysing this, and reflecting upon it in a critical manner to improve your own practice.

Being a scholarly teacher Engaging with the discussion and debates about teaching in the literature, including that contributed by scholars in your own discipline, and using this to shape your own practice. (Click here to access discipline education journals; Word doc, 60 KB)

Contributing to the scholarship of teaching Presenting your own analysis of teaching based on relevant data which you have related to the work of others, and inviting your peers to critique and comment upon the contribution you are making to a better understanding of teaching and learning.

[ 1] Kreber, C. (2005). 'Charting a critical course on the scholarship of university teaching movement'. Studies in Higher Education 30(4):389-405, p. 392

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The scholarship of teaching and learning is conceptualised by Kreber (2005) as "the practical, intellectual and critical work done by university teachers that facilitates student development toward significant educational goals."

# data[].attributes.headline
What is Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (SoTL)?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is Scholarship of Teaching & Learning (SoTL)?

# data[].attributes.body
University of Edinburgh

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The ISSOTL Advocacy and Outreach Committee has resources that scholars can use to promote the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) to campus administrators, fellow scholars, and members of the general public.

# data[].attributes.body
8-9 April, 2021

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dr Kathryn Coleman, Senior Lecturer, Visual Arts and Design Education, Co-Director UNESCO Observatory of Arts Education, Melbourne Graduate School of Education

Professor Sophia Arkoudis, Professor of Higher Education, Associate Dean (Research), Melbourne CSHE, Melbourne Graduate School of Education

Dr Bella Blaher, Faculty Research Manager, Melbourne Graduate School of Education

Melina Mallos, PhD Candidate, Melbourne Graduate School of Education

Meredith Hinze, Manager, eLearning/eTeaching, eTeaching Unit, Academic Support Office, Faculty of Arts

Dr Charles Sevigny, Senior Lecturer, Director of Digital Learning, School of Biomedical Sciences, Academic Programs and Major Coordinator, Department of Physiology. Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences

Dr Clare McNally, Lecturer, Oral Health, Melbourne Dental School, Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences

Dr Karen J. Donald, Senior Lecturer, Doctor of Physiotherapy Course Coordinator, Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences. Faculty of Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2021 Conference | Technology, Knowledge & Society Research Network

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dr Kathryn Coleman, Senior Lecturer, Visual Arts and Design Education, Co-Director UNESCO Observatory of Arts Education, Melbourne Graduate School of Education Professor Sophia Arkoudis, Professor of Higher Education, Associate Dean (Research), Melbourne CSHE, Melbourne Graduate School of Education Dr Bella Blaher, Faculty Research Manager, Melbourne Graduate School of Education Melina Mallos, PhD Candidate, Melbourne Graduate School of Education Meredith Hinze, Manager, eLearning/eTeaching, eTeaching Unit, Academic Support Office, Faculty of Arts Dr Charles Sevigny, Senior Lecturer, Director of Digital Learning, School of Biomedical Sciences, Academic Programs and Major Coordinator, Department of Physiology.

# data[].attributes.headline
AARE Seminar Series - Number four - Professor Robert Hattam

# data[].attributes.subject
AARE Seminar Series - Number four - Professor Robert Hattam

# data[].attributes.body
Towards a politics of truth for schooling in Australia
Unfortunately, educators in Australian schools now have their work constituted inside of a reform agenda that is increasingly under duress: (i) the performance of Australian students has declined at all levels of achievement compared to international benchmarks, and there is evidence mounting that Australia is one of the most unequal education systems amongst the 39 developed countries. But then those driving policy in Australia assert we should continue with the same but just do it harder. In this presentation, I examine the reform agenda for Australian schooling that now operates as a regime of truth. And to frame up my argument I want to make a case for a politics of truth, which examines how truth itself is authorised, and how what counts as truth now gets to hold sway.
The presentation makes a case that schooling suffers from a power/knowledge problem, that is multi-dimensional. The presentation interrogates: (i) four key neoliberalising policy rationales of the past decade: devolution, standardisation, parental choice, and accountability through high stakes testing; the School Effectiveness /School Improvement paradigm (SE/SI) that works in tandem with neoliberalising logics; and (iii) the radical disconnect between the official knowledge that is taught in schools and the challenges facing the communities that we all live in, and the nation. The presentation ends with a discussion of the scaling up of classroom-based curriculum and pedagogy redesign projects to the knowledge producing school.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Towards a politics of truth tor schooling in Australia

Professor Robert Hattam

Unfortunately, educators in Australian schools now have their work constituted inside of a reform agenda that is increasingly under duress: (i) the performance of Australian students has declined at all levels of achievement compared to international benchmarks, and there is evidence mounting that Australia is one of the most unequal education systems amongst the 39 developed countries. But then those driving policy in Australia assert we should continue with the same but just do it harder. In this presentation, I examine the reform agenda for Australian schooling that now operates as a regime of truth. And to frame up my argument I want to make a case for a politics of truth, which examines how truth itself is authorised, and how what counts as truth now gets to hold sway.
The presentation makes a case that schooling suffers from a power/knowledge problem, that is multi-dimensional. The presentation interrogates: (i) four key neoliberalising policy rationales of the past decade: devolution, standardisation, parental choice, and accountability through high stakes testing; the School Effectiveness /School Improvement paradigm (SE/SI) that works in tandem with neoliberalising logics; and (iii) the radical disconnect between the official knowledge that is taught in schools and the challenges facing the communities that we all live in, and the nation. The presentation ends with a discussion of the scaling up of classroom-based curriculum and pedagogy redesign projects to the knowledge producing school.

About the presenter

Robert Hallam is the Professor for Educational Justice in UniSA's Education Futures, and the Convenor of the Pedagogies for Justice Research Group His research has focused on teachers' work, critical and reconciliation pedagogies, refugees, and socially just school reform. He has been involved in Australian Research Council funded projects on teachers' learning in the devolving school, early school leaving, and middle schooling; Re-thinking Reconciliation and Pedagogy in Unsettling Times; Redesigning pedagogies in the North; Schooling, Globalisation and Refugees in Queensland; Negotiating A Space Wrthin The Nation The Case Of Ngarrindjeri, Educational Leadership and turnaround literacy pedagogies; and Towards an Australian culturally responsive pedagogy.
Register now via this link
" Back to Events Calendar Add this to iCalendar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
AARE Seminar Series - Number four - Professor Robert Hattam

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Unfortunately, educators in Australian schools now have their work constituted inside of a reform agenda that is increasingly under duress: (i) the performance of Australian students has declined at all levels of achievement compared to international benchmarks, and there is evidence mounting that Australia is one of the most unequal education systems amongst the 39 developed countries.

# data[].attributes.body
How research informs and enhances learning and teaching in the University of Melbourne

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Message from the President

If you have a question related to education, you've come to the right place. Our association is made up of experts in all fields of educational research. We are as diverse as the educational questions we investigate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Message from the President If you have a question related to education, you've come to the right place. Our association is made up of experts in all fields of educational research. We are as diverse as the educational questions we investigate.

# data[].attributes.headline
Randy Bass (Georgetown University), Joanna Renc-Roe (Central European University, Budapest), Pat Hutchings (Gonzaga University), Barbara Gayle (Viterbo University), Dan Bernstein (University of Kansas), Mary Taylor Huber (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching), Gary Poole (University of British Columbia), Nancy Chick (Vanderbilt University), Tony Ciccone (University of Wisconsin -- Milwaukee), and Sherry Linkon (Georgetown University) describe key characteristics of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL).

# data[].attributes.subject
Randy Bass (Georgetown University), Joanna Renc-Roe (Central European University, Budapest), Pat Hutchings (Gonzaga University), Barbara Gayle (Viterbo University), Dan Bernstein (University of Kansas), Mary Taylor Huber (Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching), Gary Poole (University of British Columbia), Nancy Chick (Vanderbilt University), Tony Ciccone (University of Wisconsin -- Milwaukee), and Sherry Linkon (Georgetown University) describe key characteristics of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Key Characteristics of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

# data[].attributes.headline
Presented by the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) & The Center for Engaged Learning at Elon University. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) Scholars Dan Bernstein, Mary Taylor Huber, Pat Hutchings, and Gary Poole compare Scholarly Teaching and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. This video was produced for ISSOTL Online 2013, an online conference held in conjunction with the ISSOTL 2013 conference in Raleigh, North Carolina. Hosted by the Center for Engaged Learning (www.elon.edu/cel) at Elon University.

# data[].attributes.subject
Presented by the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) & The Center for Engaged Learning at Elon University. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) Scholars Dan Bernstein, Mary Taylor Huber, Pat Hutchings, and Gary Poole compare Scholarly Teaching and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. This video was produced for ISSOTL Online 2013, an online conference held in conjunction with the ISSOTL 2013 conference in Raleigh, North Carolina. Hosted by the Center for Engaged Learning (www.elon.edu/cel) at Elon University.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning vs. Scholarly Teaching

# data[].attributes.headline
The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning:What is it? A Personal View

# data[].attributes.subject
The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning:What is it? A Personal View

# data[].attributes.body
Michael Prosser, International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
http://www.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl
Vol. 2, No. 2 (July 2008)
ISSN 1931-4744 @ Georgia Southern University

# data[].attributes.headline
Higher Education Research and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning:The Pursuit of Excellence

# data[].attributes.subject
Higher Education Research and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning:The Pursuit of Excellence

# data[].attributes.body
Angela Brew
Macquarie University, International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
http://www.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl
Vol. 5, No. 2 (July 2011)
ISSN 1931-4744 @ Georgia Southern University

# data[].attributes.headline
RMIT Lib Guides  Selected SoTL conferences

# data[].attributes.subject
RMIT Lib Guides  Selected SoTL conferences

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
All guides: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL): Conferences

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Scholarly and practical resources to support scholarly and evidence-based teaching and to promote the scholarship of teaching and learning in the School of Global, Urban and Social Studies (GUSS).

# data[].attributes.body
Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The aim of the HERDSA Scholarship of Teaching & Learning modules is to start those new to SoTL on their journey by introducing the nature, purpose and processes of SoTL.

The modules have been specifically designed for the HERDSA community. Included are videos of prominent Australian and New Zealand HERDSA members contributing their valuable SoTL insight. The modules are also relevant for international scholars, acting as a capacity building resource to assist to develop and refine your SoTL knowledge and skills.

The programme is free for HERDSA financial members

Got to the HERDSA website ( www.herdsa.org.au). Click on member login at the top of the page

Enter your email and the password you created when you signed up for HERDSA membership or create an account. Click on MY DASHBOARD at the top of the page. On the right hand side of the page click on SOTL MODULES.

For Institutional Licences

If your institution wishes to purchase a licence for the programme, contact the HERDSA Office for price and log-in details.

Overview of the Modules

Overview: the aim of this module is to introduce you to the nature and purpose of SOTL. We will explain why you would pursue SoTL, and provide examples of the types of learning and teaching that could investigate as SoTL projects.
Module outcomes:

Define the concept of scholarly teaching and learning (SoTL)

Understand why you would pursue SoTL

Describe the nature of SoTL and provide examples of the types of issues that you could investigate as SoTL projects​

Identify the spaces in which SoTL can be pursued

Module 2 | Conceptualising a SoTL Project Module Outcomes:
Overview: The aim of this module is to help you conceptualise your SoTL project through a process of generating ideas, conducting a literature review and determining your research questions. Ethical considerations of your research project will also be covered, including how to write your ethics proposal.
Module 3 | Designing and Conducting a SoTL Project Module Outcomes:

Generate ideas for the focus of your research project

Explore processes for locating and critiquing literature relevant to your research project

Determine your research question

Writing your research project plan

Module 4 | Writing up SoTL findings
Overview: The aim of this module is to familiarise you with a range of data collection methods and processes by which you can analyse and draw conclusions about your findings
Module Outcomes:

Choose the appropriate data collection method based on the research question you want to answer

Choose the appropriate data collection method taking into account time, resources, expertise and availability of data

Identify key characteristics of a well constructed survey

Recognise major interviewing pitfalls

Justify the complexity of statistical analysis employed

Undertake coding processes to analyse qualitative data

Module 5 | Disseminating SoTL Findings Module Outcomes:
Overview: The aim of this module is to provide you with some support and guidance as you begin the process of writing up the findings of your SoTL research.​

Reflect on who you are as a SoTL researcher

Focus thinking around aspects of your completed SoTL project

Identify the components of and practice writing an academic abstract

Become aware of the key aspects and structure of a piece of SoTL writing.

Overview: The aim of this module is to introduce you to the spaces in which SoTL can be shared, and made public. The Module further aims to assist you to select a journal in which to publish your SoTL work.

Identify the variety of spaces in which SoTL work can be made public;

Reflect on motivations for publishing;

Investigate the strategies used to select a journal to submit a manuscript​

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The aim of the HERDSA Scholarship of Teaching & Learning modules is to start those new to SoTL on their journey by introducing the nature, purpose and processes of SoTL. The modules have been specifically designed for the HERDSA community. Included are videos of prominent Australian and New Zealand HERDSA members contributing their valuable SoTL insight.

# data[].attributes.headline
Writing Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Articles for Peer-Reviewed Journals 

# data[].attributes.subject
Writing Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Articles for Peer-Reviewed Journals 

# data[].attributes.body
Healey , M., Matthews, K. E., & Cook-Sather, A. (2019).  Writing Scholarship of Teaching and Learning articles for peer

-reviewed journals Teaching & Learning Inquiry,

7

(2).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
View of Writing Scholarship of Teaching and Learning articles for peer-reviewed journals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Return to Article Details Writing Scholarship of Teaching and Learning articles for peer-reviewed journals

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploring the Teaching-Research Nexus QS

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploring the Teaching-Research Nexus QS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How does teaching and research integrate and overlap within the higher education space? And why is there so often conflict between these two pillars of the sector?
Teaching and research should go hand in hand within the global higher education landscape.

Unfortunately, t eaching and research frequently compe te against each other for time and resources, with some arguing that they are incompatible .

Ideally, research universities would communicat e the insights and knowledge they acquire from cutting-edge research directly to their students, but this may not be the case.

For years, many believed that active researchers were the most effective teachers. However, it was discovered in multiple studies that the correlation between high-quality teaching and research excellence was essentially nonexistent .

Instead, universities were urged to explore how teaching and research can be more effectively integrated, ensuring that one doesn't overshadow the other.

This has resulted in some institutions shifting towards a more research and inquiry-based learning environment, while others argue that teaching and research should be treated as unrelated entities.

One clear issue is that many believe that the skills required for high-quality teaching are quite different to the skills needed to pursue research excellence.

This places a significant strain on professionals who are expected to be both active researchers and active teachers, with their individual skills perhaps lending them to one more than the other.

On the plus side, this could result in staff that are more passionate and enthusiastic about their work, teaching content that is updated continuously from cutting-edge research, and the prestige of renowned researchers as teachers.

However, this could also lead to teachers that prioritize their research over teaching, students feeling disengaged and removed from the research, and a lack of face time with teachers due to their split priorities.

highlighted the fact that students firmly believed that the focus should be placed on teaching, with the majority of those surveyed stating that a lecturer's teaching ability is more important than their research profile.

Additionally, surveyed students preferred their lecturers to be "at the forefront of teaching theory and practice, rather than at the forefront of their particular research fields."

In the 2019 International Student Survey , 57% of prospective international students picked high-quality teaching as the most important factor when choosing a university.

Whatever approach your institution takes to the teaching-research nexus, it's clear that higher education professionals and students will have to work together to create a new normal.

To explore the future of the teaching-research nexus and other pressing higher education issues, register now for QS-MAPLE 2020 , an upcoming QS event held from the 1-3 March in Manama, Bahrain.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How does teaching and research integrate and overlap within the higher education space? And why is there so often conflict between these two pillars of the sector? Teaching and research should go hand in hand within the global higher education landscape. Unfortunately, teaching and

# data[].attributes.headline
AARE has a range of publications and other material for members and general readers.

# data[].attributes.subject
AARE has a range of publications and other material for members and general readers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
AARE has a range of publications and other material for members and general readers. These include:

Australian Educational Researcher: an international peer reviewed journal, published five times a year and edited by AARE and distributed online through Springer. This is a Thomson (ISI) indexed journal that is freely available to AARE members.
Read more "

Local/Global Issues in Education: this is a book series established in 2015, with Routledge. These books are available from our web shop at a reduced rate for members.
Read more "

EduResearch Matters: this is the AARE blog, published weekly and freely available online. This blog provides research-informed content about education issues.
Read more "

Research archive of conference papers: this includes a repository of AARE conference papers (1978-present).
Read more "

Corporate documents related to Governance and financial records:
Read more "

Become a Member

AARE members are eligible to receive member benefits on many of our publications including: free access to our journal; reduced rates for book series purchases; access to research archives and other publications; as well as member rates for conference registration and other events.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
AARE has a range of publications and other material for members and general readers. These include: Australian Educational Researcher: an international peer reviewed journal, published five times a year and edited by AARE and distributed online through Springer. This is a Thomson (ISI) indexed journal that is freely available to AARE members.

# data[].attributes.headline
Unpacking the teaching-research nexus and its influence on academic practice

# data[].attributes.subject
Unpacking the teaching-research nexus and its influence on academic practice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Brad Wuetherick, Director of Undergraduate Student Services in the Faculty of Agricultural, Life & Environmental Sciences at the University of Alberta looks at how rethinking the teaching-research nexus might enhance both the student and faculty experience of higher education.
Students should all be reading scholarly monographs, not just textbooks, beginning in their first year," said one academic passionately during a curriculum debate in a Department of History at a large Canadian research university. The immediate reply came from a colleague across the table, saying, "All of this (research-based learning) is applicable at the appropriate level only, and that is the graduate level not the undergraduate level."

These varied sentiments, arguing about the place of research, teaching, and the teaching-research nexus, have reverberated around the "hallowed halls" of many university campuses across Canada and around the world. These two quotes, taken from a recent study exploring faculty perceptions of the role of research in the undergraduate student learning environment, demonstrate the challenges facing departments, faculties, and institutions as they attempt to come to grips with the teaching-research nexus.

The imbalance (whether perceived or real) between the research and teaching roles of university academics has resulted in several calls for action in the higher education teaching and learning literature, ranging from Boyer's call almost 20 years ago to move beyond the "tired, old research vs. teaching debate" (1990, ix) to more recent explorations of how rethinking the teaching-research nexus might enhance both the student and faculty experience of higher education.

Inevitably, as campus communities struggle with these issues, debates emerge among all higher education stakeholders. For example, what is meant by the "teaching-research nexus"? Do student and faculty perceptions of the role of research in the undergraduate experience align with one another? What would it mean to effectively integrate research, teaching and learning at the undergraduate level? And what would be the corresponding impact on academic practice? These questions formed the basis of a series of recent studies undertaken at the University of Alberta attempting to unpack the teaching-research nexus and to explore ways of integrating research, teaching and learning more effectively at the undergraduate level.

What is the teaching-research nexus?

Whenever a conversation about the teaching-research nexus occurs, the immediate question arises: what is meant by the teaching-research nexus? In particular, as such conversations unfold, both academics and students struggle with what is meant by "research" in the context of the teaching-research nexus. Simplistically, the teaching-research nexus refers to any aspect of the interplay between the teaching and research roles of universities, whether at the level of the institution, faculty, department, or individual academic. That said, there are still multiple ways of defining research, each of which strongly influence how one might perceive the teaching-research nexus.

For a number of years the prevailing perception regarding the teaching-research nexus was that correlations between traditional measures of teaching and research excellence, usually student evaluations of teaching and publication rates/citation indices respectively, were positive. This informed the perception of many academics and administrators alike that active researchers were the most effective teachers. A meta-analysis of over 50 different studies using these types of measures, however, demonstrated that the correlation between these traditional measures of teaching and research excellence was essentially zero, with the authors concluding that universities instead needed to explore how research and teaching might be more effectively integrated (Hattie and Marsh, 1996).

Five different ways to conceptualize the teaching-research nexus has emerged from the educational literature in the past five years. First, research at the fore of the discipline, as well as the research of the individual academic teaching in the classroom, informs the content of the courses being taught. Second, students can be taught research methods. Third, students can be engaged in active, research-based learning, which can be found in degree programs that are predominantly structured around problem-based or inquiry-based learning but which can be implemented at the level of the individual course where students undertake a research project. Fourth, students can be engaged in discovery research, normally where students work (often one-on-one or as part of research teams) with academics to undertake discovery research, but these can also include students completing dissertations as part of honours programs. Finally, the teaching-research nexus can be conceptualized as academics engaging in pedagogical research, or the scholarship of teaching and learning.

How does the teaching-research nexus relate to academic identity?

Over a number of years there has been a growing consensus in the higher education literature that an undergraduate education needs to ensure that students develop higher order research and inquiry skills. As a result, we have seen a shift towards a research and inquiry-based learning environment across the higher-education sector internationally. Institutions are trying to increase undergraduate students' exposure to research and inquiry both inside and outside of the classroom through various individual, departmental, or institutional initiatives.

The success of these initiatives is still highly dependent upon individual academics' perceptions of the teaching-research nexus and the development their own academic identity. A study of academics at two universities in the U.S. confirmed that individuals with a fragmented academic identity (where the academics perceived their teaching and research roles as separate) struggled with the integration of teaching and research, while those with a more integrated academic identity were far more likely to integrate their teaching and research activities successfully (Colbeck, 1998).

Research has also recently explored other factors related to academics' ability to integrate research and teaching, such as the disciplinary or departmental culture, the research-intensiveness of the institution, or even national research funding policies that enable students to be engaged in working with academics on research projects. These studies conclude that academics who perceived a positive relationship between active research involvement and teaching were influenced strongly by the value they place on research as a part of their academic identity, their perception of how students' learning develops epistemological belief systems, how research involvement is used as a teaching method with students, and how departmental/faculty/institutional organization and culture supports (and more importantly evaluates) the link between teaching and research.

Student perceptions of, and experiences with, research

Several studies exploring students' perceptions of, and experiences with, research have been undertaken around the world, including three separate studies that have been conducted at the University of Alberta. These studies at the U of A concluded that undergraduate students are largely aware of research happening on their campus, with the proportion of students who report being aware of research increasing significantly with the respondents' year of study. The relatively high awareness of research activities does not, however, necessarily translate into a high level of reported experiences with research.

Many students reported having their instructor or a guest lecturer discuss research in a class, but relatively few students are receiving opportunities to undertake independent research projects (either inside or outside of a class), to work as research assistants, or to contribute to some form of research output (conference paper/poster, publication, etc.). That said, in a recent comparison study between the one Canadian and two U.K. universities, Canadian undergraduate students were significantly more likely to report having participated in a research seminar outside of a class or having contributed to a research project/paper/conference abstract or working as a research assistant (Turner et al, 2008).

The students' perception of the positive or negative impacts of research on the learning environment, however, may be more revealing. About half the students responded that research positively impacted their learning by increasing their understanding or stimulating their interest in the subject area. On the other hand, as many as one-quarter of students responded that research negatively impacted their learning environment through their instructor's lack of interest in teaching or the students' well-being, the instructors' lack of availability to undergraduate students, the distortion of course content towards research interests, and the inability of the instructor to communicate at an appropriate level.

On the whole, students placed a low importance on research when compared to other academic priorities, such as having instructors who are good teachers or who care about student learning, and courses or programs that help prepare them for a future career. Only 40 per cent of respondents in one study indicated that feeling engaged with research throughout the undergraduate experience was important, while just over 30 per cent responded that it was of little or no importance. Students largely agreed, however, that instructors actively engaged in research are more likely to be enthusiastic about their subject matter, that the most effective teaching is when the lecturer involves them in aspects of the research process , and that they learn the most when undertaking their own research project.

One of the most interesting results of these studies was the increased positive perception of research among students in academic programs (including the faculties of science and arts) when compared to professional programs (such as business, education, nursing, medicine, or engineering). For example, significantly more students in academic programs perceived a positive impact through their increased understanding, stimulated interest and enthusiasm, and motivation to pursue postgraduate studies. As well, students in academic programs were significantly more likely to feel that engagement with research throughout the undergraduate experience was important.

Faculty perceptions of their students' experiences

As the results of these studies exploring students' perceptions of, and experiences with, research were shared around the University of Alberta, there were a number of interesting reactions from the academic community. Anecdotally, faculty reported that the views of the students they interacted with were different than what was being reported out of these studies. This prompted a follow-up study exploring faculty perceptions and experiences of the teaching-research nexus to see how it related to the perceptions and experiences reported by undergraduate students.

Faculty were asked their perceptions of students' awareness of research, as well as their perceptions about the teaching-research nexus. Most respondents felt students were aware that faculty wrote for publication, a similar proportion to the actual responses of students who were surveyed earlier. In other areas, however, faculty significantly underestimated how much students would be aware of various research-related activities in the institution, including that faculty were supervising research students, that research seminars or conferences are held in the department or institution, that faculty were undertaking funded research, that research centres or institutes existed on campus, and that areas with national or international reputations existed on campus. While respondents largely underestimated students' awareness of research, they largely overestimated the proportion of students who gained specific experience with research. For example, they significantly overestimated the number of students who experienced having an academic staff member lecturing about their research, having read a research paper by a faculty member, undertaking independent research projects as part of or as a whole course, learning research techniques, and working as a research assistant.

Across the board, faculty respondents believed strongly that their involvement in research had a positive impact on students' learning. For example, roughly three-quarters or more of respondents believed that faculty involvement in research helped increase students' understanding in the learning environment, stimulated student interest and enthusiasm as well as increased awareness of methodological issues in the discipline, or motivated some students to continue into postgraduate study. Over half believed it positively impacted the development of student research skills. In each of these cases, however, faculty's perceptions of the positive impact were significantly higher that than students' perceptions of the positive impact.

An inverse pattern emerges for faculty's perceptions of the negative impacts of research on the student learning environment. In each case students were more likely to perceive a negative impact on the learning environment arising from faculty involvement in research. For example, no faculty respondents felt that research negatively impacted the learning environment by making them unavailable to students or by decreasing their ability to explain material to students effectively. While not statistically significant, faculty were also less likely to perceive an increase in the lack of interest in facilitating student learning, a lack of interest in students' academic well-being, and research interests distorting what they teach.

Some faculty, however, identified issues that potentially could have an impact on their ability to effectively integrate teaching and research. For example:

"Research need not distort a class but it has that potential. Often the problem is one of time - publishing priorities come before class time."

"I am not sure what the 'link' intended is, but what I research is too esoteric to have much influence on undergraduate teaching. They are not in a position to understand."

When positive and negative factors were explored further some interesting patterns emerged from the comparison of faculty and student data. Both faculty and students agreed (close to three-quarters for both faculty and students) that instructors involved in research were more enthusiastic about their discipline. As well, both students and faculty were more likely to agree that students learn best when undertaking their own research project or paper or that the most effective teaching is when the instructor involves students in aspects of the research process.

There are, however, several areas where students and faculty perceptions differed significantly. For example, faculty were far more likely to believe that students have little awareness of their professor's research interests, that students were not aware of the positive impact research has on the learning environment, and that faculty involvement in research has an impact on the amount of time spent with students. In only one case was the pattern reversed. Faculty were far more likely to believe that insufficient attention is given to developing student research skills.

The survey also provided respondents an opportunity to reflect more broadly on the teaching-research nexus. The major theme that emerged from faculty responses were related to the fundamental purpose of higher education and the purpose of teaching and learning in the context of higher education. Examples included:

"In the long run, university teaching is not about only conveying information - it is primarily about teaching students HOW to learn, ask questions and find out answers for themselves - in short, 'research' in some form."

"Our teaching should be, at least in part, informed by research and students should be exposed to some of the debates over how we collect and use evidence."

"Universities are fundamentally teaching AND research institutions. The education students receive ought to reflect that."

Several secondary themes emerged from the qualitative responses, including whether or not being research-active or not is acceptable to teaching in the discipline.

Only research-active scholars can communicate the most recent results of research along with practical knowledge of how to do research. Scholars who do not pursue scholarship/research themselves or at least keep up with their fields in an active way will soon be teaching in a way that reflects a past version of the discipline ...."

Moving towards making research-based learning the norm

Several scholars have argued that the key to the teaching-research nexus is to base the curriculum around the idea of inquiry. Research suggests, not surprisingly, that senior undergraduates, in particular those students in honours programs, are far more likely to have experienced research-based learning opportunities. More emphasis needs to be placed, however, on bringing inquiry-based learning into the learning environment earlier in the degree program and expanding opportunities for all undergraduate students. Universities need to provide opportunities for our students to become scholars in their own right and contribute to the creation of new knowledge across all disciplines.

One way that we can begin to approach the idea of involving students in both inquiry-based and discovery learning is by providing opportunities for students to become part of the scholarly community. The development of inclusive, scholarly knowledge-building communities, which engage everyone from senior academic staff through to first- year undergraduate students, is a model that has been gaining momentum in the higher education literature (Brew, 2006). In order for this to succeed, however, the hierarchy implicitly built into the organization of universities must be challenged, as must the definition of who can legitimately be a scholar. We must critically reflect on the ways we enable undergraduate students to be a part of this scholarly community. This could result in a profound transformation of the nature of universities the nature of how we construct our academic identity, and perhaps how we evaluate our academic practice.

Interesting quotes:

The research universities have often failed, and continue to fail, their undergraduate populations, thousands of students graduate without seeing the world - famous professors or tasting genuine research." The Boyer Commission, Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A blueprint for America's research universities (New York: Stony Brook, 1998), p. 3.

Our view is that university research often distracts from the quality of teaching. We regret the continuing elevation of research and the systematic neglect of the quality of instruction ... University research ... is often specialized and far removed from the needs of undergraduate students ... Universities must come clean about the relationship between teaching and research." T. Pocklington and A. Tupper, No Place to Learn: Why Universities Aren't Working (Vancouver, BC: UBC Press, 2002), Chapter One.

I believe that the main hope for realizing a genuinely student centred undergraduate education lies in the re-engineering of the teaching-research nexus." P. Ramsden, "Strategic management of teaching and learning", in C. Rust, (ed.) Improving Student Learning Strategically (Oxford: OCSLD, 2001), 1-10.

References:

Boyer E. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered. Princeton: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of University Teaching.

Brew A. (2006). Research and Teaching: Beyond the Divide. New York: Palgrave-MacMillan.

Colbeck C (1998). Merging in a Seamless Blend. Journal of Higher Education. 69 (6), p. 647-671.

Hattie J. and Marsh H. (1996). The Relationship Between Research and Teaching: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 66 (4), p. 64-85.

Turner N, Wuetherick B, and Healey M. (2008). International Perspectives on Student Awareness, Experiences, and Perceptions of Research. International Journal for Academic Development. 13 (3), p. 199-211.

Acknowledgements:

The study exploring faculty perceptions of the teaching-research nexus referred to in this article was made possible by the collaboration of Dawn Alexandria Berry, currently a PhD student in History at University of Oxford in the U.K.

Brad Wuetherick is currently the Director of Undergraduate Student Services in the Faculty of Agricultural, Life & Environmental Sciences at the University of Alberta. He previously spent several years leading the Research Makes Sense for Students initiative of the Office of the Vice-President (Research) at the U of A, a special initiative focusing on issues relating to the integration of research, teaching, and learning across the campus.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Unpacking the teaching-research nexus and its influence on academic practice - Academic Matters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Brad Wuetherick, Director of Undergraduate Student Services in the Faculty of Agricultural, Life & Environmental Sciences at the University of Alberta looks at how rethinking the teaching-research nexus might enhance both the student and faculty experience of higher education.

# data[].attributes.body
Research and Development in Higher Education: Enhancing Higher Education, Theory and Scholarship Vol. 30

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is a conceptual paper which re-thinks the underlying concepts behind the notion of "the teaching research nexus". It is based on an extensive review of the literature, on an analysis of a number of case studies available in this area, and on our preparatory work for an empirical study of teaching, research and the links between them in four creative design subjects in the UK.

# data[].attributes.headline
The teaching-research nexus in higher education

# data[].attributes.subject
The teaching-research nexus in higher education

# data[].attributes.body
Background paper supporting the
Taking university teaching seriously report
Ittima Cherastidtham, Julie Sonnemann and Andrew Norton

# data[].attributes.headline
The Teaching-Research Nexus: A Study on the Students’ Awareness, Experiences and Perceptions of Research

# data[].attributes.subject
The Teaching-Research Nexus: A Study on the Students’ Awareness, Experiences and Perceptions of Research

# data[].attributes.body
RohayatiJusoh and Zubaidah ZainalAbidin

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

This paper presents a study of students' awareness, experiences and perceptions on teaching-research nexus in three universities in Malaysia. The findings are based on a questionnaire of 480 students in which students are moderately aware of the research activities of their lecturers.Nevertheless, the studentsperceived clear benefits to teaching and learning from the research activities undertaken at their university, their experiences on research aspects and academics' involvement in research. The results of the study could inform the discussion of particular strategies that may be used to strengthen the nexus between teaching and research to benefit the undergraduate learning experience.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Teaching-Research Nexus: A Study on the Students' Awareness, Experiences and Perceptions of Research

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This paper presents a study of students' awareness, experiences and perceptions on teaching-research nexus in three universities in Malaysia. The findings are based on a questionnaire of 480 students in which students are moderately aware of the research activities of their lecturers.Nevertheless, the studentsperceived clear benefits to teaching and learning from the research activities undertaken at their university, their experiences on research aspects and academics' involvement in research.

# data[].attributes.headline
Reimagining Educational Research: A Conversation

# data[].attributes.subject
Reimagining Educational Research: A Conversation

# data[].attributes.body
University of California Berkeley Graduate School of Education

Berkeley Review of Education

Volume 7, Issue 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

The following is a transcript of an interview between the Dean of the University of California Berkeley's Graduate School of Education, Prudence Carter, and UC Berkeley's outgoing Vice Chancellor for Equity and Inclusion, Na'ilah Suad Nasir, recorded at the 2017 Graduate School of Education Research Day.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reimagining Educational Research: A Conversation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Author(s): Carter, Prudence L.; Nasir, Na'ilah Suad | Abstract: The following is a transcript of an interview between the Dean of the University of California Berkeley's Graduate School of Education, Prudence Carter, and UC Berkeley's outgoing Vice Chancellor for Equity and Inclusion, Na'ilah Suad Nasir, recorded at the 2017 Graduate School of Education Research Day.

# data[].attributes.headline
HERDSA Annual Conference RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION  Annual Conference, 2021 (postponed from 2020)

# data[].attributes.subject
HERDSA Annual Conference RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION  Annual Conference, 2021 (postponed from 2020)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
HERDSA Annual Conference, 2021 (postponed from 2020)
7 to 10 July, 2021
Brisbane Convention and Exhibition Centre
Brisbane, Australia
Conference web site: conference.herdsa.org.au/2020
Conference Grants

HERDSA is able to offer a number of conference grants to support delegates to attend the conference. The call for applications will be made around the time that submissions close and the deadline for applications will be soon after authors are notified of the acceptance of their submission. Having a presentation accepted for the conference is one of the criteria for being awarded a grant.

HERDSA Student Conference Grant (One grant of up to $1000)
Deadline for applications: to be advertised
A conference grant of up to AUD$1,000 is available to support an under-graduate or post-graduate student to attend and participate in the HERDSA conference. The conference grant can be used to support travel, accommodation or subsistence of the successful applicant.

Preference will be given to applicants who

can demonstrate financial hardship (e.g. geographical location or other personal circumstances)

are able to attend the full conference

have an accepted conference presentation based on their research or project

are the sole author of the presentation (if joint, indicate percentage contribution) and will lead the presentation at the conference

are willing to make a contribution to HERDSA Connect if asked

have had limited, or no, opportunities to attend similar conferences

have not previously received a HERDSA conference grant (Student, Taylor & Francis, Early Career).

To apply, complete the HERDSA Student Conference Grant Application Form and email to Office@herdsa.org.au by the due date.

Applicants must also submit a supporting letter from the applicant's research supervisor, including a statement indicating that the applicant complies with the criteria.

HERDSA Early Career Conference Grant (Five grants up to $1000 each)
Deadline for applications: to be advertised
HERDSA aims to support early career staff (academic and professional) in teaching and learning. Participating in the annual HERDSA conference is an opportunity for early career staff to present their research or practice in teaching and learning in higher education, network with experienced scholars, and learn from colleagues.

Early career is defined as not more than five years cumulative experience in higher education.

Five conference grants of up to AUD$1,000 are available to support early career staff (academic or professional) to attend and participate in the HERDSA conference. The conference grant can be used to support travel, accommodation or subsistence of the successful applicant.

Preference will be given to applicants who

can demonstrate financial hardship (e.g. geographical location or other personal circumstances)

will attend and participate in the full conference

have an accepted conference presentation based on their research or practice

are the sole author of the presentation (if joint, indicate percentage contribution) and will lead the presentation at the conference

are willing to write a contribution to HERDSA Connect

have had limited or no opportunities to attend similar conferences

have not previously received a HERDSA conference grant (Student, Taylor & Francis, Early Career).

To apply, download the HERDSA Early Career Conference Grant Application Form and email to office@herdsa.org.au by the due date.

Taylor & Francis Conference Grant (Five grants of up to $500 each)
Deadline for applications:
Taylor & Francis, the publishers of HERDSA's journal Higher Education Research & Development (HERD) is a sponsor of the annual HERSDA conference. As part of that sponsorship, HERDSA is able to offer five conference grants of up to AUD$500 each to support HERDSA members attend the annual HERDSA conference. The conference grant can be used to support travel, accommodation or subsistence of the successful applicant.

The Taylor & Francis conference grants are open to all current HERDSA members.

Preference will be given to applicants who

are able to attend the full conference (applicants for single day registration will be considered)

have been accepted to make a presentation at the HERDSA conference

are willing to make a contribution to HERDSA Connect if asked

have had limited or no opportunities to attend similar conferences

are able to demonstrate financial hardship (e.g. student, geographical location, no institutional support or other personal circumstances)

have not previously received a HERDSA conference grant (Student, Taylor & Francis, Early Career).

To apply, download the Taylor & Francis Conference Travel Grant Application Form and email to office@herdsa.org.au by the due date.
Assessment of Applications
Applications for conference grants will be assessed by a sub-committee of the HERDSA Executive. Applicants will be selected on the basis of demonstrated need and the quality of the application. Successful and unsuccessful applicants will be notified as soon as possible so that all applicants can take advantage of the early bird registration rate.

HERDSA Prize for Best Presentation by a Student ($500)

(Judged by members of the HERDSA Professional Learning Portfolio during the conference)

The purpose of the prize is to encourage students to disseminate their work at national and international higher education conferences. Applicants must be presenting a showcase at the HERDSA conference in order to be eligible for this prize.

Presenters will be judged on their ability to effectively communicate as well as on the academic content of their presentation.

The prize (AUD$500) will be awarded at the annual HERDSA Conference and is usually presented at the closing ceremony of the conference & awarded the certificate.

HERDSA Prize for Best Poster $500

All posters are eligible for this prize of AUD$500. The purpose of the prize is to promote and recognise excellence in the ability to visually communicate ideas, findings or outcomes related to tertiary education.

Posters will be assessed by all conference delegates - on both the ability to visually communicate as well as on the academic content of the poster. The best poster prize will be awarded to the poster that receives the highest number of votes with two runner up prizes of AUD$250 each awarded. The priizes will be awarded at the conference.

Conference participants can vote using the conference mobile.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
HERDSA Annual Conference | herdsa.org.au

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
HERDSA Annual Conference, 2021 (postponed from 2020) 7 to 10 July, 2021 Brisbane Convention and Exhibition Centre Brisbane, Australia Conference web site: conference.herdsa.org.au/2020 Conference Grants HERDSA is able to offer a number of conference grants to support delegates to attend the conference.

# data[].attributes.headline
International Journal for Academic Development

# data[].attributes.subject
International Journal for Academic Development

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This ScholarOne Manuscripts™ web site has been optimized for Microsoft© Internet Explorer 8.0 and higher, Firefox 19, Safari 6.0 and Chrome 24. You must have Java installed, cookies enabled, and pop-up blockers disabled to use the site.

Click here to find the currently supported versions of Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari or Chrome.
If you are using Windows XP, please note you must ensure that Microsoft Java has been uninstalled so that ScholarOne Manuscripts™ will function correctly. For help in uninstalling MS Java, please visit http://www.windows-help.net/WindowsXP/howto-21.html. Note that uninstalling MS Java will not cause any Microsoft applications to stop working.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This ScholarOne Manuscripts™ web site has been optimized for Microsoft© Internet Explorer 8.0 and higher, Firefox 19, Safari 6.0 and Chrome 24. You must have Java installed, cookies enabled, and pop-up blockers disabled to use the site. Click here to find the currently supported versions of Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari or Chrome.

# data[].attributes.headline
HERDSA’s journal Higher Education Research & Development (HERD)

# data[].attributes.subject
HERDSA’s journal Higher Education Research & Development (HERD)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
HERDSA's journal Higher Education Research & Development () was established in 1982. The journal publishes seven issues a year, including one Special Issue on a theme decided by the editorial team. Occasional Symposia and Virtual Issues will also be published. HERD is published by Taylor & Francis.

HERD is a leading journal in the field of higher education (and was given an A ranking in the 2010 Australian Research Council Journal Rankings). HERD's reputation as a leading journal in higher education has continued to grow. HERD's articles are indexed by the ISI social science citation index, and in 2017, the journal's Impact Factor was 2.006. In July 2016, Google Scholar Metrics ranked the journal 6 th on their list of the top 20 higher education publications. You can access HERD's current impact factor and browse the latest articles at www.tandfonline.com/toc/cher20/current.

HERD contributes to HERDSA's purpose of continuously improving higher education by informing and challenging researchers, teachers, administrators and others concerned with the past, present and future of higher education. The journal publishes scholarly articles that make a significant and original contribution to the theory, practice or research of higher education. We welcome theoretical, philosophical and historical articles and essays that address higher education in any of its dimensions. Equally, we welcome empirical higher education studies, which employ qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methodologies including big data.

All published articles propose fresh critical insights into the area being addressed and are appropriately framed for an international audience. They have also undergone rigorous, double-blind peer review by at least two internationally recognised peers.
Editorial Team
The Editorial Team is led by:

Executive Editor
Dr. Wendy Green, University of Tasmania, Australia, W.J.Green@utas.edu.au

Emily Giles is the HERD Managing Editor.
Co-Editors are:
Dr. Bernadette Knewstubb, Victoria University of Wellington, Aotearoa/New Zealand
Dr Jisun Jung, Hong Kong University, Hong Kong SAR
Prof. Ly Tran, Deakin University, Australia
Assoc. Prof. Susan Blackley, Curtin University, Australia
Screening Editors are:
Dr. Vivienne Anderson, University of Otago, Aotearoa/New Zealand
Dr. Kathleen Tait, Macquarie University, Australia

Stuart Hughes (Social Media).

Special Issues Editor is Dr. Stephen Marshall, Victoria University of Wellington, Aotearoa/New Zealand.

The Call for Papers for HERD's 2021 Special Issue, titled "Ō tātou reo, Na domoda, Kuruwilang birad: Indigenous voices in higher education" is open until 14th April 2020. For further information on this issue view the call for papers at:

Call for papers for the 2021 Special Issue: Ō tātou reo, Na domoda, Kuruwilang birad: Indigenous voices in higher education. (PDF 73KB)

Click Taylor and Francis journal information for a full listing of the Editorial Team, Associate Editors and Editorial Advisory Board.
Contribute to the editorial work of HERD
HERD is seeking reviewers to work with the editorial team on managing the double-blind peer-review process for submitted papers. HERD 's peer review process upholds the standard of scholarship published in the journal and provides a developmental space for researchers to receive helpful, informed feedback on their work.

Both experienced reviewers, who meet the criteria for the College of Reviewers, and those new to reviewing are encouraged to apply.
College of Reviewers
The College of Reviewers provides HERD with a pool of internationally recognised higher education scholars who are willing to review 4 to 6 manuscripts per year in HERD's required timeframe (4 weeks). Members of the College of Reviewers meet the following criteria, based on the depth and recency of their publications: at least three publications in peer reviewed higher education journals in the past decade.
Applying to become a reviewer for HERD
If you would like to apply to become a HERD reviewer, please send your CV, complete with details of reviewing experience, other relevant scholarly experience and publications to the Managing Editor, Emily Giles, herd.giles@gmail.com
Submission of manuscripts
All submissions should be made online at the Higher Education Research & Development ScholarOne site.

Submitted manuscripts of no more than 7000 words including abstract (300 words max) and references should not have been published elsewhere (though they may be based on a prior conference presentation or the like), and should not be under consideration concurrently by another journal.
Instructions for Authors
Criteria for review are included in the Instructions for Authors.

Obtaining the journal
1. Individuals receive HERD as a benefit of HERDSA membership. Free online access is available through your member dashboard.
2. Institutions and libraries wishing to purchase HERD can do so by subscribing directly through the publisher Taylor and Francis Journals (ISSN 0729-4360).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Higher Education Research & Development | herdsa.org.au

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
HERDSA's journal Higher Education Research & Development () was established in 1982. The journal publishes seven issues a year, including one Special Issue on a theme decided by the editorial team. Occasional Symposia and Virtual Issues will also be published. HERD is published by Taylor & Francis.

# data[].attributes.body
Felten, P. (2013). Principles of good practice in SoTL. Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal 1(1): 121-125.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Role of SoTL in the Academy: Upon the 25th Anniversary of Boyer's Scholarship Reconsidered

# data[].attributes.subject
The Role of SoTL in the Academy: Upon the 25th Anniversary of Boyer's Scholarship Reconsidered

# data[].attributes.body
Kern, B., G. Mettetal, M. D. Dixson, and R. K. Morgan. 2015.  Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 15 (3):1-14.

# data[].attributes.headline
Exploring New Conceptualisations of Old Problems: Researching and Reorienting Teaching in Indigenous Studies to Transform Student Learning

# data[].attributes.subject
Exploring New Conceptualisations of Old Problems: Researching and Reorienting Teaching in Indigenous Studies to Transform Student Learning

# data[].attributes.body
Susan Page (2014). The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 43(1), 21-30. doi:10.1017/jie.2014.4

# data[].attributes.headline
Towards a Decolonising Pedagogy:Understanding Australian Indigenous Studies through Critical Whiteness Theory and Film Pedagogy

# data[].attributes.subject
Towards a Decolonising Pedagogy:Understanding Australian Indigenous Studies through Critical Whiteness Theory and Film Pedagogy

# data[].attributes.body
Genine Hook

The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education
Volume 41 Number 2 pp. 110–119

# data[].attributes.headline
Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate.

# data[].attributes.subject
Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate.

# data[].attributes.body
Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This report on the professoriate in American higher education explores how the use of faculty time is rewarded and, especially, what activities of the professoriate are most highly prized. Changes in the work of higher education institutions through the years--its movement from teaching to service and then research, are noted, as are conflicts resulting from institutions attempting to achieve competing goals. Concern is raised regarding the emphasis on research and publication for academic advancement. Four general views of scholarship are proposed: discovery, integration, application, and teaching. Institutions are encouraged to stress their unique qualities and strengths, and to reconsider the narrowness of the faculty reward system. The report's seven chapters have the following titles: "Scholarship over Time"; "Enlarging the Perspective"; "A Mosaic of Talent"; "The Creativity Contract"; "The Campuses: Diversity with Dignity"; "A New Generation of Scholars"; and "Scholarship and Community." An appendix provides results of a 1989 national survey of faculty which addressed attitudes toward factors facilitating promotion and tenure, personal job satisfaction, and other job characteristics. Also provided in appendixes are chapter by chapter technical notes and a key to the Carnegie Classifications. Approximately 100 references are included. (DB)

Descriptors: Academic Rank (Professional), College Faculty, Creativity, Educational Trends, Faculty Promotion, Faculty Workload, Higher Education, Intellectual Disciplines, National Surveys, Organizational Objectives, Rewards, Scholarship, Teacher Attitudes, Teaching (Occupation), Trend Analysis

Princeton University Press, 3175 Princeton Pike, Lawrenceville, NJ 08648.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERIC - ED326149 - Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate., 1990-Dec-3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This report on the professoriate in American higher education explores how the use of faculty time is rewarded and, especially, what activities of the professoriate are most highly prized. Changes in the work of higher education institutions through the years--its movement from teaching to service and then research, are noted, as are conflicts resulting from institutions attempting to achieve competing goals.

# data[].attributes.headline
Student learning and the scholarship of university teaching

# data[].attributes.subject
Student learning and the scholarship of university teaching

# data[].attributes.body
Keith Trigwell and Suzanne Shale Studies in Higher Education
Vol. 29, No. 4, August 2004

# data[].attributes.headline
Transformative learning in first year Indigenous Australian studies: Posing problems, asking questions and achieving change. A Practice Report

# data[].attributes.subject
Transformative learning in first year Indigenous Australian studies: Posing problems, asking questions and achieving change. A Practice Report

# data[].attributes.body
Elizabeth Mackinlay and Katelyn Barney The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education
ISSN: 1838-2959
Volume 1, Number 1, pp. 91-99
July - 2010

# data[].attributes.headline
The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning and Higher Education Research: Boundaries and Implications

# data[].attributes.subject
The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning and Higher Education Research: Boundaries and Implications

# data[].attributes.body
Peter Ling

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
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.

Introduction

In this chapter understandings of the concept of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) and the concept of education research are reviewed; exploring the boundaries of each and the possibilities for overlap. Reference is also made to the other forms of scholarship identified by Boyer (1990): the scholarship of discovery; the scholarship of integration; and the scholarship of application. Distinguishing between SoTL and education research is of consequence to academics and university managers in matters including tenure, promotion and workload allocation. Whether SoTL is an element of teaching or is a form of research or can be both at once, can cause confusion. An article relating to faculty perceptions of SoTL in the USA for instance a claim is made that:

The majority of faculty considered the same examples of SoTL activities for both "research" and "teaching" sections of a promotion and tenure dossier. ...Revising evaluation guidelines and making distinctions between what constitutes "teaching" and "research" could give faculty clearer direction and motivation. (Secret, Leisey, Lanning, Polich, & Schaub, 2011, p. 15)

In relation to promotion, a paper addressing practice in Australian universities stated

With several Australian universities now providing opportunities for teaching staff who do not engage in research to be promoted, it is important that the teaching criteria for promotion are demonstrably of equal value to promotion based on research. ...The lack of clarity around what SoTL includes or excludes creates a risk for universities ...[relating] to university probation and promotion processes." (Vardi & Quin, 2010, p. 3)

An issue is whether SoTL forms, or can form, some sort of nexus between teaching and research; being at once an aspect of sound teaching and a form of research, namely education research.

The purpose of the present chapter is to provide a definition of possible relationships between SoTL and education research. The question explored is whether SoTL constitutes a form of education research or can constitute a form of education research in some circumstances.

Key Concepts And Their Relationship

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
the scholarship of teaching and learning and higher education research: boundaries and implications: education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning and Higher Education Research: Boundaries and Implications

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
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 credi...

# data[].attributes.body
Clark, H. H., & Brennan, S. E. (1991). Grounding in communication. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (p. 127–149). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10096-006

# data[].attributes.body
Constructive alignment in university
teaching

# data[].attributes.headline
Aligning teaching for constructing learning 

# data[].attributes.subject
Aligning teaching for constructing learning 

# data[].attributes.body
John Biggs

# data[].attributes.body
Highlighted the inequities in access to learning – highlighted for teachers and parents (in the school setting) around the challenges for students – Brought the fore those students who are finding it hard to access learning and questions around how were they catered for F2F – were they catered for there? How do you cater for them in the online context?

Different levels of engagement – what is appropriate?

Mixture of live and self directed in most contexts – what do these require / similarities / differences

Balance across and needs for different cohorts

Hybrid model going forward

Similar to rural and remote previously differences in access due to distance and resources -now due to socioeconomic constraints in metro region too

Inequities in resources and the growing economic difficulties

Student voice in higher education – where is it occurring?

To what extent can they be co-designers in curriculum both online and F2F

Teachers in survival mode things get more consolidated and moving to how to differentiate – timing is not allowing us to do that

Thinking about hybrid modes e.g. Singapore continuing 1 day a week in online mode

Breadth of subject choice – different across different settings – back to basics – what does that mean for ongoing learning / curriculum

Context for research and thinking changing rapidly

How to use previous research we have and know how does it inform the new research going forward – not all new and so different

# data[].attributes.headline
Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning (PJTEL)

# data[].attributes.subject
Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning (PJTEL)

# data[].attributes.body
Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning has a focus on informed use and application of technology in learning and teaching. In particular, how design-based research informs and enhances pedagogical use of technology in education and helps create transferable knowledge for use by other practitioners.

The journal is multidisciplinary but with attention to the scholarship of technology enhanced learning (SoTEL).

https://ojs.aut.ac.nz/pjtel/index.php/pjtel/index

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning has a focus on informed use and application of technology in learning and teaching. In particular, how design-based research informs and enhances pedagogical use of technology in education and helps create transferable knowledge for use by other practitioners.

The journal is multidisciplinary but with attention to the scholarship of technology enhanced learning (SoTEL).

Current Issue

Vol. 6 No. 1 (2024): SoTEL Symposium 2024

Proceedings of the SoTEL 2024 Symposium

View All Issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
PJTEL is an open access journal published by Tuwhera Auckland University of Technology. The PJTEL journal aims to promote informed use of technology in learning and teaching-the scholarship of technology enhanced learning (SoTEL). In particular, empirical research that grows current understanding and application of the affordances of technology for improved pedagogical practice and student learning outcomes.

# data[].attributes.headline
HERDSA Higher Education Research and Development’s Best Article Award

# data[].attributes.subject
HERDSA Higher Education Research and Development’s Best Article Award

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Higher Education Research and Development's Best Article Award is awarded annually to the best article from the previous calendar year. The first Award was announced at the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA) Conference in Auckland, July 2019. This award is sponsored by the journal's publisher Taylor & Francis and comes with a prize of $1000. Taylor & Francis kindly make the best article freely accessible. The articles shortlisted for the Award will also be freely accessible for three months. The best article is determined based on the journal's six review criteria:

The paper provides an important critical and/or analytical insight that contributes something new to the field of higher education studies

The issue/problem is well situated in an appropriate literature

The paper demonstrates methodological soundness

The conclusion is well supported and persuasively argued

The paper is succinct and coherent

Overall, the paper reads well and will engage an international higher education audience.

You can browse the winning articles below.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Higher Education Research & Development - Best Article Award

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Best Article Award AnnouncementJournal of Higher Education Research & Development Higher Education Research and Development's Best Article Award is awarded annually to the best article from the previous calendar year. The first Award was announced at the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA) Conference in Auckland, July 2019.

# data[].attributes.headline
Unpacking the teaching-research nexus and its influence on academic practice

# data[].attributes.subject
Unpacking the teaching-research nexus and its influence on academic practice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Brad Wuetherick, Director of Undergraduate Student Services in the Faculty of Agricultural, Life & Environmental Sciences at the University of Alberta looks at how rethinking the teaching-research nexus might enhance both the student and faculty experience of higher education.
Students should all be reading scholarly monographs, not just textbooks, beginning in their first year," said one academic passionately during a curriculum debate in a Department of History at a large Canadian research university. The immediate reply came from a colleague across the table, saying, "All of this (research-based learning) is applicable at the appropriate level only, and that is the graduate level not the undergraduate level."

These varied sentiments, arguing about the place of research, teaching, and the teaching-research nexus, have reverberated around the "hallowed halls" of many university campuses across Canada and around the world. These two quotes, taken from a recent study exploring faculty perceptions of the role of research in the undergraduate student learning environment, demonstrate the challenges facing departments, faculties, and institutions as they attempt to come to grips with the teaching-research nexus.

The imbalance (whether perceived or real) between the research and teaching roles of university academics has resulted in several calls for action in the higher education teaching and learning literature, ranging from Boyer's call almost 20 years ago to move beyond the "tired, old research vs. teaching debate" (1990, ix) to more recent explorations of how rethinking the teaching-research nexus might enhance both the student and faculty experience of higher education.

Inevitably, as campus communities struggle with these issues, debates emerge among all higher education stakeholders. For example, what is meant by the "teaching-research nexus"? Do student and faculty perceptions of the role of research in the undergraduate experience align with one another? What would it mean to effectively integrate research, teaching and learning at the undergraduate level? And what would be the corresponding impact on academic practice? These questions formed the basis of a series of recent studies undertaken at the University of Alberta attempting to unpack the teaching-research nexus and to explore ways of integrating research, teaching and learning more effectively at the undergraduate level.

What is the teaching-research nexus?

Whenever a conversation about the teaching-research nexus occurs, the immediate question arises: what is meant by the teaching-research nexus? In particular, as such conversations unfold, both academics and students struggle with what is meant by "research" in the context of the teaching-research nexus. Simplistically, the teaching-research nexus refers to any aspect of the interplay between the teaching and research roles of universities, whether at the level of the institution, faculty, department, or individual academic. That said, there are still multiple ways of defining research, each of which strongly influence how one might perceive the teaching-research nexus.

For a number of years the prevailing perception regarding the teaching-research nexus was that correlations between traditional measures of teaching and research excellence, usually student evaluations of teaching and publication rates/citation indices respectively, were positive. This informed the perception of many academics and administrators alike that active researchers were the most effective teachers. A meta-analysis of over 50 different studies using these types of measures, however, demonstrated that the correlation between these traditional measures of teaching and research excellence was essentially zero, with the authors concluding that universities instead needed to explore how research and teaching might be more effectively integrated (Hattie and Marsh, 1996).

Five different ways to conceptualize the teaching-research nexus has emerged from the educational literature in the past five years. First, research at the fore of the discipline, as well as the research of the individual academic teaching in the classroom, informs the content of the courses being taught. Second, students can be taught research methods. Third, students can be engaged in active, research-based learning, which can be found in degree programs that are predominantly structured around problem-based or inquiry-based learning but which can be implemented at the level of the individual course where students undertake a research project. Fourth, students can be engaged in discovery research, normally where students work (often one-on-one or as part of research teams) with academics to undertake discovery research, but these can also include students completing dissertations as part of honours programs. Finally, the teaching-research nexus can be conceptualized as academics engaging in pedagogical research, or the scholarship of teaching and learning.

How does the teaching-research nexus relate to academic identity?

Over a number of years there has been a growing consensus in the higher education literature that an undergraduate education needs to ensure that students develop higher order research and inquiry skills. As a result, we have seen a shift towards a research and inquiry-based learning environment across the higher-education sector internationally. Institutions are trying to increase undergraduate students' exposure to research and inquiry both inside and outside of the classroom through various individual, departmental, or institutional initiatives.

The success of these initiatives is still highly dependent upon individual academics' perceptions of the teaching-research nexus and the development their own academic identity. A study of academics at two universities in the U.S. confirmed that individuals with a fragmented academic identity (where the academics perceived their teaching and research roles as separate) struggled with the integration of teaching and research, while those with a more integrated academic identity were far more likely to integrate their teaching and research activities successfully (Colbeck, 1998).

Research has also recently explored other factors related to academics' ability to integrate research and teaching, such as the disciplinary or departmental culture, the research-intensiveness of the institution, or even national research funding policies that enable students to be engaged in working with academics on research projects. These studies conclude that academics who perceived a positive relationship between active research involvement and teaching were influenced strongly by the value they place on research as a part of their academic identity, their perception of how students' learning develops epistemological belief systems, how research involvement is used as a teaching method with students, and how departmental/faculty/institutional organization and culture supports (and more importantly evaluates) the link between teaching and research.

Student perceptions of, and experiences with, research

Several studies exploring students' perceptions of, and experiences with, research have been undertaken around the world, including three separate studies that have been conducted at the University of Alberta. These studies at the U of A concluded that undergraduate students are largely aware of research happening on their campus, with the proportion of students who report being aware of research increasing significantly with the respondents' year of study. The relatively high awareness of research activities does not, however, necessarily translate into a high level of reported experiences with research.

Many students reported having their instructor or a guest lecturer discuss research in a class, but relatively few students are receiving opportunities to undertake independent research projects (either inside or outside of a class), to work as research assistants, or to contribute to some form of research output (conference paper/poster, publication, etc.). That said, in a recent comparison study between the one Canadian and two U.K. universities, Canadian undergraduate students were significantly more likely to report having participated in a research seminar outside of a class or having contributed to a research project/paper/conference abstract or working as a research assistant (Turner et al, 2008).

The students' perception of the positive or negative impacts of research on the learning environment, however, may be more revealing. About half the students responded that research positively impacted their learning by increasing their understanding or stimulating their interest in the subject area. On the other hand, as many as one-quarter of students responded that research negatively impacted their learning environment through their instructor's lack of interest in teaching or the students' well-being, the instructors' lack of availability to undergraduate students, the distortion of course content towards research interests, and the inability of the instructor to communicate at an appropriate level.

On the whole, students placed a low importance on research when compared to other academic priorities, such as having instructors who are good teachers or who care about student learning, and courses or programs that help prepare them for a future career. Only 40 per cent of respondents in one study indicated that feeling engaged with research throughout the undergraduate experience was important, while just over 30 per cent responded that it was of little or no importance. Students largely agreed, however, that instructors actively engaged in research are more likely to be enthusiastic about their subject matter, that the most effective teaching is when the lecturer involves them in aspects of the research process , and that they learn the most when undertaking their own research project.

One of the most interesting results of these studies was the increased positive perception of research among students in academic programs (including the faculties of science and arts) when compared to professional programs (such as business, education, nursing, medicine, or engineering). For example, significantly more students in academic programs perceived a positive impact through their increased understanding, stimulated interest and enthusiasm, and motivation to pursue postgraduate studies. As well, students in academic programs were significantly more likely to feel that engagement with research throughout the undergraduate experience was important.

Faculty perceptions of their students' experiences

As the results of these studies exploring students' perceptions of, and experiences with, research were shared around the University of Alberta, there were a number of interesting reactions from the academic community. Anecdotally, faculty reported that the views of the students they interacted with were different than what was being reported out of these studies. This prompted a follow-up study exploring faculty perceptions and experiences of the teaching-research nexus to see how it related to the perceptions and experiences reported by undergraduate students.

Faculty were asked their perceptions of students' awareness of research, as well as their perceptions about the teaching-research nexus. Most respondents felt students were aware that faculty wrote for publication, a similar proportion to the actual responses of students who were surveyed earlier. In other areas, however, faculty significantly underestimated how much students would be aware of various research-related activities in the institution, including that faculty were supervising research students, that research seminars or conferences are held in the department or institution, that faculty were undertaking funded research, that research centres or institutes existed on campus, and that areas with national or international reputations existed on campus. While respondents largely underestimated students' awareness of research, they largely overestimated the proportion of students who gained specific experience with research. For example, they significantly overestimated the number of students who experienced having an academic staff member lecturing about their research, having read a research paper by a faculty member, undertaking independent research projects as part of or as a whole course, learning research techniques, and working as a research assistant.

Across the board, faculty respondents believed strongly that their involvement in research had a positive impact on students' learning. For example, roughly three-quarters or more of respondents believed that faculty involvement in research helped increase students' understanding in the learning environment, stimulated student interest and enthusiasm as well as increased awareness of methodological issues in the discipline, or motivated some students to continue into postgraduate study. Over half believed it positively impacted the development of student research skills. In each of these cases, however, faculty's perceptions of the positive impact were significantly higher that than students' perceptions of the positive impact.

An inverse pattern emerges for faculty's perceptions of the negative impacts of research on the student learning environment. In each case students were more likely to perceive a negative impact on the learning environment arising from faculty involvement in research. For example, no faculty respondents felt that research negatively impacted the learning environment by making them unavailable to students or by decreasing their ability to explain material to students effectively. While not statistically significant, faculty were also less likely to perceive an increase in the lack of interest in facilitating student learning, a lack of interest in students' academic well-being, and research interests distorting what they teach.

Some faculty, however, identified issues that potentially could have an impact on their ability to effectively integrate teaching and research. For example:

"Research need not distort a class but it has that potential. Often the problem is one of time - publishing priorities come before class time."

"I am not sure what the 'link' intended is, but what I research is too esoteric to have much influence on undergraduate teaching. They are not in a position to understand."

When positive and negative factors were explored further some interesting patterns emerged from the comparison of faculty and student data. Both faculty and students agreed (close to three-quarters for both faculty and students) that instructors involved in research were more enthusiastic about their discipline. As well, both students and faculty were more likely to agree that students learn best when undertaking their own research project or paper or that the most effective teaching is when the instructor involves students in aspects of the research process.

There are, however, several areas where students and faculty perceptions differed significantly. For example, faculty were far more likely to believe that students have little awareness of their professor's research interests, that students were not aware of the positive impact research has on the learning environment, and that faculty involvement in research has an impact on the amount of time spent with students. In only one case was the pattern reversed. Faculty were far more likely to believe that insufficient attention is given to developing student research skills.

The survey also provided respondents an opportunity to reflect more broadly on the teaching-research nexus. The major theme that emerged from faculty responses were related to the fundamental purpose of higher education and the purpose of teaching and learning in the context of higher education. Examples included:

"In the long run, university teaching is not about only conveying information - it is primarily about teaching students HOW to learn, ask questions and find out answers for themselves - in short, 'research' in some form."

"Our teaching should be, at least in part, informed by research and students should be exposed to some of the debates over how we collect and use evidence."

"Universities are fundamentally teaching AND research institutions. The education students receive ought to reflect that."

Several secondary themes emerged from the qualitative responses, including whether or not being research-active or not is acceptable to teaching in the discipline.

Only research-active scholars can communicate the most recent results of research along with practical knowledge of how to do research. Scholars who do not pursue scholarship/research themselves or at least keep up with their fields in an active way will soon be teaching in a way that reflects a past version of the discipline ...."

Moving towards making research-based learning the norm

Several scholars have argued that the key to the teaching-research nexus is to base the curriculum around the idea of inquiry. Research suggests, not surprisingly, that senior undergraduates, in particular those students in honours programs, are far more likely to have experienced research-based learning opportunities. More emphasis needs to be placed, however, on bringing inquiry-based learning into the learning environment earlier in the degree program and expanding opportunities for all undergraduate students. Universities need to provide opportunities for our students to become scholars in their own right and contribute to the creation of new knowledge across all disciplines.

One way that we can begin to approach the idea of involving students in both inquiry-based and discovery learning is by providing opportunities for students to become part of the scholarly community. The development of inclusive, scholarly knowledge-building communities, which engage everyone from senior academic staff through to first- year undergraduate students, is a model that has been gaining momentum in the higher education literature (Brew, 2006). In order for this to succeed, however, the hierarchy implicitly built into the organization of universities must be challenged, as must the definition of who can legitimately be a scholar. We must critically reflect on the ways we enable undergraduate students to be a part of this scholarly community. This could result in a profound transformation of the nature of universities the nature of how we construct our academic identity, and perhaps how we evaluate our academic practice.

Interesting quotes:

The research universities have often failed, and continue to fail, their undergraduate populations, thousands of students graduate without seeing the world - famous professors or tasting genuine research." The Boyer Commission, Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A blueprint for America's research universities (New York: Stony Brook, 1998), p. 3.

Our view is that university research often distracts from the quality of teaching. We regret the continuing elevation of research and the systematic neglect of the quality of instruction ... University research ... is often specialized and far removed from the needs of undergraduate students ... Universities must come clean about the relationship between teaching and research." T. Pocklington and A. Tupper, No Place to Learn: Why Universities Aren't Working (Vancouver, BC: UBC Press, 2002), Chapter One.

I believe that the main hope for realizing a genuinely student centred undergraduate education lies in the re-engineering of the teaching-research nexus." P. Ramsden, "Strategic management of teaching and learning", in C. Rust, (ed.) Improving Student Learning Strategically (Oxford: OCSLD, 2001), 1-10.

References:

Boyer E. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered. Princeton: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of University Teaching.

Brew A. (2006). Research and Teaching: Beyond the Divide. New York: Palgrave-MacMillan.

Colbeck C (1998). Merging in a Seamless Blend. Journal of Higher Education. 69 (6), p. 647-671.

Hattie J. and Marsh H. (1996). The Relationship Between Research and Teaching: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 66 (4), p. 64-85.

Turner N, Wuetherick B, and Healey M. (2008). International Perspectives on Student Awareness, Experiences, and Perceptions of Research. International Journal for Academic Development. 13 (3), p. 199-211.

Acknowledgements:

The study exploring faculty perceptions of the teaching-research nexus referred to in this article was made possible by the collaboration of Dawn Alexandria Berry, currently a PhD student in History at University of Oxford in the U.K.

Brad Wuetherick is currently the Director of Undergraduate Student Services in the Faculty of Agricultural, Life & Environmental Sciences at the University of Alberta. He previously spent several years leading the Research Makes Sense for Students initiative of the Office of the Vice-President (Research) at the U of A, a special initiative focusing on issues relating to the integration of research, teaching, and learning across the campus.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Unpacking the teaching-research nexus and its influence on academic practice - Academic Matters

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Brad Wuetherick, Director of Undergraduate Student Services in the Faculty of Agricultural, Life & Environmental Sciences at the University of Alberta looks at how rethinking the teaching-research nexus might enhance both the student and faculty experience of higher education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Using Pat Hutchings's taxonomy of SoTL questions can make it easier to think about project design, particularly the most common kinds: projects that ask "what is?" or "what works?"

"What Is?" Designs

"What is?" projects are thick descriptions, snapshots of learning dynamics, or other detailed analyses of what student learning looks like, or what's happening during the moments of learning. The size and scope can range from small (e.g., a case study of one student, a thin slice of learning in a single class period) to large (many students [a "large n"], multiple activities occurring over time).

"What Works?" Designs

"What works?" projects assess the effectiveness of or change caused by an activity, tool, or other intervention. According to the scientific method, a traditional experiment would have two randomly assigned groups: one who receives the intervention and one serving as a control. In SoTL, however, this isn't always possible. It can be challenging to access two sections of a single course, students are not randomly assigned to courses, and there are so many variables affecting the students' learning that it's difficult to design a "clean" experiment.

Some SoTL theorists have pointed out that it may not even be particularly desirable to aim for such "cleanness" in design. For instance, Catherine Lewis, Rebecca Perry, and Aki Murata explain in " How Should Research Contribute to Instructional Improvement? " (2006) that

"The very qualities that suit an innovation to controlled trial may handicap it at the later stage of broad dissemination" by ... emphasizing "fidelity to the original design that stifles continuing improvement"; whereas "the very characteristics that make an innovation...difficult to study in a well-controlled fashion" make it more applicable and usable by others. Some scholars are drawn to the "general proof" of controlled experimental design and fail to recognize the "local proof" of local and seemingly messy findings that result from less controlled research.... "In part, this is because we often choose the wrong endpoint for research: causal proof of an innovation's effectiveness under controlled circumstances at initial sites, rather than 'legs' and effectiveness at subsequent sites of spread.... In short, it should be incumbent on researchers to justify their choice of research methods based on the endpoint- instructional improvement at sites of spread [dissemination and broader use]-not just the premature stopping-point, proof of innovation effectiveness under controlled conditions. The seeds of dissemination success or failure may well be planted at the outset of innovation." (emphasis in original; p. 8 )

Similarly, Donald Schon describes a "dilemma of rigor or relevance":

"In the very topography of professional practice, there is a high, hard ground overlooking a swamp. On the high ground, manageable problems lend themselves to solution through the use of research-based theory and technique. In the swampy lowlands, problems are messy and confusing and incapable of technical solution. The irony of the situation is that the problems of the high ground tend to be relatively unimportant to individuals or to the society at large, however great their technical interest may be, while in the swamp lie the greatest problems of human concern. The practitioner is confronted with a choice. Shall he remain on the high ground where he can solve relatively unimportant problems according to his standards of rigor, or shall he descend to the swamp of important problems where he cannot be rigorous in any way he knows how to describe?" (p. 28)

As a result, SoTL researchers attempting comparisons try to use groups that are as similar as possible to measure the effect of an activity as precisely as possible. If the groups are similar, the differences in outcomes are more likely to have arisen from the intervention, rather than from innate differences across groups, but the researchers are always explicit about the specific groups, context, and potential limitations.

The video below reveals some explorations of the major controversies, debates, and tensions in SoTL.
For guidance on this stage of a SoTL project, see
"Project Design: Structuring the Learning Activities and Data Collection."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Using Pat Hutchings's taxonomy of SoTL questions can make it easier to think about project design, particularly the most common kinds: projects that ask "what is?" or "what works?" "What is?" projects are thick descriptions, snapshots of learning dynamics, or other detailed analyses of what student learning looks like, or what's happening during the moments of learning.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Because SoTL is multidisciplinary, it embraces and even values a range of methodologies. This "methodological pluralism" (Huber & Morreale, 2002) is seen in the variety in types of data recognized as evidence of student learning and then again in the methods of analyzing this data.

Historically, there has been a greater reliance on quantitative analyses, which excel at determining how much or how many; employing structured designs for the purpose of predicting, confirming, hypothesis-testing, and deducing; and striving for precise, representative results (Meyers, 2006). Examples include counts, Likert-scale surveys, and content analyses of texts (e.g., the frequency with which a specific word or pattern appears).

Biologist and SoTL scholar Craig Nelson actively encourages the use of qualitative instruments and analyses "to help counter the tendency in some circles to attempt to apply to SoTL the models of research that recognize only quantitative studies" (p. 90). Complementing the quantitative, qualitative approaches are most useful for analyzing the quality, nature, or essence of what's being studied; developing flexible or evolving designs with frequently nonrandom samples to understand, describe, and inductively reveal meaning; and richly descriptive results (Meyers, 2006). Cochrane and Oliver's (2006) list in the box above further explains when qualitative methods are most appropriate.

William M. K. Trochim of the Research Methods Knowledge Base (2006) reminds us that " All quantitative data is based upon qualitative judgments; and all qualitative data can be described and manipulated numerically." (emphasis in original; " Types of Data ").

To be clear, one is not better than the other. Each has different strengths and goals, so they should be used purposefully. That said, the multidisciplinarity of SoTL often means that the richest projects draw on this complementarity and integrate both methods to develop a fuller understanding of student learning.
For guidance on this stage of a SoTL project, see
"Analyzing the Evidence: What It Reveals about Student Learning."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Because SoTL is multidisciplinary, it embraces and even values a range of methodologies. This "methodological pluralism" (Huber & Morreale, 2002) is seen in the variety in types of data recognized as evidence of student learning and then again in the methods of analyzing this data.

# data[].attributes.headline
International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning 

# data[].attributes.subject
International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning is an open, double-blind peer reviewed electronic journal published in May and November each year by the Faculty Center at Georgia Southern University. The journal is an international forum for research and information about the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) and its applications in higher/tertiary education.

Reviewers wanted! If you would like to review for ij-SoTL, please visit the guidelines and sign up form here.

See About this Journal for more information.

Letter from the Editor

Essays about SoTL

Research Articles

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning | Journals | Georgia Southern University

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ijSOTL) is an open, double-blind peer reviewed electronic journal published published in May and November each year by The Faculty Center at Georgia Southern University. The journal is an international forum for research and information about the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) and its applications in higher/tertiary education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Thoughts on SoTL

Anchored in inquiry and engagement, the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) reconceptualizes teaching as an ongoing and scholarly process with an emphasis on improving student learning (Huber & Morreale, 2002). SoTL is distinguished from other endeavors by four characteristics. First, it treats teaching "as a form of inquiry into student learning" (Huber and Morreale, 2002, p. 9). Second, it views teaching as public and community oriented, not as private practice (Huber and Hutchings, 2005). Third, in order to qualify as scholarship the work should be subject to review and evaluation, and last, it should be accessible to others in one's field (Bass, 1999).

SoTL's existence rests on individual and collective desire to in improve student learning and the contexts in which teaching and learning occur. Often this means systematically assessing and evaluating the impact of our own teaching on students' learning.

SoTL inquiries are initiated by faculty for the purpose of improving their own teaching and their students' learning. However, administrative support for and recognition of SoTL as legitimate scholarship can help to make it count in Tenure and Promotion.

Part of SoTL's appeal is that it functions as a rich text forum through which works from different fields, interests, philosophical orientations, and methodologies find space and thrive. These works converge in their focus on improved student learning.

Embedded within SoTL, the ethic of reflexivity asserts that we are responsible for the applications and ramifications of our works in both our specific context and in society.

Gilpin, L. S. (2011). Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Trades. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(2).

Gilpin, L. S. (2007). Unearthing the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Self and Practice. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(1).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning | International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning | Journals | Georgia Southern University

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Anchored in inquiry and engagement, the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) reconceptualizes teaching as an ongoing and scholarly process with an emphasis on improving student learning (Huber & Morreale, 2002). SoTL is distinguished from other endeavors by four characteristics. First, it treats teaching "as a form of inquiry into student learning" (Huber and Morreale, 2002, p.

# data[].attributes.body
Educational Design Research or Design Based Research enables research around 4 stages including the literature review and analysis of problems, and the design and prototyping of design solutions Reeves, T. C., & Lin, L. (2020, 2020/07/26). The research we have is not the research we need. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09811-3 McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2019). Conducting educational design research (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315105642

# data[].attributes.body
From Tracii Ryan : How might we work more collaboratively on research as teachers? How do we make time and connect on priority research areas?

12:59:03 From Tracii Ryan : Are there people within the MGSE or Melb CSHE who can be drivers / leaders of collaboration, research priorities?

12:59:10 From Mahtab Janfada : Relationality and its significance for providing opportunities, and re-vitalising the importance of teaching

12:59:52 From Thomas Cochrane : See the emerging SOTEL research network https://blogs.unimelb.edu.au/sotel/

13:00:48 From Sonja Arndt : Working collaboratively within MGSE to research quite open questions using diverse methodologies and analytical lenses  and writing

13:00:56 From Aristidis Galatis : How has remote learning caused us to reflective on what the role of the teacher facilitator is; particularly in regards to critical thinking.

13:00:58 From Gwilym Croucher : We discussed that as COVID is a shared moment in many ways, although we are all experiencing it differently, it also provides an extra focus for us.

# data[].attributes.body
Cope and Kalantzis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
THESIS 1. There will be no pedagogical differences between learning in person and learning online.

In the old school, it was necessary for students to be in the same room at the same time. The class was a communications architecture, thirty or so children in a classroom, a hundred or so college students in a lecture hall-just enough for the teacher to speak and be heard. The logistics of communication, transmitting knowledge from teacher to learner, demanded confinement on two dimensions, in time and in space: the walls of the classroom and the cells of the timetable.

Then e-learning comes along, and the old school seems to change. We don't have to be in the same time and space to learn. But pedagogically, things stay much the same. The cells of the timetable become the cells of the learning management system, blocks of time in the syllabus, day after day, week after relentless week. In "flipped classroom" videos, the teacher still mostly talks and the student mostly listens. The communications architecture is still one-to-many. Didactic knowledge transmission has gone online.

In the new school, the pedagogy has changed. We have identified seven affordances, things we may have always wanted to do in education, logistically challenging in the old school, but now easily achieved: ubiquitous learning, active knowledge making, multimodal knowledge representations, recursive feedback, collaborative intelligence, metacognitive reflection and differentiated learning.[1] And because we now can, we should. But an interesting thing happens when we make this transition. Face-to-face learning is transformed. There becomes no pedagogical difference between learning online and learning face to face, just a circumstantial difference of time and space. The supporting e-learning infrastructures are the same.

THESIS 2. There will be no distinction between instruction and assessment.

In the old school, there was a sharp distinction between instruction and the peculiar practices and artifacts of assessment. To learn was to memorize; assessment is to find out what had been remembered. Learning came first; assessment followed. The relation of learning to assessment was linear: first learning, then assessment (then move on to something else). Assessment is retrospective and judgmental. Mostly, this assessment was a strange game: to distinguish the one correct answer that was hidden beside deceptively wrong answers ("distractor" items). Perhaps a student might guess right, but without understanding. Perhaps they might be distracted, but with good reasoning. The lesson: life is a game of trick questions, with right and wrong answers, and there is an element of luck in getting things right. Learning is a matter of long term memory, and the definition of long term is until the day of the exam.

Then e-learning comes along, and nothing much changes. It's just that students encounter more of these strange artifacts than ever before. But now it's not just at the end of the year or the end of the semester. There are "quizzes" at the end of each chapter in the e-textbook, and test-until-you-drop standardized assessments, designed to test teachers and systems more than to be helpful to learners.

In the new school, there is no distinction between learning and assessment. In a unit of work-let's say it's about volcanoes-students get thousands of small pieces of feedback, human and machine. They discuss volcano information, videos and data in blog-like discussion forums. Everyone must "speak" and we have a record of that, where in the old classroom, only a few could speak, and only one at a time, and speaking disappeared into the air. They create volcanoes projects, peer review others' projects against a physical geography rubric, get feedback on their feedback, revise, share with their class, and write retrospective self-reviews. And yes, they answer questions in "knowledge surveys," but where answers can be checked and arguments can be had about the at least partial validity of alternative answers. Every one of these interactions involves assessment. But this is always to contribute to learning in an incremental way. Instead of being retrospective and judgmental, assessment is prospective and constructive. Every interaction is a moment of what we call "recursive feedback," or feedback that can lead to more feedback until learning is demonstrated. There is no learning without embedded assessment. There is no separate assessment. Putting assessment and instruction together, we call "reflexive pedagogy."[2] And replacing traditional assessment, we have "learning analytics," where the student has a detailed progress record, and the teacher a running record of whole class learning.

THESIS 3. Adaptive and personalized learning will not be at the expense of learning community.

In the old school, each student was for the most part on their own. They found themselves silently listening to the teacher or another student who happened for the moment to be answering the question (for practical reasons, there were not many chances to speak, and when they did, it was usually the student least needs to be speaking). They silently read the textbook, or did their work, or studied for the exam. If there was peer community, it was in the playground or the lunch room.

Then e-learning comes along, promising personalized and adaptive learning. And the student is still alone. In fact, they are probably more alone than ever, the lone learner playing the game of learning against the machine, denied even the simultaneity of being on the same page as the learners around them.

In the new school, the logic of social media is translated into an ecology of social knowledge. Adaptivity and personalization are not at the expense of learning community. Volcanoes again: the student can spend some more time thinking, ponder other students' responses, before posting their own. There is a reciprocal obligation to offer feedback in peer reviews, and each student gives and receives feedback on their feedback. Intelligence is collaborative. There is machine feedback too, but the glue that moves learning forward is essentially social, the "stickiness" of reciprocal learning.

THESIS 4. There will be no class scale.

In the old school, there was a pragmatics of one to thirty in the classroom or one to one hundred in the lecture hall. This is classical one-to-many communications, born in the era of "mass media" and "broadcast" communications, an era of silent audiences and read-only culture.

Then e-learning comes along, but we keep classes about the same size, and the architecture of knowledge communication one-to-many. Did anyone notice that the media have profoundly changed, that social media is a read-write culture, where we are create culture and knowledge as much as and at the same time as we consume it? Large scale (the scope of social media) and small scale come together (our friends and followings), mass and micro sociability. But not in learning management and other e-learning systems, with their old fashioned hub-and-spoke model of knowledge transmission.

In the new school, there is no necessary scale. In some moments, a teacher is working one-to-one, while any number of other students continue their interactions, structured according to the design of the learning module. In a MOOC, thousands or tens of thousands of students might be working together on peer reviewed projects scaffolded by the learning designer. Working closely with three peer reviewers is no different in a class of three than a class of three thousand. But for moments also, the class is indeed three thousand.

THESIS 5. Educators will stop insisting on inequality of outcomes.

"No child left behind?" "Every child succeeds?" These are not believable slogans so long as we have standardized assessments. Whoever the students are, no matter how advanced or how needy, we score them across a bell curve. In order to be able to tell some students that they have excelled, we must deem the others to have been mediocre or to have failed. The measure of the success of the few, is the necessary mediocrity and failure of the many. Many children must be classified "left behind" for a few to move forward. No matter how rigorously we profile and track learners into cohorts of similarity, we continue to insist on inequality.

Then e-learning comes along, and we mechanize the standardized test. We remain just as insistent that there must always be inequality. But now that insistence is on an industrial scale.

Fifty years ago, the renowned educator Benjamin Bloom came up with a simple idea he called "mastery learning." Every child can learn (... volcanoes, or whatever). But some may need more time and special attention. Learners start a unit of work with different knowledge, interests and capabilities-of course. Standardized instruction translates these differences into inequalities. Those who start behind, stay behind because the instruction is the same for all. Bloom called the alternative "optimal" instruction where students could keep working on a unit of learning until they achieve mastery, with support from teachers and peers where necessary. The problem with mastery learning was that, in Bloom's day, it was hard work. Today, e-learning ecologies offer possibilities that we call "reflexive pedagogy" where learners are supported "recursive feedback." Today at last, e-learning ecologies make Bloom's half-century old aspiration, a practical possibility. Indeed, in the new school let's have every child succeed. Let's leave no child behind.

[1] Cope, Bill and Mary Kalantzis. 2017. "Conceptualizing E-Learning." Pp. 1-45 in E-Learning Ecologies, edited by B. Cope and M. Kalantzis. New York: Routledge.

[2] Kalantzis, Mary and Bill Cope. 2012. New Learning: Elements of a Science of Education. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.

[3] CGScholar is a research and development project developed with the support of the Institute of Educational Sciences in the US Department of Education, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the National Science Foundation. Scholar and made available by Common Ground Research Networks, a not-for-profit, public benefit corporation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
THESIS 1. There will be no pedagogical differences between learning in person and learning online. In the old school, it was necessary for students to be in the same room at the same time. The class was a communications architecture, thirty or so children in a classroom, a hundred or so college students in a lecture hall-just enough for the teacher to speak and be heard.

# data[].attributes.body
As part of the Melbourne CSHE Technology-Enhanced Learning (TEL) research program, Melbourne CSHE is establishing a Scholarship of Technology Enhanced Learning (SoTEL) research network across the University.

The SoTEL research network will :

Showcase research informed TEL teaching practice

Support SoTEL transdisciplinary curriculum design teams and funding proposal development

Provide avenues for collaborative scholarly publication of TEL teaching practice in journals, such as: ⚬  PJTEL (Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning)
⚬  RLT (Research in Learning Technology)
⚬  AJET (Australasian Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning)

Mentor professional membership via ASCILITE (Australasian Society for Computers In Learning in Tertiary Education) and accreditation via CMALT (Certified Member of the Association for Learning Technology)

Facilitate an international forum for SoTEL

The Melbourne CSHE SoTEL research network seeks to bring together specific expertise across all of the University Departments in: mobile learning, immersive reality, wearable technologies, enhanced simulation, design-based research, designing authentic learning, ePortfolios, and self-regulated learning. https://melbourne-cshe.unimelb.edu.au/news-and-events/call-for-sotel-research-network-members

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Webinar on Immersive Reality Learning Environments - Projects from @caguayo Presentation slides for discussion https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1xEODrqEL-Rb6U8_HgHm9trUUV-qqYnWGOok72wxfIG0/edit?usp=sharing

Recording available at

The special issue "A Synthesis of Systematic Review Research on Emerging Learning Environments and Technologies" edited by Drs. Florence Martin, Vanessa Dennen, and Curtis Bonk has assembled a noteworthy collection of systematic review articles, each focusing on a different aspect of emerging learning technologies. In this conclusion, we focus on these evidence-based reviews and their practical implications for practitioners as well as future researchers. While recognizing the merits of these reviews, we conclude our analysis by encouraging readers to consider conducting educational design research to address serious problems related to teaching, learning, and performance, collaborating more closely with teachers, administrators, and other practitioners in tackling these problems, and always striving to make a difference in the lives of learners around the world.

Reeves, T.C., Lin, L. The research we have is not the research we need. Education Tech Research Dev (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09811-3 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09811-3

Today's #ASCILITEMLSIG webinar featured @aiello_stephen discussing 3 immersive reality projects in Paramedicine training
https://spark.adobe.com/page/S6Nxk9DcT2TbO/
as part of the #MESH360 project https://www.researchgate.net/project/MESH360

Welcome to the Melbourne CSHE Scholarship of Technology Enhanced Learning (SoTEL) research network.

The SoTEL research network will :

Showcase research informed TEL teaching practice

Support SoTEL transdisciplinary curriculum design teams and funding proposal development

Provide avenues for collaborative scholarly publication of TEL teaching practice in journals, such as:

PJTEL (Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning)

RLT (Research in Learning Technology)

AJET (Australasian Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning)

Mentor professional membership via ASCILITE (Australasian Society for Computers In Learning in Tertiary Education) and accreditation via CMALT (Certified Member of the Association for Learning Technology)

Facilitate an international forum for SoTEL

The Melbourne CSHE SoTEL research network seeks to bring together specific expertise across all of the University Departments in: mobile learning, immersive reality, wearable technologies, enhanced simulation, design-based research, designing authentic learning, ePortfolios, and self-regulated learning.

If you are part of an existing TEL research group that would like to become part of the SoTEL research network, or you would like to join one, or establish a new one - please contact us:

Associate Professor Thomas Cochrane
Technology Enhanced Learning in Higher Education
cochrane.t@unimelb.edu.au
https://melbourne-cshe.unimelb.edu.au/about/our-staff/thomas-cochrane

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Webinar on Immersive Reality Learning Environments - Projects from @caguayo Presentation slides for discussion https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1xEODrqEL-Rb6U8_HgHm9trUUV-qqYnWGOok72wxfIG0/edit?usp=sharing Recording available at The special issue "A Synthesis of Systematic Review Research on Emerging Learning Environments and Technologies" edited by Drs. Florence Martin, Vanessa Dennen, and Curtis Bonk has assembled a noteworthy collection of systematic review articles, each focusing on a different aspect of emerging learning technologies.

# data[].attributes.body
Reeves, T. C., & Lin, L. (2020, 2020/07/26). The research we have is not the research we need. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09811-3
Reeves, T. (2015). Educational design research: Signs of progress. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(5), 613-620. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2902
Amiel, T., & Reeves, T. (2008). Design-Based Research and Educational Technology: Rethinking Technology and the Research Agenda. Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 29-40. www.ifets.info/journals/11_4/3.pdf

Reeves, T., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2005). Design research: a socially responsible approach to instructional technology research in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(2), 97-116. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02961476

# data[].attributes.body
Scholarship of Technology Enhanced Learning—Presenting a showcase of student learning supported by technology. After the success over the last three years, we are excited to announce that the 4th SoTEL Symposium will be held at the Auckland University of Technology (City Campus) in February on the 18th and 19th, 2021, with virtual and remote participation options available.

# data[].attributes.body
Weaver, D., Robbie, D., Kokonis, S., & Miceli, L. (2012, 2013/09/01). Collaborative scholarship as a means of improving both university teaching practice and research capability. International Journal for Academic Development, 18(3), 237-250. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144x.2012.718993

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The literature suggests generic workshops on the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) rarely have a lasting impact on teaching. Seeking an alternative approach, academic developers designed a four-stage Collaborative Scholarship Model where they provided individualised SoTL mentoring to academics implementing a teaching innovation. Project outcomes included sustained change to teaching, openness to new ideas, scholarly contributions and peer recognition (through awards, publications or invited presentations). This model had a sustained impact on participants' teaching and increased research productivity. Although few individuals can be mentored at one time in this labour-intensive model, long-term benefits may still outweigh limitations in scalability.

Additional information

Acknowledgements

We are very grateful for the input of Kym Fraser, who helped us articulate our approach into the stages in our Collaborative Scholarship Model, and for excellent constructive feedback from three anonymous reviewers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Collaborative scholarship as a means of improving both university teaching practice and research capability

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The literature suggests generic workshops on the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) rarely have a lasting impact on teaching. Seeking an alternative approach, academic developers designed a four-stage Collaborative Scholarship Model where they provided individualised SoTL mentoring to academics implementing a teaching innovation.

# data[].attributes.body
The Scholarship of Technology Enhanced Learning (SoTEL) brings Boyer's (1990) concept of SOTL into the 21st Century. Haynes (2016): defining SOTEL  “a new sub-branch of Boyer’s model of scholarship… which seeks to create dialogue between the findings of educational research and actual teaching in technology-enhanced learning contexts” (Haynes, 2016, p. 1)
Haynes, D. (2016). Introducing SOTEL. International Journal for the Scholarship of Technology Enhanced Learning, 1(1), 1-2.

Wickens, R. (2006). SoTEL: Toward a Scholarship of Technology Enhanced Learning. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, 32(2), 21-41. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21225/D56300

Cochrane, T., & Narayan, V. (2019, 19 February). A Model for Developing a SOTEL Research Cluster: MESH360. Pacific Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(1), 11-12. https://doi.org/10.24135/pjtel.v2i1.31

Cochrane, T., Redmond, P., & Corrin, L. (2018, 20 July). Technology Enhanced Learning, Research Impact and Open Scholarship. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 34(3), i-viii. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.4640

Cochrane, T., & Narayan, V. (2018, 25-29 June, 2018). The Scholarship of Technology Enhanced Learning: Reimagining SOTL for the Social Network Age. EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2018, Amsterdam, Netherlands. https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/184247/

# data[].attributes.body
Cochrane, T., & Jenkins, M. (2019, 4 September). Mapping Professional Accreditation Pathways in HE: Triangulating the UCISA Surveys with a Systematic Review and Analysis [A-037]. ALT annual conference 2019, University of Edinburgh. https://altc.alt.ac.uk/2019/sessions/a-037/

Cochrane, T., & Jenkins, M. (2019, 4 July). Reimagining Professional Development for Next Generation Higher Education: Mapping Professional Accreditation Pathways. HERDSA Conference 2019: Next Generation, Higher Education: Challenges, Changes and Opportunities, University of Auckland. https://www.herdsa2019.auckland.ac.nz/program/parallel-sessions-day-two/reimagining-professional-development-for-next-generation-higher-education-mapping-professional-accreditation-pathways/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Enhancing professional recognition for Learning Technology professionalsThe CMALT Accreditation Framework provides pathways to peer-assessed accreditation for Learning Technology professionals in the UK and internationally.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Amundsen, C., Emmioglu, E., Hotton, V, Hum, G. & Xin, C. (2016). The intentional design of a scholarship of teaching and learning initiative. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 146, 31-38. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20184

Amundsen, C., & Wilson, M. (2012). Are we asking the right questions? A conceptual review of the educational development literature in higher education, Review of Educational Research, 82(1), 90-126.

Felten, P. (2013). Principles of good practice in SoTL. Teaching & Learning Inquiry 1 (1), 121-25. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.1.1.121.

Hubball, H. T., & Gold, N. (2007). The scholarship of curriculum practice and undergraduate program reform: Integrating theory into practice. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 112, 5-14.

Hubball, H. T., Pearson, M. L., & Clark A. (2013). SoTL inquiry in broader curricular and institutional contexts: Theoretical underpinnings and emerging trends. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 1(1), 41-57.

Hutchings, P. (2000). Opening lines: Approaches to the scholarship of teaching and learning. Menlo Park, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Ethics & Scholarly Integrity

Chang, R.L., Gray, K. (2013). Ethics of research into learning and teaching with Web 2.0: Reflections on eight case studies. Journal of Computers in Higher Education, 25, 147-165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-013-9071-9

Lipton, S., Boyd, E. A., & Bero, L. A. (2004). Conflicts of interest in academic research: Policies, processes, and attitudes. Accountability in Research, 11, 83-102.

Maurer, T. (2017). Guidelines for authorship credit, order, and co-inquirer learning in collaborative faculty-student SoTL projects. Teaching & Learning Inquiry 5(1), 115-31. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.1.9

Schoenherr, J. Williams-Jones, B. (2011). Research integrity/misconduct policies of Canadian universities. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 41(1). https://journals.sfu.ca/cjhe/index.php/cjhe/article/view/2173/2122

Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans - TCPS 2 (2018). https://ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-politique_tcps2-eptc2_2018.html

Danielson, M. A. (2012). SoTL as generative heuristic methodology for building learning communities. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2012.060204

Divan, A., Ludwig, L. O., Matthews, K. E., Motley, P. M. & Tomljenovic-Berube, A. M. (2017). Survey of research approaches utilised in the scholarship of teaching and learning publications. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.2.3

Grauerholz, L., & Main, E. (2013). Fallacies of SoTL: Rethinking how we conduct our research. The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in and Across the Disciplines, 152-168.

Gurung, R.A.R. (2014). Getting foxy: Invoking different magesteria in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Teaching & Learning Inquiry 2(2), 109-114. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.2.2.109.

Hubball, H. T., & Clarke, A. (2010). Diverse methodological approaches and considerations for SoTL in higher education. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(2). http://dx.doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2010.1.2

Pearson, M. L., Albon, S. P., & Hubball, H. (2015). Case study methodology: Flexibility, rigour, and ethical considerations for the scholarship of teaching and learning. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(3), 12.

Punch, K. F. (2003). Survey research the basics. London: Sage Publications. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781849209984

Webb, A. (2015). Research interviews in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 8(1), 1-8.

Webb, A. S. & Welsh A. J. (2019). Phenomenology as a methodology for scholarship of teaching and learning research. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 7(1), 168-181. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.7.1.11

Qualitative Methods in Education

DeJong, M., & Schellens, P. (1998). Focus groups or individual interviews?: A comparison of text evaluation approaches. Technical Communication, 45, 77-88.

Morgan D.L. (1996). Focus group. Annual review of sociology, 22, 129-152. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.22.1.129

Vaismoradi, M., & Snelgrove, S. (2019). Theme development in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis. Qualitative Social Research, 20, 3. http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/fqs-20.3.3376.

Vaismoradi, M., Jones, J., Turunen, H. & Snelgrove, S. (2016). Theme development in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 6(5), 100-110.

Vaismoradi, M., Jones, J., Turunen, H., & Bondas T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implication for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nursing & health sciences, 15 (3), 398-405. https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.12048

Quantitative Methods in Education

Bernstein, J. L. (2018). Unifying SoTL methodology: Internal and external validity. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 6(2), 115-126. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.6.2.9

Boeren, E. (2018). The Methodological Underdog: A review of quantitative research in the key adult education journals. Adult Education Quarterly, 68(1), 63-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741713617739347

Mixed Methods in Education

Johnson, R.B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L.A. (2007). Towards a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112-133.

Leech, N. L., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2009). A typology of mixed methods research designs. Quality & quantity, 43(2), 265-27.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education. Eighth edition, Routledge.

Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Researcher, 17(2), 13-17

Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Hitchcock, J. H. (2017). A meta-framework for conducting mixed methods impact evaluations: Implications for altering practice and the teaching of evaluation. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 53, 55-68.

Indigenous Methodologies in Education

Cole, P. (2002). Aboriginalizing methodology: Considering the canoe. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 15(4), 447-459.

Pidgeon, M. (2018). Moving between theory and practice within an Indigenous research paradigm. Qualitative research, 19(4), 418-436. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1468794118781380

Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Eociety, 1(1).

Whiteduck, M. (2013). "But it's our story. Read it": Stories my grandfather told me and writing for continuance. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 2, 72-92.

UBC Indigenous Research Guide: https://guides.library.ubc.ca/IndigResearch

Dewar, J. M., Bennett, C. D., & Fisher, M. A. (2018). The scholarship of teaching and learning: A guide for scientists, engineers, and mathematicians. Oxford University Press.

Friberg, J., & McKinney, K. (Eds.). (2019). Applying the scholarship of teaching and learning beyond the individual classroom. Bloomington, Indiana, USA: Indiana University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctvpb3w0t

Webb, A., Hubball, H., Clarke, A., & Ellis, S. (2020). Strategic approaches to SoEL inquiry within and across disciplines: Twenty-year impact of an international faculty development program in diverse university contexts. Global Research in Higher Education, 3(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/grhe.v3n1p1

Allin, L. (2014). Collaboration between staff and students in the scholarship of teaching and learning: The potential and the problems. Teaching & Learning Inquiry. 2(1), 95-102. doi:10.2979/teachlearninqu.2.1.95.

Brew, A. (2011). Higher education research and the scholarship of teaching and learning: The pursuit of excellence. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(2).

Chick, N. (2013). Difference, privilege, and power in the scholarship of teaching and learning: The value of humanities SOTL. In McKinney K. (Ed.), The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning In and Across the Disciplines. Indiana University Press.

Geertsema, J. (2016). Academic development, SoTL and educational research. International Journal for Academic Development, 21(2), 122-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2016.1175144

Larsson, M., Mårtensson, K., Price, L., & Roxå, T. (2017). Constructive friction? Exploring patterns between educational research and the scholarship of teaching and learning. In The 2nd EuroSoTL Conference, Lund, Sweden.

Mathany, C., Clow, K. M., & Aspenlieder, E. D. (2017). Exploring the role of the scholarship of teaching and learning in the context of the professional identities of faculty, graduate students, and staff in higher education. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2017.3.10

Miller-Young, J., & Yeo, M. (2015). Conceptualizing and communicating SoTL: A framework for the field. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 3(2), 37-53. doi:10.2979/teachlearninqu.3.2.37

Potter, M. K., & Kustra, E. (2011). The relationship between scholarly teaching and SoTL: Models, distinctions, and clarifications. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1).

Alvarez-Bell, R. M., Wirtz, D. & Bian, H. (2017). Identifying keys to success in innovative teaching: Student engagement and instructional practices as predictors of student learning in a course using a Team-Based Learning approach. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.2.10

Chick, N., Karis, T., & Kernahan, C. (2009). Learning from their own learning: How metacognitive and meta-affective reflections enhance learning in race-related courses. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2009.030116

Healey, M., Matthews, K. E., & Cook-Sather, A. (2020). Writing about Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Creating and Contributing to Scholarly Conversations across a Range of Genres. Elon, USA: Elon University Centre for Engaged Learning. https://doi.org/10.36284/celelon.oa3

Levkoe, C. Z., Brail, S., & Daniere, A. (2014). Engaged pedagogy and transformative learning in graduate education: A service-learning case study. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 44(3), 68-85. https://journals.sfu.ca/cjhe/index.php/cjhe/article/view/186039

Popenici, S.A.D., & Kerr, S. (2017). Exploring the impact of artificial intelligence on teaching and learning in higher education. Research & Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 12(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41039-017-0062-8

For more examples visit: https://sotlannotations.com/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Amundsen, C., Emmioglu, E., Hotton, V, Hum, G. & Xin, C. (2016). The intentional design of a scholarship of teaching and learning initiative. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 146, 31-38. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20184 Amundsen, C., & Wilson, M. (2012). Are we asking the right questions?

# data[].attributes.headline
Relations between teachers' approaches to teaching and students' approaches to learning Keith Trigwell, Michael Prosser & Fiona Waterhouse 

# data[].attributes.subject
Relations between teachers' approaches to teaching and students' approaches to learning Keith Trigwell, Michael Prosser & Fiona Waterhouse 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This paper reports on an empirical study which shows that qualitatively different approaches to teaching are associated with qualitatively different approaches to learning. More specifically, the results indicate that in the classes where teachers describe their approach to teaching as having a focus on what they do and on transmitting knowledge, students are more likely to report that they adopt a surface approach to the learning of that subject. Conversely, but less strongly, in the classes where students report adopting significantly deeper approaches to learning, teaching staff report adopting approaches to teaching that are more oriented towards students and to changing the students conceptions. The study made use of a teaching approach inventory derived from interviews with academic staff, and a modified approach to learning questionnaire. These conclusions are derived from a factor and cluster analysis of 48 classes (involving 46 science teachers and 3956 science students) in Australian universities. The results complete a chain of relations from teacher thinking to the outcomes of student learning. Previous studies have shown relations between teachers' conceptions of teaching and learning and their approaches to teaching. Numerous studies have shown correlations between students' deeper approaches to learning and higher quality learning outcomes. The results reported here link these two sets of studies. They also highlight the importance, in attempts to improve the quality of student learning, of discouraging teacher-focused transmission teaching and encouraging higher quality, conceptual change/student-focused approaches to teaching.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Relations between teachers' approaches to teaching and students' approaches to learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This paper reports on an empirical study which shows that qualitatively different approaches to teaching are associated with qualitatively different approaches to learning. More specifically, the results indicate that in the classes where teachers describe their approach to teaching as having a focus on what they do and on transmitting knowledge, students are more likely to report that they adopt a surface approach to the learning of that subject.

# data[].attributes.headline
Student learning and the experience of teaching Michael Prosser  & Keith Trigwell University of Sydney, Australia, University of Tasmania, Australia

# data[].attributes.subject
Student learning and the experience of teaching Michael Prosser  & Keith Trigwell University of Sydney, Australia, University of Tasmania, Australia

# data[].attributes.headline
Phenomenographic pedagogy and a revised Approaches to teaching inventory Keith Trigwell, Michael Prosser and Paul Ginnsca University of Oxford, UK; Higher Education Academy, UK; University of Sydney, 

# data[].attributes.subject
Phenomenographic pedagogy and a revised Approaches to teaching inventory Keith Trigwell, Michael Prosser and Paul Ginnsca University of Oxford, UK; Higher Education Academy, UK; University of Sydney, 

# data[].attributes.headline
Evaluating the New Technologies: A student learning focused perspectiveMichael Prosser Academic Development Unit, La Trobe University 

# data[].attributes.subject
Evaluating the New Technologies: A student learning focused perspectiveMichael Prosser Academic Development Unit, La Trobe University 

# data[].attributes.headline
Positioning the Design Tutor’s presence in the Design Studio for successful student design learning Ann Quinlan, Linda Corkery and Nancy Marshall

# data[].attributes.subject
Positioning the Design Tutor’s presence in the Design Studio for successful student design learning Ann Quinlan, Linda Corkery and Nancy Marshall

# data[].attributes.headline
what do students want from their student experience at an undergrad and graduate level. How do we leverage on Gregor and Chi's provocations, to develop a research agenda into the future, the global economy is vastly affected, and I can imagine governments to pay most attention to this aspect. This will threaten funding to school education, how might we continue to propose to the government, this context.Do we have exemplars already within you uni Melbourne that we could learn from and in inform other ways to link to Chi's identification of existential concerns for democracy into the ways we enable student voices in the processes to inform next steps.How do we think about preparing teachers for an education system that may itself be in a state of change. In what ways might we research our own practice, thinking here about self study research opportunities. What are the implications for the new normal and initial teacher education, how do we begin to reimagine placement and work integrated learning for becoming teachers, what do we need to know to design and develop for this.How might we develop in student engagement in a redesign.Where are students involved in curriculum design and delivery.What might learning look like for students right now, and how can we discover this.How can a curriculum support the development of students self regulated learning.How do we think about preparing teachers for an education system that may itself be in a state of change.What are the most effective and engaging designs for hybrid teaching and learning.How can we research the notion of relationality in this new hybrid space.How might we enable student engagement in a redesign and what is their why purpose.How has the new normal illuminated the inequities in education for students.What kinds of curriculums structures. Modular? intensive? are suitable for building students skills and knowledge to equip them for global problems, and how can we do this across institutions and countries.How has the new normal eliminated the inequities of education for students.How do we offer both spaces flexibly and let the students choose week by week. Hi flex.What does self study research opportunities look like. hyflex.How does higher education in general and teacher education specifically explore the idea of a Post truth politics information ecology.Other than the Anglo American canon explored.What are the cost and save staffing implications of a shift to hybrid online learning.How can we explore inclusive practices for students from rural and remote backgrounds.Transcribed by https://otter.ai

# data[].attributes.subject
what do students want from their student experience at an undergrad and graduate level. How do we leverage on Gregor and Chi's provocations, to develop a research agenda into the future, the global economy is vastly affected, and I can imagine governments to pay most attention to this aspect. This will threaten funding to school education, how might we continue to propose to the government, this context.Do we have exemplars already within you uni Melbourne that we could learn from and in inform other ways to link to Chi's identification of existential concerns for democracy into the ways we enable student voices in the processes to inform next steps.How do we think about preparing teachers for an education system that may itself be in a state of change. In what ways might we research our own practice, thinking here about self study research opportunities. What are the implications for the new normal and initial teacher education, how do we begin to reimagine placement and work integrated learning for becoming teachers, what do we need to know to design and develop for this.How might we develop in student engagement in a redesign.Where are students involved in curriculum design and delivery.What might learning look like for students right now, and how can we discover this.How can a curriculum support the development of students self regulated learning.How do we think about preparing teachers for an education system that may itself be in a state of change.What are the most effective and engaging designs for hybrid teaching and learning.How can we research the notion of relationality in this new hybrid space.How might we enable student engagement in a redesign and what is their why purpose.How has the new normal illuminated the inequities in education for students.What kinds of curriculums structures. Modular? intensive? are suitable for building students skills and knowledge to equip them for global problems, and how can we do this across institutions and countries.How has the new normal eliminated the inequities of education for students.How do we offer both spaces flexibly and let the students choose week by week. Hi flex.What does self study research opportunities look like. hyflex.How does higher education in general and teacher education specifically explore the idea of a Post truth politics information ecology.Other than the Anglo American canon explored.What are the cost and save staffing implications of a shift to hybrid online learning.How can we explore inclusive practices for students from rural and remote backgrounds.Transcribed by https://otter.ai

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It seems that you're in USA. We have a dedicated site for USA

Read While You Wait - Get immediate ebook access, if available*, when you order a print book

Reimagining Pedagogy, Practice and Research

Editors: Taylor, Carol A., Bayley, Annouchka (Eds.)

Free Preview

Analyse how higher education can be rethought and move towards posthumanism

Reconceptualizes the academy and offers new way for academics and researchers to do higher education differently

Encourages imagination and creative thinking in re-thinking higher education

see more benefits

Buy this book

eBook 93,08 €

Hardcover 114,39 €

About this book

This book explores ways in which posthumanist and new materialist thinking can be put to work in order to reimagine higher education pedagogy, practice and research. The editors and contributors illuminate how we can move the thinking and doing of higher education out of the humanist cul-de-sac of individualism, binarism and colonialism and away from anthropocentric modes of performative rationality. Based in a reconceptualization of ontology, epistemology and ethics which shifts attention away from the human towards the vitality of matter and the nonhuman, posthumanist and new materialist approaches pose a profound challenge to higher education. In engaging with the theoretical twists and turns of various posthumanisms and new materialisms, this book offers new, experimental and creative ways for academics, practitioners and researchers to do higher education differently. This ground-breaking edited collection will appeal to students and scholars of posthumanism and new materialism, as well as those looking to conceptualize higher education as other than performative practice.

About the authors

Carol A. Taylor is Professor of Higher Education and Gender at the University of Bath, UK. Her research draws on feminist, new materialist and posthumanist approaches to generate experimental methodologies and transdisciplinary theories for exploring gender, space, power and participation in higher education. She co-edits the journal Gender and Education and is an Editorial Board member of Teaching in Higher Education and Critical Studies in Teaching and Learnin g. Annouchka Bayley is Programme Lead in Creative Education at the Royal College of Art, UK. Her research incorporates posthumanisms and new materialisms for 21st century higher education development; practice-as-research in the academy; and creating new approaches to the practice and critique of contemporary live performance.

Buy this book

eBook 93,08 €

Hardcover 114,39 €

Bibliographic Information

Bibliographic Information

Book Title

Posthumanism and Higher Education

Book Subtitle

Reimagining Pedagogy, Practice and Research

Editors

Carol A. Taylor

Annouchka Bayley

Copyright

2019

Publisher

Palgrave Macmillan

Copyright Holder

The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)

eBook ISBN

978-3-030-14672-6

DOI

10.1007/978-3-030-14672-6

Hardcover ISBN

978-3-030-14671-9

Edition Number

1

Number of Pages

XXXV, 375

Number of Illustrations

6 b/w illustrations, 34 illustrations in colour

Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Posthumanism and Higher Education - Reimagining Pedagogy, Practice and Research | Carol A. Taylor | Palgrave Macmillan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This book explores ways in which posthumanist and new materialist thinking can be put to work in order to reimagine higher education pedagogy, practice and research. The contributors illuminate how we can move the thinking and doing of higher education out of individualism and colonialism....

# data[].attributes.body
Dot points of the discussion:

·         Shift to virtual teaching showed different aspects of teaching à stop and look at teachingà analysis and move forward.

·         Lots of data can be and has been collected but what are the questions

·         Some question we have answers for but there are perpetual questions that need to be asked over time

·         Real opportunity is to look at individual practice but all within governance and institutional context

·         Few studies looking at governance of teaching

o   Student evaluation as a governance tool

o   Opportunity to develop new courses and designs

o    Changes need to the bureaucratic processes within the uni to new courses and amendment to courses.

o    MOOCs?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Covid-19 crisis has revealed inequalities and vulnerabilities, but it has also surfaced extraordinary human resourcefulness and potential. Decisions made today in the context of Covid-19 will have long-term consequences for the futures of education. Policy makers, educators and communities must make high-stakes choices today-these decisions should be guided by shared principles and visions of desirable collective futures.

These are the key messages of the International Commission on the Futures of Education new report Education in a post-COVID world: Nine ideas for public action. The Commission-established by UNESCO in 2019 and composed of thought leaders from the worlds of academia, science, government, business and education- builds on important lessons from the global health crisis to propose policy actions that can be taken today to advance education tomorrow.

From the necessity of committing to strengthen education as a common good to the final call to advance global solidarity to end current levels of inequality all nine ideas for public action aim to invite debate, engagement and action at all levels. Her Excellency Sahle-Work Zewde, President of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia and Chair of the Commission stresses in her preface the importance of collective mobilization in order to drive sustainable change: "COVID-19 has the potential to radically reshape our world, but we must not passively sit back and observe what plays out."

Education in a post-COVID world: Nine ideas for public action is available in English and French; additional languages are forthcoming.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nine ideas for public action - New publication from International Commission on the Futures of Education | Unesco Futures of Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Covid-19 crisis has revealed inequalities and vulnerabilities, but it has also surfaced extraordinary human resourcefulness and potential. Decisions made today in the context of Covid-19 will have long-term consequences for the futures of education. Policy makers, educators and communities must make high-stakes choices today-these decisions should be guided by shared principles and visions of desirable collective futures.

# data[].attributes.headline
Writing about Learning and Teaching in Higher Education Creating and Contributing to Scholarly Conversations across a Range of Genres

# data[].attributes.subject
Writing about Learning and Teaching in Higher Education Creating and Contributing to Scholarly Conversations across a Range of Genres

# data[].attributes.headline
Examining the Focus of SoTL Literature—Teaching and Learning?

# data[].attributes.subject
Examining the Focus of SoTL Literature—Teaching and Learning?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
View of Examining the Focus of SoTL Literature-Teaching and Learning?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Return to Article Details Examining the Focus of SoTL Literature-Teaching and Learning?

# data[].attributes.headline
UIIN The New Edition of The Future of Universities Thought book

# data[].attributes.subject
UIIN The New Edition of The Future of Universities Thought book

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Are North American universities set for a bleak future or are they about to take an even more central role in an increasingly global world? As the rate of change in our societies accelerates and technology is increasingly adopted, universities face challenges like never before. Imagining how the future of universities might unfold in the light of these challenges is a difficult task, but it is a necessary one if universities are to recapture a preeminent societal role.

This is precisely the task tackled by The Future of Universities Thoughtbook | North American Edition, which focuses on the future of the North American higher education system. Yes, even in North American institutions, many of whom are regularly thought to be the envy of the world, transformative and fast-paced circumstances today require new ideas for inspiring the university of the future.

The Thoughtbook artfully collates a group of 40 diverse voices and narratives while sketching out the future roles of universities, their relevance, and their evolving position within the broader ecosystem of knowledge and innovation production. Collectively, professionals from across a spectrum of university, non-profit, industry, higher education associations, and government conceive a future pathway for universities to embrace their potential for intentional impact locally and globally over the coming 20 years. The authors' broad areas of expertise, experience, and influence provide a thought-provoking 360-degree review of the pending North American higher education ecosystem.

Amongst the contributors are thought leaders like Ted Mitchell, the President of the American Council on Education, who describes the innovativeness and relevance of US universities, Gregory W. Fowler, President of SNHU's Global Campus, who shifts the focus of our thinking from industry changes to the disruptions that are likely for the lives of the learners, and Elizabeth Dearborn-Hughes, CEO and co-founder of Davis College, who foresees a change in education through stackable and modularized academic programs as part of global universities. While Andrew Petter, President, and Vice-Chancellor of Simon Fraser University, highlights the reasons why AI will help higher education, Marcia McNutt, President of the National Academic of Sciences, emphasizes the critical importance of university-industry-government partnerships.

Initiated by Lumina Foundation, UIIN and Siemens, this edition of The Thoughtbook becomes a thought-starter for the development of the Future-Oriented North American University whereby academics and students work in real-time symbiotic partnerships with industry, government, and societal stakeholders to simultaneously create and implement new knowledge and solutions to address business and social issues.

Editors: Arno Meerman, Balzhan Orazbayeva, Todd Davey, Cameron McCoy, Carolin Plewa, Victoria Galan Muros, Mason Ailstock, Courtney Brown
For more information about the editors or on FUT please visit the FUT website: www.futureuniversities.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The New Edition of The Future of Universities Thoughtbook Just Launched!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Are North American universities set for a bleak future or are they about to take an even more central role in an increasingly global world? As the rate of change in our societies accelerates and technology is increasingly adopted, universities face challenges like never before.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Writing about Learning and Teaching in Higher Education offers detailed guidance to scholars at all stages-experienced and new academics, graduate students, and undergraduates-regarding how to write about learning and teaching in higher education. It evokes established practices, recommends new ones, and challenges readers to expand notions of scholarship by describing reasons for publishing across a range of genres, from the traditional empirical research article to modes such as stories and social media that are newly recognized in scholarly arenas. The book provides practical guidance for scholars in writing each genre-and in getting them published.

To illustrate how choices about writing play out in practice, we share throughout the book our own experiences as well as reflections from a range of scholars, including both highly experienced, widely published experts and newcomers to writing about learning and teaching in higher education. The diversity of voices we include is intended to complement the variety of genres we discuss, enacting as well as arguing for an embrace of multiplicity in writing about learning and teaching in higher education.

"This book is a real gift. Books about writing can be pretty pedestrian, but the authors have truly invited readers into a conversation. . . . Most important, it's beautifully written - with a great voice - scholarly but personal."

Pat Hutchings, Senior Associate, Carnegie Foundation and Senior Scholar with the National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment

Cite this Book

Healey, Mick, Kelly E. Matthews, and Alison Cook-Sather. 2020. Writing about Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Creating and Contributing to Scholarly Conversations across a Range of Genres. Elon, NC: Elon University Center for Engaged Learning. https://doi.org/10.36284/celelon.oa3.

Table of Contents

Part 1: Understanding the Book and Meeting the Authors

Chapter 1: Articulating our Goals: Origins, Audiences, and Structure

Chapter 2: Situating Our Work: Focus, Motivation, Educational Research, and Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL)

Part 2: Embracing the Potential of Writing about Learning and Teaching

Chapter 3: Creating and Contributing to Scholarly Conversations through Writing

Chapter 4: Fostering Identity through a Values-based Approach to Writing

Chapter 5: Conceptualizing Writing as a Learning Process

Part 3: Clarifying Your Purpose and Preparing to Draft

Chapter 6: Reflecting on Motivations

Chapter 7: Writing Alone or with Others

Chapter 8: Choosing an Outlet

Chapter 9: Selecting a Title

Chapter 10: Preparing the Abstract

Part 4: Writing in Different Genres

Chapter 11: Extending the Conventional Writing Genres

Chapter 12: Analyzing and Reporting Data: Empirical Research Articles

Chapter 13: Advancing New Perspectives: Theoretical and Conceptual Articles

Chapter 14: Synthesizing What We Already Know: Literature Reviews

Chapter 15: Focusing on Practical Experiences: Case Studies

Chapter 16: Telling a Bigger Story: Books and Edited Collections

Chapter 17: Talking About Learning and Teaching: Conference and Workshop Presentations

Chapter 18: Revealing the Process: Reflective Essays

Chapter 19: Provoking Thought: Opinion Pieces

Chapter 20: Sharing Everyday Experiences: Stories

Chapter 21: Engaging in Scholarly Conversations Online: Social Media

Chapter 22: Applying, Reflecting, and Evidencing: Teaching Awards, Fellowships, and Promotions

Part 5: Writing Efficiently, Effectively, and Energizingly

Chapter 23: Allotting Time and Choosing Space to Write

Chapter 24: Writing and Rewriting Your Draft

Chapter 25: Becoming an Engaging Writer

Chapter 26: Seeking Networks, Critical Friends, and Feedback

Part 6: Submitting, Responding to Reviewers, and Promoting Your Work

Chapter 27: Preparing for Submission

Chapter 28: Responding to Reviewers and Dealing with Rejection

Chapter 29: Promoting Your Published Work and Developing a Publication Plan

Chapter 30: Conclusion: Reflecting on the Potential of Writing about Learning and Teaching

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Writing about Learning and Teaching in Higher Education - Center for Engaged Learning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Writing about Learning and Teaching in Higher Education offers detailed guidance to experienced and new academics, graduate students, and undergraduates regarding how to write about learning and teaching in higher education.