Survey of Research Approaches Utilised in The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Publications

IF 1.7 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal Pub Date : 2017-09-25 DOI:10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.2.3
Aysha Divan, Lynn O. Ludwig, K. Matthews, Phillip Motley, Ana Tomljenovic-Berube
{"title":"Survey of Research Approaches Utilised in The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Publications","authors":"Aysha Divan, Lynn O. Ludwig, K. Matthews, Phillip Motley, Ana Tomljenovic-Berube","doi":"10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.2.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) has been described as the fastest growing academic development movement in higher education. As this field of inquiry matures, there is a need to understand how SoTL research is conducted. The purpose of our study was to inform this debate by investigating research approaches used in SoTL publications. We analysed 223 empirical research studies published from 2012 to 2014 in three explicitly focused SoTL journals. We classified the studies as either qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods using an analytical framework devised from existing literature on research methods. We found that the use of the three research designs was fairly evenly distributed across the papers examined: qualitative (37.2%), quantitative (29.6%), and mixed methods (33.2%). However, there was an over-reliance on data collection from a single source in 83.9% of papers analysed, and this source was primarily students. There was some, but limited, evidence of the use of triangulation through the use of multiple data collection instruments (e.g. survey, assessment tasks, grade databases). Similarly, only one-third of publications classified as mixed methods integrated the analysis and interpretation of the qualitative and quantitative data equally within the study. We conclude that current SoTL research is characterised by methodological pluralism but could be advanced through inclusion of more diverse approaches, such as close reading, and adoption of strategies known to enhance the quality of research, for example, triangulation and visual representation.","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"5 1","pages":"16-29"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"35","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.2.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 35

Abstract

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) has been described as the fastest growing academic development movement in higher education. As this field of inquiry matures, there is a need to understand how SoTL research is conducted. The purpose of our study was to inform this debate by investigating research approaches used in SoTL publications. We analysed 223 empirical research studies published from 2012 to 2014 in three explicitly focused SoTL journals. We classified the studies as either qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods using an analytical framework devised from existing literature on research methods. We found that the use of the three research designs was fairly evenly distributed across the papers examined: qualitative (37.2%), quantitative (29.6%), and mixed methods (33.2%). However, there was an over-reliance on data collection from a single source in 83.9% of papers analysed, and this source was primarily students. There was some, but limited, evidence of the use of triangulation through the use of multiple data collection instruments (e.g. survey, assessment tasks, grade databases). Similarly, only one-third of publications classified as mixed methods integrated the analysis and interpretation of the qualitative and quantitative data equally within the study. We conclude that current SoTL research is characterised by methodological pluralism but could be advanced through inclusion of more diverse approaches, such as close reading, and adoption of strategies known to enhance the quality of research, for example, triangulation and visual representation.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
教学出版物学术研究方法综述
教学奖学金(SoTL)被描述为高等教育中发展最快的学术发展运动。随着这一研究领域的成熟,有必要了解SoTL研究是如何进行的。我们研究的目的是通过调查SoTL出版物中使用的研究方法来为这场辩论提供信息。我们分析了2012年至2014年在三本明确关注的SoTL期刊上发表的223项实证研究。我们使用根据现有研究方法文献设计的分析框架,将研究分为定性、定量或混合方法。我们发现,三种研究设计的使用在所研究的论文中分布相当均匀:定性(37.2%)、定量(29.6%)和混合方法(33.2%)。然而,在83.9%的分析论文中,过度依赖单一来源的数据收集,而这一来源主要是学生。有一些但有限的证据表明,通过使用多种数据收集工具(如调查、评估任务、等级数据库)使用了三角测量。同样,只有三分之一被归类为混合方法的出版物在研究中平等地整合了定性和定量数据的分析和解释。我们得出的结论是,当前的SoTL研究以方法论多元化为特征,但可以通过纳入更多样的方法来推进,如细读,并采用已知的提高研究质量的策略,如三角测量和视觉表征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal
Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
30.00%
发文量
37
审稿时长
17 weeks
期刊最新文献
Navigating between Scylla and Charybdis: SoTL as its Own Kind of Inquiry Experiences with Supporting Teachers with Scholarship of Teaching and Learning at a Research-Intensive University: Lessons Learned Defining Active Learning: A Restricted Systemic Review Using Scenarios to Explore the Complexity of Student-Faculty Partnership Challenges of Shaping Student Study Strategies for Success: Replication and Extension
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1