Pub Date : 2021-03-07DOI: 10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.2
Laura Cruz, Eileen Grodziak
This essay considers how the current age of multiple crises is leading to changes in questions we ask of teaching and learning, questions we ask in SoTL, and the role of SoTL scholars.
{"title":"SOTL under STRESS: Rethinking Teaching and Learning Scholarship during a Global Pandemic","authors":"Laura Cruz, Eileen Grodziak","doi":"10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.2","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.2","url":null,"abstract":"This essay considers how the current age of multiple crises is leading to changes in questions we ask of teaching and learning, questions we ask in SoTL, and the role of SoTL scholars.","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"143 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79188843","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-07DOI: 10.20343/teachlearninqu.9.1.16
Trent Maurer,Catelyn Shipp
This paper reports results from a mixed-methods intervention conducted in partnership between a faculty member and an undergraduate to shape student study strategies for success in an introductory course. The instructor provided students with information on the effectiveness of the successive relearning study strategy, conducted an in-class demonstration of the strategy, and explained how students could apply the strategy to their study plan for the first exam. Students were asked about their planned study behaviors for the first exam before the intervention and exam and about their actual study behaviors for the exam after the intervention and exam. Students were asked before the intervention what an instructor could do to convince them to try a new strategy, and again after the intervention whether or not they adopted the new strategy and why. Quantitative results indicated that the intervention had no effect on students’ study behaviors, contrary to the predictions of the prior literature. Qualitative analyses suggested that students were open to learning more effective ways to study and thought that interventions like the one used in this investigation would convince them to try a new strategy. However, students were unable to use successive relearning because of procrastination and time management issues.
{"title":"Challenges of Shaping Student Study Strategies for Success","authors":"Trent Maurer,Catelyn Shipp","doi":"10.20343/teachlearninqu.9.1.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.9.1.16","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports results from a mixed-methods intervention conducted in partnership between a faculty member and an undergraduate to shape student study strategies for success in an introductory course. The instructor provided students with information on the effectiveness of the successive relearning study strategy, conducted an in-class demonstration of the strategy, and explained how students could apply the strategy to their study plan for the first exam. Students were asked about their planned study behaviors for the first exam before the intervention and exam and about their actual study behaviors for the exam after the intervention and exam. Students were asked before the intervention what an instructor could do to convince them to try a new strategy, and again after the intervention whether or not they adopted the new strategy and why. Quantitative results indicated that the intervention had no effect on students’ study behaviors, contrary to the predictions of the prior literature. Qualitative analyses suggested that students were open to learning more effective ways to study and thought that interventions like the one used in this investigation would convince them to try a new strategy. However, students were unable to use successive relearning because of procrastination and time management issues.","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"7 6","pages":"241-257"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138507484","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper reports results from a mixed-methods intervention conducted in partnership between a faculty member and an undergraduate to shape student study strategies for success in an introductory course. The instructor provided students with information on the effectiveness of the successive relearning study strategy, conducted an in-class demonstration of the strategy, and explained how students could apply the strategy to their study plan for the first exam. Students were asked about their planned study behaviors for the first exam before the intervention and exam and about their actual study behaviors for the exam after the intervention and exam. Students were asked before the intervention what an instructor could do to convince them to try a new strategy, and again after the intervention whether or not they adopted the new strategy and why. Quantitative results indicated that the intervention had no effect on students’ study behaviors, contrary to the predictions of the prior literature. Qualitative analyses suggested that students were open to learning more effective ways to study and thought that interventions like the one used in this investigation would convince them to try a new strategy. However, students were unable to use successive relearning because of procrastination and time management issues.
{"title":"Challenges of Shaping Student Study Strategies for Success","authors":"Trent W. Maurer, Catelyn Shipp","doi":"10.20343/9.1.16","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20343/9.1.16","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports results from a mixed-methods intervention conducted in partnership between a faculty member and an undergraduate to shape student study strategies for success in an introductory course. The instructor provided students with information on the effectiveness of the successive relearning study strategy, conducted an in-class demonstration of the strategy, and explained how students could apply the strategy to their study plan for the first exam. Students were asked about their planned study behaviors for the first exam before the intervention and exam and about their actual study behaviors for the exam after the intervention and exam. Students were asked before the intervention what an instructor could do to convince them to try a new strategy, and again after the intervention whether or not they adopted the new strategy and why. Quantitative results indicated that the intervention had no effect on students’ study behaviors, contrary to the predictions of the prior literature. Qualitative analyses suggested that students were open to learning more effective ways to study and thought that interventions like the one used in this investigation would convince them to try a new strategy. However, students were unable to use successive relearning because of procrastination and time management issues.","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90163902","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-07DOI: 10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.23
K. Manarin, C. Adams, Richard J. Fendler, H. Marsh, Ethan Pohl, Suzanne L. Porath, A. Thomas
Although the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) claims to focus on student learning, some have argued that SoTL studies often adopt a narrow view of learning and focus more on teaching than on learning. In this paper, we explore whether teaching is the primary focus of recent articles published from 2013-2017 in three international, self-identified SoTL journals: Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal (TLI), The International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ijSOTL), and The Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL). Based on our analysis of the 299 empirical articles, we argue that they portray SoTL as a field focused primarily on teacher activity rather than student learning, despite efforts to broaden its scope.
{"title":"Examining the Focus of SoTL Literature—Teaching and Learning?","authors":"K. Manarin, C. Adams, Richard J. Fendler, H. Marsh, Ethan Pohl, Suzanne L. Porath, A. Thomas","doi":"10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.23","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.23","url":null,"abstract":"Although the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) claims to focus on student learning, some have argued that SoTL studies often adopt a narrow view of learning and focus more on teaching than on learning. In this paper, we explore whether teaching is the primary focus of recent articles published from 2013-2017 in three international, self-identified SoTL journals: Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal (TLI), The International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ijSOTL), and The Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL). Based on our analysis of the 299 empirical articles, we argue that they portray SoTL as a field focused primarily on teacher activity rather than student learning, despite efforts to broaden its scope.","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89737428","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-07DOI: 10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.22
T. Maurer, Cherie Woolmer, N. Powell, Carol F. Sisson, C. Snelling, O. Stalheim, Ian J. Turner
This paper critically examines the reasons for and processes of sharing SoTL findings with students. Framed by our commitment to SoTL’s role to make teaching “community property,” we interpret sharing SoTL findings with students as an act of knowledge mobilization, where SoTL might be disseminated, translated, or co-created with the student as a legitimate knowledge broker. We connect these knowledge mobilization processes with four primary reasons why faculty might want to share SoTL findings with students. Finally, we provide examples of knowledge mobilization that use different “voices” found in contemporary communication settings and that reach various student audiences in micro, meso, macro, and mega contexts.
{"title":"Sharing SoTL Findings with Students: An Intentional Knowledge Mobilization Strategy","authors":"T. Maurer, Cherie Woolmer, N. Powell, Carol F. Sisson, C. Snelling, O. Stalheim, Ian J. Turner","doi":"10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.22","url":null,"abstract":"This paper critically examines the reasons for and processes of sharing SoTL findings with students. Framed by our commitment to SoTL’s role to make teaching “community property,” we interpret sharing SoTL findings with students as an act of knowledge mobilization, where SoTL might be disseminated, translated, or co-created with the student as a legitimate knowledge broker. We connect these knowledge mobilization processes with four primary reasons why faculty might want to share SoTL findings with students. Finally, we provide examples of knowledge mobilization that use different “voices” found in contemporary communication settings and that reach various student audiences in micro, meso, macro, and mega contexts.","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"143 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86780241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-07DOI: 10.20343/teachlearninqu.9.1.4
Ingie Hovland
This paper gives an example of an inductive Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) process, adapting Anthony Ciccone’s five conditions of a meaningful SoTL question. Presenting a study on pre-class reading in an undergraduate religion class, I describe how my question went through five life stages. I began with nine different pre-class reading assignments. Students judged the “map” assignment to be most helpful. This led to a further question: why maps? In a close reading of students’ reading reflections, two themes stood out: students experienced maps as helping them create a mental overview of the reading, and maps facilitated greater ownership of the act of reading. In conclusion, I argue that humanities instructors who wish to teach advanced reading skills can start by providing pre-class assignments that allow for making-while-reading, and that this making should not be merged with other reading steps. In an epilogue I reflect on the inductive research process. I suggest that SoTL scholars who use this process may reach an impasse when deciding how to present meaningful answers because their conceptual answers will stand in tension with SoTL’s practical orientation. I propose focusing on conceptual generalization (rather than empirical generalization), while still foregrounding a balance between “what works” and “what is.”
{"title":"The Importance of Making-While-Reading for Undergraduate Readers: An Example of Inductive SoTL","authors":"Ingie Hovland","doi":"10.20343/teachlearninqu.9.1.4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.9.1.4","url":null,"abstract":"This paper gives an example of an inductive Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) process, adapting Anthony Ciccone’s five conditions of a meaningful SoTL question. Presenting a study on pre-class reading in an undergraduate religion class, I describe how my question went through five life stages. I began with nine different pre-class reading assignments. Students judged the “map” assignment to be most helpful. This led to a further question: why maps? In a close reading of students’ reading reflections, two themes stood out: students experienced maps as helping them create a mental overview of the reading, and maps facilitated greater ownership of the act of reading. In conclusion, I argue that humanities instructors who wish to teach advanced reading skills can start by providing pre-class assignments that allow for making-while-reading, and that this making should not be merged with other reading steps. In an epilogue I reflect on the inductive research process. I suggest that SoTL scholars who use this process may reach an impasse when deciding how to present meaningful answers because their conceptual answers will stand in tension with SoTL’s practical orientation. I propose focusing on conceptual generalization (rather than empirical generalization), while still foregrounding a balance between “what works” and “what is.”","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"3 2","pages":"27-44"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138507490","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-07DOI: 10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.26
Jennifer C. Friberg, Mandy Frake-Mistak, Ruth L. Healey, S. Sipes, J. Mooney, Stephanie Sanchez, K. Waller
Mentoring relationships that form between scholars of teaching and learning occur formally and informally, across varied pathways and programs. In order to better understand such relationships, this paper proposes an adapted version of a three-stage model of mentoring, using three examples of unseen opportunities for mentoring in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) to illustrate how this framework might be operationalized. We discuss how the adapted framework might be useful to SoTL scholars in the future to examine mentorship and how unseen opportunities for mentoring might shape how we consider this subset of mentorship going forward.
{"title":"A Developmental Framework for Mentorship in SoTL Illustrated by Three Examples of Unseen Opportunities for Mentoring","authors":"Jennifer C. Friberg, Mandy Frake-Mistak, Ruth L. Healey, S. Sipes, J. Mooney, Stephanie Sanchez, K. Waller","doi":"10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.26","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.26","url":null,"abstract":"Mentoring relationships that form between scholars of teaching and learning occur formally and informally, across varied pathways and programs. In order to better understand such relationships, this paper proposes an adapted version of a three-stage model of mentoring, using three examples of unseen opportunities for mentoring in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) to illustrate how this framework might be operationalized. We discuss how the adapted framework might be useful to SoTL scholars in the future to examine mentorship and how unseen opportunities for mentoring might shape how we consider this subset of mentorship going forward.","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89709094","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-07DOI: 10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.10
Joe Bandy, M. B. Harbin, Amie Thurber
Effectively addressing both cognitive and affective dimensions of learning is one of the greatest obstacles to teaching race and racial justice in higher education. In this article, we first explore the need to integrate attention to cognitive and affective development, along with evidence-based strategies for doing so. We then provide a case study of an undergraduate sociology course on environmental justice in which the instructor intentionally adopted holistic pedagogical principles of teaching race. Analyzing student responses from a pre- and post- course survey, course assignments, and instructor observations of student participation, we find that both white students and students of color experienced significant growth in their cognitive and affective understanding of the complexities of race and work toward racial justice. However, results also show how challenging it can be to create the conditions for productive multiracial dialogues that produce extensive affective development, particularly interpersonal skills of racial reconciliation. Reflecting on the limitations of the case, we conclude that more holistic teaching approaches are necessary to develop both students’ cognitive and affective abilities to navigate race and work against racism, and we make suggestions for faculty development and administrative support.
{"title":"Teaching Race and Racial Justice: Developing Students’ Cognitive and Affective Understanding","authors":"Joe Bandy, M. B. Harbin, Amie Thurber","doi":"10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.10","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.9.1.10","url":null,"abstract":"Effectively addressing both cognitive and affective dimensions of learning is one of the greatest obstacles to teaching race and racial justice in higher education. In this article, we first explore the need to integrate attention to cognitive and affective development, along with evidence-based strategies for doing so. We then provide a case study of an undergraduate sociology course on environmental justice in which the instructor intentionally adopted holistic pedagogical principles of teaching race. Analyzing student responses from a pre- and post- course survey, course assignments, and instructor observations of student participation, we find that both white students and students of color experienced significant growth in their cognitive and affective understanding of the complexities of race and work toward racial justice. However, results also show how challenging it can be to create the conditions for productive multiracial dialogues that produce extensive affective development, particularly interpersonal skills of racial reconciliation. Reflecting on the limitations of the case, we conclude that more holistic teaching approaches are necessary to develop both students’ cognitive and affective abilities to navigate race and work against racism, and we make suggestions for faculty development and administrative support.","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"39 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72587579","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-07DOI: 10.20343/teachlearninqu.9.1.17
Lauren Scharff,Aysha Divan,Phillip Motley
Collaborative research and writing across disciplines and institutions happens frequently in discipline-based research. However, opportunities for cross-collaborative scholarship in teaching and learning is limited in comparison (Kahn et al., 2013; MacKenzie and Myers, 2012). Yet the value of larger scale, team-based approaches to scholarly writing is well recognised in building networks and in providing a deeper understanding of a topic as informed by multi-disciplinary and/or international perspectives (Marquis et al., 2014; 2015; Matthews et al., 2017). It is for these reasons that the International Collaborative Writing Groups (ICWG) program that crystallises around the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) conference is so valuable. ICWGs bring together academics, professional staff, and students to co-author learning and teaching articles on topics of shared interest. The aims are two-fold: 1) to build capacity of participants to work and write with international collaborators, and 2) to contribute meaningful and topical perspectives to the SoTL literature.
跨学科和机构的合作研究和写作经常发生在基于学科的研究中。然而，相比之下，在教学和学习中进行交叉合作的学术机会有限(Kahn et al.， 2013;MacKenzie和Myers, 2012)。然而，更大规模的、基于团队的学术写作方法的价值在建立网络和提供对主题的更深入理解方面得到了广泛认可，这是由多学科和/或国际视角提供的信息(Marquis et al.， 2014;2015;Matthews et al.， 2017)。正是由于这些原因，围绕国际教与学奖学金学会(ISSOTL)会议而形成的国际协作写作小组(ICWG)项目才如此有价值。icwg将学者、专业人员和学生聚集在一起，就共同感兴趣的主题撰写学习和教学文章。目标有两个:1)建立参与者与国际合作者合作和写作的能力，2)为SoTL文献贡献有意义和主题的观点。
{"title":"Foreword: 2019 International Collaborative Writing Groups (ICWGs)","authors":"Lauren Scharff,Aysha Divan,Phillip Motley","doi":"10.20343/teachlearninqu.9.1.17","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.9.1.17","url":null,"abstract":"Collaborative research and writing across disciplines and institutions happens frequently in discipline-based research. However, opportunities for cross-collaborative scholarship in teaching and learning is limited in comparison (Kahn et al., 2013; MacKenzie and Myers, 2012). Yet the value of larger scale, team-based approaches to scholarly writing is well recognised in building networks and in providing a deeper understanding of a topic as informed by multi-disciplinary and/or international perspectives (Marquis et al., 2014; 2015; Matthews et al., 2017). It is for these reasons that the International Collaborative Writing Groups (ICWG) program that crystallises around the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) conference is so valuable. ICWGs bring together academics, professional staff, and students to co-author learning and teaching articles on topics of shared interest. The aims are two-fold: 1) to build capacity of participants to work and write with international collaborators, and 2) to contribute meaningful and topical perspectives to the SoTL literature. ","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"4 3","pages":"258-261"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138507489","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-10-06DOI: 10.20343/teachlearninqu.8.2.5
C. Happel, Xiaomei Song
To determine factors that influence faculty engagement and success in faculty learning communities focused on collaborative Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL), our project gathered information on (1) faculty motivation to engage with SoTL; (2) structures that support collaboration; (3) the perceived impact of SoTL on teaching, scholarship, and faculty engagement in academic communities on campus and beyond; and (4) the role of the teaching center in supporting collaborative faculty learning communities focused on SoTL. In this explanatory, sequential design mixed-methods study, participants were asked to complete a survey on their experience as participants in faculty learning communities at a large comprehensive public university in the southeastern United States; researchers then conducted one-on-one interviews with select participants to gain an in-depth understanding of trends and questions emerging from the survey data. Results indicate that personal, institutional, professional, and team factors contribute to participants’ perception of the success and effectiveness of collaborative research teams. Findings from the study offer guidance for setting up effective collaborative structures for SoTL projects and nurturing inter-disciplinary research among faculty members, thus providing insights that can inform the design and facilitation of similar programs in the United States and internationally.
{"title":"Facilitators and Barriers to Engagement and Effective SoTL Research Collaborations in Faculty Learning Communities","authors":"C. Happel, Xiaomei Song","doi":"10.20343/teachlearninqu.8.2.5","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.8.2.5","url":null,"abstract":"To determine factors that influence faculty engagement and success in faculty learning communities focused on collaborative Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL), our project gathered information on (1) faculty motivation to engage with SoTL; (2) structures that support collaboration; (3) the perceived impact of SoTL on teaching, scholarship, and faculty engagement in academic communities on campus and beyond; and (4) the role of the teaching center in supporting collaborative faculty learning communities focused on SoTL. In this explanatory, sequential design mixed-methods study, participants were asked to complete a survey on their experience as participants in faculty learning communities at a large comprehensive public university in the southeastern United States; researchers then conducted one-on-one interviews with select participants to gain an in-depth understanding of trends and questions emerging from the survey data. Results indicate that personal, institutional, professional, and team factors contribute to participants’ perception of the success and effectiveness of collaborative research teams. Findings from the study offer guidance for setting up effective collaborative structures for SoTL projects and nurturing inter-disciplinary research among faculty members, thus providing insights that can inform the design and facilitation of similar programs in the United States and internationally.","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.0,"publicationDate":"2020-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90215187","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：