合作师生SoTL项目中的作者学分、顺序和共同探究者学习指南

IF 1.7 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal Pub Date : 2017-03-29 DOI:10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.5.1.9
T. Maurer
{"title":"合作师生SoTL项目中的作者学分、顺序和共同探究者学习指南","authors":"T. Maurer","doi":"10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.5.1.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Determining authorship credit and order in collaborative research projects can be difficult, can introduce or increase conflict in the research environment, and can exacerbate existing inequalities and affect power dynamics between team members. As a result, much disciplinary scholarship has been written to develop potential guidelines for authorship credit and order. However, the collaborative interdisciplinary nature of much SoTL work, along with the increasing focus of SoTL on students as co-inquirers into SoTL research, creates unique issues and challenges in ethically assigning authorship credit on SoTL projects. Informed by seminal disciplinary papers on authorship issues and best practices in undergraduate research, this paper proposes a new model to identify the relative contributions of student collaborators and explicitly incorporate a process-focused approach to collaborative faculty-student SoTL projects.","PeriodicalId":44633,"journal":{"name":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","volume":"5 1","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Guidelines for Authorship Credit, Order, and Co-Inquirer Learning in Collaborative Faculty-Student SoTL Projects\",\"authors\":\"T. Maurer\",\"doi\":\"10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.5.1.9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Determining authorship credit and order in collaborative research projects can be difficult, can introduce or increase conflict in the research environment, and can exacerbate existing inequalities and affect power dynamics between team members. As a result, much disciplinary scholarship has been written to develop potential guidelines for authorship credit and order. However, the collaborative interdisciplinary nature of much SoTL work, along with the increasing focus of SoTL on students as co-inquirers into SoTL research, creates unique issues and challenges in ethically assigning authorship credit on SoTL projects. Informed by seminal disciplinary papers on authorship issues and best practices in undergraduate research, this paper proposes a new model to identify the relative contributions of student collaborators and explicitly incorporate a process-focused approach to collaborative faculty-student SoTL projects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44633,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"1-17\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-03-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.5.1.9\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teaching & Learning Inquiry-The ISSOTL Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20343/TEACHLEARNINQU.5.1.9","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: 11

摘要

在合作研究项目中确定作者信用和顺序可能很困难,可能会在研究环境中引入或增加冲突,并可能加剧现有的不平等,影响团队成员之间的权力动态。因此,已经编写了许多学科奖学金,以制定作者信用和秩序的潜在指导方针。然而,许多SoTL工作的跨学科合作性质,加上SoTL越来越关注学生作为SoTL研究的共同询问者,在对SoTL项目进行伦理署名方面产生了独特的问题和挑战。根据关于作者问题和本科生研究最佳实践的开创性学科论文,本文提出了一个新的模型来确定学生合作者的相对贡献,并明确将以过程为中心的方法纳入合作师生的SoTL项目中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Guidelines for Authorship Credit, Order, and Co-Inquirer Learning in Collaborative Faculty-Student SoTL Projects
Determining authorship credit and order in collaborative research projects can be difficult, can introduce or increase conflict in the research environment, and can exacerbate existing inequalities and affect power dynamics between team members. As a result, much disciplinary scholarship has been written to develop potential guidelines for authorship credit and order. However, the collaborative interdisciplinary nature of much SoTL work, along with the increasing focus of SoTL on students as co-inquirers into SoTL research, creates unique issues and challenges in ethically assigning authorship credit on SoTL projects. Informed by seminal disciplinary papers on authorship issues and best practices in undergraduate research, this paper proposes a new model to identify the relative contributions of student collaborators and explicitly incorporate a process-focused approach to collaborative faculty-student SoTL projects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 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