1. The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) And Variations
Karl A. Smith
University of Minnesota

2. Participant Survey Published articles on teaching & learning?
Subscribe to teaching journals?
Read/skim teaching journals?
Attended teaching conferences/workshops?
Other activity in scholarship of teaching and learning?

3. Agenda What is SoTL? Characteristics of SoTL
Difference between SoTL & scholarly teaching
Why do it?
How to do it
Organizational challenges

4. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate Ernest L
Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate Ernest L. Boyer
Scholarship of Discovery, research that increases storehouse of new knowledge within disciplines;
Scholarship of Integration, efforts by faculty to explore connectedness of knowledge within and across disciplines, brining new insights to original research;
Scholarship of Application, leads faculty to explore how knowledge can be applied to consequential problems in service to community and society; and
Scholarship of Teaching, views teaching not as a routine task, but as perhaps highest form of scholarly enterprise, involving constant interplay of teaching and learning.

5. What is SoTL?
“The systematic reflection on teaching and learning made public”—Illinois State University

6. SoTL IS: public peer-reviewed and critiqued
exchanged with other members of our professional communities (Pat Hutchings and Lee Shulman of the Carnegie Foundation)

7. Scholarly Teaching and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning*
Scholarly teaching: The instructor
is aware of modern pedagogical developments and incorporates them in his/her teaching where appropriate
reflects on, assesses, and attempts to improve his/her teaching (classroom research)
Scholarship of teaching and learning: Research, publication, possibly grants on work related to education
*Shulman & Hutchings

9. Basic Features of Professional and Scholarly Work
It requires a high level of discipline-related expertise
It is conducted in a scholarly manner with clear goals, adequate preparation, and appropriate methodology
The work and its results are appropriately and effectively documented and disseminated. This reporting should include a reflective critique that addresses the significance of the work, the process that was used, and what was learned.
It has significance beyond the individual context.
It breaks new ground or is innovative.
It can be replicated or elaborated on.
The work both process and product or result is reviewed and judged to be meritorious and significant by a panel of ones peers.
Diamond, R., “The Mission-Driven Faculty Reward System,” in R.M. Diamond, Ed., Field Guide to Academic Leadership, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002

10. Guiding Principles for Scientific Research in Education
Question: pose significant question that can be investigated empirically
Theory: link research to relevant theory
Methods: use methods that permit direct investigation of the question
Reasoning: provide coherent, explicit chain of reasoning
Replicate and generalize across studies
Disclose research to encourage professional scrutiny and critique
Purposes: Exploration, description, explanation
National Research Council, 2002

11. Use (Applied) Understanding (Basic) Research Inspired By: No Yes
Pure basic research (Bohr)
Use-inspired basic research (Pasteur)
Pure applied research (Edison)
Understanding (Basic)
LL to KS: From the layout, I am not clear on where “CAEE Approach” lies in the matrix. It looks like a cross-over between Bohr and Pasteur (nice references, not sure I understand …). It is my own interpretation that CAEE is 100% Pasteur and/or a cross over to Edison in that all our empirical research is field research. In any case, perhaps the cells can change color when you bring in CAEE’s approach.
Stokes, Donald Pasteur’s quadrant: Basic science and technological innovation. Wash, D.C., Brookings.

12. Why do SoTL?
Fosters significant, long-lasting learning for all students
Enhances practice and profession of teaching
Brings faculty’s work as teachers into the scholarly realm.
CASTL project purposes

13. Types of Questions
Instructional Knowledge—components of instructional design
Pedagogical Knowledge—student learning & how to facilitate it
Curricular Knowledge—goals, purposes & rationales for courses or programs

14. 3 types of reflection within each form of knowledge
Content—What should I do…
Process—How did I do…
Premise—Why does it matter…

15. Examples for process reflection:
How did I (we) do at:
Course design, methods & assessing effectively? (instructional)
Facilitating student knowledge? Was I successful? (pedagogical)
Arriving at goals & rationale for courses? (curricular)

16. How to do it?
Question: pose significant question that can be investigated empirically
Theory: link research to relevant theory
Methods: use methods that permit direct investigation of the question
Reasoning: provide coherent, explicit chain of reasoning
Replicate and generalize across studies
Disclose research to encourage professional scrutiny and critique
Purposes: Exploration, description, explanation
National Research Council, 2002

17. Research Thrust Areas
Define bodies-of-knowledge required for disciplinary practice and use of discipline study for other careers.
Develop strategies that value diversity in the formulation and solution of disciplinary problems.
Develop cost-effective and time-efficient strategies and technologies for
Improving student learning, and
Enhancing the instructional effectiveness of current and future faculty.
Develop assessments of student learning and instructional effectiveness.

18. Organizational Opportunities & Challenges
Work collaboratively within departments
Provide faculty leaves of absence, fellowships, & sabbaticals
Establish departmental reading circles
Provide base workshops on educational theory & practice
Change emphases within disciplines

19. Think-Pair-Share
Are you interested in developing a SoTL project? Why-why not?
If yes, what question(s) would you explore?
What organizational challenges do you face?

20. Boyer, Ernest L Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities for the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Diamond, R., “The Mission-Driven Faculty Reward System,” in R.M. Diamond, Ed., Field Guide to Academic Leadership, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002
Diamond R. & Adam, B Recognizing faculty work: Reward systems for the year San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
National Research Council Scientific research in education. Committee on Scientific Principles in Education. Shavelson, R.J., and Towne, L., Editors. Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Shulman, Lee S Taking learning seriously. Change, 31 (4),
Wankat, P.C., Felder, R.M., Smith, K.A. and Oreovicz, F The scholarship of teaching and learning in engineering. In Huber, M.T & Morreale, S. (Eds.), Disciplinary styles in the scholarship of teaching and learning: A conversation. Also presented at American Association for Higher Education Faculty Roles & Rewards Conference, February, 2001.