Conceptualizing and communicating SoTL: A framework for the field
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.3.2.37Keywords:
SoTL, field, methodology, learning theory, frameworkAbstract
The emerging field of SoTL is an inherently interdisciplinary endeavor which requires embracing a diverse range of research methods and disciplinary differences in world views. This diversity has caused a lack of coherence in its conceptualization and communication, which can be confusing for new scholars. Ongoing debates in the community concern the use of theory and methodology, as well as definitional questions of what constitutes SoTL and the nature of its purpose. This article offers a framework for conceptualizing the field which attempts to broadly delineate the available learning theories underlying and methodologies appropriate to studying teaching and learning, while intending to be hospitable to a broad range of diverse disciplines. Further, the framework illustrates the tacit links between learning theories and methodologies, serving as a guide to potential approaches to SoTL work. The framework is illustrated with example SoTL studies. It is hoped that the framework will help ground future SoTL investigations in appropriate theories and methodologies, and build interdisciplinary communication and understanding in the “trading zone” that is SoTL.
Metrics
References
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M.W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M.K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Barrow, R. (2006). Empirical research into teaching. Interchange, 37(4), 287-397.
Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. New York, NY: David McKay Company.
Bernstein, D. (2010). Finding your place in the scholarship of teaching and learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 4(2).
Burton, L. (2002). Methodology and methods in mathematics education research: Where is “The Why?” In S. Goodchild & L. English (Eds.), Researching mathematics classrooms: A critical examination of methodology (pp. 1-10). Westport, CT: Praeger.
Carey, M. (2012). In the valley of the giants: Cultivating intentionality and integration. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(1).
Chick, N. (2013) Difference, power and privilege in the scholarship of teaching and learning. In K. McKinney (Ed.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in and across the disciplines (pp. 15-33). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Chick, N. (2014). ‘Methodologically sound’ under the ‘big tent’: An ongoing conversation. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(2).
Chism, N., Douglas, E., & Hilson, W.J. (2010). Qualitative research basics: A guide for engineering educators. http://crlte.engin.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2013/06/Chism-Douglas-Hilson-Qualitative-Research-Basics-A-Guide-for-Engineering-Educators.pdf
Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.) (2013). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dickson, K.L., & Treml, M.M. (2013). Using assessment and SoTL to enhance student learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2013(136), 7-16.
Easton, L., & Hewson, K. (2010). Reflections on the interplay of race, whiteness and Canadian identity in a film studies classroom. Reception: texts, readers, audiences, history, 2, 116-148.
Ellsworth, E. (1997). Teaching positions: Difference, pedagogy and the power of address. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Felten, P. (2013). Principles of good practice in SoTL. Teaching & Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal, 1(1), 121-125.
Daniels, L. (Producer) & Forster, M. (Director). (2001). Monster’s Ball. United States: Lee Daniels Entertainment.
Glassick, C.E., Huber, M.T., & Maeroff, G.I. (1997). Scholarship assessed: Evaluation of the professoriate. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass Inc.
Grauerholz, L., & Main, E. (2013). Fallacies of SoTL: Rethinking how we conduct our research, In K. McKinney (Ed.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in and across the disciplines (pp. 152-168). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Gurung, A.R., & Wilson, J.H. (2013). Doing the scholarship of teaching and learning: Measuring systematic changes to teaching and improvements in learning. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 2013(136).
Gurung, A.R., & Schwartz, B.M. (2013). Contributions from psychology: Heuristics for interdisciplinary advancement of SoTL. In K. McKinney (Ed.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in and across the disciplines (pp. 34-53). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Helberg, N., Heyes, C., & Rohel, J. (2009). Thinking through the body: Yoga, philosophy, and physical education. Teaching Philosophy, 32(3), 263-284.
Hubball, H., & Clarke, A. (2010). Diverse methodological approaches and considerations for SoTL in higher education. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(1).
Hutchings, P. (2000). Approaching the scholarship of teaching and learning. In P. Hutchings (Ed.), Opening lines: Approaches to the scholarship of teaching and learning (pp. 1-10). Menlo Park, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Kanuka, H. (2011). Keeping the scholarship in the scholarship of teaching and learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1).
Kilk, J. & Lee, S. (Producers); & Lee, S. (Director). (2000) Bamboozled [Motion Picture]. United States: 40 Acres and a Mule Filmworks.
Kreber, C. (2013). Empowering the scholarship of teaching: An Arendtian and critical perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 38(6), 857-869.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral articipation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Leamson, R. (1999). Thinking about teaching and learning: Developing habits of learning with first year college and university students. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Leder, D. (1990). The Absent body. Chicgo: University of Chicago Press.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
MacMillan, M. (2014). Student connections with academic texts: A phenomenographic study of reading. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(8), 943-954.
Manarin, K. (2012). Reading value: Student choice in reading strategies. Pedagogy, 12(2), 281-297.
Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and personality (2nd Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
McGrath, A. (2014). Just checking in: The effect of an office hour meeting and learning reflection in an introductory statistics course. Teaching of Psychology, 41(1), 83-87.
McKinney, K. (2013). Introduction to SoTL in and across the disciplines. In K. McKinney (Ed.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in and across the disciplines (pp. 1-11). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Middendorf, J., & Pace, D. (2004). Decoding the disciplines: A model for helping students learn disciplinary ways of thinking. New Directions in Teaching and Learning, 98, pp. 1-12.
Miller-Young, J.E. (2013). Calculations and expectations: How engineering students describe three-dimensional forces. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 4(1).
Naested, I., Potvin, B., & Waldron, P. (2004). Understanding the landscape of teaching. Toronto Canada: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Nelson, C. (2003). Doing it: Examples of several of the different genres of the scholarship of teaching and learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 14(2).
Poole, G. (2013a). Controversies, debates, and tensions in SoTL. Retrieved from http://www.issotl13.com
Poole, G. (2013b). Square one: What is research? In K. McKinney (Ed.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in and across the disciplines (pp. 135-151). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Seitz, D. (2004). Who can afford critical consciousness?: Practicing a pedagogy of humility. Creskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Streveler, R.A., Litzinger, T.A., Miller, R.L., & Steif, P.S. (2008). Learning conceptual knowledge in the engineering sciences: Overview and future research directions. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 279-294.
Zull, J.E. (2002). The art of changing the brain: Enriching the practice of teaching by exploring the biology of learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
