Faculty learning processes: A model for moving from scholarly teaching to the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.1.1.81Keywords:
faulty learning, faculty development, scholarly teaching, student learningAbstract
This essay explores the development and conceptual validation of the Faculty Processing Model for SoTL through anecdotal reports gathered from six institutions and additional survey data collected from three institutions. The results identified how faculty learning occurred through faculty development activities across various campuses and how that faculty learning cumulatively represented distinctive developmental stages that led to both cognitive and affective transformations for the professors’ and their students’ learning. This analysis provided a first step in understanding the efficacy of faculty development activities in relation to their impact on student and faculty learning and upon practicing the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
References
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L. & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How People Learn. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
Cottrell, S. A., & Jones, E. A. (2003). Researching the scholarship of teaching and learning: An analysis of current curriculum practices. Innovative Higher Education, 27(3), 169-181.
Freezel, J., & Welch, S. A. (2000). What is new and different about the Scholarship of Teaching. Journal of Association for Communication, 29, 250-256.
Gayle, B., Randall, N., & Langley, L. (2007, October). Faculty development for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Impact on student learning. Paper presented at the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning conference, Sydney, Australia.
Gayle, B., Randall, N., & Langley, L. (2010, October). Student learning enhanced through faculty learning: Translating faculty development into measurable student learning outcomes. Paper presented at the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning conference, Liverpool, UK
Hoessler, C., Britnelll, J., & Stockley, D. (2010). Assessing the impact of educational development through the lens of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 122, 81-89.
Hubball, H. T., & Burt, H. (2006). The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Theory, practice, integration in a faculty certificate program. Innovative Higher Education, 30(5), 327-344.24
Kreber, C., & Cranton, P. A., (2000). Exploring the Scholarship of Teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 71(4). 476-495.
Lawler, P. A. (2003).Teachers as adult learners: A new perspective. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 98, 15-22.
Ocha, A. (2011). The Scholarship of Teaching: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. The Journal of the Professoriate, 6(1),100-116.
Randall, N. 2004. Navigating the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. In B. Cambridge (Ed.), Campus Progress: Supporting the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (pp.181-185). Washington, DC: AAHE.
Randall, N., Gayle, B., Wolffe, R., & Kiser, L. (2004, October). Fanning the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Effective and innovative faculty development. Paper presented at the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning conference, Bloomington, IN.
Shulman, Lee S. (2002, November/December). Making differences: A Table of Learning. Change, 34(6). 36-44.
University of Portland, (2003). Statement on scholarly teaching. Accessed 16 October 2010 at http://www.up.edu/tl/default.aspx?cid=5545&pid=119
Wang, X., & Hurley, S. (2012). Assessment as a scholarly activity: Faculty perceptions of and willingness to engage in student learning assessment. The Journal of General Education, 61(1), 1-15.
Weston, C. & McAlpine, L. (2001). Making explicit the development towards the scholarship of teaching. In C. Kreber (Ed.), Scholarship Revisited: Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching (pp. 88-97). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
