Conflicts and configurations in a liminal space: SoTL scholars’ identity development
Keywords:academic identity, Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL), liminality, troublesome knowledge
Although academic identity has received attention in the literature, there have been few attempts to understand the influence on identity from engagement with the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL). In this aper, we (a group of eight scholars from five different countries) describe how our interactions with SoTL have impacted the shaping of our academic identities. We have struggled to define the value, purpose, outcomes, and meanings of being a disciplined SoTL scholar, sometimes in addition to and sometimes in opposition to being a disciplinary scholar. Through analysis of our own 100-word reflective narratives, we identify common conflicts and configurations around our experiences of developing a SoTL identity. We describe how navigating among conflicting identities can lead us into a troublesome but deeply reflective liminal space, prompting profound realizations and the reconstruction of academic identity. Drawing on this notion of liminality helps us to understand our journeys as moving through a necessary and important transformational landscape, and allows us to suggest ways to support those engaging with SoTL to develop an integrative SoTL identity.
Åkerlind, G. (2005). Academic growth and development: How do university academics experience it? Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 50(1), 1-32.
Bath, D., & Smith, C. (2004). Academic developers: An academic tribe claiming their territory in higher education. International Journal for Academic Development, 9(1), 9-27.
Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1999). Creating contexts for learning and self-authorship. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Buckingham, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education and the Open University Press.
Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. New York, NY : The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Brew, A. (2008). Disciplinary and interdisciplinary affiliations of experienced researchers. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 56, 423-438.
Brookfield, S. D. (1990) The skillful teacher: On technique, trust, and responsiveness in the classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Clegg, S. (2008). Academic identities under threat? British Educational Research Journal: Journal of the British Education Research Association, 34(3), 329-345.
Coppola, B. P. (2011). Making your case: Ten questions for departments and individuals building an argument for work in discipline-centered education. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1).
Fanghanel, J., & Trowler, P. (2008). Exploring academic identities and practices in a competitive enhancement context: A UK-based case study. The European Journal of Education: Research, Development and Policy, 43(3), 301-313.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Hawthorne, NY : Aldine.
Healey, M. (2000). Developing the scholarship of teaching in higher education: A discipline-based approach. Higher Education Research & Development: Journal of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia, 19(2), 169-189.
Healey, M. (2003). The scholarship of teaching: Issues around an evolving concept. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 14(1/2), 5-26.
Huber, M. T. (2005). Balancing acts: The scholarship of teaching and learning in academic careers. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Huber, M. T., & Morreale, S. (Eds.). (2002). Disciplinary styles in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Menlo Park, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Janke, E. M., & Colbeck, C. L. (2008). Lost in translation: Learning professional roles through the situated curriculum. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 113, 57-68.
Jawitz, J. (2007). New academics negotiating communities of practice: Learning to swim with the big fish. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(2), 187-197.
Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kelly, N., Nesbit, S., & Oliver, C. (2012). A difficult journey: Transitioning from STEM to SOTL. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(1).
Land, R. (2001). Agency, context and change in academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 6(1), 4-20.
Land, R., Cousin, G., Meyer, J. H. F., & Davies, P. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (3): Implications for course design and evaluation. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving student learning diversity and inclusivity (pp. 412-424). Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Little, D., & Green, D. A. (2012). Betwixt and between: Academic developers in the margins. International Journal for Academic Development, 17(3), 203-215.
Meyer, J. H. F., & Land, R. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framework for teaching and learning. Higher Education:The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 49, 373-388.
Neuman, W.L. (1997). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Oliver, C., Nesbit, S., & Kelly, N. (2013). Dissolving dualisms: How two positivists engaged with non-positivist qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 12, 180-194.
Perkins, D. (1999). The many faces of constructivism. Educational Leadership, 57(3), 6-11.
Savin-Baden, M. (2012). Disjunction as a form of troublesome knowledge in problem-based learning. In J. H. F. Meyer, & R. Land (Eds.), Overcoming barriers to student understanding: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge. (pp. 160-172). New York, NY : Routledge.
Simmons, N. (2011). Caught with their constructs down? New academics’ development as teachers. International Journal for Academic Development, 16(3), 229-241.
Tajfel, H. (Ed.). (2010). Social identity and intergroup relations (2nd ed., vol. 7). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole.
Tremonte, C. M. (2011). Window shopping: Fashioning a scholarship of interdisciplinary teaching and learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1), 1-10.
Trowler, P., & Knight, P. T. (2000). Coming to know in higher education: Theorising faculty entry to new work contexts. Higher Education Research & Development: Journal of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia, 19(1), 27-42.
Weimer, M. (2006). Enhancing scholarly work on teaching and learning: Professional literature that makes a difference. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.