The Importance of Making-While-Reading for Undergraduate Readers: An Example of Inductive SoTL
This paper gives an example of an inductive Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) process, adapting Anthony Ciccone’s five conditions of a meaningful SoTL question. Presenting a study on pre-class reading in an undergraduate religion class, I describe how my question went through five life stages. I began with nine different pre-class reading assignments. Students judged the “map” assignment to be most helpful. This led to a further question: why maps? In a close reading of students’ reading reflections, two themes stood out: students experienced maps as helping them create a mental overview of the reading, and maps facilitated greater ownership of the act of reading. In conclusion, I argue that humanities instructors who wish to teach advanced reading skills can start by providing pre-class assignments that allow for making-while-reading, and that this making should not be merged with other reading steps. In an epilogue I reflect on the inductive research process. I suggest that SoTL scholars who use this process may reach an impasse when deciding how to present meaningful answers because their conceptual answers will stand in tension with SoTL’s practical orientation. I propose focusing on conceptual generalization (rather than empirical generalization), while still foregrounding a balance between “what works” and “what is.”
Ambrose, Susan A., Michael W. Bridges, Michele DiPietro, Marsha C. Lovett, and Marie K. Norman. 2010. How Learning Works: Seven Research-based Principles for Smart Teaching. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
Anson, Chris M. 2017. “Writing to Read, Revisited.” In What is College Reading?, edited by Alice S. Horning, Deborah-Lee Gollnitz, and Cynthia R. Haller, 21–39. Louisville, CO: University Press of Colorado.
Berenson, Carol. 2018. “Identifying a Tradition of Inquiry.” In SoTL in Action: Illuminating Critical Moments of Practice, edited by Nancy L. Chick, 45–52. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Chick, Nancy L., Holly Hassel, and Aeron Haynie. 2009. “‘Pressing an Ear against the Hive’: Reading Literature for Complexity.” Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture 9, no. 3: 399–422. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-2009-003.
Ciccone, Anthony. 2018. “Learning Matters: Asking Meaningful Questions.” In SoTL in Action: Illuminating Critical Moments of Practice, edited by Nancy L. Chick, 15–22. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Cisco, Jonathan. 2020. “Embracing Difficulty across the Disciplines: The Difficulty Paper as a Tool for Building Disciplinary Literacy.” Teaching & Learning Inquiry 8, no. 2: 73–89. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.8.2.6.
Corrigan, Paul T. 2013/2014. “Attending to the Act of Reading: Critical Reading, Contemplative Reading, and Active Reading.” Reader: Essays in Reader-Oriented Theory, Criticism, and Pedagogy 65/66: 146–73. https://firescholars.seu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=seu_papers.
Graham, Steve, and Michael Hebert. 2011. “Writing to Read: A Meta-analysis of the Impact of Writing and Writing Instruction on Reading.” Harvard Educational Review 81, no. 4: 710–44. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.81.4.t2k0m13756113566.
Hovland, Ingie. 2019a. “Bringing Reading into the Classroom: Using Active Learning to Practice the Invisible Skill.” International Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education 31, no. 3: 512–23. http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/pdf/IJTLHE3467.pdf.
Hovland, Ingie. 2019b. “From Reading to Thinking: Student Lines of Thought in a Seminar on Christianity and Colonialism.” Teaching Theology & Religion 22, no. 3: 161–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/teth.12491.
Hutchings, Pat. 2000. “Approaching the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.” In Opening Lines: Approaches to the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, edited by Pat Hutchings, 1–10. Menlo Park, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Kandiko, Camille, David Hay, and Saranne Weller. 2013. “Concept Mapping in the Humanities to Facilitate Reflection: Externalizing the Relationship between Public and Personal Learning.” Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 12, no. 1: 70–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474022211399381.
Manarin, Karen. 2012. “Reading Value: Student Choice in Reading Strategies.” Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture 12, no. 2: 281–97. https://doi.org/10.1215/15314200-1503595.
Manarin, Karen. 2016. “Interpreting Undergraduate Research Posters in the Literature Classroom.” Teaching & Learning Inquiry 4, no. 1: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.4.1.8.
Manarin, Karen, Miriam Carey, Melanie Rathburn, and Glen Ryland. 2015. Critical Reading in Higher Education: Academic Goals and Social Engagement. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
McRae, Angela, and John T. Guthrie. 2009. “Promoting Reasons for Reading: Teacher Practices that Impact Motivation.” In Reading More, Reading Better, edited by Elfrieda H. Hiebert, 55–76. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Miller-Young, Janice, and Michelle Yeo. 2015. “Conceptualizing and Communicating SoTL: A Framework for the Field.” Teaching & Learning Inquiry 3, no. 2: 37–53.
Salvatori, Mariolina R., and Patricia Donahue. 2005. The Elements (and Pleasures) of Difficulty. New York, NY: Pearson Longman.
Staudinger, Alison K. 2017. “Reading Deeply for Disciplinary Awareness and Political Judgment.” Teaching & Learning Inquiry 5, no. 1: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.5.1.11.
Timmermans, Julie A. 2010. “Changing Our Minds: The Developmental Potential of Threshold Concepts.” In Threshold Concepts and Transformational Learning, edited by Jan H. F. Meyer, Ray Land, and Caroline Baillie, 3–19. Rotterdam: Sense.
Young, Sue F., and Robert J. Wilson. 2000. Assessment and Learning: The ICE Approach. Winnipeg: Portage & Main Press.
Copyright (c) 2021 Ingie Hovland
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.