SoTL and students’ experiences of their degree-level programs: An empirical investigation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.1.2.75Keywords:
student experience, curriculum, student learningAbstract
In the global higher education sector, government accountability initiatives are increasingly focused on degree-level competencies that may be expected from university graduates. The purpose of this paper was to examine the extent to which SoTL reflects this increased interest in student learning across the degree program. Articles (N=136) published in three international SoTL journals, over the past three years, were systematically reviewed using a framework that concentrated on the extent to which they reflected a focus of (a) teaching-emphasis versus learning-emphasis and (b) unit-level (subject, course) versus degree-/program-level. Our analysis indicated that the majority of SoTL publications (47%) were focused at the level of a single unit with an emphasis on teaching practice; in contrast, only a small minority of SoTL publications (9%) were focused at the level of the overall degree with an emphasis on learning processes. Drawing on our review, we highlight SoTL publications that exemplify the inquiry into student learning at the level of the degree program and offer questions to guide future SoTL inquiries.
Metrics
References
Amundsen, C., & Wilson, M. (2012). Are we asking the right questions?: A conceptual review of the educational development literature in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 82(1), 90–126.
Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). (2002). Greater expectations: A new vision for learning as a nation goes to college. Washington, DC: AAC&U.
Barnett, R., & Coate, K. (2005). Engaging the curriculum in higher education. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.
Barrie, S. C. (2006). Understanding what we mean by the generic attributes of graduates. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education Research, 51(2), 215-241.
Becher, T. (1994). Quality assurance and disciplinary differences. Australian Universities’ Review, 37(1), 4–7.
Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines (2nd ed.). Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for quality learning at university (3rd ed.). Birkshire: McGraw Hill, Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Cerbin, B. (2013). Emphasizing Learning in the scholarship of teaching and learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(1). Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v7n1/invited_essays/PDFs/IE_Cerbin.pdf
Erickson, F., & Shultz, J. (1992). Students’ experience of the curriculum. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 465–485). New York, NY : MacMillan.
Ewan, C. E. (2009). Learning and teaching in Australian universities: A thematic analysis of cycle 1 AUQA audits. Australian Universities Quality Agency and the Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Retrieved from http://www.olt.gov.au/resources/3899text=AUQA&solrsort=score%20desc
Felten, P., Bagg, J., Bumbry, M., Hill, J., Hornsby, K., Pratt, M., & Weller, S. (2013). A call for expanding inclusive student engagement in SoTL. Teaching & Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal, 1(2).
Fraser, S. P., & Bosanquet, A. M. (2006). The curriculum? That’s just a unit outline, isn’t it? Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 269–284.
Gibbs, G. (2010). Dimensions of quality. York: The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/evidence_informed_practice/Dimensions_of_Quality.pdf
Grawe, N. D. (2011). The potential for teaching quantitative reasoning across the curriculum: Empirical evidence. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1). Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v5n1/articles/PDFs/_Grawe.pdf
Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching: Disciplinary spaces. In R. Barnett (Ed.), Reshaping the university: new relationships between research, scholarship and teaching (pp. 30–42). Maidenhead, England: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press.
Healey, M., Cook-Sather, A., Gerum, N, & Yanagida, K. (2012, October). Students as change agents, Keynote Presentation to ISSOTL Annual Conference, Hamilton, ON, Canada. Retrieved from http://issotl12.com/plenary-presenters/
Hubball, H. T., & Gold, N. (2007). The scholarship of curriculum practice and undergraduate program reform: Integrating theory into practice. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 112, 5-14.
Hubball, H.T., Pearson, M., & Clarke, A. (2013). SoTL inquiry in broader curricula and institutional contexts: Theoretical underpinnings and emerging trends. Teaching & Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal, 1(1), 41-57.
Hutchings, P. (2007). Theory: The elephant in the scholarship of teaching and learning room. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(1).
Hutchings, P., Borin, P., Keesing-Styles, L., Martin, L., Michael, R., Scharff, L., Simkins, S., & Ismail. A. (2013). The scholarship of teaching and learning in the age of accountability: Building bridges. Teaching & Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal, 1(2).
Hutchings, P., Huber, M. T., & Ciccone, A. (2011). The scholarship of teaching and learning reconsidered: Institutional integration and impact. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kember, D. (1997). A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics’ conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7(3), 255-75.
Kuh, G. D., & Ewell, P. T. (2010). The state of learning outcomes assessment in the United States. Higher Education Management and Policy, 22(1), 1-20.
Levin, B. (2000). Putting students at the centre in education reform. Journal of Educational Change, 1, 155–172.
Lumina Foundation Degree Qualifications Profile (LFDQP). (2011). Indianapolis, IN: Lumina Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.luminafoundation.org/publications/The_Degree_Qualifications_Profile.pdf
Maki, P. L. (2010). Assessing for learning: Building a sustainable commitment across the institution (2nd ed.). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Matthews, K. E. (2010). The hidden experience: Mathematics in science. Paper presented at the First International Conference of STEM in Education, Brisbane, Australia. Retrieved from http://stem.ed.qut.edu.au/index.php/conference-proceedings.html#h
McKinney, K. (2012). Increasing the impact of SoTL: Two sometimes neglected opportunities. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(1). Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v6n1/invited_essays/PDFs/IE_McKinney.pdf
National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment (NILOA). (2012). Champaign, IL: NILOA. Retrieved from www.learningoutcomeassessment.org/DQPCorner.html
Poole, G., Taylor, L., & Thompson, J. (2007). Using the scholarship of teaching and learning at disciplinary, national and institutional levels to strategically improve the quality of post-secondary education. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(2). Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v1n2/invited_essays/poole/Invited_EssaE_Poole-Taylor-Thompson.pdf
Potter, M. K., & Kustra, E. (2011). The relationship between scholarly teaching and SoTL: Models, distinctions, and clarifications. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1). Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v5n1/essays_about_sotl/PDFs/_PotterKustra.pdf
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to teach in higher education. New York, NY : Routledge.
Reid, A., Taylor, P., & Petocz, P. (2011). Business as usual: Business students’ conceptions of ethics. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1). Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v5n1/articles/PDFs/_ReidTaylorPetocz.pdf
Saljo, R. (1979). Learning in the learner’s perspective:Some common-sense conceptions. In Reports from the Institute of Education. University of Gothenburg.
Sampson, K., & Comer, K. (2011). Engineering research teams: The role of social networks in the formation of research skills for postgraduate students. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1). Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v5n1/articles/PDFs/_SampsonComer.pdf
Scoufis, M. (2013). Have we lost focus on our students’ learning? International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(1). Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v7n1/invited_essays/PDFs/IE_Scoufis.pdf
Tagg, J. (2003). The learning paradigm college. Boston, MA: Anker.
Tuitt, F. (2010). Enhancing visibility in graduate education: Black women’s perceptions of inclusive pedagogical practices. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 22(3), 246–257.
Voluntary System of Accountability Program (VSA). (2011). Retrieved from http://voluntarysystem.org/
Werder, C., & Otis, M. M. (Eds.). (2010). Engaging student voices in the study of teaching and learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Williams, A.L., Verwoord, R., Beery, T.A., Dalton, H., McKinnon, J., Pace, J., Poole, G. and Strickland, K. (2013). The power of social networks: A model for weaving the scholarship of teaching and learning into institutional culture. Teaching & Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal, 1(2).
Yang, M., Webster, B., & Prosser, M. (2011). Exploring the variation in first year undergraduates’ induction into their academic disciplines. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1). Retrieved from http://academics.georgiasouthern.edu/ijsotl/v5n1/articles/PDFs/_YangWebsterProsser.pdf
Yorke, M., & Knight, P. T. (2006). Curricula for economic and social gain. Higher Education: TheInternational Journal of Higher Education Research, 51(4), 565–588.
