Search

Citing is a political act. It is a practice that can work both sides of the same coin: it can give voice, and it can silence. Through this research, we call for those contributing to the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) to attend to this duality explicitly and intentionally. In this multidisciplinary field, SoTL knowledge-producers bring the citation norms of their home disciplines, a habit that calls for interrogation and negotiation of the citation practices used in this shared space. The aim of our study was to gather data about how citation is practiced within the SoTL community: who we cite, how we cite, and what values, priorities, and politics are conveyed in these practices. We were also interested in whether any self-selected categories of identity (e.g., gender, career stage) related to self-described citation practices and priorities. Findings suggest several statistically significant relationships did emerge, which we identify as important avenues for further research and writing. We conclude with 10 principles of citation practices in SoTL.

Today, close to 300 graduate-level higher education and student affairs (HESA) programs exist nationally, and the Council for the Advancement of Standards (CAS) recommends studying the historical context of higher education as part of the curriculum. The strong social justice emphasis within HESA programs offers a valuable hook for introducing the complexities of the past and the craft of the historian. Research on the history of higher education has expanded in the last decade and is beginning to reshape the field, including current explorations of the relationship between institutions of higher education, slavery, and racism. For this study, the authors surveyed HESA programs nationally to understand the current landscape of history of higher education courses and conducted follow-up interviews with twenty-eight faculty. Drawing upon this rich data, this article examines the ways in which history of higher education instructors worked through the lens of social justice to make history relevant for graduate students outside of the discipline of history and to foster an appreciation of history as an iterative process involving analysis, evaluation, and interpretation of past events.

In a classic 2010 article, Craig Nelson critiques his own previously held "dysfunctional illusions of rigor" that for years had constrained his teaching. He demonstrates that certain "rigorous" pedagogical practices disadvantage rather than support learners, and he argues for an expansion of what counts as legitimate pedagogical approaches. We evoke Nelson's assertions to make a parallel argument regarding the traditional conventions of academic discourse. While formal scholarly writing may be well suited to capturing some of the outcomes of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL), these genres can also be exclusive; inadequate to the task of conveying the complex, incomplete, and messy aspects of the work; and neither interesting nor accessible to those who are not required to produce or to read publications focused on the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. We propose that reflective writing be legitimated as a form of writing for SoTL, and we use examples from a growing body of reflective writing about pedagogical partnership to illustrate our points. Echoing Nelson, we offer four reasons for this expansion of legitimacy: (1) the process of reflection is an essential component of learning; (2) reflective writing captures the complexity of learning; (3) reflection is an accessible form of writing for both new and experienced SoTL authors; and (4) reflective writing is accessible to a wide range of readers. We conclude by emphasizing the potential of including reflective writing among those modes of analysis valued in SoTL to expand what counts as rigor in the construction and representation of knowledge about teaching and learning.

Peer tutoring in undergraduate education can provide many benefits to students and instructors. However, the roles and responsibilities of peer tutors can be complex and varied, even within a single program. In particular, navigating between students and faculty can challenge peer tutors' sense of purpose and role clarity. In order to bring the voices of peer tutors themselves into the scholarly conversation about peer tutoring in higher education, this article provides a case study of a peer tutoring program at a small, private, primarily undergraduate institution. We find that professor-student relationships, role clarity and expectations, and tutor positionality are significant themes in peer tutors' understanding of, and satisfaction with, their tutoring experiences.

Academic developers play a key role in advancing instructor engagement in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) at their higher education institutions, but face structural and epistemological isolation. To leverage the knowledge and experience of developers leading SoTL efforts at their respective institutions, a group of academic developers co-created a regional community of practice (CoP) centered on developing evidence-based strategic plans and programming models to advance SoTL at their. We describe the development and outcomes of this regional CoP. Future directions for the use of such a regional CoP model to collaboratively develop cross-institutional offerings are also discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Linguistic, literary, and feminist studies define translation as a process of rendering a new version of an original with attention to context, power, and purpose. Processes of translation in the context of student-faculty co-inquiry in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning offer examples of how this re-rendering can play out in the realm of academic development. In this article, translation serves as a conceptual framework that allows us to bring a fresh interpretation to the collaborative work of participants in a student-faculty pedagogical partnership program based at two colleges in the mid-Atlantic United States. We argue that faculty members and student consultants who participate in this program engage in processes of translation that lead to transformed perceptions of classroom engagement, transformed terms for naming pedagogical practices, and, more metaphorically, transformed selves. Drawing on data from an ongoing action research study of this program and on articles and essays we and other participants in the program have published, we use a form of narrative analysis as it intersects with the conceptual framework offered by translation to illustrate how, through their collaboration, faculty and students engage in never-finished processes of change that enable mental perceptions, linguistic terms, and human selves to be newly comprehended, communicated, and expressed. We touch upon what is lost in translation as well and the necessity of ongoing efforts to make meaning through collaborative explorations, analyses, and re-renderings. Finally, we provide examples of how the changes participants experience and effect endure beyond the time of partnership and in other realms of their lives. [This article contains a student response by Hannah Silvers.]

Student-staff pedagogical partnership is a rapidly expanding practice documented by a growing body of scholarship. That scholarship includes a wide range of empirical examples of what students and staff experience through pedagogical partnership, an emerging set of theoretical frameworks for analysing those experiences, and practical guidelines to support participant engagement in this work. Many publications have focused on identifying the possibilities and the challenges of pedagogical partnership and on developing premises and approaches that can create common ground on which to build such countercultural collaborative efforts. In this discussion, we provide an overview of that scholarship to situate our findings from a study focused on what happens when staff and student partners might find common ground for collaboration but nevertheless disagree about basic pedagogical questions. Using a narrative analysis approach, we examined qualitative data gathered through an ethics-board-approved survey that asked about pedagogical disagreements in classroom-focused pedagogical partnership as experienced by students and academic staff at 16 colleges and universities across Canada, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Our findings suggest that when pedagogical disagreements arise, they can help clarify perspectives and pedagogical commitments, and when they do not arise, it may be due to the receptive and responsive stance students and staff take within their partnerships. These findings are important for the ways they normalise disagreement as a productive aspect of pedagogical partnership. They also point to opportunities for further research into how all staff and students might consider managing differences of perspective and disagreements.

As calls for student-staff partnership proliferate across higher education, academic development must re-examine and reimagine its relationship to students. Students generally occupy roles with limited agency in academic development. We argue that this needs to change. We propose re-articulating the purpose of academic development toward the creation of conditions that liberate everyone involved in teaching and learning in higher education. We offer four vignettes that illustrate what is possible when students have the opportunity to embrace their essential roles. We conclude by reflecting on the human implications of student agency in academic development and higher education more broadly.

In this chapter, the authors describe the theory of change behind a regional cross‐institutional community of practice (CoP) for educational developers seeking to strengthen their institution's SoTL culture and increase faculty SoTL production by providing institution‐level support initiatives and programming. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As centers for teaching and learning increasingly offer support and leadership for the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) at their institutions, educational developers need better tools to plan their SoTL programming. This article shares the work of a regional network of educational developers across six institutions in Virginia, who aimed to enhance SoTL offerings within and across their institutions. While SoTL tools and models for individual instructors proliferate, this community of practice noted a gap in support for developers doing more institution-level planning. Through their collaboration, they developed two tools for planning and launching institution-level SoTL programs: the SoTL Strategic Planning Worksheet and the SoTL Program Taxonomy. This article describes the development of these tools and assesses their implications for educational development practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study which examined the impact of an authentic digital assessment on student engagement with the history of higher education in the U.S. Topics include the number of Higher Education and Student Affairs (HESA) programs in the U.S. that included a course on the history of higher education, the importance of an authentic learning assessment in history education, and the indicators of engagement of students who participated in the study such as hard work.

This article explores how mapping patterns of student participation in classroom discussion can both illuminate and complicate the dynamic relationships among identity, physical position in the classroom, student engagement, and course content. It draws on the perspectives of an undergraduate in the role of pedagogical consultant, a faculty member who worked in partnership with that student, and the coordinator of the program through which this collaborative exploration unfolded. The authors provide multiple angles of vision on the impetus behind, approach to, results of, and interdisciplinary possibilities of mapping classrooms and offer recommendations and cautions regarding the use of mapping.

Citing is a political act. It is a practice that can work both sides of the same coin: it can give voice, and it can silence. Through this research, we call for those contributing to the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) to attend to this duality explicitly and intentionally. In this multidisciplinary field, SoTL knowledge-producers bring the citation norms of their home disciplines, a habit that calls for interrogation and negotiation of the citation practices used in this shared space. The aim of our study was to gather data about how citation is practiced within the SoTL community: who we cite, how we cite, and what values, priorities, and politics are conveyed in these practices. We were also interested in whether any self-selected categories of identity (e.g., gender, career stage) related to selfdescribed citation practices and priorities. Findings suggest several statistically significant relationships did emerge, which we identify as important avenues for further research and writing. We conclude with 10 principles of citation practices in SoTL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Student-staff pedagogical partnership is a rapidly expanding practice documented by a growing body of scholarship. That scholarship includes a wide range of empirical examples of what students and staff experience through pedagogical partnership, an emerging set of theoretical frameworks for analysing those experiences, and practical guidelines to support participant engagement in this work. Many publications have focused on identifying the possibilities and the challenges of pedagogical partnership and on developing premises and approaches that can create common ground on which to build such countercultural collaborative efforts. In this discussion, we provide an overview of that scholarship to situate our findings from a study focused on what happens when staff and student partners might find common ground for collaboration but nevertheless disagree about basic pedagogical questions. Using a narrative analysis approach, we examined qualitative data gathered through an ethics-board-approved survey that asked about pedagogical disagreements in classroom-focused pedagogical partnership as experienced by students and academic staff at 16 colleges and universities across Canada, Hong Kong, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Our findings suggest that when pedagogical disagreements arise, they can help clarify perspectives and pedagogical commitments, and when they do not arise, it may be due to the receptive and responsive stance students and staff take within their partnerships. These findings are important for the ways they normalise disagreement as a productive aspect of pedagogical partnership. They also point to opportunities for further research into how all staff and students might consider managing differences of perspective and disagreements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In a classic 2010 article, Craig Nelson critiques his own previously held "dysfunctional illusions of rigor" that for years had constrained his teaching. He demonstrates that certain "rigorous" pedagogical practices disadvantage rather than support learners, and he argues for an expansion of what counts as legitimate pedagogical approaches. We evoke Nelson's assertions to make a parallel argument regarding the traditional conventions of academic discourse. While formal scholarly writing may be well suited to capturing some of the outcomes of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL), these genres can also be exclusive; inadequate to the task of conveying the complex, incomplete, and messy aspects of the work; and neither interesting nor accessible to those who are not required to produce or to read publications focused on the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. We propose that reflective writing be legitimated as a form of writing for SoTL, and we use examples from a growing body of reflective writing about pedagogical partnership to illustrate our points. Echoing Nelson, we offer four reasons for this expansion of legitimacy: (1) the process of reflection is an essential component of learning; (2) reflective writing captures the complexity of learning; (3) reflection is an accessible form of writing for both new and experienced SoTL authors; and (4) reflective writing is accessible to a wide range of readers. We conclude by emphasizing the potential of including reflective writing among those modes of analysis valued in SoTL to expand what counts as rigor in the construction and representation of knowledge about teaching and learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As calls for student-staff partnership proliferate across higher education, academic development must re-examine and reimagine its relationship to students. Students generally occupy roles with limited agency in academic development. We argue that this needs to change. We propose re-articulating the purpose of academic development toward the creation of conditions that liberate everyone involved in teaching and learning in higher education. We offer four vignettes that illustrate what is possible when students have the opportunity to embrace their essential roles. We conclude by reflecting on the human implications of student agency in academic development and higher education more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peer tutoring in undergraduate education can provide many benefits to students and instructors. However, the roles and responsibilities of peer tutors can be complex and varied, even within a single program. In particular, navigating between students and faculty can challenge peer tutors' sense of purpose and role clarity. In order to bring the voices of peer tutors themselves into the scholarly conversation about peer tutoring in higher education, this article provides a case study of a peer tutoring program at a small, private, primarily undergraduate institution. We find that professorstudent relationships, role clarity and expectations, and tutor positionality are significant themes in peer tutors' understanding of, and satisfaction with, their tutoring experiences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Linguistic, literary, and feminist studies define translation as a process of rendering a new version of an original with attention to context, power, and purpose. Processes of translation in the context of student-faculty co-inquiry in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning offer examples of how this re-rendering can play out in the realm of academic development. In this article, translation serves as a conceptual framework that allows us to bring a fresh interpretation to the collaborative work of participants in a student-faculty pedagogical partnership program based at two colleges in the mid-Atlantic United States. We argue that faculty members and student consultants who participate in this program engage in processes of translation that lead to transformed perceptions of classroom engagement, transformed terms for naming pedagogical practices, and, more metaphorically, transformed selves. Drawing on data from an ongoing action research study of this program and on articles and essays we and other participants in the program have published, we use a form of narrative analysis as it intersects with the conceptual framework offered by translation to illustrate how, through their collaboration, faculty and students engage in never-finished processes of change that enable mental perceptions, linguistic terms, and human selves to be newly comprehended, communicated, and expressed. We touch upon what is lost in translation as well and the necessity of ongoing efforts to make meaning through collaborative explorations, analyses, and re-renderings. Finally, we provide examples of how the changes participants experience and effect endure beyond the time of partnership and in other realms of their lives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the ways in which history of higher education (HE) instructors worked through the lens of social justice to make history relevant for graduate students outside of the history discipline using data from a survey of HE and student affairs (HESA) programs in the U.S. Topics include the number of HESA programs in the U.S., the importance of the strong social justice emphasis within HESA programs to HE history, and the principles of social justice education (SJE) pedagogy.