Search

This article offers narratives of individual journeys through the scholarship of leading in three different contexts--Asia, Europe, and Africa. Together, these narratives argue for the need to make explicit the diversity of practices of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL), with each practice inextricably tied to specific geographical, sociocultural, and political contexts. In offering these contextual specificities, we call on all who engage in SoTL to exercise reflexivity in thought, language, and action--to actively foreground our mental models and assumptions about SoTL and what it looks like for ourselves and for others; to sensitively engage scholars who do not share our context; and to strive toward an inclusive mindset and practice that will situate all of us within the "international" of an international organization. We highlight the problems of language, meaning, and translation; and the challenge scholars from "different shores" face in engaging with "other" shores.

While educational research and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) are overlapping fields, over time there has appeared considerable friction between the two. There are claims that educational research has been tainted by SoTL's emergence and that those engaged in SoTL lack adequate training. They maintain that those engaged in SoTL would benefit from a better understanding of educational research theories and methods. Some engaged in SoTL perceive educational research as too distanced from practice. What underpins these perceived differences between the two fields? How might this friction be explained? The study described in this article explored empirical, interview-based viewpoints from new and experienced educational researchers and SoTL scholars, respectively. Participants were purposefully drawn from attendees at two European conferences specializing in educational research and SoTL. The data was examined using thematic analysis and focused mainly on the perceived differences between these communities. The central themes that emerged where differences occurred are community membership and governance, scope and purpose of inquiry, and intended recipients of inquiry results. Some differences include what and who determines the value of the contribution to the field and why it is valuable. This article provides an empirically based understanding of the relative attributes of both communities. We hope that it leads to future discussions about further developing fruitful and constructive interrelationships.

This research investigated social interactions within small significant networks across a range of higher education settings to determine their role in supporting improvements to assessment. Thirty-four academic staff from three higher education settings (Australia, Canada and Sweden) provided assessment change examples and drew network diagrams to explain their interactions. Significant social interactions were defined as engaged exchanges between people who trust and respect each other, around topics that hold common value. They led to an emotional response, promoted reflection and resulted in action and/or a shift in thinking. Significant social interactions were demonstrated to be effective in supporting changes in assessment practices. The qualitative findings were supplemented with quantitative investigation of the relational ties within the networks. The most significant relational ties related to changes in the assessment were the value of the interactions (d = 0.64) and the similarity between individuals (d = 0.50). Authors recommend that leaders in higher education heed lessons learned about how value was generated within networks and utilized for improvement activities. It is suggested that the following positive change-oriented behaviours be developed and actively encouraged: Building of diverse networks; appreciating reciprocity; forging trust; creation of time and space for significant social interactions; and external recognition of the shift toward quality assessment practices. This study builds on existing literature for improving teaching and assessment in higher education, and particularly highlights the benefits of informal academic networks and the potential for significant interactions as a mechanism for change toward a quality agenda.

A series of worldwide projects concerning assessment, student outcomes and quality in higher education has revealed the need for a change in how higher education institutions assess student outcomes; however, many academics remain unconvinced. The success of assessment change arguably depends on the assessment culture within the institution. This qualitative investigation of assessment cultures draws on the perspectives of 35 academics from Australia, Canada and Sweden. Data were analysed through a socio-cultural lens, with results supporting assessment cultures related to institutional structures and collegial relationships. The results also suggest the existence of assessment microcultures embedded in disciplines. This study provides concurrent validity to previous studies of assessment cultures, evidenced from institutional leadership perspectives, through the analysis of academic practitioners' viewpoints. Synthesis of findings observed that a combination of agency for change and policy levers effectively stimulated change. Included are suggestions to address the perceived barriers of entrenched disciplinary practices, institutional systems and logistical constraints. There is limited empirical research on the impact of assessment culture on assessment practices; this study addresses this shortcoming and provides a new aspect to add to the literature on assessment cultures in higher education.

This text discusses the professional development of academic developers. It is based on the authors' reflections and observations in the context of a semi-formal programme, "Strategic Academic Development," held for academic developers in different regions of the world. Most recently the programme participants were academic developers in Singapore. In this text, we as authors share what we notice as similar traits and common patterns across contexts when academic developers develop professionally and their 'lifeworld' changes. Five dimensions are highlighted: expanding horizons; widening orientations; intensified focus on 'the others'; using and/or producing research; and finally, the frames within which academic developers work.

This text taps into an ongoing discussion about academic development. It challenges an image of academic development as precarious and liminal and explores academic development as powerful. Sources of power are described and put into the context of values, ideologies, and policies governing higher education of today. It is our hope that readers will be inspired to problematise their own academic development practices and to reclaim a phase in the history of the profession where members displayed more of a political awareness.

This article presents the results of research examining an innovative initiative designed to build capacity for international, collaborative scholarship of teaching and learning: the development of international collaborative writing groups (ICWG). The study focusses particularly on the role of leadership within the groups as a significant factor in the effectiveness of the initiative. Results from an online survey of 30 former ICWG-participants reaffirm the significance of leadership to the ICWG's success. In particular, respondents emphasise the value of leadership approaches that foster community and encourage members to take responsibility for tasks. Implications for leadership in related academic development contexts are considered.

This paper explores, mainly through a socio-cultural perspective, the role of mid-level leadership in higher education in relation to educational development. It is argued that supporting and engaging local-level leaders, such as academic programme directors, increases the potential for development of local teaching and learning cultures. The paper describes a programme in a research-intensive university, where leaders conduct scholarly projects focused on contextualised educational development and leadership. Projects are reported in writing and peer-reviewed within the programme. In this article 25 project reports are analysed through a framework focusing on the relational and contextual aspects of leadership. Four projects are specifically elaborated to illustrate important aspects of leadership that become visible through the analysis. These aspects relate to external and internal mandates to lead, i.e. the potential actions available to leaders when navigating the need to build and maintain legitimacy in the formal organisation as well as in the group/s that they as leaders try to influence.

This article contributes to knowledge about learning in workgroups, so called "microcultures" in higher education. It argues that socially constructed and institutionalised traditions, recurrent practices, and tacit assumptions in the various microcultures influence academic teachers towards certain behaviour. In line with this perspective, we present a heuristic with the potential to differentiate various types of microcultures: the commons, the market, the club, and the square. The heuristic is based on a socio-cultural perspective and research on collective action. Its purpose is to assist academic developers to fine-tune their approaches while engaging with colleagues, but also to aid further inquiry into how institutionalised norms and traditions influence academic teaching and student learning.

One of the main beliefs in quality assurance is that this activity--indirectly--will stimulate change in the work practices associated with teaching and learning in higher education. However, few studies have provided empirical evidence of the existence of such a link. Instead, quality assurance has created an unfortunate divide between formal rules and routines, and the daily practices in academia associated with teaching and learning. This article reports a study of "quality work"--concrete practices in academic microcultures with a reputation for being strong in their teaching and learning as well as in their research function. We argue that the relationship between quality assurance and enacted quality practice needs to be understood in the light of how formal organizational structures, as well as cultural characteristics and academic aims, are balanced within working groups in universities.

Academic developers (ADs) often participate in the implementation of programmes or reforms in higher education. Sometimes they agree with these and sometimes they disagree. This paper discusses possible agentic positions during a genuine policy implementation--the National Qualification Framework at a Norwegian university. Through reflexive interpretation, and by applying concepts from "discursive institutionalism" the process of implementation from the national level to university departments is described and analysed. The actions and arguments of the ADs involved in the process are presented and their educational rationale is described. The ADs' agency is discussed through educational and political science concepts and in light of power and of a tension between two competing world views: professional "accountability" and professional "responsibility."

Socio-culturally formed collegial contexts in the midlevel of higher education organizations have attracted increased attention from higher education researchers. It is assumed that development, change and stability are dependent on norms, habits and traditions in these contexts. This text introduces a framework useful for identifying and investigating these collegial contexts. The framework is applied on a material describing five academically strong "microcultures." The result is promising as the framework illuminates critical features of these microcultures without depriving them of originality and uniqueness. The article concludes that the framework presents a promising alternative to state-driven and bureaucratic perspectives as well as to market-inspired perspectives.

Copyright of Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning is the property of Society for Teaching & Learning in Higher Education and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

(21) These two points also frame the structure of the book, with the first part dedicated to how "Writing can capture and convey what makes us human, what makes us connected, what keeps us alive" (17) TLI REVIEWS Chick, Nancy L, and Katharina Mårtensson. CC-BY-NC License 4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons - Attribution License 4.0 International (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly attributed. For example, while the book covers a lot of ground in its 300+ pages, it includes chapters on writing about teaching and learning in TLI REVIEWS Chick, Nancy L, and Katharina Mårtensson. And, althoughTLI's peer review ethos is different from many other journals (Chick & Poole, 2015; Chick, Poole, & Blackman 2016; Peer Review at Teaching & Learning Inquiry), we find the "Responding to Reviewers and Dealing with Rejection" helpful for potential TLI authors. [Extracted from the article]