Search

This paper critically examines the reasons for and processes of sharing SoTL findings with students. Framed by our commitment to SoTL's role to make teaching "community property," we interpret sharing SoTL findings with students as an act of knowledge mobilization, where SoTL might be disseminated, translated, or co-created with the student as a legitimate knowledge broker. We connect these knowledge mobilization processes with four primary reasons why faculty might want to share SoTL findings with students. Finally, we provide examples of knowledge mobilization that use different "voices" found in contemporary communication settings and that reach various student audiences in micro, meso, macro, and mega contexts.

Pedagogical partnership is increasingly recognized as a practice with the potential to contribute to more just and equitable post-secondary education institutions. Previous studies have reported on the ways specific institutional programs attend to issues of equity, particularly considering if and how they involve students from marginalized groups. Similarly, others have argued for the scaling-up of partnership initiatives as a way to ensure greater inclusion and diversity amongst the staff and students who participate. Whilst the literature on this dimension of pedagogical partnerships grows, further attention to the ways in which faculty social locations influence and intersect with perceptions and experiences of partnerships is merited. Our study contributes to the literature exploring this issue. Our findings show a complex range of ways in which participants understand their social locations and the ways these influence their experiences of partnership, demonstrating the need for sophisticated conceptualizations of power and risk that attend to individuals' positions within and outside of partnership spaces.

There is a wide range of activity taking place under the banner of 'co-created curriculum' within higher education. Some of this variety is due to the different ways people think about 'co-creation', but significant variation is also due to the ways in which higher education curriculum is conceptualised, and how these conceptualisations position the student in relation to the curriculum. In addition, little attention is paid to the differences between co-creation "of" the curriculum and co-creation "in" the curriculum. This paper addresses this gap by examining four theoretical frameworks used to inform higher education curriculum design. We examine how each framework considers the position of the learner and how this might influence the kinds of curricular co-creation likely to be enacted. We conclude by calling for more discussion of curriculum and curriculum theories in higher education--and for these discussions to include students. We argue that more clarity is needed from scholars and practitioners as to how they are defining curriculum, and whether they are focused on co-creation "of" the curriculum or co-creation "in" the curriculum. Finally, we suggest that paying greater attention to curriculum theories and their assumptions about the learner, offers enhanced understanding of curricular intentions and the extent to which collaboration is possible within any particular context.

This paper explores the characteristics of relationships in SoTL, informed by the lived experiences of the authors. We situate our discussion in literature relating to relationship-rich education and academic hospitality, and propose three features that characterize SoTL-focused relationships: acts of giving, vulnerability and trust, and service. Taken together, and drawing on existing literature, we present the notion of Relational Hospitality as a key aspect of SoTL-focused relationships. The development of this piece itself was a relational act: The authors weave through insights drawn from multiple conversations, each conversation building on shared reflections, co-creating commonalities and questions, and collaborative editing of each other's writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) is no longer considered an emerging field, it continues to dynamically evolve. This evolution pertains to the nature of the inquiries posed, the scholars active in the field, and the frameworks and conventions that shape the transdisciplinary SoTL landscape. These structures serve as pillars and offer support to SoTL scholars; occasionally, they may also constrain the diversity of voices and perspectives that are embraced within this academic domain. In this article we apply a generational framework to the way that SoTL has evolved in white, Western, English-speaking contexts. We first articulate the generational waves (Generation Zero, Generation One, Generation Two and "SoTL First" scholars) that have emerged in this context and explore the people, goals, challenges, and successes that each generation has frequently experienced in their work to transform higher education. Subsequently, each author positions themselves within this generational framework, placing emphasis on the structures, norms, and processes that have aided and hindered their engagement with SoTL. Our goal is to explore what can be learned from the generational journey of this set of SoTL scholars, so that as SoTL continues to grow, we can better support a broader and more diverse set of scholars. In our discussion, we invite readers to consider their own SoTL journeys and to complicate and expand on this generational analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reflects upon the development of a multidisciplinary lesson plan aimed at developing science skills for Physics and Astronomy, Geographical and Earth Sciences, and Chemistry students at a research intensive Scottish university. The lesson plan was co-developed with a small group of staff and undergraduate students from these disciplinary areas. The authors discuss the rationale and process for developing the course, drawing upon literature relating to students and staff co-creating curricula in higher education. The authors conclude by offering suggestions for the academic development community about ways in which this kind of collaboration can be supported at local and institutional levels.

In this paper, we present and reflect on using scenarios and role-plays as an effective approach to engaging in the often complicated conversations about student-faculty/staff partnerships, particularly those involving the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL). Students as co-developers of pedagogical processes, as well as co-researchers in SoTL, has become an increasingly valued practice in higher education institutions around the world, one that promises to be transformative in its pursuit to break down the traditional hierarchies and establish more democratic and equitable relationships between faculty/staff and students. While there is a growing body of evidence that demonstrates the value of creating spaces and processes to enhance teaching and learning, it can be challenging to know how to develop and implement partnership in SoTL. How do we actually do it? Many of us need guidance for where and how to get started, how to build effective partnerships, how to work through difficulties, how to share our experiences, and how to invite others into this practice. Informed by our own experiences of engaging in pedagogical SoTL partnerships and drawing upon materials developed for a conference workshop we delivered at the 2019 International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) conference, we argue that scenarios and role-plays, when informed by the principles of Scenario Based Learning (SBL), are effective tools that help explore partnership experiences of faculty/staff and students. We offer considerations for how readers can adopt and adapt scenarios in their contexts and invite further research on the ways SBL contributes to SoTL and partnership. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper describes five orientations informing the efforts of postsecondary educators to teach more accessibly, including commitments to accessibility as the mandated, right, pedagogically effective, nice, and/or profitable thing to do. These orientations emerged from focus groups and interviews with instructors and teaching assistants at a research-intensive Canadian university. By attending to these underlying orientations, we can grapple with important, but often unexamined, complexities, such as messages we may be inadvertently endorsing and contradictions between intentions and potential outcomes and their ramifications. We encourage support for educators to reflect on the limitations and complications of their orientations and associated efforts to advance accessibility, as well as cross-pollination with other areas of critical scholarship beyond that focusing on Universal Design and accessibility-specific principles. University instructors and teaching assistants seek to teach more accessibly for a number of reasons. This paper describes five reasons – or 'orientations' – for teaching more accessibly informed by: (1) legislative or university requirements; (2) equity and social justice; (3) effective teaching practices; (4) kindness; and/or (5) profit. Paying attention to these orientations for teaching more accessibly is important because they may impact which accessibility practices are implemented, when and under what conditions, and for whose benefit. Some orientations may also promote negative ideas of disability, such as disability as costly or a burden, even while they encourage teaching more accessibly. We reflect on the challenges and limitations of applying 'accessibility' language and principles broadly to 'all' students, instead of intentionally focusing on reducing barriers for students with disabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]