Scholarship of Teaching Johns Hopkins University Anne Belcher

Boyer’s Scholarship Reconsidered Proposed a new model of scholarship Scholarship of discovery Scholarship of integration Scholarship of application Scholarship of teaching

The faculty: A mosaic of talent “ The richness of faculty talent should be celebrated, not restricted” (Boyer, p. 27). Universal dimensions of scholarship: All faculty should establish their credentials as researchers All members of the faculty should stay in touch with developments in their fields and remain professionally alive Every faculty member must be held to the highest standards of integrity The work of the professoriate must be carefully assessed

Characteristics of scholars of teaching* Are excellent teachers—share knowledge and advance knowledge of teaching and learning in the discipline in a way that can be peer-reviewed Are expert teachers—engage in focused reflection or self-regulated learning about teaching Know more about teaching—draw on formal and personal sources of knowledge construction about teaching (pedagogical content knowledge) *Kreber, 2002

Issues surrounding the scholarship of teaching Many universities have failed to identify the salient features; have almost universally failed to recognize teaching as a form of scholarship (Allen & Field, 2005). Research universities present more ambiguity over institutional messages about teaching expectations and norms than do other types of institutions (Wright, 2005).

Scholarly teaching (as opposed to the scholarship of teaching)* Based on practice wisdom; tends to be focused on teacher effectiveness or on effective teaching strategies (rather than on student learning) Focus on application of educational principles to teaching; use of evidence to guide teaching; use of peer evaluation Encompasses teacher’s contribution to design, development, maintenance and evaluation of curricula *Allen & Field, 2005

Scholarship of teaching* Is student focused, driven by desire to understand how students learn effectively and how teaching influences this process Must be public Must be susceptible to critical review and evaluation Must be accessible for exchange and use by other members of one’s scholarly community * Cohen, Barton & Fast, 2000

Criteria for the scholarship of teaching and sources of information* Shared public account of teaching Emphasis on learning outcomes and relevant teaching practices Discipline and pedagogical knowledge and innovation Sources of information Self-report or teaching portfolio Departmental annual review *Theall & Centra, 2001

Exemplars of the scholarship of teaching in education* Peer-reviewed publications Accreditation or other comprehensive program reports Successful application of technology to teaching and learning Positive peer assessments of innovations in teaching State, regional, national or international recognition as a master teacher Published textbooks or other learning aids Grants awarded in support of teaching and learning Design of outcome studies or evaluation/assessment programs Presentations related to teaching and learning * AACN, 1999; Glanville & Houde, 2004

Components of teaching portfolio* Philosophy of teaching Course syllabi and descriptions; course materials Descriptions of teaching innovations Teaching evaluations by students; letters from students Copies of manuscripts related to teaching Abstracts of poster or paper presentations Participation in workshop or conferences Evaluations of teaching by colleagues Honors related to teaching * Glanville & Houde, 2004; Reece, Pearce, Melillo, & Beaudry, 2001; Seldin, 2004; The Silver Book, 2006.

References Allen, M.N. & Field, P.A. (2005). Scholarly teaching and scholarship of teaching: Noting the difference. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 2 (1), Article 12. American Association of Colleges of Nursing (1999). Position statement on defining scholarship for the discipline of nursing. Retrieved September 1, 2009 from http://www.aacn.nche.edu Berk, R.A., Naumann, P.L., & Appling, S.E. (2004). Beyond student ratings: Peer observation of classroom and clinical teaching. International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 2 (1), Article 10. Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered. Priorities of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Chism, N.V.N. (2007). Peer review of teaching. A sourcebook. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Co., Inc. Cohen, J., Barton, R. & Fast, A. (2000). The growth of the scholarship of teaching in doctoral programs. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 55, 4-13. Emerson, R.J. & Records, K. (2008). Today’s challenge, tomorrow’s excellence: The practice of evidence-based education. Journal of Nursing Education, 47 (8), 359-370. Glanville, I. & Houde, S. (2004). The scholarship of teaching: Implications for nursing faculty. Journal of Professional Nursing, 20 (1), 7-14. Glassick, C.E. (2000). Boyer’s expanded definition of scholarship, the standards for assessing scholarship, and the elusiveness of the scholarship of teaching. Academic Medicine, 75 (9), 877-880.

References (continued) Kreber, C. (2002). Teaching excellence, teaching expertise, and the scholarship of teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 27 (1), 5-23. Reece, S.M., Pearce, C.W., Melillo, K.D. & Beaudry, M. (2001). The faculty portfolio: Documenting the scholarship of teaching. Journal of Professional Nursing, 17 (4), 180-186. Reising, D.L. (2008). Nursing education research—how to use it to build your promotion and tenure case. Journal of Nursing Education, 47 (9), 387-388. Riley, J.M., Beal, J., Levi, P., & McCausland, M.P. (2002). Revising nursing scholarship. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, Fourth Quarter, 383-389. Seldin, P. (2004). The teaching portfolio. Boston, MA: Anker Publishing Co., Inc. Theall, M. & Centra, J.A. (2001). Assessing the scholarship of teaching: Valid decisions from valid evidence. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 86, 31-43. The Silver Book: Professional Development Guide for the Faculty of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 2006. Wright, m. (2005). Always at odds? Congruence in faculty beliefs about teaching at a research university. The Journal of Higher Education, 76 (3), 331-353.