Understanding the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline M. Dewar
Keyword(s):  
Education Research ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Junior Faculty ◽  
Critical Issue ◽  
Undergraduate Teaching ◽  
Scholarship Of Teaching ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Scholarly Teaching ◽  
And Mathematics

Chapter 1 describes the origins of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) movement and explores the distinctions among SoTL, good teaching, and scholarly teaching. It also discusses the development of discipline-based education research (DBER) into undergraduate teaching and learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Since this varies by discipline, the chapter provides some details and additional references for the origins of DBER in physics, biology, chemistry, and engineering. It then examines in more depth the distinctions between SoTL and education research in the discipline of mathematics. The chapter discusses the critical issue of how to evaluate SoTL work. It acknowledges the spectrum of possibilities for how the work is valued for tenure and promotion, and closes with a discussion of implications for junior faculty who wish to engage in SoTL.

Evidence: From Surveys

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline M. Dewar
Keyword(s):  
Student Learning ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Reliability And Validity ◽  
Scholarship Of Teaching ◽  
What Works ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Course Material ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Knowledge Survey

Chapter 5 describes the use of surveys in scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) studies. Topics include how to design a survey, the reliability and validity of surveys, and response rates and how to improve them. The chapter also includes a detailed discussion of a special type of survey called a knowledge survey that is used to measure students’ confidence in their knowledge of disciplinary content. Multiple uses for knowledge surveys are described: a means to assess changes in student learning, a way to improve course organization and coordination across multiple sections, and as guide through the course material for students. The importance of a survey being a good match for the type of research question—What works? What is? What could be?—is emphasized. Many examples are given of studies of student learning in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields that employed surveys.

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline Dewar ◽  
Curtis Bennett ◽  
Matthew A. Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Teaching Experience ◽  
Junior Faculty ◽  
The United States ◽  
Faculty Members ◽  
Scholarship Of Teaching ◽  
Inquiry Process ◽  
Collegiate Level ◽  
And Mathematics

This book is a guide to the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) for scientists, engineers, and mathematicians teaching at the collegiate level in countries around the world. It shows instructors how to draw on their disciplinary knowledge and teaching experience to investigate questions about student learning. It takes them all the way through the inquiry process beginning with framing a research question and selecting a research design, moving on to gathering and analyzing evidence, and finally to making the results public. Numerous examples are provided at each stage, many from published studies of teaching and learning in science, engineering, or mathematics. At strategic points, short sets of questions prompt readers to pause and reflect, plan, or act. These questions are derived from the authors’ experience leading many SoTL workshops in the United States and Canada. The taxonomy of SoTL questions—What works? What is? What could be?—that emerged from the SoTL studies undertaken by the Carnegie scholars provides a useful framework at many stages of the inquiry process. The book addresses the issue of evaluating and valuing this work, including implications for junior faculty who wish to engage in SoTL. The authors explain why SoTL should be of interest to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) faculty at all types of institutions, including faculty members active in traditional STEM research. They also give their perspective on the benefits of SoTL to faculty, to their institutions, to the academy, and to students.

scholarly journals Knowledge for teaching, knowledge about teaching: exploring the links between education research, scholarship of teaching and learning (SOTL) and scholarly teaching

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Case
Keyword(s):  
Education Research ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
University Teaching ◽  
Output Analysis ◽  
Scholarship Of Teaching ◽  
Teaching Knowledge ◽  
Knowledge For Teaching ◽  
Research Scholarship ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Scholarly Teaching

The relationship between education research and the scholarship of teaching and learning (SOTL) is still debated, while a distinction has been made between scholarly teaching and SOTL. This study compares and contrasts two programmes of work that took place in a particular 2nd year engineering course, both led by the author. The first programme was an educational research project investigating student learning in the course. The second programme was a period of teaching, leading to some SOTL output. Analysis of the knowledge drawn on in teaching, confirms that good university teaching is not a direct application of research findings but rather draws on a broad and largely tacit practical base of knowledge. The article also offers a deliberation on whether it is productive to maintain the distinction between education research and SOTL.

A Worthy Endeavor

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacqueline M. Dewar
Keyword(s):  
Education Research ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Scholarship Of Teaching ◽  
Significant Time ◽  
Traditional Research ◽  
Time And Energy

Chapter 0 calls for wide participation in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) by faculty at all types of institutions, including faculty active in traditional research. The chapter provides examples of many well-known scientists, engineers, and mathematicians who eventually devoted significant time and energy to improving education in their disciplinary fields. While acknowledging the difficulty of doing both traditional research and SoTL, it cautions against ruling out the possibility of undertaking a scholarly study of learning simply because of lack of expertise in education research. Numerous benefits that may accrue to instructors who do investigate learning in their own classrooms are described.

scholarly journals Problematizing teaching and learning mathematics as “given” in STEM education

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yeping Li ◽  
Alan H. Schoenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Mathematics Education ◽  
Stem Education ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Teaching And Learning Mathematics ◽  
Learning Mathematics ◽  
Alternative Approach ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Scientific Engineering

AbstractMathematics is fundamental for many professions, especially science, technology, and engineering. Yet, mathematics is often perceived as difficult and many students leave disciplines in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) as a result, closing doors to scientific, engineering, and technological careers. In this editorial, we argue that how mathematics is traditionally viewed as “given” or “fixed” for students’ expected acquisition alienates many students and needs to be problematized. We propose an alternative approach to changes in mathematics education and show how the alternative also applies to STEM education.

Fostering Persistence in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): Creating an Equitable Environment That Addresses the Needs of Undergraduate Students

2022 ◽  
pp. 152102512110735
Author(s):  
Jennifer Louten
Keyword(s):  
Social Support ◽  
Student Retention ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Real World ◽  
Hispanic Students ◽  
Critical Issue ◽  
Degree Programs ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Stem Students ◽  
And Mathematics

Student retention is a critical issue for universities, and nearly half of the students who start degree programs in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) do not complete them. The current study tracks the progress of STEM students taking part in an entry-to-graduation program designed to build community, provide academic and social support, and promote engagement in academically purposeful activities. Although it had no effect on the number of students who changed their major, the program more than doubled the number of students who graduated in their original major. Black or Hispanic students taking part in the program also graduated at twice the rate of comparator students, largely attributable to the success of women in these groups. The results provide needed real-world insights into how to create an equitable environment that promotes the persistence and graduation of students, including those from groups historically underrepresented in STEM.

Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study and gendered math teaching in Kuwait

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 327-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatimah Ahmad ◽  
Heather Greenhalgh-Spencer
Keyword(s):  
Education Research ◽  
Math Education ◽  
Math Performance ◽  
Science Study ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Women And Girls ◽  
Math Teaching ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Mathematics And Science

This paper argues for a more complex literature around gender and math performance. In order to argue for this complexity, we present a small portion of data from a case study examining the performance of Kuwaiti students on the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study and on Kuwait national math tests. Westernized discourses suggest that girls have a harder time in math classes; these discourses frame and are reified by prominent literature and practices within the field of math education research that suggest that women and girls need help in order to reach their potential in math. These Westernized discourses stand in contrast to the discourses in Kuwait that normalize women and girls as outperforming boys in all subjects – including all science, technology, engineering and mathematics subjects. As our study shows, the reality is more complex. And, while the reality is more complex, we yet lack the discourses to understand this complexity.

scholarly journals Breaking Boundaries: Pressing Issues in Equity, Computing, and Problem-Solving in STEM Undergraduate Education

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-12
Author(s):  
Anna Bargagliotti ◽  
Dorothea Herreiner ◽  
Jefrey A. Phillips
Keyword(s):  
Problem Solving ◽  
Undergraduate Education ◽  
National Science Foundation ◽  
Teaching And Learning ◽  
Main Research ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
The Common ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Education Conference

The April 2017 National Science Foundation-funded Breaking the Boundaries in STEM Education conference brought together Southern California science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) faculty to explore equity, problem-solving, and computing in an interdisciplinary manner. Two main research questions guided the overall scope of the conference: (1) What are the common threads across disciplines to approach the teaching and learning of skills that are relevant in STEM? (2) What are the challenges and barriers that need to be overcome in order to foster collaboration across disciplines to impact the teaching and learning of skills relevant in STEM? We describe the background of the conference and provide an overview of the questions addressed.

scholarly journals Breaking Down Silos Working Meeting: An Approach to Fostering Cross-Disciplinary STEM–DBER Collaborations through Working Meetings

2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. mr3
Author(s):  
Daniel L. Reinholz ◽  
Tessa C. Andrews
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Education Research ◽  
Stem Education ◽  
Research Priorities ◽  
Deep Understanding ◽  
Institutional Transformation ◽  
Stem Fields ◽  
Professional Societies ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
And Mathematics

There has been a recent push for greater collaboration across the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields in discipline-based education research (DBER). The DBER fields are unique in that they require a deep understanding of both disciplinary content and educational research. DBER scholars are generally trained and hold professional positions in discipline-specific departments. The professional societies with which DBER scholars are most closely aligned are also often discipline specific. This frequently results in DBER researchers working in silos. At the same time, there are many cross-cutting issues across DBER research in higher education, and DBER researchers across disciplines can benefit greatly from cross-disciplinary collaborations. This report describes the Breaking Down Silos working meeting, which was a short, focused meeting intentionally designed to foster such collaborations. The focus of Breaking Down Silos was institutional transformation in STEM education, but we describe the ways the overall meeting design and structure could be a useful model for fostering cross-­disciplinary collaborations around other research priorities of the DBER community. We describe our approach to meeting recruitment, premeeting work, and inclusive meeting design. We also highlight early outcomes from our perspective and the perspectives of the meeting participants.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document