Origins

Background

In the spring of 2018, the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) developed a comprehensive plan to enhance the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) at IU Indianapolis. At the center of that plan were the following goals for CTL programming:

1. To foster a culture of scholarly teaching across all ranks and appointments
2. To provide support for the development of scholarly teaching, of which SoTL may be a part
3. To provide ongoing expertise and support for faculty to become reflective practitioners
4. To facilitate dissemination of scholarly teaching practices and products.

These goals laid the groundwork for a taxonomy that describes the essential dimensions and characteristics of teaching as scholarly activity and profession at IU Indianapolis. Though all faculty have acquired expertise in their disciplines, few enter academia with specific preparation for teaching. The features, impacts, and achievements of scholarly teaching need to be made visible in ways that shape teaching practices and articulate paths to growth and success.

Development of the Taxonomy

Co-chaired by Lisa Contino (Psychology) and Terri Tarr (CTL), a task force was appointed to synthesize research and theory on scholarly teaching and SoTL. Members of the task force included Rachel Applegate (Academic Affairs and Library Science), Andy Buchenot (English), Margie Ferguson (Academic Affairs and Political Science), Douglas Jerolimov (CTL), Kathy Marrs (Biology), Anusha Rao (CTL and Engineering), Laura Romito (Dentistry), and Richard Turner (English, Philanthropy, and CTL).

The content and structure of the Scholarly Teaching Taxonomy emerged from a comprehensive review of the literature on teaching and learning that uncovered similarities and distinctions between the terms SoTL and scholarly teaching. SoTL and scholarly teaching are neither synonymous nor interchangeable; they are, however, related through a shared emphasis on evidence and inquiry. The hallmark of SoTL is its systematic, rigorous investigation of questions related to teaching and/or learning that is subject to peer review, requires dissemination, and advances the practice of teaching (Potter & Kustra, 2011; Trigwell, 2013). Though SoTL is a highly developed form of inquiry and dissemination that may overlap with scholarly teaching, it is neither a sole indicator nor a differentiating  element of the larger domain of scholarly teaching. The main goal of scholarly teaching is to maximize learning through effective teaching; it is grounded in evidence, well-reasoned theory, and critical reflection (Potter & Kustra, 2011). As such, it is a condition for excellent teaching (Hutchings & Shulman, 1999).

Five core dimensions of the practice of scholarly teaching were identified through content analysis of evidence-based teaching practices in a wide variety of disciplines. The first draft was formally vetted by 15 faculty reviewers from within the IU Indianapolis, IU School of Medicine, and IU Indianapolis communities, as well as the IU Indianapolis Faculty Council Executive Committee. Revisions were made based on critical feedback.

Dimensions of Scholarly Teaching

• It is based on significant and reliable evidence.
• At its center is reflective practice.
• It is built upon principles of course design (i.e., alignment of learning outcomes, assessment, and learning activities).
• Its practice is ethical, responsible, just, and inclusive.
• It is pedagogically sound within one’s disciplinary expertise.

The taxonomy uses three levels to capture how practices and characteristics of scholarly teaching develop over the course of one’s professional teaching career.

• Level 1: Considered a starting point for the acquisition of knowledge and skills, Level 1 is therefore most proximal to the educator. Scholarly teaching practices are limited to learning environments (i.e., classrooms, online, laboratories, and clinical settings).
• Level 2: Scholarly teaching takes on more complexity in its application, and/or the added responsibility of engaging and sharing – ideas, questions, conversations, teaching strategies – with a community of peers.
• Level 3: Scholarly teachers attain high levels of knowledge in their areas of interest, take on leadership roles, and may disseminate their work more formally.

Changes from Level 1 to Level 3 reflect professional growth that begins with knowledge and mastery of skills and moves toward application and innovation; that starts with self and extends to community; that increases in complexity and reach through dissemination and leadership of others.

The Scholarly Teaching Taxonomy is designed to support the professional growth and development of faculty of all types at all points in their teaching careers. It is intended to serve as a guide to assist faculty as they determine the shape and arc of their teaching careers. The knowledge, skills, and values contained in the taxonomy form the foundation of a scholarly teacher’s professional identity as it develops within the boundaries and opportunities of each person’s unique circumstances and job responsibilities. Although the essence and skills  associated with each dimension are common to all scholarly teachers, we anticipate variability in interpretation, application, and growth patterns among practitioners. We believe that this taxonomy will be most useful in a formative sense, whether feedback originates from self-observation, reflection, or peers. The taxonomy may also be useful to chairs, program directors, and deans as they guide and support faculty at key points in their teaching careers. As the taxonomy becomes more widely used in different settings (e.g., online, face-to-face, and hybrid courses, engaged learning, clinical labs, community service), we expect that it will become a living piece of scholarship as faculty add examples and share their practices with the IU Indianapolis community and beyond. There are certainly additional uses yet to be discovered.

References

Hutchings, P. & Shulman, L. (1999). The scholarship of teaching: New elaborations, new developments, Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 31 (5), 10-15.

Potter, M. & Kustra, E. (2011). The relationship between scholarly teaching and SoTL: Models, distinctions, and clarifications. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5 (1), 1-20.

Trigwell, K. (2013). Evidence of the impact of scholarship of teaching and learning purposes. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 1(1), 95-105.