Scholarship

Draft

Definition

The question is whether what I (Daniel K. Schneider) and others do here can be considered scholarship. Maybe a bit. See Boyer's scholarship of integration and teaching.

“The twentieth century saw the university change from a site in which teaching and research stood in a reasonably comfortable relationship with each other to one in which they became mutually antagonistic (2003:157).” (Barnett, 2003: 157).

Boyer's four part paradigm

1. Advancing knowledge is the most essential form of scholarship; the other functions flow from it.
2. Synthesizing and integrating knowledge gives meaning to isolated facts, “putting them into perspective…making connections across disciplines, placing the specialties in larger context, illuminating data in a revealing way, often educating non-specialists.”
3. Applying knowledge occurs when the scholar asks, “How can knowledge be responsibly applied to consequential problems? How can it be helpful to individuals as well as to institutions?”
4. Representing knowledge through teaching “means not only transmitting knowledge but transforming and extending it as well…” In other words, the teacher is also seen as a learner.

(Carol Holmes)

Summarized by Zamorski (2003:3-4) [first parts] and Scott (2001:Abstract) [second parts]

1. The scholarship of discovery (An activity of investigation):
   • Boyer states that: 'research is at the very heart of academic life, and we celebrate what we call the scholarship of discovery. Research will always be central to the work of higher learning, and in the century ahead, universities must support and provide a home for this essential function.'
   • "reflects our pressing, irrepressible need as human beings to confront the unknown and to seek understanding for its own sake. It is tied inextricably to the freedom to think freshly, to see propositions of every kind in ever changing light. And it celebrates the special exhilaration that comes with a new idea."
2. The scholarship of integration (An activity of synthesis):
   • This is a plea for inter-disciplinarity, as, Boyer argues: 'in the coming century, there will be an urgent need for scholars who go beyond the isolated facts; who make connections across the disciplines; and who begin to discover a more coherent view of knowledge and a more integrated, more authentic, view of life.'
   • "Through the scholarship of integration, we give meaning to isolated facts by fitting them into larger patterns, making connections across disciplines, and interpreting what has been discovered in ways that provide a larger, more comprehensive understanding."
3. The scholarship of application (An activity of engagement) :
   • Boyer suggests that the third element, application: 'defines the campus not as an isolated island, but as a staging ground for action.' Here he argues for a 'reciprocity' - both between higher education and societal development, and 'from theory to practice, and from practice back to theory.'
   • Otherwise, he suggests, we fall into the trap of 'irrelevance'. "The scholarship of application engages us to solve consequential problems with our gained knowledge for the good of individuals and society. Here is where theory and practice interact vitally, each renewing the other."
4. The scholarship of teaching (An activity of transmission):
   • Boyer suggests that for the next century, universities need to 'deepen their commitment to the scholarship of teaching' as it is 'through the influence of great teachers that the flame of scholarship is kept alive from one generation to the next'. In order to do so, he suggests that we need to reinterpret our conception of teaching and reaffirm it as the 'heart of the scholarly endeavour ... if the lifelong interests of the students of the coming century are to be met.'
   • Through the scholarship of teaching, we ensure the continuity of knowledge and stimulate students to be critical, creative thinkers. Through teaching, knowledge is not only transmitted, but transformed and extended as students and teachers are impelled in creative new directrions. Inspired teaching "keeps the flame of scholarship alive."

(Boyer 1994: 116 - 121)

The relation between theory and practise

Educational research is potentially a great resource for supporting learner-centered practices, but there is a disjuncture between the worlds of the educational researcher and the practitioner (whether faculty member, instructional technologist, or learning designer). A few years ago at the International Conference on Learning Sciences held in Ann Arbor, keynote speaker Linda Roberts commented on a 500+ page proceeding, saying "This is fabulous, relevant, and meaningful work... the only problem is: no one who needs it is going to read it." That is, there is not much of a bridge between research and practice.

By the same token, the bridge for practice to inform theory is also absent. Practitioners have an opportunity to situate their own practice in a research and scholarship of teaching and learning context. Practitioners could build into their project designs components, such as transformative assessment, that help advance and transform the understanding of teaching and learning with technology, but often lack the skills, methodologies or framework to do this.

(Bridging Communities of Research & Practice to Transform Higher Education Teaching and Learning, June 28, 2004

In terms of Boyer: Scholarship of discovery ("pure research") is essential. But it may not be immediately reflected in scholarship of application since "real world" problems are swampy (Schön) and do not lend themselves for clean research. Scholarship of integration that may also help application is an activity that one does at start of a career (the theory part of some PhD's) and at the end (writing texbooks). Integration is time consuming and not so highly valued. Latency in education from theory to practise is in Daniel K. Schneider's opinion between 30 years (a generation) and 100 years (three generations). Teacher training relies on scholarship of application that in turn relies on scholarhip of integration and discovery.

References

• Barnett, R. (2003). Beyond All Reason: Living with Ideology in the University Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press

• Boyer. E. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriat Princeton Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. 15-25.

• Boyer, E. (1994). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities for a New Century. In Rigby, G. (Ed) Universities in the Twenty-First Century: a Lecture Series London: National Commission on Education.

• Scott, Rosalyn P. (2001). Our contributions: scholarship revisited, The Annals of Thoractic Surgery 71, 30-54.

• Schön, D. A. (1995). The new scholarship requires a new epistemology: Knowing-in-action. Change Magazine, 27, (2), 10-17. Also published in Deborah DeZure (ed.) (2000). Learning from Change: Landmarks in Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Routledge, ISBN 0749433965.

• Zamorski, Barbara (2003). Keynote Address: The role of scholarship and research in teaching and learning in Higher Education. International Conference - Lithuanian Higher Education: Diagnoses and Prognoses, 11 - 12 December 2003., PDF, retrieved 19:04, 19 November 2007 (MET)