Who is the “public” when you make teaching public? Conceptions of audience in the scholarship of teaching and learning

Main Article Content

Stanford T. Goto

Abstract

This article considers how SoTL practitioners have addressed three types of audiences: personal, administrative, and discipline-based. The analysis draws on narrative data from a collaborative SoTL project at a community college. The findings are discussed in relation to broader trends across institutions and disciplines. It is argued that investigators should take into account the audience’s epistemology of teaching. This approach helps investigators to enter into the professional discourse of that audience. Five strategies are offered to help SoTL practitioners communicate effectively with audiences outside of their professional area.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Goto, S. T. (2012). Who is the “public” when you make teaching public? Conceptions of audience in the scholarship of teaching and learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 9(3), 1–14. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/josotl/article/view/2138
Section
Articles

References

Aragon, S. R., Woo, H. J., and Marvel, M. R. (2004). Analysis of the integration of skill standards into community college curriculum. St Paul, MN: National Research Center for Career and Technical Education.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1982). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin (Michael Holquist, Ed; Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist, Trans.. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Bazerman, C. (1994). Constructing experience. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Bowden, R. G. (2007). Scholarship Reconsidered: Reconsidered. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 7(2), 1-21.

Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Princeton, N.J.: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Cross, K. P. (1996). Classroom Research: Implementing the Scholarship of Teaching. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 60(Winter) 402-407.

Feldman, A. (2003). Validity and quality in self-study. Educational Research, 32(3), 26-28.

Fumerton, R. (2006). Epistemology. Malden: Blackwell Pub.

Gee, J. P., (1989). What is literacy? Journal of Education, 171(1), 18-25.

Goto, S. T., and Davis, A. C. (2009). Promoting the scholarship of teaching and learning at community colleges: Insights from two learning communities. To Improve the Academy, 27.

Huber, M. T., and Cox, R. (2004). Work that matters should be work that counts. Stanford, CA: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

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

Kreber, C. (2001). Conceptualizing the scholarship of teaching and identifying unresolved issues: The framework for this volume. In M. D. Svinicki and R. E. Rice (Eds.), New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 86 (pp.1-18). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kreber, C. (2002). Teaching excellence, teaching expertise, and the scholarship of teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 27(1), 5-23.

Litterst, J. K., and Tompkins, P. (2000). Assessment as a scholarship of teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association. Seattle, WA.

Louie, B.Y., Drevdahl, D. J., Purdy, J. M., and Stackman, R. W. (2003). Advancing the scholarship of teaching through collaborative self-study. The Journal of Higher Education, 74(2), 150-171.

Lucaites, J. L., Condit, C. M., and Caudill, S. (Eds.). (1999). Contemporary rhetorical theory: A reader. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

MacAllum, K., and Johnson, A. B. (2002). Reconceptualizing education as an engine of economic development: A case study of the central educational center. Washington, DC: Academy for Educational Development. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED475153).

Mettetal, G. (2001). The what, why and how of classroom action research. The Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 6-13.

Miles, M., and Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

National Commission on Excellence in Education. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative of educational reform. Washington, D.C.

O’Brien, M. (2008). Navigating the SoTL landscape: A compass, map and some tools for getting started. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 1-20.

Prosser, M. (2008). The scholarship of teaching and learning: What is it? A personal view. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 1-4.

Riessman, C. K. (1993). Narrative analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Schulman, L. S. (2000). Fostering a scholarship of teaching and learning. Paper presented at the Annual Louise McBee Lecture. Athens, GA: University of Georgia.

Sperling, C. B. (2003). How community colleges understand the scholarship of teaching and learning. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 27, 593-601.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. (2005). Stanford, CA: Stanford University.

Trigwell, K., Martin, E., Benjamin, J., and Prosser, M. (2000). Scholarship of teaching: A model. Higher Education Research and Development, 19(2), 155-168.

Washington Higher Education Coordinating Board. (2006). Accountability for student success in Washington higher education. Olympia, WA.

Weimer, M. (2008). Positioning scholarly work on teaching and learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 2(1), 1-6.