Advertisement

Becoming a Teaching Scholar

Concepts of “Good” Teaching Among Science Teachers Participating in Training Programmes
Chapter
  • 902 Downloads

University teaching is going through a professionalization process as part of a change or reform of the teaching and learning culture. This process builds on the notion that it is no longer sufficient for a university employee to be an excellent researcher; she must also be an excellent teacher. The relation and interaction between research and teaching is of great importance, but it is documented that being a good researcher does not necessarily correlate with being a good teacher (Feldman, 1987; Hattie and Marsh, 1996, 2002)

In higher education there is a reinterpretation of academic scholarship including educational/teaching scholarship (Boyer, 1990; Entwistle, 2003; Entwistle et al., 2000; Trigwell et al., 2000). The primary argument for scholarship is that we share common knowledge about good teaching, which is promoted by the community of scholars communicating their concepts, findings, methods, and principles. The idea is that educational scholarship promotes high quality teaching (Shulmann, 1993). So if the aim of teaching is “to make student learning possible” (Ramsden, 1992), the aim of scholarly teaching is “to make it transparent how we have made learning possible” (Healey, 2000, p. 171). In other words, we need theories about teaching. Andresen (2000) points out that educational scholarship is not just about describing what, how and why, but also a term of recommendation or challenge. We are engaged in promoting a set of intellectual values, so teaching scholarship is also a moral discourse. Scholars' communication is also a negotiation of status and power in the establishment of teaching. Boyer (1990) points out that the scholarship of education cannot be isolated from academic scholarship in general. The aim of professionalism is to change the academic culture towards including knowledge about teaching and learning in academic scholarship. Staff development programmes aim to promote this educational scholarship or professionalism. Thus today, university teachers are being educated as educators. In an international context, this professionalization has become one of the most important parameters in the further development of research-based education (Felten and Pingree, 2003; Lauersen, 2003). But why is this professionalization process taking place now?

Keywords

Science Teacher Teaching Practice Good Teaching Academic Staff Teaching Scholar 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andresen, L.W. (2000). A Suitable, Trans-Disciplinary Conception of Scholarship. Higher Education Research & Development, 19(2), 137–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berendt, B. (1998). How to Support and Bring About the Shift from Teaching to Learning Through Academic Staff Development Programs: Examples and Perspectives. Higher Education in Europe, 23(3), 317–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University PressGoogle Scholar
  4. Boyer, E.L. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Princeton: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of TeachingGoogle Scholar
  5. Cope, C. & Prosser, M. (2005). Identifying Didactical Knowledge: An Empirical Study of the Educational Critical Aspect of Learning About Information Systems. Higher Education in Europe, 49, 345–372Google Scholar
  6. Dale, E.L. (1989). Pedagogisk Professionalitet. Oslo: GyldendalGoogle Scholar
  7. Entwistle, N. (2003). Concepts and Conceptual Frameworks Underpinning the ETL Project. Occasional Report 3. Edinburgh: Higher and Community Education, School of Education, University of Edinburgh. Retrieved 28 May 2008, http://www.etl.tla.ed.ac.uk/docs/ETLreport3. pdf
  8. Entwistle, N., Skinner, D., Entwistle, D. & Orr, A. (2000). Conceptions and Beliefs About “Good Teaching”: An Integration of Contrasting Research Areas. Higher Education Research & Development, 19(1), 5–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Entwistle, N. & Walker, P. (2002). Strategic Alertness and Expanded Awareness Within Sophisticated Conceptions of Teaching. In N. Hativa & O. Goodyear (Eds.), Teacher Thinking, Beliefs and Knowledge in Higher Education (pp. 15–39). Dordrecht: KluwerGoogle Scholar
  10. Feldman, K.A. (1987). Research Productivity and Scholarly Accomplishment of College Teachers as Related to Their Instructional Effectiveness. Research in Higher Education, 26, 227–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Felten, P. & Pingree, A. (2003). Centres for Teaching Improvement in Colleges and Universities. In J.W. Guthrie (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Education, Vol. 1 (pp. 254–257). New York: MacmillanGoogle Scholar
  12. Gibbs, G. & Coffey, M. (2004). The Impact of Training of University Teachers on Their Teaching Skills, Their Approach to Teaching and the Approach to Learning of Their Students. Active Learning in Higher Education, 5(1), 87–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hattie, J. & Marsh, H.W. (1996). The Relationship Between Research and Teaching. A Meta- Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 507–542Google Scholar
  14. Hattie, J. & Marsh, H.W. (2002). The Relation Between Research Productivity and Teaching Effectiveness. Journal of Higher Education, 73(5), 603–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Healey, M. (2000). Developing the Scholarship of Teaching in Higher Education: A Discipline- Based Approach. Higher Education Research & Development, 19(2), 169–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ho, A.S.P. (2000). A Conceptual Change Approach to Staff Development: A Model for Programme Design. The International Journal for Academic Development, 5(1), 30–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kane, R., Sandretto, S. & Heath, C. (2002). Telling Half the Story: A Critical Review of Research on the Teaching Beliefs and Practices of University Academics. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 177–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kane, R., Sandretto, S. & Heath, C. (2004). An Investigation into Excellent Tertiary Teaching: Emphasising Reflective Practice. Higher Education, 47, 283–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kreber, C. (2000). How University Teaching Award Winners Conceptualise Academic Work: Some Further Thoughts on the Meaning of Scholarship. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(1), 61–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kruse, S. (2001). Pævdagogisk professionalisme i universitetsundervisningen. Aalborg: Dansk Center for NaturvidenskabsdidaktikGoogle Scholar
  21. Kruse, S. (2006). Udvikling af universitetslærerens pædagogiske kompetencer — en didaktisk skitse. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 2, 36–44Google Scholar
  22. Kruse, S., Nielsen, K. & Troelsen, R. (2004). Pædagogisk uddannelse af universitetsadjunkter: Analyse af adjunktprogrammerne på de tekniske og naturvidenskabelige fakulteter ved højere læreanstalter i Danmark. DCN Papers n r. 20. Aalborg: Dansk Center for NaturvidenskabsdidaktikGoogle Scholar
  23. Lauersen, P.F. (2003). Universitetspædagogikkens barndom og DUN's. In DUN (Ed.), Universitetspædagogik år 2003 — inkl. Kortlægning af universitetspædagogiske centre i Danmark. København: Dansk Universitetspædagogisk NetværkGoogle Scholar
  24. Lortie, D.C. (1975). Schoolteacher. A Sociological Study. London: The University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  25. Martin, E. & Lueckenhausen, G. (2005). How University Teaching Changes Teachers: Affective as well as Cognitive Challenges. Higher Education, 49, 389–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Martin, E. & Ramsden, P. (1993) An Expanding Awareness: How lecturers Change Their Understanding of Their Understanding of Teaching. Research and Development in Higher Education, 15, 148–55Google Scholar
  27. Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography — Describing Conceptions of the World Around Us. International Science, 10, 177–200Google Scholar
  28. McManus, D.A. (2001). The Two Paradigms of Education and the Peer Review of Teaching. Journal of Geoscience Education, 49(5), 423–434Google Scholar
  29. Prosser, M., Martin, E., Trigwell, K., Ramsden, P. & Lueckenhausen, G. (2005). Academics' Experiences of Understanding of Their Subject Matter and the Relationship of This to Their Experiences of Teaching and Learning. Instructional Science, 33, 135–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Schön, D.A. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey Bass PublishersGoogle Scholar
  32. Schön, D.A. (1995). The new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change Nov./dec. 27–34Google Scholar
  33. Shulmann, L. (1993). Teaching as Community Property. Changes, 25, 6–7Google Scholar
  34. Trowler, P. & Cooper, A. (2002). Teaching and Learning Regimes: Implicit Theories and Recurrent Practice in the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning Through Educational Development Programmes. Higher Education Research & Development, 21(3), 221–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Trigwell, K., Martin, E., Benjamin, J. & Prosser, M. (2000). Scholarship of Teaching: A Model. Higher Education Research & Development, 19(2), 155–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Trigwell, K. & Prosser, M. (1996). Changing Approach to Teaching: A Relational Perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 21(3), 275–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Trigwell, K., Prosser, M. & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations Between Teacher's Approaches to Teaching and Students' Approaches to Learning. Higher Education, 37, 57–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Trigwell, K. & Shane, S. (2004). Student Learning and the Scholarship of University Teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 29(4), 523–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations