The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) has been described as the fastest growing academic development movement in higher education. As this field of inquiry matures, there is a need to understand how SoTL research is conducted. The purpose of our study was to inform this debate by investigating research approaches used in SoTL publications. We analysed 223 empirical research studies published from 2012 to 2014 in three explicitlyfocused SoTL journals. We classified the studies as either qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods using an analytical framework devised from existing literature on research methods. We found that the use of the three research designs was fairly evenly distributed across the papers examined: qualitative (37.2%), quantitative (29.6%), and mixed methods (33.2%). However, there was an over-reliance on data collection from a single source in 83.9% of papers analysed, and this source was primarily students. There was some, but limited, evidence of the use of triangulation through the use of multiple data collection instruments (e.g. survey, assessment tasks, grade databases). Similarly, only one-third of publications classified as mixed methods integrated the analysis and interpretation of the qualitative and quantitative data equally within the study. We conclude that current SoTL research is characterised by methodological pluralism but could be advanced through inclusion of more diverse approaches, such as close reading, and adoption of strategies known to enhance the quality of research, for example, triangulation and visual representation.

Methods of Reflection about Service Learning: Guided vs. Free, Dialogic vs. Expressive, and Public vs. Private aBSTraC T reflection is a key component of service learning, but research shows that in order to maximize learning, the reflection must be of high quality. This paper compares the affordances of three different models of written reflection in engendering students' higher-order thought processes. Student reflections were compared across axes of guided versus free response, dialogic versus expressive reflection, and pub lic versus private reflection. results indicate that guided reflection yields more response than free reflection does. Dialogic and guided reflections both yield more integration of knowledge from service learning activities within a larger context. results for pub lic reflection versus private were mixed. ethical considerations for pub lic reflection are also discussed.Key WOrDS reflection, applied learning, experiential learning, service learning, blogsAs instructors work with students to meet course objectives through service learning, intentional reflection about the process is an important way for students to integrate knowledge of theory with experience in practice. In fields where direct service is not a goal of the discipline-for example, in business or communications-engaging students in effective reflection can be a challenge, as it may be more difficult to convince students of the need for it. This is unfortunate because reflection will be an essential part of successfully integrating their knowledge into a professional context.Reflection has been well studied and is key to distinguishing service learning from volunteering. There are many types of reflection, in clud ing group discussion, partner interactions, and other face-to-face opportunities. This paper investigates the affordances of different types of written reflection along three dimensions. We examine the reflections of students enrolled in multiple sections of an international service learning class. Cases are drawn from the same cohort of students, who are doing similar projects, but engaging in different methods of reflection. Their level of criti cal thinking about the service experience is coded and compared.

Like many disciplines in design and the visual fine arts, critique is a signature pedagogy in the graphic design classroom. It serves as both a formative and summative assessment while also giving students the opportunity to practice the habits of graphic design. Critiques help students become keen observers of relevant disciplinary criteria; reflective about what they’ve been taught, what they’ve observed, and how they’ve applied both; articulate in giving meaningful feedback to peers; and capable of using a specific tool to assess the successes and failures of their own design work.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to highlight the benefits and challenges of immersive, design thinking and community-engaged pedagogies for supporting social innovation within higher education; assess the impact of such approaches across stakeholder groups through long-term retrospective analysis of transdisciplinary and cross-stakeholder work; offer an approach to ecosystems design and analysis that accounts for complex system dynamics in higher education partnerships. Design/methodology/approach This study uses constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz and Belgrave, 2012) to create a long-term systemic analysis of university innovation efforts. Researchers analysed 37 semi-structured interviews across key stakeholders involved in the design and implementation of the Design Thinking Studio in Social Innovation. Interview subjects include alumni (students), faculty, community partners and administrators. Interviews were coded using constant comparative coding (Mills et al., 2006) to develop and analyse themes. This study includes situated perspectives from the authors who offer their subjective relationship to the Studio’s development. Findings This paper assesses the outcomes and design of a transdisciplinary cross-stakeholder social innovation program and extends prior research on the potential and challenges of design thinking and immersive pedagogies for supporting service-learning and community engagement (SLCE) practices within higher education. Qualitative interview results reveal how time, resources and other structural and systemic factors operate across stakeholder groups. The findings address a gap in SLCE and social innovation literature by situating community learning within pedagogical interventions constructed not only for the benefit of students but for community members. The authors conclude that the research on social innovation in higher education could benefit from a more intentional examination of longitudinal effects of innovative pedagogical environments across a broad range of stakeholder perspectives and contexts. Social implications This paper identifies how innovative higher education programs are forced to navigate structural, epistemological and ethical quandaries when engaging in community-involved work. Sustainable innovation requires such programs to work within institutional structures while simultaneously disrupting entrenched structures, practices, and processes within the system. Originality/value Social innovation in higher education could benefit from harnessing lessons from collective impact and ecosystem design frameworks. In addition, the authors argue higher education institutions should commit to studying longitudinal effects of innovative pedagogical environments across multiple stakeholder perspectives and contexts. This study closes these gaps by advancing an ecosystems model for long-term and longitudinal assessment that captures the impact of such approaches across stakeholder groups and developing an approach to designing and assessing community-involved collaborative learning ecosystems (CiCLE).

No abstract