SoTL and Students’ Experiences of their Degree-Level Programs: An Empirical Investigation

Matthews, Kelly E.; Divan, Aysha; John-Thomas, Nicole; Lopes, Valerie; Ludwig, Lynn O.; Martini, Tanya S.; Motley, Phillip; Tomljenovic-Berube, Ana M.

doi:10.20343/teachlearninqu.1.2.75

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With some exceptions (e.g., Testa & Egan, 2014;Rasi, Hautakangas, & Väyrynen, 2015), meanings and practices of inclusivity at a program level are generally ignored and are in need of much development. At the same time, such attention would align with calls for scholarly investigations at the programmatic level in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning more broadly (Hubball, Pearson, & Clarke, 2013;Matthews, Divan, John-Thomas, Lopes, Ludwig, Martini, Motley, & Tomljenovic-Berube, 2013). This finding, which was not emphasized by Hockings in 2010, is a central outcome of our review.…”

mentioning

confidence: 65%

Moving towards inclusive learning and teaching: A synthesis of recent literature

Lawrie

Marquis

Fuller

et al. 2017

T&LI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The need for inclusive and equitable approaches to teaching and learning is a persistent theme in recent literature. In spite of relatively widespread agreement about this objective, inclusion remains elusive, and opinions about how best to achieve it proliferate. To provide a landscape view of the field and offer recommendations for research and practice, this article provides a focussed review of literature connected to inclusive teaching and learning published since 2010. Drawing from a framework advanced by Hockings (2010), we synthesize key findings from recent scholarship and argue for the value of a whole-of-institution approach that considers the activities and interactions of educational actors operating at different institutional levels. We also extend this argument to consider the need for greater attention to factors that move beyond the individual institution and to advocate for further international research in particular.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 65%

Moving towards inclusive learning and teaching: A synthesis of recent literature

Lawrie

Marquis

Fuller

et al. 2017

T&LI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, the vast majority of the studies we analyzed (87.6%) collected data from undergraduate students, compared to 83.9% of those analyzed by Divan et al Further, in both studies surveys were found to be the most common form of data collection (63.9% of articles in our study and 71% in Divan et al). In our sample most studies focused on specific undergraduate courses, and the impact of pedagogical interventions on knowledge transfer using a 'snapshot' approach, as described in Divan, Ludwig, Matthews, Motley, and Tomljenovic-Berube (2017) and Matthews, Divan, John-Thomas, Lopes, Ludwig, Martini, Motley, and Tomljenovic-Berube (2013).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Examining the Focus of SoTL Literature—Teaching and Learning?

Manarin

Adams²,

Fendler³

et al. 2021

TLI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) claims to focus on student learning, some have argued that SoTL studies often adopt a narrow view of learning and focus more on teaching than on learning. In this paper, we explore whether teaching is the primary focus of recent articles published from 2013-2017 in three international, self-identified SoTL journals: Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal (TLI), The International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ijSOTL), and The Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL). Based on our analysis of the 299 empirical articles, we argue that they portray SoTL as a field focused primarily on teacher activity rather than student learning, despite efforts to broaden its scope.

show abstract

“…Still others argue that this scope of the research "seldom has much impact beyond the individual or individuals concerned" (Tight, 2017). And of course some call for the field to also expand its lens to include program-level studies of learning-in-context (Matthews, Divan, John-Thomas, Lopes, Ludwig, Martini, Motley, & Tomljenovic-Berube, 2013).…”

Section: In Defense Of Microscopesmentioning

confidence: 99%