Spodbujanje koncepta Scholarship of Teaching and Learning z učnimi teorijami in refleksivnostjo

  • Lester Brian Shawa University of KwaZulu Natal, South Africa
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.298
Ključne besede: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, diploma na podiplomskem študiju, teorije učenja, reflektivnost, socialno-konstruktivistična teorija učenja

Povzetek

Koncept Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) večinoma ostaja nedorečen pojem. Univerze morajo jasno opredeliti parametre delovanja, če želijo resnično prispevati k SoTL. Nekatere ustanove sodelujejo pri SoTL na akademski ravni, druge jo preučujejo z vidika institucionalne politike, tretje pa jo obravnavajo z vidika nacionalnih in mednarodnih okvirov, ki vplivajo na poučevanje in učenje na univerzah. Za prikaz dodelitve SoTL na akademski ravni so v članku uporabljeni: modul diplome na podiplomskem študiju, Kontekst in politika visokošolskega izobraževanja (večinoma so se ga udeležili univerzitetni akademiki z južnoafriških univerz) in način, na katerega bi spodbujevalec poučeval in spodbujal dodelitev SoTL na osnovi učnih teorij in refleksivnosti. Prav tako članek podrobno opisuje, na kak način lahko spodbujevalec posreduje modul ob uporabi socialno-konstruktivistične teorije učenja.

Prenosi

Podatki o prenosih še niso na voljo.

Literatura

Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child development: Six theories of child development (pp. 1–60). Greenwich, CT: Jai Press.

Boose, D., &. Hitchings, P. (2016). The scholarship of teaching and learning as a subversive activity. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 4(1), 1–12.

Boshier, R. (2009). Why is the scholarship of teaching and learning such a hard sell? Higher Education Research and Development, 28(1), 1–15.

Boyer, E. (1996). The scholarship of engagement. Journal of Public Service and Outreach, 1(1), 11–20.

Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Washington, DC: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Fanghanel, J., Pritchard, J., Potter, J., & Wisker, G. (2016). Defining and supporting the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SOTL): A sector-wide study. Heslington, UK: Higher Education Academy.

Fani, T., & Ghaemi, F. (2011). Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development (ZPD) in teacher education: ZPTD and self-scaffolding. Procedia: Social and Behavioural Science, 29, 1549–1554.

Flint, E. (2016). Engaging social constructivist teaching in the diverse learning environment: Perspectives from a first year faculty member. Higher Education for the Future, 3(1), 38–45.

Fry, H., S. Ketteridge., & Marshall, S. (2009). A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education. New York, NY: Taylor and Francis.

Glassick, C. (2000). Boyer’s expanded definitions of scholarship, the standards for assessing scholarship, and the elusiveness of the scholarship of teaching. Academic Medicine, 75(9), 877–880.

Hằng, NgÈ, B. A., & Pilot, A. (2017). Interaction of Vietnamese teachers with a social constructivist-based primary science curriculum in a framework appropriate for a Confucian heritage culture. Asia-Pacific Science Education 3(2). Retrieved from doi10.1186/s41029-017-0013-0

Hsueh-Jui L. S., & Lan. Y. (2016). Social constructivist approach to web-based EFL learning: Collaboration, motivation, and perception on the use of Google docs. Educational Technology and Society, 19(1), 171–186.

John-Steiner, V., &. Mahn, H. (1996). Sociocultural approaches to learning and development: A Vygotskian framework. Educational Psychologist, 31(3/4), 191–206.

Kay, D., & Kibble. J. (2016). Learning theories 101: Application to everyday teaching and scholarship. Advanced Physiology Education, 40(1), 17–25.

Kreber, C. (2013). Empowering the scholarship of teaching: An Arendtian and critical perspective. Studies in Higher Education, 38(6), 857–869.

Kreber, C., & Kanuka. H. (2006). The scholarship of teaching and learning and the online classroom. Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education, 32(1), 109–131.

Leibowitz, B., & Bozalek. V. (2016). The scholarship of teaching and learning from a social justice perspective. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(2), 109–122.

Maurer, T. (2016). The scholarship of teaching and learning in family science. Family Science Review, 21(2), 1–17.

McKinney, K. (2006). Attitudinal and structural factors contributing to challenges in the work of the scholarship of teaching and learning. In J. Braxton (Ed.), Analysing faculty work and rewards: Using Boyer’s four domains of scholarship - New directions in institutional research (pp. 37–50). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

O’Brien, F. (2013). Higher education context and policy: A module in the postgraduate Diploma in Higher Education. Durban: University of KwaZulu-Natal.

Quin, L., &Vorster. J. (2015). Pedagogy for fostering criticality, reflectivity and praxis in a course on teaching for lecturers. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(7), 1100–1113.

Reddy, S., Searl, R., Shawa, L. B., & Teferra, D. (2016). A balancing act: Designing and facilitating a university education induction programme for (early career) academics. Studies in Higher Education, 40(10), 1820–1834.

Remmik, M., Karm, M., Haamer, A., & Lepp, L. (2016). Early-career academics’ learning in academic communities. International Journal for Academic Development, 16(3), 187–199.

Scanlan, J., & Chernomas, W. (1997). Developing the reflective teacher. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25(6), 1138–1143.

Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Schumm, M., & Bogner, F. (2016). How environmental attitudes interact with cognitive learning in a science lesson module. Education Research International, 2016. Retrieved from doi.org/10.1155/2016/6136527

Schunk, D. (2012). Learning theories: An educational perspective. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), 935–947.

Subbaye, R., & Dhunpath, R. (2016). Early-career academic support at the University of KwaZulu-Natal. Towards a scholarship of teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 41(10), 1803–1819. doi:10.1080/03075079.2016.1221657

Taylor, D., & Hamdy, H. (2013). Adult learning theories: Implications for learning and teaching in Medical Education. Medical Teacher, 35(11), 1561–1572.

Timmermans, J., & Ellis, D. (2016). Reconceptualising the scholarship of teaching and learning at the University of Waterloo: An account of influences and impact. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2016(146), 71–78.

Vithal, R. (2018). Growing a scholarship of teaching and learning institutionally. Studies in Higher Education, 43(3), 468–483. doi:10.1080/03075079.2016.1180350

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Willis, J., Muktha, J., & Nilakanta, R. (2007). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Objavljeno
2020-03-20
Kako citirati
Shawa, L. B. (2020). Spodbujanje koncepta Scholarship of Teaching and Learning z učnimi teorijami in refleksivnostjo. Revija Centra Za študij Edukacijskih Strategij , 10(1), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.298
Številka
Letn. 10 Št. 1 (2020): Chemistry Education in the Countries of the Former Yugoslavia
Rubrike
VARIA

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
  2. The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
  3. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  4. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.