College instructors too often mistakenly believe that we have expertise in and are practitioners of a single discipline, namely the subject that we teach. It is easy to see why we labor under this false assumption. Society considers us “masters” in these fields both for the knowledge in these areas that we have accumulated over the years and the degrees (at the very least) that we have earned. Then, most of us work within a department that bears the name of that field in which we studied.
The second discipline that all experienced college educators have a great deal of expertise in and are vigorous practitioners of is often overlooked; it is, instead, not seen as a discipline but rather as something that we simply do. That discipline is, of course, the discipline of teaching.
That teaching is a distinct discipline, one that requires skill, nuance, and constant examination, is a very important point to make, especially for educators at a community college where our paramount objective is the teaching of students, as opposed to research in our “other” field. On one hand, this is something that I don’t have to tell you. You know. Teaching is hard work.
On the other hand, teaching as a discipline has not gotten the recognition and institutional attention that it deserves, both here and at most other colleges and universities.
In Fall 2003, at Community College of Philadelphia, this neglect was addressed through a new initiative. Faculty members who teach and have an interest in improving the learning of Developmental students have formed the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Institute (SoTL). Approximately thirty educators met four times last semester, under the facilitation of Tom Ott, Director of Developmental Education, and myself, to formulate our vision of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
At the outset, the Institute reaffirmed the principles asserted by Pat Hutchings and Lee S. Shulman in their article “The Scholarship of Teaching.” These principles assert that scholars and practitioners of teaching “1) foster significant, long lasting learning for all students, 2) advance the practice and profession of teaching, and 3) bring to teaching the recognition afforded to other forms of scholarly work.”
After reading the above mentioned article, members of the Institute submitted written statements of their vision of SoTL. The submissions contained various well considered reflections on the various impediments faced by adult Developmental learners, as well as possible approaches to address these obstacles, approaches that could then be implemented and examined. The diverse views of learning impediments depicted by the members show the value of addressing these issues collaborativley. Simply, by discussing these issues in a formal setting, two objectives of SoTL are already met: Each instructor no longer feels he or she is working in isolation with porblems that all of us face, and a common vocabulary to discuss our classroom challenges is developing.
In addition, the statements written by SoTL members illustrate a great consistency in terms of how the group will proceed to improve student learning. First, there is general agreement that SoTL members see themselves as researchers. They should learn from their students to teach their students more effectively. Thus, beginning in Spring 2004, Institute members will identify specific learning challenges their students face in regard to developing their reading abilities. Next, these instructors will devise methods to improve their students' success at meeting the specific challenges. During this time, each instructor will carefully document and assess the new method employed, while making modifications as necessary. Finally, the results of this implementation will be shared with the group.
Some Viewpoints readers may be thinking to themselves, isn’t a conscientious instructor always updating and seeking to improve his or her effectiveness in teaching? What does SoTL offer that is different?
The first and possibly most important way in which SoTL inquiry is different is that methods and results are shared with the group. The work we do in our classes is made public. An individual instructor is no longer working in isolation to improve instruction and address obstacles to learning that are common to our student population. Thus, instructors, as SoTL researchers, have a structured opportunity to collaborate and a forum in which to share results. By sharing our results with each other and with the College community (chiefly through Viewpoints), we hope to create a body of research and a collection of effective practices. In time, new and seasoned instructors will be able to access the methods and results of others and try these out for themselves.
We are not seeking to determine the definitive, singular, or “best” way to teach specific skills; rather, we hope to create a diverse catalogue of successful practices. SoTL is meant to be inclusive and continually expanding. The inquiry is ongoing.
A second way in which SoTL inquiry is different is that instructors will seek to target improving discrete skills with their specific approaches. As with all good research, results should be measurable and able to be duplicated by other instructors. In other words, the focus is on the effectiveness of the method of teaching rather than an individual instructor’s charisma or personal ability to motivate his or her students.
SoTL members believe that no “bad” results can come from ethical classroom research. In other words, even if a method is found to be ineffective, that knowledge is still useful. A specific attempt to improve learning that has been proven to be less effective than others can be discarded. This is an important declaration to make, for it shows that the group is supportive of one another’s efforts and that no instructor should be embarrassed by trying something that may not work.
Additionally, impediments to student learning from a SoTL perspective are not seen as problems; rather, they are seen as challenges to overcome and possible questions for inquiry. SoTL seeks to inspire imaginative ways to address the challenges that adult Developmental students face.
Working together, we hope to create an optimistic and supportive environment where practices are shared and teaching is seen as a discipline worthy of scholarship. We believe our students deserve no less.
©Copyright 2004. Contact author for permission
Maintained by Jay Howard,Jan 2004