When it comes to the academy, does teaching really matter?

Announcements
Published
on
August 31, 2011
| 0 followers
 
members are following updates on this item.
Total views and unique visitors for the last 30 days and all time
Last 30 DaysAll-Time
Total Views  
Unique Visitors  

*Unique visitors count logged-in members only and excludes anonymous views. Total view count is real-time.

Published
on
August 31, 2011
Total views and unique visitors for the last 30 days and all time
Last 30 DaysAll-Time
Total Views  
Unique Visitors  

*Unique visitors count logged-in members only and excludes anonymous views. Total view count is real-time.

0
 
members are following updates on this item.
Offline
Jean Mandernach
Scholarship was reconsidered. Tenure, not so much.

That's the conclusion of a new book, The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Reconsidered: Institutional Integration and Impact (Jossey-Bass), the latest in a series of examinations by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching of the impact (potential and realized) of the late Ernest Boyer's 1990 work, Scholarship Reconsidered.

Scholarship Reconsidered: Discrepancies in How Faculty Teach and How Faculty Are Evaluated
A new study looks at the impact of Ernest Boyer's "Scholarship Reconsidered" (1990), which argued that the rigors of controlled experiments, peer review, and sustained research could be applied to pedagogy, from course design to curriculum planning. The new study finds significant impact of these ideas on the practice of teaching, but notes that these ideas have not significantly influenced how faculty are evaluated.

To see the complete article, see Inside Higher Ed.

Related Content (0)

    There is no related content for this article.