Learning Objectives

• What are some leading definitions of scholarship and of the academic scholar?

• What criteria do several theorists agree on when it comes to scholarship?

Criteria for Scholarship and for the Scholar

The term scholar can be difficult to define, but Ireland (2014) summed it up as, “A learned person who is committed to taking the actions required to fully understand a discipline” (p. 152). This involves discipline immersion and “persistence in and passion for acquiring knowledge and learning to disseminate it, and a commitment to strong professional ethics” (Ireland, 2014, p. 152).

The concepts and definitions of scholarship and scholarly activities can differ between institutions and among faculty. In early American, scholarship was teaching. In the early to mid-20th century scholarship was faculty research and publication. Since 1990, Boyer’s model has redefined scholarship to include the four domains of teaching, research, application, and integration. Studies indicate that faculty workload is the most common reason for faculty to not engage in scholarship (DeHart, 2015), and when faculty do engage, the domains of teaching and discovery are still considered the most prioritized (Braxton, Luckey, & Helland, 2002). Another issue, however, is that some faculty are unclear as to the definitions of scholarship or what is expected of them as a scholar (DeHart, 2015; Secret, Leisey, Lanning, Polich, & Schaub, 2011). 2011). 

Module 2 described the differences of scholarly activities and scholarship as defined by Braxton et al. (2002). In the same way, there are different criteria for what it means to be a scholar and what constitutes scholarship. Following are some theorists’ criteria for defining scholarship and for the scholar:

As shown in the above chart, there are several similarities. Most theorists agree that scholarship must contribute to new knowledge and be peer reviewed. These are two key elements to remember when defining scholarship. Scholars pursue truth and have a passion for their studies.

Martinez, Floyd, and Erichsen (2011) found that faculty who are highly productive in producing scholarly output have the following characteristics: 

• Enjoy their work

• Research topics they are interested in

• Persist have a hard work ethic

• Have intrinsic motivation

• Collaborate well with others

• Have time management skills that allow for both research and teaching

• Remain accountable to deadlines

• Stay current on the literature

• Conduct research that builds upon itself

• Improve their research skills

• Receive mentoring

References and Suggested Readings

Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Lawrenceville, NJ: Jossey-Bass.  

Braxton, J., Luckey, W., & Helland, P. (2002). Institutionalizing a broader view of scholarship in colleges and universities through Boyer’s four domains. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Rice, 1996

DeHart, D. (2015). Promoting a culture of scholarship in higher education. Global Journal of Human-Social Science, 15(11), 34–44.

Diamond, R. M., & Adam, B. E. (1995). Describing the work of faculty: Disciplinary perspectives. In R. M. Diamond & B. E. Adam, The disciplines speak: Rewarding the scholarly, professional, and creative work of faculty (pp. 1–14). Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.

Glassick, C. E., Huber, M. T., & Maeroff, G. I. (1997). Scholarship assessed: Evaluation of the professorate. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Ireland, R. D. (2014). Our academy, our future. Academy of Management Review, 40(2), 151–162. 

Martinez, R., Floyd, R., & Erichsen, L. (2011). Strategies and attributes of highly productive scholars and contributors to the school psychology literature: Recommendations for increasing scholarly productivity. Journal of School Psychology, 49(6), 691–720. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2011.10.003 

Rice, E. (1996). Making a place for the new American scholar. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.

Secret, M., Leisey, M., Lanning, S., Polich, S., & Schaub, J. (2011). Faculty perceptions of the scholarship of teaching and learning: Definition, activity level and merit considerations at one university. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 11(3), 1–20.