These themes, called standards in Scholarship Assessed, stated that for a work of scholarship to

Craig Scanlan

Informations

• Publié par: Anyi
• Nombre de lectures: 7
• Langue: English

Extrait

DRAFT UMDNJ School of Health Related Professions Committee on Appointments and Promotions Perspective on Scholarship The UMDNJ - School of Health Related Professions Committee on Appointments and Promotions (CAP) is charged with reviewing and recommending candidates for academic appointment or promotion in the School. A critical component of this process is the assessment of candidates’ scholarly activity. Because scholarship is an expectation for all SHRP faculty holding full academic rank at the assistant professor level and above, and because the meaning of scholarship is not always clear to those seeking appointment or promotion in the School, CAP believes it important to share its perspective on this important obligation with all School faculty. What is Scholarship? Scholarship represents a planned process of rigorous inquiry designed to systematically advance the research, teaching and/or service missions of a profession. To qualify as scholarship, such inquiry should be: 1) significant to the profession and/or the publics it serves, 2) well-planned and documented, 3) conducted using appropriate procedures that allow for replication or elaboration by others; 4) effectively communicated to colleagues; and 5) publicly shared for review and critique by others. As a personal activity that is both iterative and progressive, the scholarly process also should impact upon the individual by fostering ongoing learning and subsequent inquiry, and by promoting continuous professional growth and development. What Types of Scholarship Do Faculty Engage In? In his classic monograph,Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate,Boyer (1990) differentiated among four types of scholarship: 1) the scholarship of discovery, 2) the scholarship of integration, 3) the scholarship of application, and 4) the scholarship of teaching. Table 1 describes the meaning of each of these different types of scholarship as interpreted by CAP, and includes examples of applicable activities and the kinds of evidence that would help document one’s achievement in that category when being considered for appointment or promotion to academic rank. Although some faculty engage in all four types of scholarship, that is the exception. Normally, faculty emphasize the one or two areas of scholarship most closely associated with their primary role and responsibilities and most consistent with their area of concentration, i.e., Clinical, Research, Education or Administration/Service. For example, a faculty member with a concentration in education might focus primarily on the scholarship of teaching and integration. On the other hand, a faculty member concentrating in the administration/service area may focus primarily on the scholarship of application. CAP assigns no hierarchy of value to these different types of scholarship. Ultimately, it is the quality of the scholarship that matters most, as manifested by it real or potential contribution toward (a) meeting the needs of those we serve and (b) fostering a life-long process of academic growth and development among the faculty of the School.

1

Table 1 –Types of Scholarship and Example Activities/ Documentary Evidence Type ofInterpretive ExampleActivities and Scholarship MeaningDocumentary Evidence Discovery •Comes closest to the meaning of basic•Publication of original research in peer- research reviewedjournals or meeting •Contributes both to the inventory of human proceedings knowledge and the intellectual climate of the •Invited presentations of original institution scientificdata •Address both what is to be known and what is•Successful peer-reviewed research grant yet to be foundproposals Integration •Collects isolated facts or findings and•Publication of integrative research synthesizes them into a new perspective reviews (addresses themeaningof others’ findings) •Publication of scholarly overviews, book •Illuminates existing data in new or revealingchapters or monographs ways •Publication of scholarly essays/editorials •or invited presentations on issues orSeeks to interpret, draw together and bring new insight to bear on original researchtopics of interdisciplinary importance •Integrates primary research within larger intellectual patterns •Places specialties in a larger context •Makes connections across disciplines Application •Represents the application of knowledge to•Publication of applied research in peer- deal with real-world problemsreviewed journals or in meeting •Usually relates directly to one’s professional proceedings/abstracts service activity•Planning, implementation, evaluation • and dissemination of model outreach Includes applied research activities on methods and procedures; evaluation and programming or service systems outcomes research; economic and policy•Successful peer-reviewed, service- analyses; and development of evidence-basedrelated grant proposals protocols or practice guidelines •Invited presentations on the planning, •Can also involve the interaction of theory andimplementation and evaluation of new, practice via provision ofmodeloutreach novelor innovative service delivery programs to other institutions, businesses,models communities, and individuals Teaching •Involves actively seeking and imparting•Evidence of mastery of one’s subject knowledge, including knowledge of thematter, knowledge of effective teaching/learning processpedagogical methods, and demonstrated • effective teaching Entails mastery of the subject matter, knowledge of effective pedagogical methods•Publication of peer-reviewed papers on and involvement in educational research orteaching/ learning development activities, i.e., designing, •Published instructional textbooks, implementing, assessing, and disseminating workbooks, courseware or curricula innovative instructional methods and/or •Development and dissemination of materials innovative teaching tools or methods •Necessitates a commitment to continuing •Invited presentations or workshops on personal growth as an educator teaching/learning •Successful peer-reviewed educational grant proposals How is Faculty Scholarship Assessed? In an effort to seek consensus on a common framework for assessing these various types of scholarship Glassick, Huber and Maeroff (1997) developed a set of basic criteria by which any

2

scholarly work or effort could be evaluated for quality. According to these standards, a quality work of scholarship must be characterized byclear goals, adequate preparation, appropriate methods, outstanding results, effective communication, and a reflective critique. Table 2 lists these standards and provides the basic questions CAP currently applies to determine if the standards are being achieved. Table 2 – Standards and Questions Used by CAP to Assess Scholarly Efforts Standard RelevantQuestion(s) Clear goalsWas the purpose of the effort well-defined, i.e., was the basic question, problem or need being addressed clearly stated and its importance justified? Adequate preparationWas the effort soundly based on current state-of-the-art knowledge in the field of study? Appropriate methodsWere the methods and procedures appropriate to the effort? Significant resultsDid the effort make or does the effort have the potential to make a significant contribution to the field? Effective communicationHas the effort been effectively communicated, widely disseminated and openly shared with colleagues for their review? Reflective critiqueHas engagement in and evaluation of the effort stimulated additional learning or inquiry, personal growth or professional development? Bibliography — (2000). Expanding the View of Scholarship [Theme Issue].Academic Medicine, 75: 871-943. Also available online at:http://www.academicmedicine.org/content/vol75/issue9/ American Association of Colleges of Nursing. (2002). Position Statement on Defining Scholarship for the Discipline of Nursing. Accessed 2003 Jul. Available at: http://www.aacn.nche.edu/Publications/positions/scholar.htm Boyer EL. (1990).Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1990. Felder, R. M. (2000). The Scholarship of Teaching.Chem Engr Education, 34(2), 144. Also available online at:http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Columns/scholarteach.pdf Glassick CE, Huber MT, and Maeroff G. (1997).Scholarship Assessed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Martin, M. (2002).Scholarly Activities. (n.d.). Society for Academic Emergency Medicine. Accessed 2003 Aug. Available at:http://www.saem.org/newsltr/2001/july-august/scholar.htm Shulman L. (1999). The Scholarship of Teaching.Change, 31(5):11 . University of Nebraska Board of Regents. (n.d.). Policy Statement on the Relationship of Teaching, Research and Service. Accessed 2003 Aug. Available at: http://www.unomaha.edu/aa/borrsrch.html

3