Building on higher
education research
Taking a scholarly approach to
teaching and learning
John Airey
Department of Mathematics and Science Education
Stockholm University
Overview
1.
Discipline-based education research.
2.
A shared problem.
3.
A study of teaching and learning.
4.
What is SoTL?
5.
Treating teaching like research.
6.
Operationalizing SoTL
John Airey Lärarkonferensen 2018
Discipline-based education research
“
investigates learning and
teaching in a discipline using a
range of methods with deep
grounding in the discipline’s
priorities, worldview, knowledge
and practices
”.
Long-term goal:
“
to understand the
nature of expertise in a
discipline
”.
Language in university physics
e.g. Airey & Linder (2006; 2008), Airey (2004; 2010; 2012; 2016).
Disciplinary use of semiotic resources
e.g. Airey & Linder (2009; 2017), Airey (2014), Volkwyn et al (2018).
Disciplinary literacy
e.g. Airey (2011a,b; 2013), Linder et al (2014).
How people become physics teachers
Undergraduate degree in physics.
Trained physics teacher.
Retrained as a language teacher.
Taught ESP for 10 years.
PhD in physics:
Science, Language and Literacy
(2009)
Reader (docent) in physics
Senior lecturer (lektor) English
Senior lecturer in (lektor) science education
John Airey Lärarkonferensen 2018
You went to university.
You were successful in your studies.
You carried on studying.
You understand the nature of research in your
discipline.
You ended up being a university teacher.
Your students are special too...
But usually not in the same way as you.
And that’s the problem!
Leads to a mismatch in expectations.
John Airey Lärarkonferensen 2018
Voices you may have heard...
“The quality of students we get has declined.”
“Some students don’t seem to be able to grasp simple
concepts.”
“I explained that concept in the last lecture
—
don’t
they listen?”
Are most students just weaker nowadays?
Or is there another, more plausible answer?
Sheila Tobias
A study of teaching and learning
Best first-year physics lecturers, University of Chicago
Would teach introductory physics to professors from the
humanities.
Only difference between teacher and learner would be
knowledge of the subject.
A study of teaching and learning
John Airey Lärarkonferensen 2018
The “students” complained they couldn’t “see” what they
were supposed to see.
“I could follow what was being described, but I could not
grasp what was actually happening in what was being
described. It was like seeing without any faculty of
intelligent perception”.
The instructors were unaware that their “students” were
confused.
What’s going on?
If professors of other disciplines can’t understand first
year lectures given by our best lecturers, what chance
do undergraduate students have?
Conclusion:
It takes a long time to see things like a disciplinary
insider.
What’s going on?
John Airey Lärarkonferensen 2018
“[University teachers] thoughts are so deeply rooted
in specialist discourse that they are unaware that
meanings that they take for granted are simply not
construable from outside the discourse”.
Northedge (2002:256)
As lecturers we have forgotten what it’s like to not know
our discipline.
Houston. We have a problem...
Need to understand how our efforts are perceived by our
students.
Otherwise we are wasting our time teaching.
To do this we need to take a
scholarly approach
to our
teaching.
What is Scholarship?
Websters online dictionary
Four scholarly practices
Discovery
Integration
Application
Teaching
The last scholarship quickly became known as the
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
(SoTL)
Descriptions of SoTL
“systematic reflection on teaching and learning made
public.”
McKinney (2006:39)
“Composing [
…
] a manuscript to be submitted to an
appropriate journal or conference venue.”
Descriptions of SoTL
“Engagement with the existing knowledge on teaching
and learning, self-reflection on teaching and learning in
ones discipline, and public sharing of ideas about
teaching and learning within the discipline.”
Martin, E., Benjamin, J., Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999)
“Treat your teaching like you treat your research.”
Airey (2018)
What do we do in our research?
Find out about what has been done.
Carry out new work building
on past experiences.
Discuss with colleagues.
Present at conferences.
Publish.
]
Share
Read
The apprenticeship of observation
What we are trying to get past with SoTL is
the
apprenticeship of observation.
Lortie (1977)
Lecturers teach courses in the same way they
themselves were taught.
The system has no facility for change or growth.
Read
Research always builds on earlier work in some way.
Scholarly teaching does the same.
Avoid re-inventing the wheel
Research
This is an area most of us know a lot about.
Beginning SoTL researchers tend to use the research
tools from their discipline.
May not be the most appropriate tools for researching
teaching and learning.
Share
Research only works as an enterprise if we share.
Scholarly teaching needs us to do the same.
August 1664
Laws governing attraction between objects
Solved problem four years earlier!
Couldn’t find it!
Promised to re-do
Led to one of the most important publications in
the history of physics and mathematics
Halley meets Newton
Share
For Newton sharing his work didn’t seem that important
“I seem to have been only like a boy, playing on the
seashore and diverting myself, in now and then finding a
smoother pebble, or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the
great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.”
Share
Even Newton eventually shared his work.
Not popular in Sweden in educational settings.
Everyone responsible for their own course.
Things you can do locally
John Airey Lärarkonferensen 2018
Try team teaching.
Conferences
Large number of general education conferences.
Specific, discipline-based teaching conferences.
University-wide.
National.
Discipline–based education journals
People often claim there are no journals in their discipline
where they can publish educational work.
I say they probably haven’t looked
J
Discipline–based education journals
People often claim there are no journals in their discipline
where they can publish educational work.
I say they probably haven’t looked
J
Operationalising SoTL
Inform yourself. Journal sign up.
Research what is happening in your teaching.
Team teaching.
Local sharing.
Conferences.
Publish papers.
What do we do in our research?
Find out about what has been done.
Apply for funding!
Carry out new work building
on past experiences.
Discuss with colleagues.
Present at conferences.
]
Share
Read
Educational ambassadors
Centre for the Advancement of
University Teaching (CeUL)
Educational ambassadors
Swedish Research Council
Centre for the Advancement of
University Teaching (CeUL)
Read what’s been done
Research your own classroom
Share your findings
Conclusions
“Treat your teaching like you treat your
research.”
Airey (2018)
Thanks for
listening!
Airey, J. (2004). Can you teach it in English? Aspects of the language choice debate in Swedish higher education. In Robert. Wilkinson (Ed.), Integrating Content and Language: Meeting the Challenge of a Multilingual Higher Education (pp. 97-108). Maastricht, Netherlands: Maastricht University Press.
Airey, J. (2006). När undervisningsspråket blir engelska [When the teaching language is changed to English]. Språkvård, 2006(4), 20-25.
Airey, J. (2006). Physics Students' Experiences of the Disciplinary Discourse Encountered in Lectures in English and Swedish. Licentiate Thesis. Uppsala, Sweden: Department of Physics, Uppsala University.
Airey J. (2009). Science, Language and Literacy. Case Studies of Learning in Swedish University Physics. Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of Science and Technology 81. Uppsala Retrieved 2009-04-27, from
http://publications.uu.se/theses/abstract.xsql?dbid=9547
Airey, J. (2010). The ability of students to speak about science concepts in two languages as a function of lecture language.
Hermes Journal of Linguistics. 45, 35-49.
Airey, J. (2011a). Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education: Disciplinary Literacy and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Dynamic content and language collaboration in higher education: theory, research, and reflections (pp. 57-65). Cape Town, South Africa: Cape Peninsula University of Technology.
Airey, J. (2011b). The Disciplinary Literacy Discussion Matrix: A Heuristic Tool for Initiating Collaboration in Higher Education. Across the disciplines, 8(3), unpaginated. Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/atd/clil/airey.cfm
Airey, J. (2012). “I don’t teach language.” The linguistic attitudes of physics lecturers in Sweden. AILA Review, 25(2012), 64–79. Airey, J. (2013). Disciplinary Literacy. In E. Lundqvist, L. Östman, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Scientific literacy – teori och praktik
(pp. 41-58): Gleerups.
Airey, J. & Larsson (2018). Developing Students’ Disciplinary Literacy? The Case of University Physics. In Tang, K-S. & Danielsson, K. Global developments in literacy research for science education.
Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2006). Language and the Experience of Learning University Physics in Sweden. European Journal of
Physics, 27(3), 553-560.
Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2008). Bilingual scientific literacy? The use of English in Swedish university science programmes. Nordic
Journal of English Studies, 7(3), 145-161.
Airey, J., & Linder, C. (2009). "A disciplinary discourse perspective on university science learning: Achieving fluency in a critical constellation of modes." Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 27-49.
Airey, J. & Linder, C. (2017) Social Semiotics in University Physics Education: Multiple Representations in Physics Education
Springer. pp 85-122.
Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered. Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton, NJ.: The Carnegie foundation for the advancement of teaching.
Linder, A., Airey, J., Mayaba, N., & Webb, P. (2014). Fostering Disciplinary Literacy? South African Physics Lecturers’ Educational Responses to their Students’ Lack of Representational Competence. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science
and Technology Education, 18(3), 242-252. doi:10.1080/10288457.2014.953294
Martin, E., Benjamin, J., Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Scholarship of teaching: A study of the approaches of academic staff. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving Student Learning: Improving Student Learning Outcomes: Proceedings of the 1998 6th International
Symposium. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development.
McKinney, K. (2006). Attitudinal and structural factors contributing to challenges in the work of the scholarship of teaching and learning. New Directions for Institutional Research, 129 (Summer), 37-50.
Northedge, A. (2002). Organizing excursions into specialist discourse communities: A sociocultural account of university teaching. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century. Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 252-264). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
National Research Council. (2012). Discipline Based Education Research. Understanding and Improving Learning in
Undergraduate Science and Engineering. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.
Richlin, L. (2001). Scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2001(86), 57–68. Tobias, S. (1986). Peer perspectives. On the teaching of science. Change, March/April 1986, 36-41.
Volkwyn, T., Airey, J., Gregorčič, B., Heijkenskjöld, F. & Linder, C. (in press). Physics students learning about abstract mathematical tools when engaging with “invisible” phenomena. PERC https://www.compadre.org/per/perc/proceedings.cfm.
