The Faculty of Education Live Life Learning
Document Sample


Scholarly Activity
The Question of Impact
James Heap
CSSE/ACDE May 27,2007
[revision1]
Betwixt the Tower and the Field
• As professional schools, FOEs are Janus-
faced organizations, oriented to the
academy, with its disciplines and
standards, and the field of education,
primarily K-12 public education, with its
multiple stakeholders, professional
organizations and provincial regulations.
Faculty of Education
• We need to turn our “location” in this
normative, regulated space into a position.
• We need to formulate our position in each
domain of the university‟s mission:
instruction, scholarship and service
• We need to clarify confusions and
opportunities arising from our location.
Faculty of Education
Consider scholarship
• A review of Ontario university and FOE tenure &
promotion documents reveals an abiding
orientation to the “tower” (the academy and its
disciplines) over “the field.”
• Refereed publication in top-tier journals is the
“gold standard.”
• This standard is enshrined in SSHRC proposal
guidelines and reviews and in (OCT)
accreditation requirements.
Faculty of Education
• For resource allocation decisions in the
university, e.g., P&T, research funding, the value
of having refereed journals with different levels
of selectivity is that they provide a public
measure of the quality of scholarship.
• For Janus-faced professional schools, what‟s
wrong with this picture?
• A professional school ought to be concerned
with the impact of scholarship on the field of
practice to which it is oriented.
Faculty of Education
Wait, it‟s more complex
• It‟s not that scholarship that is academy-
oriented should be judged in terms of
quality, and scholarship that is field-
oriented should be judged in terms of
impact.
• All scholarship, especially in FOEs, should
be judged in terms of both quality and
impact.
Faculty of Education
The Question of Impact…
• has to be addressed by formulating and getting
agreement on types of scholarship.
• Concern with refereed publications in top- tier
journals is appropriate to what Boyer (1990)
called the Scholarship of Discovery and the
Scholarship of Integration.
• These two types of scholarship are oriented to
the standards, problematics and paradigms of
the academy and its disciplines.
Faculty of Education
Other types of scholarship
• Boyer defined two other types of
scholarship: Application and Teaching
• “Scholarship of Teaching” has come to
identify a substantive focus for
scholarship, not a formal structure of
inquiry. (I will not address it here.)
• Scholarship of Application: „knowledge
responsibly applied to consequential
problems.‟ (Scholarship Reconsidered)
Faculty of Education
“Scholarship of Application”
disaggregates into…
• “Scholarship of Resolution”—concerned
with resolving consequential problems,
e.g., of policy and/or practice in the field of
education.
• “Scholarship of Creation”—concerned with
creating knowledge objects (textbooks,
manuals, curricula, methods, software,
etc.) for use, or performances for use
and/or appreciation, in a field of practice.
Faculty of Education
So, OK, it‟s even more complicated
• Four types of scholarship: Discovery,
Integration, Resolution, Creation (??).
• Each type of scholarship has two reflexive
cycles:
• Quest for discovery, integration,
resolution, or creation.
• Expression of the results of the quest.
Faculty of Education
For each type of scholarship…
• the “question of impact” is primarily a
question about the impact of the
“expression of the results of a quest.”
• the question of impact must be asked in
terms of the orientation of the expression
of the results of a quest.
• Is the expression oriented primarily toward
the academy or the field?
Faculty of Education
It seems that…
• The expression of the scholarship of
discovery is oriented to the academy.
• The expression of the scholarship of
integration can be oriented either to the
academy or a field.
• The expression of the scholarships of
resolution and creation is oriented toward
a field.
Faculty of Education
Now for something completely
different…
• Brock‟s FOE Impact Objectives for
scholarly activity (www.brocku.ca/fed)
• provoke discussion by peers, practitioners,
and policy makers [Recognition]
• result in application of our practices,
materials and theories [Utilization]
• contribute to the improvement of education
and the human condition [Betterment]
Faculty of Education
• The impact of the academy or discipline-
oriented scholarships of discovery and
integration is a question primarily of
Recognition and Utilization within the
academy.
• The impact of field-oriented scholarships
of integration, resolution and creation is a
question primarily of Recognition,
Utilization and Betterment in a field.
Faculty of Education
Three tasks ahead
• Discuss, clarify and refine the types of
scholarship.
• Discuss, develop and define ways to
demonstrate and judge quality for each
type of scholarship.
• Discuss, develop and define ways to
demonstrate and judge impact for each
type of scholarship.
Faculty of Education
• The resulting framework, or set of accords, will
provide FOEs with a reasoned, coherent and
useable conceptual apparatus for defining,
explaining and defending the scholarly activity
we value as professional schools.
• We will, thereby, turn our location “betwixt tower
and field” into a self-aware position in service
and accountable to both the academy and the
field of education.
Faculty of Education
The end
• Surgite!
• Thank you.
jheap@brocku.ca
Faculty of Education
Get documents about "