- Shopping Bag ( 0 items )
No reform effort in American higher education in the last twenty years has been more important than the attempt to enlarge the dominant understanding of the scholarly work of facult—what counts as scholarship. Faculty Priorities Reconsidered assesses the impact of this widespread initiative to realign the priorities of the American professoriate with the essential missions of the nation's colleges and universities: to redefine faculty roles and restructure reward systems. Faculty Priorities Reconsidered traces the history of the movement to redefine scholarship: examining the impact of the 1990 landmark report Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate from The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and the decade-long work of the American Association for Higher Education's Forum on Faculty Roles and Rewards that initiated and sustained much of the work reported on here. The struggles to move beyond narrow definitions of research, to distinguish between scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching while acknowledging the importance of both, to encourage faculty engagement in meeting the scholarly needs of the larger civic community, and to recognize the importance of academic synthesis and integration—all elements of a broader understanding of scholarship—are addressed in this book.
Foreword (Russell Edgerton).
Acknowledgments (KerryAnn O’Meara and R. Eugene Rice).
Introduction (KerryAnn O’Meara and R. Eugene Rice).
PART ONE: CONTEXT.
1. “Scholarship Reconsidered”: History and Context (R. Eugene Rice).
2. The Four Forms of Scholarship.
The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Today (Mary Taylor Huber, Pat Hutchings, and Lee S. Shulman).
Tracing the Scholarship of Engagement Through My Professional Memoirs (Amy Driscoll).
The Scholarship of Discovery (George E. Walker).
The Scholarship of Integration (David K. Scott).
3. Issues of Implementation.
Scholarship Reconsidered: Barriers to Change (Robert M. Diamond).
Redefining Scholarship: A Small Liberal Arts College’s Journey (Kenneth J. Zahorski).
Preparing Future Faculty and Multiple Forms of Scholarship (Jerry G. Gaff).
PART TWO: LESSONS LEARNED FROM CAMPUS STUDIES.
4. A Question of Mission: Redefining Scholarship at Franklin College (David G. Brailow).
5. Redefining the Culture of Scholarship: Madonna University (Dennis Bozyk).
6. Encouraging Multiple Forms of Scholarly Excellence at Albany State University (Barbara DeVeaux Holmes).
7. Faculty Scholarship in a Nontraditional University: The University of Phoenix (Catherine Garner, William Pepicello, and Craig Swenson).
8. Ensuring Equity Across the Missions of a Land-Grant University: South Dakota State University (Carol J. Peterson and Diane Kayongo-Male).
9. Optimism With Our Eyes Wide Open: Reconsidering Scholarship at Kansas State University (Victoria L. Clegg and Gretchen R. Esping).
10. Identifying and Managing University Assets: A Campus Study of Portland State University (John Rueter and Talya Bauer).
11. Signs of Change at a Research-Extensive University: Promoting the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning at Arizona State University (Don Evans, Judy Grace, and Duane Roen).
12. Broadening the Definition of Scholarship: A Strategy to Recognize and Reward Clinician-Teachers at the University of Colorado School of Medicine (Steven R. Lowenstein and Robin A. Harvan).
PART THREE: NATIONAL PERSPECTIVES.
13. Effects of Encouraging Multiple Forms of Scholarship Nationwide and Across Institutional Types (KerryAnn O’Meara).
14. Principles of Good Practice: Encouraging Multiple Forms of Scholarship in Policy and Practice (KerryAnn O’Meara).
15. The Future of the Scholarly Work of Faculty (R. Eugene Rice).
APPENDIX: SURVEY TABLES.
Table A.1: Catalysts.
Table A.2: Barriers.
Table A.3: Increases and Improvements From Reform.
Table A.4: What Counts for Faculty Evaluation.
Table A.5: Change in Reward Systems.
Table A.6: Criteria Used to Evaluate Scholarship.
Table A.7: Support for a Broader Definition of Scholarship.
Table A.8: Acceptance of Multiple Forms of Scholarship Within Institutional Cultures.