When evaluating faculty performance at Carthage, we have traditionally used the analogy of the “three legged stool.” Teaching, scholarship, and community service comprise the three legs of the stool. We have always acknowledged the critical importance of teaching excellence. In hiring and retaining faculty at Carthage, evidence of competency progressing to mastery in the classroom has been and will continue to be an essential characteristic of Carthage faculty.
Evidence of scholarly productivity and contributions to the Carthage community, while not as critically essential as teaching excellence, continue to be very important characteristics of Carthage faculty. Some would suggest that over the past couple of decades, as the size of the Carthage faculty has increased and the hiring emphasis has been focused on applicants from top graduate programs, that our (i.e., faculty) desire for and expectations of research productivity has also increased. Most of us, if asked to define scholarship, would respond with characteristics that included some type of research culminating in the creation of something new and tangible, often in the form of a book or paper in many areas of the academy.
The purpose of this report is to ask the question “What constitutes scholarly productivity at Carthage?” Our purpose is not to provide a simple answer to that question. We firmly believe that such a question can only be answered through dedicated conversations across the institution with one’s colleagues, especially at departmental and divisional levels. For more than a decade, the issue of what constitutes scholarly activity has been debated in the academy at large. A redefining and broadening of the concept of scholarship is taking place, and with the encouragement and support of the Faculty Executive Committee and the Personnel and Tenure committee we would like to report on some of these developments. The traditional work of publishing books and papers comprises a small part of the expanding understanding of scholarly activity in higher education. We also propose a time frame and method for engaging the question of scholarly productivity at Carthage. We feel strongly that before we as a faculty attempt to answer that question, we need to be informed of the multiple ways of participating in scholarship that are increasingly acceptable at reputable institutions across our nation.
Below we provide for faculty consideration an initial framework for redefining scholarship at Carthage. This framework emphasizes process over the particular products that we normally associate with scholarship. Rather than placing a particular activity into discipline specific categories, criteria are provided that can be applied across disciplines.
Criteria for Scholarship
The following have been suggested as ways of identifying scholarly activity:
1. The activity or work requires a high level of discipline-related expertise.
2. The activity or work is conducted in a scholarly manner with (a) clear goals, (b) adequate preparation, and (c) appropriate methodology.
3. The activity or work and its results are appropriately and effectively documented and disseminated.
This reporting should include a reflective critique that addresses the significance of the work, the process that was used, and what was learned.
4. The activity or work has significance beyond the individual context. It (a) breaks new ground or is innovative, and (b) can be replicated or elaborated.
5. The activity or work, both process and product or result, is reviewed and judged to be meritorious and significant by a panel of one’s peers.
It will be the responsibility of the academic unit (at Carthage, that would involve departments, divisions, and DAC) to determine if the activity or work itself falls within the priorities of the department, college, and discipline.
(Diamond, 2002)
Redefining Scholarship
In 1990, Ernest Boyer catalyzed a sustained and lively debate about the meaning of scholarship with the publication of Scholarship Reconsidered, Priorities of the Professoriate. A brief summary of his categorization of scholarly activities, with several illustrative examples, is provided below. These terms will provide the framework for a departmental, divisional, and faculty-wide discussion of scholarship in the coming months. A bibliography is also provided. Most of these texts are available in the Hedberg Library.
Four Categories of Scholarship of the Professoriate
Scholarship of Discovery
Where new and unique knowledge is generated (This is what we have traditionally described as scholarship in the academy)
This form of scholarship includes but is not limited to:
• A refereed journal article reporting findings of research designed to gain new knowledge and/or provide new understanding within a discipline
• A book or book chapter describing a new theory developed by the author
Scholarship of Teaching
Where the teacher creatively builds bridges between his or her own understanding and the students’ learning.
Teaching as a scholarly inquiry involves formal, peer-reviewed communication in an appropriate media and venue that becomes part of the knowledge base of teaching and learning in higher education (Richlin, 2006). This form of scholarship includes but is not limited to:
• Presentation about new instructional technique to colleagues
• Publication on examples, materials, class exercises, or assignments that help students to learn difficult course concepts
• Publication listing resource materials for a course
Scholarship of Engagement
Where the emphasis is on the use of new knowledge in solving society’s problems
The Scholarship of Engagement emphasizes collaboration, the learning and instruction will be multi-directional and the expertise will be shared. The Scholarship of Engagement can involve community-based pedagogy and research (Rice, 2002). In 1990, Boyer termed this the Scholarship of Application. This form of scholarship includes but is not limited to:
• Study conducted for a local organization or government agency
• Seminars conducted for laypersons on current disciplinary topics
• An article that applies new disciplinary knowledge to a practical problem
Scholarship of Integration
Where new relationships among disciplines are discovered
The Scholarship of Integration involves making connections across disciplines, placing the specialized work of individual faculty members into a larger context, and educating non-specialists. This form of scholarship includes but is not limited to:
• A book or book chapter interpreting a theory or area for a lay audience
• A review of literature on a disciplinary or interdisciplinary topic
• A critical book review published in an academic or professional journal
Timeline
• Spring term: CADRE open forum to discuss the redefined categories of scholarship and activities included in those categories.
• Spring or Summer: departmental retreats to discuss forms of redefined scholarship that are appropriate for one’s department at Carthage.
• Beginning of Fall term: opening faculty retreat to include divisional conversations regarding departmental work over the summer.
• Fall term: information is pooled and considered by the Dean and DAC. A publication of scholarship redefined at Carthage is released at the end of the term.
Bibliography
*on reserve at the Hedberg Library Circulation Desk, ask for the CADRE Reserves
*Boyer, E. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 1997. [Former citation: Boyer, E. Scholarship Reconsidered, Priorities of the Professoriate. The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Princeton University Press, Lawrenceville, New Jersey, 1990.]
Braxton, J. M., Luckey, W., & Helland, P. Institutionalizing a Broader View of Scholarship Through Boyer’s Four Domains. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report: Volume 29, Number 2. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 2002.
*Diamond, R. Defining Scholarship for the Twenty-First Century. In Zahorski, K., ed. Scholarship in the Postmodern Era: New Venues, New Values, New Visions. New Directions For Teaching and Learning, no. 90. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 2002 p. 73-79.
*O’Meara, K. & Rice, R.E. Faculty Priorities Reconsidered: Rewarding Multiple Forms of Scholarship. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 2005.
*Rice, E. Beyond “Scholarship Reconsidered”: Toward an Enlarged Vision of the Scholarly Work of Faculty Members. In Zahorski, K., ed. Scholarship in the Postmodern Era: New Venues, New Values, New Visions. New Directions For Teaching and Learning, no. 90. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 2002 p. 7-17.
*Richlin, L. Blueprint for Learning: Constructing College Courses to Facilitate, Assess and Document Learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus Pub. 2006.
*Zahorski, K., ed. Scholarship in the Postmodern Era: New Venues, New Values, New Visions. New Directions For Teaching and Learning, no. 90. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. 2002.
Dan Miller
Christine Rener
January 30, 2007