Teaching excellence, teaching expertise, and the scholarship of teaching

Innovative Higher Education

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2002, Pages 5-23

  Kreber, Carolin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Scholarship of teaching; Teaching excellence; Teaching expertise

Indexed keywords

EID: 4043082584     PISSN: 07425627     EISSN: 15731758     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1020464222360     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Andresen, L.W. (2000). A useable, trans-disciplinary conception of scholarship. Higher Education Research and Development, 19, 137-153.
2. Atkinson, J.W. (1977). Motivation for achievement. In T. Blass (Ed.), Personality variables (pp.25-108). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Baume, C., & Baume, D. (1996). A national scheme to develop and accredit university teachers. The International Journal for Academic Development, 1, 51-58.
4. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves. Chicago and La Salle: Open Court.
5. Blackburn, R.T., & Lawrence, J.H. (1995). Faculty at work. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6. Boice, R. (1992). The new faculty member. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7. Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered. Washington, DC: The Carnegie Foundation.
8. Braskamp, L.A., & Ory, J. C. (1994). Assessing faculty work: Enhancing individual and institutional performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publisers.
9. Braxton, J.M. (1996). Contrasting perspectives on the relationships between teaching and research. In J.M. Braxton (Ed.),Faculty teachingandresearch: Is there a conflict? New Directions for Institutional Research, no. 90 (pp.5-14). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10. Cambridge, B.L. (2000). The scholarship of teaching and learning: A national initiative. In M. Kaplan & D. Lieberman (Eds.), To improve the academy, 18, (pp. 55-68). Bolton, MA: Anker.
11. Cambridge, B.L. (2001, April). Campus conversations on the scholarship of teaching. Paper presented as part of the Symposium "More on the scholarship of teaching: Follow-up studies, reactions, and the possible future". American Educational Research Association, Division J, Post-Secondary Education, Seattle, WA.
12. Carr, D. (1992). Practical enquiry, values, and the problem of educational theory . Oxford Review of Education, 18, 241-251.
13. Centra, J.A. (1993). Reflective faculty evaluation : Enhancing teaching and determining faculty effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
14. Clark, B. (1997). The modern integration of research activities with teaching and learning. Journal of Higher Education, 68, 241-256.
15. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S.L. (1990). Research on teaching and teacher research: The issues that divide. Educational Researcher, 19(2), 2-11.
16. Colbeck, C. (1998). Merging in a seamless blend: How faculty integrate research and teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 96, 647-672.
17. Csikzentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow. The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper Perennial.
18. Diamond, R.M. (1993). Changing priorities and the faculty reward system. In R.M. Diamond and B.E. Adam (Eds.), Recognizing faculty work: Reward systems for the year 2000 (pp. 5-23). New Directions for Higher Education, no. 81. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19. Edgerton, R., Hutchings, P., & Quinlan, K. (1991). The teaching portfolio: Capturing the scholarship of teaching. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.
20. Feldman, K.A. (1987). Research productivity and scholarly accomplishments of college teachers as related to their instructional effectiveness: A review and exploration. Research in Higher Education, 26, 227-298.
21. Franklin, J., & Theall, M. (2001, April). Faculty opinions about the value and interest of the scholarship of teaching. After a decade, have Buyer's goals been achieved?. Paper presented as part of the Symposium "More on the scholarship of teaching: Follow-up studies, reactions, and the possible future". American Educational Research Association, Division J, Post-Secondary Education, Seattle, WA.
22. Glassick, C.E., Huber, M.T., & Maeroff, G.I. (1997). Scholarship assessed. Evaluation of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23. Hattie, J., & Marsh, H.M. (1996). The relationship between research and teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 66, 507-542.
24. Healey, M. (2000). Developing the scholarship of teaching in higher-education: A discipline-based approach. Higher Education Research and Development, 19, 169-189.
25. Hutchings, P. (1999). 1999 Pew Scholars Institute. Menlo Park, CA.
26. ILT (2001). (The Institute for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education), http:// www.ilt.ac.uk/about.html
27. Kember, D. (1997). A reconceptualization of the research into university academics' conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7, 255-272.
28. Knapper, C., & Rogers, P. (1994). Increasing the emphasis on teaching in Ontario universities. Contributed paper. Task Force on Resource Allocation, Ontario Council on University Affairs: Toronto, Ontario.
29. Kreber, C. (2000a). How teaching award winners conceptualize academic work: Further thoughts on the meaning of scholarship, Teaching in Higher Education, 5, 61-78.
30. Kreber, C. (2000b). Becoming an expert university teacher: A self-directed process. In H. Long (Ed.), Practice and theory in self-directed learning (pp. 131-143). Schaumburg, IL: Motorola University Press.
31. Kreber, C., & Associates (2001). Revisiting scholarship: Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no 86. San Francisco: JosseyBass.
32. Kreber, C. (2001). Conceptualizing the scholarship of teaching and identifying unresolved issues: The framework for this volume. In C. Kreber (Ed.), Revisiting Scholarship: Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching (pp. 1-19). New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no 86.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33. Kreber, C. (2001). Designing a teaching portfolio based on a formal model of the scholarship of teaching. In D. Lieberman & C. Wehlburg (Eds.), To improve the academy, 19, (pp. 268-285). Bolton, MA: Anker.
34. Kreber, C. (2002). Controversy and consensus on the scholarship of teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 27, 151-167.
35. Kreber, C. (in press). Challenging the dogma: Towards a more inclusive view of the scholarship of teaching. Journal of Excellence in College Teaching.
36. Kreber, C., & Cranton, P.A. (2000). Exploring the scholarship of teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 71, 476-495.
37. Martin, E., & Ramsden, P. (2000). Introduction. Higher Education Research and Development, 19, 133-135.
38. Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography-describing conceptions of the world around us. International Science, 10, 177-200.
39. Menges, R. J., & Weiiner, M. (1996) . Teaching on solid ground: Using scholarship to improve practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
40. Mentkowski, M., & Associates (2000). Learning that lasts. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
41. Morehead, J.W., & Shedd, P.J. (1996). Student interviews: A vital role in the scholarship of teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 20, 261-269.
42. Munby, H., & Russell, T. (1994). The authority of experience in learning to teach: Messages from a physics methods class. Journal of Teacher Education, 45(2), 86-95.
43. Morris, S. P. (2000). The pale of consideration when seeking sources of teaching expertise. American Journal of Education, 108, 167-195.
44. Paulsen, M.B. (2001a). After twelve years of teaching the college teaching course. In D. Lieberman & C. Wehlburg (Eds.), To improve the academy, 19, (pp.169-192). Bolton, MA: Anker.
45. Paulsen, M.B. (2001b). The relation between research and the scholarship of teaching. In C. Kreber (Ed.), Revisiting scholarship: Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching (pp. 19-31). New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no.86. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
46. Paulsen, M.B., & Feldman, K.A.(1995). Toward a reconceptualization of scholarship: A human action system with functional imperatives. Journal of Higher Education, 66, 615-641.
47. Pintrich, P.R. (Ed.). (1995). Understanding self-regulated learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
48. Prosser, M., Trigwell, K., & Taylor, P. (1994). A phenomenographic study of academics' conceptions of science learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction, 4, 217-231.
49. Rae, A., & Frost, P. (Eds) (1997). Researchers hooked on teaching : Noted scholars discuss the synergies of teaching and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
50. Rice, R. E.(1992) To ward a broader conception of scholarship: The American context. In T. Whiston and R. Geiger (Eds.), Research and higher education: The United Kingdom and the United States (pp. 117-129). Buckingham: SRHE/Open University Press.
51. Richlin, L. (Ed.) (1993). Preparing faculty for the new conceptions of scholarship. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no. 54. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
52. Richlin, L. (2001). Scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching. In C. Kreber (Ed), Revisiting scholarship: Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching (pp. 57-69). New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No 86. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
53. Rowland, S. (1996). Relationships between teaching and research. Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 7-21.
54. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
55. Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
56. Shulman, L.S. (1998). Course anatomy: The dissection and analysis of knowledge through teaching. In P. Hutchings (Ed.), The Course Portfolio. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education.
57. Smith, R. (1997, June). Making teaching count in Canadian higher education: Developing a national agenda. Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Newsletter of the Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (STLHE), pp. 1-10.
58. Smith, R. (2001). Expertise in teaching and in the scholarship of teaching . In C. Kreber (Ed.), Revisiting scholarship: Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching (pp. 69-79). New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no.86. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
59. Smith, S.L. (1991). Report: Commission of inquiry on Canadian university education. Ottawa, Ontario: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada.
60. Taylor, K. L. (1993). The role of scholarship in unversity teaching. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 23(3), 64-79.
61. Theall, M., & Centra, J. (2001). Assessing the scholarship of teaching: Valid decisions from valid evidence. In C. Kreber (Ed.), Revisiting scholarship: Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching (pp.31-45). New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no 86. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
62. Trigwell, K., Martin, E., Benjamin, J, & Prosser, M. (2000). Scholarship of teaching: A model. Higher Education Research and Development, 19, 155-168.
63. Vroom, V. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley.
64. Weimer, M. (1990). Improving university teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
65. Weimer, M. (1992). Scholarship of teaching. Journal of the Freshman Year Experience, 4(1), 41-58.
66. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92, 548-573.
67. Weston, C., & McAlpine, L. (2001). Making explicit the development towards the scholarship of teaching. In C. Kreber (Ed.), Revisiting scholarship: Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching (pp. 89-99). New Directions for Teaching and Learning, no.86. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
68. Zimmerman, B.J. (1998). Developing self-fulfilling cycles of academic regulation: An analysis of exemplary models. In D.H. Schunk, & B.J. Zimmerman (Ed.), Self-regulated learning. From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp.1-10). London: The Guilford Press.