Managing Editor's Comment
In her introduction to Opening Lines: Approaches to the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Pat Hutchings (2000) proposes a "taxonomy of questions" that characterizes the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL). The eight cases that constitute Opening Lines represent accounts of investigative work into significant issues of teaching and learning in fields such English composition, psychology, chemistry, and history. This issue of MountainRise, the first produced by the expanded international Editorial Board, with members from 16 countries and six continents (we hope Antarctica soon will be represented), is a continuation of Opening Lines and of two other collections of case studies of SoTL work published by the American Association for Higher Education and The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Disciplinary Styles in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Exploring Common Ground (Huber & Morreale, 2002) and Balancing Acts: The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Academic Careers (Huber, 2004).
According to Hutchings (2000), one kind of question that characterizes SoTL is the "What works?" question, one that generates a search for evidence of the relative effectiveness of different teaching approaches. A second kind of question is the "What is?" question, in which the focus is on describing the features of a particular approach to promoting student learning. A "Visions of the possible" question, the third kind, leads to inquiry about what is most essential about teaching and learning in our discipline.
In this issue of MountainRise are examples of SoTL work that have been sparked by each of these kinds of questions in Hutchings' taxonomy. Suzanne Burgoyne, Sharon Welch, Karen Cockrell, Helen Neville, Peggy Placier, Meghan Davidson, Tamara Share, and Brock Fisher, in their study of student responses to Theatre of the Oppressed, a widely-used interactive theatre form, explore a "what is" question. In their description of their module approach to online integrative teaching and learning, Jane M. Cirillo and Cammy S. Artiz also pursue a "what is" question and present step-by-step guidelines for implementing their model.
A "what works" question is the trigger for John LeBaron and Ieda Santos' study of ways to promote peer interaction in an online learning environment. Also in pursuit of a "what works" question, Joan Benek-Rivera examines how student journals facilitate student and faculty learning. In her study she presents evidence that both students and faculty benefit from the assignments she describes. A "what works" question is the stimulus for Jean D. Hines, Mary E. Swinker, Diane K. Frey, and Kelly M. Broughton as they explore the effectiveness of a teaching and learning strategy for integrating information literacy into merchandising instruction.
All three questions in Hutchings' taxonomy appear to stimulate both Kathleen McKinney's analysis of the learning log entries of sociology majors and the efforts of Julie Mills. Mary Ayre, David Hands, and Pam Carden's to produce "awareness raising" about learning styles in both instructors and students in a variety of engineering disciplines. Not only do the these studies provide evidence for "what works" with respect to strategies to increase learning in sociology and efforts to improve instructors' understanding of learning styles, they also offer "what is" descriptions of student reflections on learning in sociology and of the variety of learning styles of engineering students . In addition, these two studies offer "visions of the possible"-visions of potential interventions at the course and program levels in sociology and visions of teaching and assessment practices in engineering courses that accommodate the range of students' learning styles.
One of the goals of MountainRise is to stimulate dialogue about the nature, meaning, methods and goals of teaching and learning. Therefore, we invite readers' critical responses to any of the articles in this issue. We will include them in "Peak Responses," a section for readers' responses in the next issue of MountainRise, appearing in spring 2005. In addition, we encourage readers to contact authors directly via their email addresses found in "About the Contributors."
References
Huber, M. T. (2004). Balancing acts: The scholarship of teaching and
learning in academic careers. Washington, DC: American Association
for Higher Education and The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching.
Huber, M. T., & Morreale, S. (Eds.). (2004). Disciplinary styles in the scholarship of teaching and learning: Exploring common ground. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education and The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Hutchings, P. (2000). Approaching the scholarship of teaching and learning. In P. Hutchings, (Ed.), Opening lines: Approaches to the scholarship of teaching and learning (pp. 1-10). Menlo Park: CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
-John Habel, Managing Editor