The SoTL Advocate

Supporting efforts to make public the reflection and study of teaching and learning at Illinois State University and beyond…


Leave a comment

Thoughts on SoTL Advocacy from the SoTL Commons Conference

Written by Jennifer Friberg, Cross Endowed Chair in SoTL and Professor of Communication Sciences & Disorders at Illinois State University (jfribe@ilstu.edu)

A few weeks ago, I had the good fortune of being invited to deliver one of two keynote addresses at the annual SoTL Commons conference in Savannah, Georgia. Happily, I was given the opportunity to select my own topic for my talk and, having thought deeply about several options, selected SoTL advocacy as my focus. This is likely not a surprise to those who know me, as I am a passionate advocate for research on teaching and learning. After developing several iterations of my talk, I chose to focus my remarks on five ideas I believe to be central to effective SoTL advocacy. I share them here, in the hopes that one or more of these might resonate with folks for use now or at a later time in their own SoTL advocacy efforts.

As a starting point, I do feel as though the above screenshot of one of the slides from my keynote hits on something very important: SoTL advocacy should be undertaken in ways that employ diverse approaches to our advocacy work. Perhaps the the word “customized” might even be appropriate as a corollary to this recommended diverse approach to advocacy, as efforts to engage an expanded group of stakeholders in SoTL should be specifically tailored to fit the contexts in which SoTL advocacy is being undertaken. With that in mind, suggestions for thoughtful and purposeful SoTL advocacy presented at the SoTL Commons included the following:

  1. Keep your SoTL “start-up” story in mind. Share it with others, as understanding your interest in SoTL might drive someone else to develop an interest, too. I have found this to be true, particularly for colleagues within your own discipline. My field of speech-language pathology has an established standard for using evidence-based practices to inform clinical decision-making. When I explain to other speech-language pathologists or audiologists that I started with SoTL because of my view that evidence to support my teaching practices is just as necessary as evidence to support my clinical work, folks can easily understand my perspective. While they might not engage in SoTL, they can conceive of how it might be important to others and to the discipline, at large.
  2. Develop an “advocative” (ad-VOCK-ah-tiv) mindset. Encourage people to think about SoTL in different ways, via a lens of provocative advocacy. The central idea to being advocative is being both thoughtful and purposeful in advancing (in this case) SoTL. Think about why advocacy is needed with a person or group. Plan a thoughtful approach to your advocacy efforts, one that makes the stakeholders you seek to engage leave their interaction(s) with you changed in their thinking about SoTL. If you find yourself having similar conversations across a variety of stakeholders, that’s okay, as being advocative can be necessarily repetitive!
  3. Consider the advantages of code switching. I have facilitated a particular undergraduate language development course over a dozen times in the last decade at my university. One of the important concepts in that course’s curriculum is that of code switching, the notion that children learn to adjust the language they use (tone, vocabulary, delivery) based on who they are communicating with. I would argue that advocacy efforts require a similar type of code switching to make SoTL matter to a given audience. As there are very different stakeholder groups for SoTL (e.g., faculty, students, administration, accreditation groups), it is important to speak to language of the individuals you seek to engage in your advocacy efforts. SoTL should be made important to individual stakeholders in individual ways.
  4. Establish semantic congruency with specificity. We often lack semantic congruency in our discussions about SoTL. Why? A variety of words and phrases are used to talk about research on teaching and learning, which can lead to confusion (as discussed in this blog post a few weeks ago!). If you’re talking with folks about SoTL, be able to identify similarities and differences between SoTL and educational research, action research, or classroom-based research. Develop ways to describe well that which you advocate for.
  5. Mentorship is a critical component of SoTL advocacy. With experience, many SoTL scholars become mentors to novice student or novice/veteran faculty SoTLists. While this is wonderful, I would argue that mentees need to observe not only the work that goes into a SoTL project, but advocacy efforts to advance that work. This type of mentorship includes the sharing of practices and processes for self-advocacy and collective advocacy at any point in a project’s lifespan (pre, during, post) to advance SoTL at micro through mega levels of impact.
Advertisements


2 Comments

Finding the Goldilocks fit for your SoTL manuscript: It’s a question of content, voice, and application!

Written by Jennifer Friberg, Cross Endowed Chair in SoTL and Professor of Communication Sciences and Disorders at Illinois State University (contact email: jfribe@ilstu.edu)

As is the case with disciplinary research, SoTL research is carried out carefully and systematically. Data is analyzed, results are presented, and a compelling case is made for the implications of the outcomes of SoTL research process. For those of us for whom a peer-reviewed journal article is the “currency” of academic productivity, we think about where we might eventually send our work for review and (hopefully!) publication throughout our project’s life. We search lists of SoTL publication outlets seeking the Goldilocks “fit” for our research, carefully reviewing the aims, scopes, and missions of SoTL journals as part of this process. As these efforts unfold, there is a foundational question that must be asked as part of the search for a journal “home” for your SoTL work: Does my SoTL best fit in a disciplinary journal or a cross-disciplinary journal?

To make sure we are all on the same page semantically, I’d define a disciplinary SoTL journal as one that focuses primarily on one discipline. Teaching and Learning in Communication Sciences and Disorders is one that is a great example of this, with its focus on SoTL for the connected disciplines of speech-language pathology and audiology. Teaching and Learning Inquiry would be an ideal example of a cross-disciplinary SoTL journal, as manuscripts selected for publication potentially apply to a variety of disciplines across the academic spectrum.

The question of disciplinary versus cross-disciplinary fit has to do (mainly) with the potential reach for your work. For instance, if you conduct a rigorous SoTL project to understand how art history students’ learning is impacted through study abroad experiences in Italian museums, it’s possible that your findings might have primary interest and impact within the discipline of art history. As such, a journal like Art History Pedagogy & Practice would be a wonderful outlet for your work. A study on intrapersonal learning as a result of students’ involvement with an array of campus student organizations might have a broader disciplinary appeal, with publication in the cross-disciplinary Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning one potential outcome.

That said, it’s often how a manuscript is written that truly influences its fit for publication. With this in mind, three primary considerations become evident:

  • The content of your manuscript is extremely important. Is the topic being explored centered on questions from a single discipline? Or, might the content of your paper be of interest to people representing a variety of disciplines and contexts?
  • Your writing voice is also critical. When you constructed your manuscript, did you use accessible terminology or did you employ disciplinary jargon to best make your points?
  • How have you described the potential applications of your work? Did you tie your findings to uses and impacts in one discipline or did you make an effort to extend your research outcomes to a variety of fields and contexts?

The decision tree below operationalizes the notions of content, voice, and application through the lens that the more linguistically accessible and contextually inclusive your manuscript seeks to be, the more likely it is to find a fit in a cross-disciplinary SoTL journal.

SoTL decision tree

I have one last thought for your consideration. Some SoTL is simply so focused on one discipline that its contributions to the pedagogical content knowledge of that discipline must be honored with publication in a disciplinary journal. Similarly, some SoTL cannot be tied to only one discipline, or perhaps it’s so applicable to other disciplines that publishing in a cross-disciplinary outlet is its best fit. Thus, SoTL is not “better” or “worse” if its published in a disciplinary rather than a cross-disciplinary journal — or vice versa. Rather, it’s knowing where your SoTL belongs that helps it to have value to your audience. 

 


Leave a comment

The SLaM Model of Applying SoTL In and Beyond One Classroom

Written by Kathleen McKinney, Illinois State University, Emeritus and Jennifer Friberg, Illinois State University 

slamIn this blog post we share a model for the application of scholarship of teaching and learning findings in and beyond the individual classroom level. The model, named SLaM, is detailed in the Introduction chapter of our edited book, Applying the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Beyond the Individual Classroom (Indiana University Press, 2019, in press). The focus of that volume is on SoTL and its application beyond one classroom but the SLaM model is about application at any level. We define SoTL using both our institutional definition, ‘the systematic reflection/study of teaching and learning made public,’ as well as key characteristics as practitioner, action reflection/research that is usually about the instructor/researchers’ own students and/or students in their discipline and is most often at the local level. We understand application as the use of SoTL research findings and implications to design, change, intervene, make decisions, etc., primarily in institutions and disciplines, to enhance teaching and student learning.

The SLaM model is an outgrowth of our early discussions of application at various levels (e.g., Friberg & McKinney, 2015, 2016; McKinney 2003, 2007, 2012).[1] We then organized and built on those ideas, as we wrote for and edited our latest book, to create the SLaM model. The model uses three questions to conceptualize, categorize, and understand the use of SoTL results/knowledge in applications to teaching and learning. We briefly note these here but a more detailed discussion, diagram, and examples of the model can be found in our Introduction to our edited book (see endnote 1 below for the citation for the model).

  1. What is the source of the SoTL that is applied? The “S” in our SLaM framework is connected to identifying the source(s) of SoTL findings being applied. SoTL research results that are applied at various levels may be from the teacher’s original scholarship of teaching and learning studies, SoTL work by colleagues, the synthesis of presented or published SoTL research in the discipline/institution/larger SoTL field, or some combination of these sources of SoTL results and implications.
  2. At what level(s) are the data/results/implications applied? There are numerous levels (the “L” in our framework) at which SoTL findings and implications could be applied to positively impact teaching and learning. These levels include the individual classroom, course/module, program, department, college, co-curricular, institutional, disciplinary, multi-institutional, and multi-disciplinary levels.
  3. What mechanisms or processes are used (or could be used) to apply the SoTL data/results/implications to new areas or contexts at various levels? The “M” in our SLaM framework represents the many mechanisms that exist or could be created that can be used as processes for novel applications of SoTL findings. A few examples include assessment, quality assurance, course/program design or redesign, accreditation, budget development, strategic planning, faculty/staff development, interdisciplinary initiatives, and graduate student training.

In our forthcoming edited book, eleven examples of the application of SoTL are described; two in our Introduction and nine in the contributed chapters. We briefly summarize three of these examples of applications and their fit with our model here. First, Brent Oliver, Darlene Chalmers, and Mary Goitom of Mount Royal University in Canada in their chapter, “Reflexivity in the Field: Applying Lessons Learned from a Collaborative Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Study Exploring the Use of Reflexive Photography in Field Education” use findings and implications from face-to face interviews with students from multiple institutions (source). They apply what they learned at the course, program and department levels using curricular reform, program review and accreditation (mechanisms). They are planning additional applications in a new interdisciplinary fellowship program and via faculty development programs.

Another example comes from Belgium. In the chapter, “Feedback First Year”- A Critical Review of the Strengths and Shortcomings of a Collective Pedagogical Project,” Dominique Verpoorten, Laurent Leduc, Audrey Mohr, Eléonore Marichal, Dominique Duchâteau, and Pascal Detroz describe their sources of SoTL findings: SoTL literature on feedback practices as well as original data from interviews with members of the faculty participating in SoTL staff development programs, observations and diaries of advisers, minutes of meetings, and descriptive templates of project outcomes. Levels of application included individual courses, faculties/departments (group of courses; program), and institution. The mechanisms they used for application were specific course re-design tasks (designing feedback activities by faculty participants), a variety of course interventions, and sharing results in departments via meetings and plenaries.

Finally, contributors Claire Vallotton, Gina A. Cook, Rachel Chazan-Cohen, Kalli B. Decker, Nicole Gardner-Neblett, Christine Lippard, and Tamesha Harewood share their SoTL applications in “The Collaborative for Understanding the Pedagogy of Infant/toddler Development: A Cross-University, Interdisciplinary Effort to Transform a Field through SoTL.” Their project used implications from past SoTL literature, reflection, and original SoTL studies on multiple campuses (sources) at the course, program, department and disciplinary levels. The application mechanism was a cross-institutional, collaborative group of scholars (CUPID) where participants shared resources, conducted research, and disseminated work via conferences, workshops, publications, meetings.

We hope readers of this blog post will take a look at the details of the SLaM model and the interesting projects and applications from around the globe presented in the edited volume. We welcome feedback on the model and hope others will find it useful in their SoTL research and applications.

Blog References

Friberg, Jennifer C., and Kathleen McKinney. 2016. “Creating Opportunities for Institutional and Disciplinary SoTL Advocacy and Growth.” Presentation. SoTL Commons Conference, Savannah, GA, USA.

Friberg, Jennifer C., and Kathleen McKinney. 2015. “Strengthening SoTL at the Institutional and Disciplinary Levels.” Poster presentation. EuroSoTL, Cork, Ireland.

McKinney, Kathleen. 2012. “Making a Difference: Applying SoTL to Enhance Learning.” The Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 12(1): 1-7.

McKinney, Kathleen. 2007. Enhancing Learning through the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: The Challenges and Joys of Juggling. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

McKinney, Kathleen. 2003. “Applying the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: How Can We Do Better?” The Teaching Professor August-September:1,5,8.

 

[1] As discussed in the Introduction to our edited book, the SlaM model overlaps slightly with the 4M model (Poole and Simmons, 2013; Wuetherick and Yu, 2016). Our initial presentations and writings of the SLaM model, however, predate the 4M model and the two models are distinct in various ways.

 


Leave a comment

A&O’s List of SoTL-Minded Twitter Accounts: #ISSoTL18 Edition

Compiled by members of the Advocacy and Outreach Committee for International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSoTL) in advance of this week’s international SoTL conference in Bergen, Norway.

Please note that you don’t have to attend the ISSoTL conference to read about conference happenings (search for #ISSoTL18) or to follow the SoTL-minded twitter accounts identified below! Safe travels to all headed to Bergen!

ISSOTL Twitter 2018


Leave a comment

Sources, Types, and Analysis of Data in SoTL

Written and compiled by Jennifer Friberg, Cross Endowed Chair in SoTL, and Professor of Communication Sciences & Disorders at Illinois State University

A few weeks ago, I published a blog titled “Study Design and Data Analysis in SoTL,” which provided a resource for viewing different types of research designs and their application for the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL). This resource was developed as a part of preparations for a two-day “intro to SoTL” workshop at the University of South Alabama. Today’s blog shares a related resource created for the same workshop series.

dataWhile research design is a really important consideration in the planning of SoTL projects, I would argue that an equally important consideration is the determination of the type(s) of data that could be collected to address an identified research purpose/question, as different types of data can provide different types of narratives to describe teaching and learning. The tables below explore eight different data types commonly utilized by individuals completing SoTL studies. Each describes a data type, talks about the data yielded from each type, indicates whether qualitative and/or quantitative analysis is possible for the data source in question, and provides extra information to consider possible to using any of these data sources. Please note that this is not an exhaustive list of possible data sources for SoTL research!

Should you wish to obtain a copy of this information in PDF form, please feel free to email me at jfribe@ilstu.edu. I’m happy to share!

Survey Data

Description Surveys collect data to reflect participant perceptions or knowledge about a particular phenomenon at one point in time.
Data Potentially Yielded Data generated via a survey are answers to specific questions drafted and administered. Survey questions can be closed ended (e.g., multiple choice answers or Likert-type scale data) or can be open ended in nature. Different question types yield different data.
Quantitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Qualitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Miscellaneous Thoughts on Data Type
  • Look for previously validated surveys to use as part of your study to increase validity/reliability of data collected.
  • For non-validated surveys, consider soliciting 2-3 expert reviewers to provide feedback re: survey content and format.
  • If survey is collecting indirect data (e.g., student perceptions), consider a plan to triangulate these data with a different, more directly objective source of information.

Interviews/Focus Groups

Description Considered a subset of survey research, these methods gather information about participant knowledge and feelings individually or with a group of people in a manner that allows (in some designs) for follow-up questions and non-standard data collection.  Interviews are generally conducted with a single person, while focus groups are group interviews.
Data Potentially Yielded Interactions occurring within interviews and focus groups are typically audio or video recorded. Orthographic transcriptions of these interactions can be created and analyzed to identify relevant trends across participants. Observations of specific behaviors might be quantified, as well, depending on the intent of the study’s design.
Quantitative Analysis Possible? Yes, but less frequent than qualitative analysis
Qualitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Miscellaneous Thoughts on Data Type Collection of interview and focus group data often causes extra human subjects review board scrutiny due to threats to confidentiality and/or anonymity. Consider how you will protect and explain protections for your study participants as part of your IRB development process.

Think Alouds

Description Think alouds are specific types of interviews where participants are asked to verbalize thoughts for internal cognitive processes in a sequential manner (e.g., how to complete a professionally-oriented task)
Data Potentially Yielded Like with interviews/focus groups, think alouds are typically audio or video recorded so that orthographic transcriptions of these interactions can be created and analyzed to identify relevant trends across participants.
Quantitative Analysis Possible? Yes, but less frequent than qualitative analysis
Qualitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Miscellaneous Thoughts on Data Type Similar to interviews and focus groups, collection of think aloud data often causes extra human subjects review board scrutiny due to threats to confidentiality and/or anonymity. Consider how you will protect and explain protections for your study participants.

Pre-/Post-Tests

Description Pre/post tests allow for collection of data to reflect changes resulting from some sort of intervention or experience over a pre-determined span of time.
Data Potentially Yielded Data collected is intended to reflect any changes (either positive or negative) resulting from an intervention or experience. Pre-/post-test data could be collected via a survey, reflection, or interview/focus group. The key here is that there are two (or more) sets of data to reflect differences across time.
Quantitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Qualitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Miscellaneous Thoughts on Data Type
  • Look for previously validated instruments to use for pre/post test designs.
  • For non-validated surveys, consider soliciting 2-3 expert reviewers to provide feedback re: survey content and format.
  • If pre/post test collects indirect data (e.g., student perceptions), consider a plan to triangulate these data with a different source.

Onlooker/Participant Observations

Description Specific, systematic observations conducted to collect behavioral data about participants within a teaching or learning context. In onlooker observations, the observer is not a part of the intervention/ experience. In participant observation, observers are active participants in the intervention/ experience.
Data Potentially Yielded Data collected from trained observers will quantify or describe the behaviors of participants at one or at multiple time frames. These data might be tallies of observed behaviors, descriptive notes describing behaviors, or time-managed tracking of behaviors in an environment.
Quantitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Qualitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Miscellaneous Thoughts on Data Type
  • All observers should be carefully trained to collect data that reflects the intent of the study.
  • Observations can be made in real time or via videotaped sample.
  • Consider gathering inter-rater reliability data if more than one reviewer is operating within the context or project.

Course Assignments/Projects/Assessments

Description Course assignments, projects, or assessments are any tasks students complete as a part of your class which can be used to understand participant mastery of content or performance at a given point in an academic term or program. This might include: writings, journals, projects, online assignments, quizzes, tests, etc.
Data Potentially Yielded Data reflects a wide array of possibilities, but commonly would reflect participant knowledge and/or understanding of course content at a specific point in time during the course’s duration.
Quantitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Qualitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Miscellaneous Thoughts on Data Type
  • Any artifact that is part of a course you regularly teach or a course you have taught in the past can be used in a SoTL study. Consider the use of archival data to compare groups with and without a particular intervention or experience.
  • If you can no longer obtain consent from past students as they are gone from campus or you lack contact information for them, you can ask your IRB for a waiver of informed consent, so long as you have a plan to protect participant identity.

Written Student Reflections

Description Written student reflections are comprised of student thoughts and ideas presented that are expressed to demonstrate deep thinking and consideration (e.g., reflective journals).
Data Potentially Yielded Generally, data are journal entries or responses to specific reflection questions. Written data is analyzed to identify changes or trends across study participants.
Quantitative Analysis Possible? Yes, but less frequent than qualitative analysis
Qualitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Miscellaneous Thoughts on Data Type
  • Reflection data is almost always derived from some sort of prompt (e.g., journal prompt, reflective question). Craft these prompts carefully to ensure that you’re collecting the data most valuable for your study.
  • Analysis of written reflection data is almost always a qualitative endeavor. There are a variety of valid approaches to this sort of work, so consulting with a qualitative researcher if this is a new form of method for you is a good idea.

Visual Student Reflections

Description Visual student reflections are comprised of student thoughts and ideas presented that are expressed to demonstrate deep thinking and consideration (e.g., concept maps, drawings, figures, photos).
Data Potentially Yielded Visual reflection data provide representations of knowledge, skills, or learning at a given point in time to identify changes or trends across study participants.
Quantitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Qualitative Analysis Possible? Yes
Miscellaneous Thoughts on Data Type
  • Visual reflection data is almost always derived from some sort of classroom project or activity. Craft these experiences carefully to ensure that you’re collecting the data most valuable for your study.
  • Consider various visual data analysis methods as a lens for understanding your data.

 


1 Comment

Study Design and Data Analysis in SoTL

Written and compiled by Jennifer Friberg, Cross Endowed Chair in SoTL and Professor of Communication Sciences & Disorders at Illinois State University

In June, I visited the University of South Alabama (USA) and worked with Raj Chaudhury and Sue Mattson to get a group of faculty started with their year-long SoTL Academy efforts. Approximately 30 faculty from across USA’s campus came together to learn about SoTL and plan a SoTL project. We spent two days together in workshops and consultations and all participants left with a draft plan for SoTL work they hoped to conduct this current academic year.

This was the second year I was able to join the USA crew for this two-day educational and research development event. Sue and I agreed that a resource that would be valuable for the USA faculty for the second iteration of the SoTL Academy would be something that helped social science-oriented researchers see how SoTL might dovetail with concepts and ideas they already understood well. Thus, the following grids focused on descriptive, correlational, and experimental/quasi-experimental design were drafted and used in discussions about how SoTL might look like participants’ own disciplinary research — and how it might not. This resource is being shared here now, in the hopes that others might find this information valuable, as well.

Should you wish to obtain a copy of this information in PDF form, please feel free to email me at jfribe@ilstu.edu. I’m happy to share!

Descriptive Research
Description of Study Design Descriptive research characterizes a group of people, a context, or a phenomenon. These studies do not seek to establish a causal relationship; rather, they provide information about “what is” occurring or being observed regarding the focus of study.

Descriptive studies include observational, case study, and survey methods.

Exemplar SoTL Projects
  • Survey students’ re: practices in using print vs. online textbooks to support learning.
  • Observe how students’ use of technology in the classroom impacts attention span.
  • Study high achieving students in a course to predict practices/variables of success to share with future students.
Qualitative Analysis Options Qualitative data in a descriptive study is reported as narrative, reflection, open-ended response, field note, etc. Such data will need to be further analyzed for themes, categories, or patterns.

Common qualitative approaches in descriptive SoTL research include: case studies, action research processes, analytic induction, ethnography, comparative analysis, frame analysis, grounded theory, and interpretive phenomenology, among others.

Quantitative Analysis Options Quantitative data in a descriptive study is often reported in the form of descriptive statistics (e.g., mean, median, mode) along with standard deviations. Statistics might be used here, depending on the data collected and the topic being studied.

These data might emerge from test scores, grades on a course assignment or project, survey data, or frequency data.

 

Correlational Research
Description of Study Design Correlational research seeks to determine whether a relationship exists between two or more variables, but cannot determine if one variable causes another. Variables aren’t manipulated; rather, they are observed to determine any relationship that might exist between them.

Note that some sources identify correlational research as a quantitative-only subset of descriptive research, as some descriptive research might suggest a correlation found via grounded theory or other qualitative methods of research.

Exemplar SoTL Projects
  • Determine the relationship between number of hours studying and success on a quiz/test.
  • Identify whether there is a link between the use of peer editing and performance on a writing assignment.
  • Understand whether the use of social media helps students to summarize course content effectively.
Qualitative Analysis Options Qualitative data analysis is not undertaken for correlational research, as numerical data is needed to calculate a correlation coefficient.
Quantitative Analysis Options Correlational research is a quantitative method of inquiry. Correlation can only be determined for quantifiable data. These are data in which numbers are meaningful, usually quantities of some sort. It cannot be used for purely categorical data, such as gender, brands purchased, or favorite color.

Statistics are used to determine a correlation coefficient to identify positive, negative, or zero correlation. One thing to keep in mind is that any identified correlation does not mean that one variable caused the other to react. Instead, correlations simply define that a relationship exists.

 

Experimental/Quasi-Experimental Research
Description of Study Design Experimental and quasi-experimental research designs seek to manipulate one variable and control all others to investigate cause/effect relationships. All participants are assigned to either a control or experimental group. An intervention is applied to the experimental group. The control group has no intervention applied.

The key difference between experimental and quasi-experimental designs is the concept of randomization. If participants are assigned to control and experimental groups randomly, the research design is experimental. Non-random group assignment yields a quasi-experimental research design. True experimental research is considered the gold standard of research by many researchers, because random group assignment leads to optimal internal validity. In situations where random group assignment is not possible or ethical, quasi-experimental designs offer an alternative that allows the research to continue and still produce valid results.

Almost no SoTL qualifies as truly experimental in nature due to inherent ethical and logistical characteristics of SoTL that makes this type of research difficult to conduct (e.g., true randomization). One of the most common quasi-experimental designs for SoTL research is the pre-test/post-test with no control group design.

Exemplar SoTL Projects
  • Does the use of simulated patients help nursing students improve observational skills?
  • Do architecture students who initially design structures by hand understand the concept of space more deeply?
  • Do history students exposed to guided reading demonstrate a deeper understanding of historical imagination?
Qualitative Analysis Options Experimental and quasi-experimental designs may yield data that is descriptive (e.g., surveys, interviews, observations) that require qualitative analyses. Similar to information provided above for descriptive research, any qualitative data will need to be further analyzed for themes, categories, or patterns.

Common qualitative approaches to data analysis in SoTL include: case study, action research processes, analytic induction, ethnography, comparative analysis, frame analysis, grounded theory, and interpretive phenomenology, among others.

Quantitative Analysis Options Experimental design lends itself to more straightforward and simpler types of statistical analysis. Primarily due to the lack of randomization, quasi-experimental studies usually require more advanced statistical procedures. Quasi-experimental designs may also utilize surveys, interviews, and observations which may further complicate the data analysis.

Quantitative analysis requires several steps. First numeric data is assigned a level (nominal, ordinal, interval, or ratio). Next, descriptive statistics are calculated for data (e.g., means, standard deviations). For some studies, descriptive statistics may be adequate; however, if you want to make inferences or predictions about your population, inferential statistics (e.g., t-test, ANOVA, regression) may be indicated.

Blog References:

Bishop-Clark, C. & Dietz-Uhler, B. (2012). Engaging in the scholarship of teaching and learning: A guide to the process and how to develop a project from start to finish.        Stylus: Sterling, VA.

Campbell, D. T. & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Cengage: Boston.

Cresswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA.

Gurung, R. A. R. & Wilson, J. H. (Eds.). (2014). Doing the scholarship of teaching and learning: Measuring systematic changes to teaching and improvements in learning. Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

 

 


Leave a comment

Fall 2018 Program and Funding Opportunities at ISU for SoTLists

Illinois State University faculty and students have a robust selection of programming and funding opportunities this fall. Information below summarizes each. Contact Jen Friberg, Cross Endowed Chair in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, for additional information or to submit information as requested below (jfribe@ilstu.edu).

Programming Opportunities for Faculty & Students

SoTL Advocate Guest Author Incentives: Faculty and students involved in SoTL are invited to submit guest blog posts for The SoTL Advocate, a blog established in 2014 to provide information about SoTL and SoTL research to stakeholders at ISU and beyond. With 14,000 readers a year in over 20 countries, this blog has a wide readership and a strong sharing network for your work. Authors of accepted blog posts will receive a $100 stipend for their contribution.

Certificate of Specialized Instruction in SoTL: Graduate students with a strong interest in teaching and researching in higher education after graduation are invited to join this year’s cohort of students seeking focused study and reflection of research on teaching and learning to facilitate their work as students and as future faculty. All graduate students will receive information about this program, but others can access details at sotl.ilstu.edu.

SoTL Abstracts: The Office of the Cross Endowed Chair in SoTL is preparing a late fall newsletter (to be disseminated campus-wide) to feature the SoTL work of ISU students and faculty. Forward the citation and abstract for any SoTL work you’ve published in 2017 or 2018 for inclusion in this compendium. Be recognized for your work!

1:1 Consultations: Considering a SoTL project, but not sure where or how to start? Arrange a consultation with an experienced SoTL researcher.

Watch for a separate notice about an upcoming half-day workshop on the topic of collecting, analyzing, and interpreting qualitative data for your SoTL study. Dr. Sarah Ginsberg of Eastern Michigan University will be joining us for a hands-on session for faculty and for 1:1 consultations afterward. Save the date – 10/26/18.

Funding Opportunities (Full RFPs, submission guidelines, and review criteria are available @ ilstu.infoready4.com)

SoTL Travel Grants: Applications are being accepted for the SoTL Travel Grant Program for travel to present SoTL work. Funds may be used toward conference registration and/or travel costs. This applies to a trip already taken (and not fully reimbursed) or to be taken, to present SoTL work this fiscal year. We expect to award 10-12 grants for FY19. Please note that faculty/staff are eligible for one travel grant (of any kind) per year. Awards of up to $700 will be available to those presenting SoTL research at disciplinary or other teaching/learning conferences. Special awards of up to $1000 will be available to those presenting at international teaching and learning conferences. There are 2 cycles for SoTL Travel Grants. Applications for the fall award cycle are currently being accepted and must be submitted by 5pm on October 1, 2018. Applications for the spring award cycle will open October 8, 2018, and must be submitted by 5pm on February 4, 2010.

SoTL Seed Grants: Applications for seed grant funding to get SoTL projects up and running will be accepted starting in early September 2018. Grant funds will be awarded (in the form of a stipend) for work toward one of the following: writing an IRB or literature review for a SoTL project, gathering/collecting/analyzing data for a SoTL project, or applying SoTL to solve a teaching/learning issue in your classroom. Up to 12 SoTL Seed Grants in the amount of $250 will be awarded to faculty conducting their first SoTL project. Applications will be reviewed on a rolling basis from September 2018 through May 2019, with awards granted until funds are exhausted.