Planting the seeds of inquiry : Engaging faculty in promoting the teaching-research nexus Marcy Slapcoff, dik Harris, Eva Dobler, Teaching and Learning Services, McGill University, 2012 Overview

In 2008, the University gave TLS a mandate to promote the teaching research nexus at the undergraduate level. We decided to focus on coursework, and started a cross-disciplinary faculty learning community in 2009 whose members explore ways to enhance students’ understanding of research/scholarship. With our guidance, the members of the community have: •collectively set goals; •developed a common language to bridge disciplinary differences; •shared ownership of the development process; •developed their own framework of learning outcomes and demonstrated; their effectiveness by applying them to their own courses; and •presented the results of their work to the University. The process we adopted could serve as a model for other institutions interested in promoting the teaching-research nexus. Likewise, the framework of learning outcomes could be a useful starting point for faculty members to use to enhance their students’ understanding of research/scholarship.

Focus on Learning

Faculty members often do not perceive any link between their undergraduate teaching and their research. It was therefore crucial to find a definition of the teaching-research nexus that would resonate with them.

We chose to focus on the role of learning and scholarship (Boyer, 1990) since "Learning (....) is the vital link between research and teaching. It is a shared process in these two enterprises (…) it is the process whereby an individual teacher – researcher, student, learner – comes to know” (Brew and Boud, 1995).

Restricting the scope of the teaching-research nexus to coursework also built on the existing expertise of our teaching and learning centre.

Theoretical Framework & Examples

In view of the focus on student learning, the work of Healey (2005) provided an effective theoretical framework.

The framework provided a definition of the teaching-research nexus, and gave legitimacy to our initiative among our core audience – university professors whose first steps in any research project would include a survey of the relevant literature and a definition of terms. In addition to a framework, we provided examples of undergraduate courses, described in the literature, where instructors had successfully introduced students to research/scholarship. In addition, we developed home grown examples from a range of disciplines, and these seemed to resonate well with our faculty members. Some of these examples are viewable in the documentary series “Sowing the Seeds of Inquiry.”

Faculty Learning Community

Our faculty learning community, the Inquiry Network, began as 12 instructors from across the University, together with 2 facilitators from TLS and a graduate-student assistant. The group's twofold mandate is to: •encourage members to examine their teaching practice to determine how to better integrate research/scholarship and teaching, and •propose to the University how to promote the teaching-research nexus in ways that would benefit undergraduate student learning.

Critical Steps: Year 1

Discussions leading Inquiry Network members to: •Understand the “need to reflect upon their own ways of understanding subject matter and consider the implications of this for the ways in which they teach and bring their students into a relationship with that subject matter” (Prosser, Martin, Trigwell, Ramsden and Middleton, 2008).

•Develop a common language for discussing teaching and research. •Apply the categories of the Healey framework to real situations and therefore to wrestle with their meaning.

•Revise the Healey framework to better reflect their own understanding of the teaching-research nexus.

Figure 1: Revised Healey Framework for the Nexus. Adapted from Healey (2005).

STUDENTS AS PARTICIPANTS EMPHASIS ON RESEARCH CONTENT Discussing research

Students discuss and/or write about research.

Doing research

Students do research (low key, original or not).

Learning about research

Students learn about research by listening, reading, and/or observing.

Developing research skills

Students develop research skills by doing something and (ideally) receiving feedback to improve.

STUDENTS AS AUDIENCE EMPHASIS ON RESEARCH PROCESSES AND PROBLEMS Learning Outcomes

The framework has three categories that summarize how students can deepen their understanding of research: 1.In terms of knowledge, students need to develop an awareness that knowledge is dynamic, not static.

2.In terms of methodological skills, students need to become familiar with the methods used to gather, organize, analyze, interpret, and evaluate data and source material.

3.In order to develop advanced critical thinking skills, students need to learn how to use discussion and writing not only as mechanisms for reporting on work, but as processes to help them develop and communicate their thinking.

Instructors are encouraged to use the framework as a springboard for discussion and to modify the outcomes to better reflect their particular instructional needs and shared conceptions of the teaching-research nexus.

If used by departments and Faculties, this framework could also provide a foundation for the design and sequencing of curricula such that students have acquired experience in all three areas on completing a given program.

Launching Year 2

Year 2 began with a slight increase in membership and representation from a broader range of disciplines. To facilitate a smooth start, an workshop was held to: •introduce basic course design principles (Saroyan & Amundsen, 2004); •define the teaching-research nexus, review its importance for the institution, describe the past work of the Inquiry Network.

As a result: •Members began to use terms from the educational literature to describe their academic work, thus allowing improved communication across disciplinary boundaries.

•A group identity formed: Members became more familiar with each other's teaching contexts and disciplinary homes. They were enthused about working together and contributing their perspectives.

Critical Steps: Years 2 and 3

•Developing of a framework of learning outcomes to reflect aspects of research/scholarship in any discipline. Instructors can use these outcomes to define what they want students to learn about research/scholarship within their courses. •Writing of a report summarizing the group’s activities.

•Outreach to the broader community: members of Board of Governors, Senate, staff, students and particularly, other faculty. This was done via presentations and workshops.

http://www.mcgill.ca/tls/projects/nexus What is Essential?

The framework for learning outcomes because: •it incorporates the essentials for embedding research/scholarship in undergraduate coursework; •it contains examples that faculty members can use to design aspects of their courses to incorporate research, regardless of class size, level and discipline; •it is open to modification, so that future groups can create new outcomes, based on the existing set.

The collaborative process because: •participants’ expertise and identities as scholars in their own disciplines are valued; •a common language is introduced to facilitate conversations across disciplinary boundaries; •a theoretical framework resonates with participants who are accustomed to a research environment; •participants are supported in developing their own approach to linking teaching and research.

References:

Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate, Stanford, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Brew, A. & Boud, D. (1995). Teaching and research: Establishing the vital link with learning', Higher Education, 29, 261-73.

Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching: Exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based teaching. In Barnett, R. (Ed.), Reshaping the University: new relationships between research, scholarship and teaching (pp. 67-78). Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Open University Press.

Prosser, M., Martin, E., Trigwell, K., Ramsden, P. and Middleton H., (2008). University academics’ experience of research and its relationship to their experience of teaching. Instructional Science, 36, 3-16.

Saroyan, A. & Amundsen, C. (Eds.). (2004). Rethinking Teaching in Higher Education. Sterling, VA: Stylus.

Acknowledgements

: The authors wish to thank the members of the Inquiry Network: Chris Barrett, Chemistry; Richard Chromik, Mining and Materials Engineering; Isabelle Cossette, Music Research; Jaye Ellis, Law and McGill School of Environment; Kathleen M. Fallon, Sociology; Megan Fitzgibbons, McGill Library; dik Harris, Physics; Terry Hébert, Pharmacology and Therapeutics; Sue Laver, The McGill Writing Centre; George McCourt, McGill School of Environment; Peter Radziszewski, Mechanical Engineering; Dave Ragsdale, Neurology and Neurosurgery; Annie Savard, Integrated Studies in Education; Mariela Tovar, Teaching and Learning Services