Scholarship in psychology: A paradigm for the twenty-first century.

Abstract

Numerous changes in higher education (e.g., the demand for accountability, threats to tenure, new modes of instruction) and discontent with narrow definitions of scholarship have created the need for a broader and more precise definition of the nature of scholarship in psychology. The 5-part definition that we propose includes ( a ) original research (creation of knowledge), ( b ) integration of knowledge (synthesis and reorganization), ( c ) application of knowledge, ( d ) the scholarship of pedagogy, and ( e ) the scholarship of teaching in psychology. Scholarly activities require high levels of discipline-specific expertise, are innovative, can be replicated, are documented, can be subject to peer review, and have significance. This broader conceptualization of scholarship will benefit all stakeholders in higher education-students, faculty, colleges and universities, the community, and society at large.

From conceptions of effective teachers to styles of teaching: Implications for higher education

“…Perceiving both research and teaching as part of scholarship, Halpern and her colleagues (Halpern et al, 1998) asserted that no individual academic can be expected to excel at every type of scholarship. Thus, it is possible that university teachers tend to emphasize either research activities or teaching activities, but not both.…”

Can we administer the scholarship of teaching? Lessons from outstanding professors in higher education

“…For the past two decades major scholars have called for broadening the concept of scholarship in higher education (Boyer 1990a;Halpern 1998). Specifically, Ernest Boyer demanded that institutes of higher education should include ''the scholarship of teaching'' as a legitimate consideration when assessing faculty members' portfolios.…”

The Theoretical and Practical Implications of Marketing Scholarship

“…In a follow-up report to the Boyer (1990) study, Glassick, Huber, and Maeroff attempted to provide standards for scholarly work of all kinds, a language that enables us to see clearly what discovery, integration, application, and teaching share as scholarly activities: clear goals, adequate preparation, effective presentation, and reflective critique. (1997, p. 35) The Task Force of the Society for the Teaching of Psychology (Halpern et al 1998) and a series of commentaries on their work (Girgus 1999;Halpern and Reich 1999;Korn 1999;Myers and Waller 1999;Peterson and Trierweiler 1999) identified a five-category taxonomy of scholarship-original research, integration of knowledge, application of knowledge, pedagogy, and teaching (notice the Task Force distinction between pedagogy and teaching). The Task Force drew upon Diamond and Adam's (1993) definition of scholarship as activities that require high levels of disciplinary expertise; are innovative; can be replicated, peer-reviewed, and documented; and have high significance.…”