Not Signed-In
Which clippings match 'Scholarship Of Integration' keyword pg.1 of 1
06 MARCH 2011

PhD pedagogy and the changing knowledge landscapes of universities

"At the level of form and content of the knowledge produced in postgraduates' work, the supervisor, whose intellectual roots are frequently based in a singular domain characterised by horizontal knowledge structures, must acquire principles that enable them to understand the students' research problems in terms of a vertical or hierarchical knowledge structure. For example, a student may wish to contribute to insights in the domain of social aspects of urban design. The supervisor, who may be a sociologist, must find a means of integrating insights from sociology with its own nuanced conceptual language, with discourses from design associated with user centred design principles, at a level that is sufficient to guide the student through the processes of integration and recontextualisation. Thus vertical knowledge structures need to be employed by both supervisor and student to address the weakening classifications between sociology and design. Further, however, the hidden aspect of pedagogy here is that the supervisor must have a sufficient understanding at a generic level of what is required for the development of knowledge through integration to provide the student with the tools to accomplish this with respect to their own specific topic area. This is an area that receives very little attention in any of the discourses or literature around what is required of supervisors, and is a key area for further research on postgraduate pedagogy."

(Barbara Adkins, 2009, QUT ePrints)

Adkins, Barbara A. (2009) PhD pedagogy and the changing knowledge landscapes of universities. Higher Education Research and Development Journal, 28(2), pp. 165–177.

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
12 OCTOBER 2009

Ernest Boyer's Model of Scholarship

"Boyer (1997) proposed an expanded definition of 'scholarship' within the professorate based on four functions that underlie the Profile of a Quality Faculty Member (1.2.4): discovery, integration, application, and teaching. He argues that, within this framework, all forms of scholarship should be recognized and rewarded, and that this will lead to more personalized and flexible criteria for gaining tenure. He feels that, too often faculty members wrestle with conflicting obligations that leave little time to focus on their teaching role. Boyer proposes using 'creativity contracts' that emphasize quality teaching and individualized professional development. He recommends that this model be based upon the life patterns of individuals and their passions.

The first element of Boyer's model, discovery, is the one most closely aligned with traditional research. Discovery contributes not only to the stock of human knowledge but also to the intellectual climate of a college or university. He stresses that new research contributions are critical to the vitality of the academic environment, and that his model does not diminish the value of discovery scholarship.

The second element, integration, focuses on making connections across disciplines. One interprets one's own research so that it is useful beyond one's own disciplinary boundaries and can be integrated into a larger body of knowledge. He stresses that the rapid pace of societal change within a global economy have elevated the importance of this form of scholarship.

The third element, application, focuses on using research findings and innovations to remedy societal problems. Included in this category are service activities that are specifically tied to one's field of knowledge and professional activities. Beneficiaries of these activities include commercial entities, non–profit organizations, and professional associations.

Finally, Boyer considers teaching as a central element of scholarship. Too often teaching is viewed as a routine function and is often not the focus of professional development. Many professors state that they are primarily interested in teaching, but they feel that their institutions do not value or reward excellence in teaching (Borra, 2001). The academic community continues to emphasize and assign high value to faculty members' involvement in activities other than teaching (Royeen, 1999)."

Boyer, E. L. (1997). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey–Bass.

Royeen, C. B. (1999). Scholarship revisited: Expanding horizons and guidelines for evaluation of the scholarship of teaching. In P. A. Crist (Ed.), Innovations in occupational therapy education. Bethesda, MD: American Occupational Therapy Association.

1

TAGS

discoveryErnest Boyer • forms of scholarship • integrationpedagogyresearchscholarship • scholarship of application • scholarship of discovery • scholarship of integrationscholarship of teachingteachingtheory buildingtraining

CONTRIBUTOR

Simon Perkins
07 SEPTEMBER 2005

Boyer's Scholarship of Integration

"The scholarship of integration has at least three main aspects. First, there is integration, within a discipline or field of study, of knowledge claims derived by different research approaches, or at different times or in different parts of the world. This sort of 'integrative scholarship' is vital, and involves an intimate familiarity with the traditions and major lines of development in the field, as well as a high degree of intellectual sophistication. In a post–modern world characterised by fragmentation and an over–abundance of information, such integration provides much–needed synthesis and offers a platform both for the conduct of further inquiry and for practical application of consolidated outcomes and insights.The second aspect of integration involves the incorporation of new knowledge acquired in real–world settings into the intellectual apparatus of the disciplines. This in turn can be particularly useful in training people for the professions. In his paper on entrepreneurial universities, Formica writes: 'The holistic model moves away from the notion of technology transfer as a one–time handout from the university and research institutions to the firm, replacing it by a broader vision, which encompasses an ongoing multiway exchange between the partners' (1996, p. 255). In the case of university partners, the incorporation of such insights and new knowledge developed by industry is part of the scholarship of integration. Third, and finally, integrative scholarship may involve drawing together insights from different disciplines or fields of study. Most real–world problems do not present themselves neatly labelled according to a discipline, which, after all, is little more than a conventional way of dividing up the complexity of the world into administrative or cognate areas of study. Instead, real–world problems span several different disciplines and solutions are often found through the juxtaposition of those fields. Moreover, it is also true that fruitful lines of inquiry and speculation often arise in multidisciplinary or cross–disciplinary teams, thus integrative scholarship can throw up productive new insights which can be of use to more than one field of practice at a time. Clearly, integration is a hallmark of much knowledge work both inside and outside universities, and the intellectual capabilities and organisational infrastructure required are virtually the same in both cases. FORMICA, P. (1996). Innovative players of economic development: 'Learning' companies and 'entrepreneurial' universities in action within territorial and business ecosystems of innovation. In M. Guedes & P. Formica (Eds.), The economics of science parks (pp. 233–268). Brazil: Faculdade de Tecnologia, Universidade de Brasilia. Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 19, No. 3, 2000"

(Philip C. Candy, 2000)

[In his book "Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate", Ernest Boyer describes what he sees as four major, complementary aspects of an academics scholarly work: the scholarship of discovery; the scholarship of application; the scholarship of integration; and, the scholarship of teaching.]

Candy, P. C. (2000). "Knowledge Navigators and Lifelong Learners: producing graduates for the information society." Higher Education Research & Development 19(3): 273–274.

Sign-In

Sign-In to Folksonomy

Can't access your account?

New to Folksonomy?

Sign-Up or learn more.