Faculty priorities reconsidered: rewarding multiple forms of scholarship
No reform effort in American higher education in the last twenty years has been more important than the attempt to enlarge the dominant understanding of the scholarly work of faculty—what counts as scholarship. Faculty Priorities Reconsidered assesses the impact of this widespread initiative to realign the priorities of the American professoriate with the essential missions of the nation's colleges and universities: to redefine faculty roles and restructure reward systems.
Faculty Priorities Reconsidered traces the history of the movement to redefine scholarship. It examines the impact of the 1990 landmark report Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate from The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, and the decade-long work of the American Association for Higher Education's Forum on Faculty Roles and Rewards that initiated and sustained much of the work reported on here. The struggles to move beyond narrow definitions of research, to distinguish between scholarly teaching and the scholarship of teaching while acknowledging the importance of both, to encourage faculty engagement in meeting the scholarly needs of the larger civic community, and to recognize the importance of academic synthesis and integration—all elements of a broader understanding of scholarship—are addressed in this book.
In Faculty Priorities Reconsidered the leading pioneers of the movement reflect on their own work with campuses nationwide and examine concrete issues involved in introducing new perspectives on the different forms of scholarship. In addition, the book contains studies of nine very diverse institutions—Madonna, Albany State, South Dakota State, Kansas State, Portland State, and Arizona State universities, Franklin College, the University of Phoenix, and the University of Colorado School of Medicine. Each study tells a unique story of the struggle to change faculty work and its rewards.
This book offers practical advice to academic leaders considering similar changes and responds to questions for the future about encouraging, supporting, assessing, and rewarding multiple forms of scholarship.
Results 1-3 of 32
In such a context, even as recently as 1996, new faculty members with doctorates
received mixed messages from the faculty handbook and from the culture about
the expectations for scholarly activity. Clearly, faculty could not find a concise ...
However, the faculty from these two colleges said these same deans were very
understanding of their workloads as related to other university priorities, and
would not penalize them for lack of scholarly activity. The College of Nursing and
They wanted faculty to discuss their reluctance to place more emphasis on
scholarly activity. The committee charged with reviewing evaluation and rewards
interviewed faculty and discovered that one major reason for their reluctance
What people are saying - Write a review
History and Context
The Four Forms of Scholarship
12 other sections not shown