Facult y Per spect iv e, Chapt er 3: The Scholar ship of Teaching and Lear ning, Pr ofessional Gr ow t h, and Facult y Developm ent
Expanding the Teaching Commons:
Making the Case for a New Perspective on SoTL
Kim A. Case, PhD
Associat e Pr ofessor of Psy chology and Wom en’s St udies Univ er sit y of Houst on- Clear Lak e
As a r eflect ion on O’Mear a, Ter osky , and Neum ann’s ( 2011) w or k on scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning ( SoTL) facult y developm ent , t his essay descr ibes t he benefit s
of SoTL t o indiv idual facult y and univ er sit y goals. I n suppor t and ex pansion of ar gum ent s adv anced by O’Meara et al., t his w or k calls for t he use of SoTL facult y dev elopm ent t o pr om ot e t he shar ed t eaching com m ons, act iv e r ecr uit m ent of new SoTL scholar s, inst it ut ionalizat ion of SoTL v alues, and int egr at ion of SoTL init iat iv es
in bot h t eaching cent er s and r esear ch- focused dev elopm ent offices.
I n t heir insight ful chapt er , “ The Scholar ship of Teaching and Lear ning, Pr ofessional Gr ow t h, and Facult y Dev elopm ent ,” O’Mear a, Ter osky , and Neum ann ( 2011) out line t he benefit s of adm inist r at iv e and inst it ut ional suppor t for adv ancing facult y inv olv em ent in t he scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning ( SoTL) . This essay offer s a r eflect ion on t he inv isible benefit s t hat SoTL pr ov ides at t he indiv idual facult y and inst it ut ion lev els, as w ell as a new m odel for adv ancing facult y dev elopm ent appr oaches t o r ecr uit ing and m ent or ing SoTL scholar s. Essent ially , t he benefit of SoTL lies in it s insist ence t hat int ellect ual discov ery ex t end bey ond t he isolat ed classr oom inv est igat ion and cont r ibut e t o under st anding of lear ning in t he br oader pedagogical com m unit y . By pr om ot ing SoTL benefit s, facult y dev elopm ent adm inist r at or s w ill aid in m ov ing scholar ship on t eaching and lear ning fr om t he backgr ound t o t he for efr ont in higher educat ion.
Invisible SoTL Benefits for Faculty and Institutions
As O’Mear a et al. ( 2011) ar t iculat ed in t heir chapt er , SoTL offer s a long list of academ ic benefit s t hat oft en r em ain inv isible t o bot h facult y and univ er sit y adm inist r at or s. Given t hat adm inist r at or s adm it t edly m ust at t end t o br oader inst it ut ional goals such as publishing r esear ch and pr om ot ing t eaching m et hods t o enhance st udent lear ning, SoTL pr ovides a pr oduct ive appr oach at t he int er sect ion of t hese goals. The t r adit ional “ nar r at iv e of const r aint ” r epr esent s a r em edial appr oach t o facult y dev elopm ent t hat em phasizes t eaching deficit s am ong facult y and fix ing pr oblem at ic t eaching st r at egies. Rat her t han per pet uat e for m er m odels em phasizing t he nar r at ive of const r aint w her e facult y needed t o be “ fixed” ( Shulm an, 2004) , facult y dev eloper s and t eaching cent er adm inist r at or s can suppor t facult y r eflect ion for im pr ov em ent t hr ough pr om ot ion of SoTL inquir y . I n ot her w or ds,
By legit im izing t he classroom as t he sour ce of int er est ing, consequent ial quest ions about t eaching and lear ning, and in r ecognizing t he t eacher as t he per son best suit ed t o for m ulat e and st udy t hese quest ions, t he scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning r einfor ces t he possibilit y of t he kind of pr ofessional gr ow t h t hat com es fr om w it hin ( O’Mear a et al., p. 58) .
38 V olu m e 8
●
2 0 1 3 ex cept ional t eacher s. O’Mear a et al. ( 2011) appr opr iat ely point ed out t hat t eaching cent er s pr om ot ing SoTL ser v e univer sit y goals by pr ov iding spaces for facult y t o pursue int r insic m ot iv at ions t o im pr ov e as pr ofessional educat or s. This “ int ernal im pet us” ( O’Mear a et al., p. 48) dr iv es facult y t o cont inue lear ning about lear ning and gr ow ing as pr ofessionals, w hich clear ly aligns w it h t he inst it ut ional goals and gr ow t h.As an exam ple, t he t eaching cent er at m y univer sit y or iginat ed fr om t he facult y out of an int er nal need t o shar e ideas and im pr ov e t eaching. The facult y developm ent m ot t o of TLEC ( Teaching- Lear ning Enhancem ent Cent er ) developed int o a r esounding “ by facult y for facult y ” t o em phasize t he focus on t he nar r at iv e of gr ow t h. Thr ough SoTL pr ogr am s, speak er s, w or kshops, r esear ch gr oups, and confer ence t r av el suppor t , TLEC m ade it possible for facult y t o br ing t heir pedagogical discover ies int o t he shar ed t eaching com m ons t hat Huber and Hut chings ( 2006) descr ibed as essent ial t o t he SoTL pr ocess. The SoTL sk ills t hat facult y dev elop ( e.g., collabor at ion, collegialit y , and r eflect ion for infor m ed act ion and im pr ovem ent ) all t r ansfer t o ot her ar eas of r esear ch and ser vice. Speaking t o t he cor e benefit of SoTL, scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning pr ovides syst em at ic m et hods ( oft en new m et hods fr om out side disciplines) t o invest igat e lear ning, ult im at ely leading t o im pr ov ed t eaching appr oaches shar ed w it h t he br oader com m unit y.
Faculty Development to Promote the Shared Teaching Commons
I n r ecent y ear s, I or ganized facult y book clubs t o r ead and discuss The Last Lect ur e ( Pausch, 2008) , Teaching t o Tr ansgr ess ( hook s, 1994) , What t he Best College Teacher s Do ( Bain, 2004) , and Teaching for Cr it ical Thinking ( Br ook field, 2012) . Facult y oft en r epor t back t o m e t hat t hey found t he par t icular book w e ar e r eading for t hat sem est er lack ing in som e w ay . Ot her facult y t ell m e t hey appr ov e of m y excellent select ion. Regar dless of w het her t hese com m ent s r at e t he book in a posit ive or negat ive light , m y r esponse is t he sam e. My facult y developm ent goals focus on br inging facult y t oget her in a space for pedagogical r eflect ion and shar ing. I n ot her w or ds, t he book becom es alm ost ir r elev ant as it ser ves as only a cat aly st t o bolst er our t eaching com m ons. I n m y r ole as t eaching cent er dir ect or and facult y dev eloper, I at t em pt t o encour age a facult y com m unit y of lear ner s spanning a w ide v ar iet y of disciplines for shar ed discussion of t eaching innov at ions as w ell as pedagogical scholar ship.
I n or der t o m ov e bey ond scholar ly or t hought ful t eaching t o openly shar ed scholar ship of t eaching ( Shulm an, 1993) , t he inst r uct ional r eflect ion, m et hodology , and final out com es m ust be shar ed w it h ot her educat or s ( Huber & Hut chings, 2006) . Pr om ot ing r ecent w or k t o br oaden t he im pact of SoTL in higher educat ion, O’Mear a et al. ( 2011) called for collabor at ion and conv er sat ion ar ound SoTL “ t o engage a lar ger gr oup of facult y…beyond t he individual classr oom ” ( p. 63) . Alt hough indiv idual facult y m ay not feel com pelled t o shar e t heir SoTL effor t s w it h t he br oader academ ic audience v ia publicat ion, O’Mear a et al. r ight ly ar gued t hat facult y developer s can cont r ibut e t o building t he t eaching com m ons by encour aging publicat ion. I n m y view , t he r ole of t eaching cent er dir ect or s includes nur t ur ing “ par t ner ships t hat r aise k now ledge about lear ning fr om anecdot al t o sy st em at ic” ( O’Mear a et al., p. 65) and cult ivat ing a cult ur e of t he shar ed t eaching com m ons acr oss t he univ er sit y.
Faculty Development to Recruit New SoTL Scholars
findings in not only SoTL j our nals, but also m or e t r adit ional r esear ch j our nals t hat lack a t eaching focus. Thr ough developm ent and im plem ent at ion of t eaching cent er ( TLEC) init iat iv es, I t r y t o cult iv at e facult y SoTL int er est by encour aging a com m unit y of facult y lear ner s, or ganizing int er disciplinar y SoTL r esear ch t eam s, and r ecr uit ing new SoTL scholar s for t he m ent or ing inst it ut e ( I I SSAM, pr ev iously CASTL I nst it ut e) . I n ot her w or ds, I ut ilize TLEC as an inst it ut ional for ce t o est ablish and m aint ain a t eaching com m ons for pr ofessional gr ow t h and SoTL facult y dev elopm ent . For inst ance, m y r ole as TLEC Dir ect or and CASTL I nst it ut e and I I SSAM planning com m it t ee m em ber allow ed m e t o successfully r ecr uit and m ent or facult y as new SoTL scholar s, fund t heir t rav el t o t he m ent or ing inst it ut es, and inv it e t hem t o present t heir SoTL st udies and findings t o t he cam pus facult y , t hus expanding t he t eaching com m ons and pedagogical lear ning com m unit y. For ex am ple, pr ev ious CASTL I nst it ut e scholar s from t he Univ ersit y of Houst on- Clear Lak e r et ur ned t o cam pus and pr esent ed t heir SoTL pr oj ect s on a v ar iet y of t opics: assessing cr it ical t hinking; inv est igat ing st udent bias t ow ar d out - gr oups; explor ing a pr oj ect w her e st udent s cr eat e t heir ow n nonpr ofit or ganizat ion; and under st anding t he effect iveness of a policy analysis assignm ent r equir ing st udent s t o apply t heor y t o r eal- w or ld pr oblem s. When new SoTL scholar s pr esent ed t heir st udy findings at TLEC ev ent s, t heir passion for t his scholar ship spr ead am ong colleagues fr om disciplines t hat w ould ot her w ise nev er cr oss pat hs. Phy sics pr ofessor s gained new ideas fr om psychology and social w or k SoTL scholar s w hile educat ion facult y found innovat iv e appr oaches in t he SoTL r esear ch of a com put er engineer ing facult y m em ber .
When facult y developer s pr ov ide spaces for gr oups of facult y t o r eflect and explor e lear ning, w het her t hr ough discussions, book clubs, speaker s, or ot her init iat iv es, disciplinar y boundar ies oft en m elt aw ay , m ak ing r oom for innov at iv e int er disciplinar y collabor at ions. At a TLEC- sponsor ed event , speaker Ant hony Herm an int roduced t he facult y t o t he first day int erv iew act iv it y ( Her m ann & Fost er , 2008) and inspir ed facult y fr om acr oss t hr ee schools and four disciplines ( psy chology , educat ion, com put er science, and w om en’s st udies) t o conduct a st udy exam ining t he im pact of t he class int er v iew on st udent per cept ions of t he cour se and t heir m ot iv at ions for lear ning. This fir st day act iv it y consist s of 1) t he inst r uct or int er view ing st udent s t o discover t heir ex pect at ions for t he cour se, t heir educat ional backgr ounds, and t heir needs as lear ner s, and 2) t he st udent s int er view ing t he inst r uct or about his or her appr oach t o t he classr oom . The r esult ing SoTL publicat ion ( Case et al., 2008) m ov ed t his pedagogical inquir y bey ond t he indiv idual classroom t o not only t he shared t eaching com m ons w it hin t he univ er sit y , but also int o t he br oader academ ic t eaching com m ons w hile ser v ing t w o inst it ut ional goals, r esear ch publicat ion and im pr oved t eaching.
Facult y dev eloper s, w het her in t eaching cent er s, SoTL pr ogr am s, or r esear ch offices, help facult y in t heir ow n pr ofessional gr ow t h w hen t hey r ecr uit not only j unior , but also m idcar eer and senior facult y int o t he field of SoTL. My inv olv em ent in t he SoTL com m unit y dir ect ly r esult ed fr om t he fr iendly and suppor t iv e push fr om t he t eaching cent er dir ect or . Facult y int er est ed in st udy ing classr oom act ivit ies, assignm ent effect iv eness, or t he best st r at egies t o enhance learning m ay not be int er est ed in cont ribut ing t o t he t eaching com m ons w it hout t he m ent or ing of facult y dev eloper s t o encour age t hem . As cent er dir ect or s, coor dinat or s of pr ogr am s and init iat iv es, and adm inist r at or s, facult y dev eloper s m ust st r engt hen t he m ar k et ing of SoTL as t r ansfor m at iv e lear ning on t he par t of facult y scholar s.
40 V olu m e 8
●
2 0 1 3 for m er I nst it ut e par t icipant s r ev ealed t he I nst it ut e had an im pact on indiv idual behavior s and at t it udes, appr oaches in t he classr oom , lear ning com m unit ies w it hin inst it ut ions, and t he field t hr ough incr eased SoTL confer ence pr esent at ions and publicat ions. On a sm aller scale, TLEC ( t he UHCL t eaching cent er ) r ecr uit s new SoTL scholar s t hr ough w or kshops on SoTL m et hods, pr esent at ions of facult y SoTL pr oj ect s, nat ional speak er s such as Pew Scholar and Car negie Fellow Randy Bass, t r av el funds t o at t end t he m ent or ing inst it ut es, and int er disciplinar y SoTL gr oups t hat publish ar t icles. Thr ough t hese effor t s, bot h t he inst it ut e SoTL m ent or ing m odel and t he TLEC init iat iv es ser v e t o t r ansfor m inst it ut ional cult ur e for gr eat er value of scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning and t he facult y m em ber s engaging in t his t y pe of r esear ch.Faculty Development to Change Institutional Culture
I n or der t o fur t her advance SoTL and expand it s benefit s t o t he inst it ut ion, I ar gue t hat facult y developer s m ust focus on t w o m ain goals: 1) fost er ing par t ner ships and collabor at ions t o int egr at e SoTL int o t he w or k of bot h t eaching cent er s and r esear ch developm ent offices; and 2) r aising aw ar eness of t he value of SoTL am ong adm inist r at or s.
Alt hough facult y dev elopm ent encom passes a w ide r ange of adm inist r at iv e posit ions and goals w it hin cent er s and offices acr oss inst it ut ions, facult y shar e t he com m on goal of pr ov iding pat hw ay s for facult y pr ofessional gr ow t h and im pr ov em ent . For facult y dev eloper s w or k ing w it hin t eaching cent er s as w ell as SoTL pr ogr am s and cent er s, t he dev elopm ent m ission em phasizes im pr ov ed t eaching effect iveness t o enhance st udent lear ning out com es. For facult y developm ent offices devot ed t o r esear ch and gr ant suppor t , facult y pr oduct iv it y in w r it ing and secur ing gr ant s and publishing r esear ch findings is of gr eat im por t ance. O’Mear a et al. ( 2011) suggest ed t hat t hese seem ingly div er gent goals act ually shar e a com m on pur pose at t he int er sect ion k now n as t he scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning. Alt hough r esear ch- focused facult y dev elopm ent offices ar e char ged w it h ident ify ing gr ant oppor t unit ies and offer ing seed funds for facult y r esear ch pr oj ect s such as pilot st udies, t hese effor t s oft en neglect t he scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning ( ex cept w hen w or king w it h educat ion facult y) .
O’Mear a et al. ( 2011) descr ibed Boy er ’s ( 1990) ar gum ent t hat t eaching r equir es int ellect ual and scholar ly subst ance as a call for appr opr iat e r ecognit ion of t eaching, r at her t han v iew ing t eaching as som ehow infer ior t o r esear ch scholar ship. Unfor t unat ely, t hose false boundar ies bet w een t eaching and r esear ch st ill car r y w it h t hem a hier ar chical syst em t hat pr ivileges r esear ch over t eaching. I n fact , som e facult y feel an academ ic st igm a associat ed w it h pr ofessional focus on t eaching, including scholar ship about t eaching and lear ning. Giv ing an inv it ed w or kshop t o facult y on navigat ing t he j our ney t o becom ing a SoTL scholar , a chem ist r y pr ofessor expr essed t hat his int er est in SoTL did not align w it h his field’s v iew of SoTL as “ not r eal r esear ch.” He felt t hat his locat ion in a field out side psy chology and educat ion m eant SoTL w ould never be valued as cont r ibut ing t o t he advancem ent of chem ist r y. His concer ns ar e valid and m ust be m et w it h clear ar t iculat ion of suppor t fr om univ er sit y adm inist r at or s. Wit hout ex plicit st at em ent s of suppor t for SoTL w or k , facult y w ill r em ain unm ot iv at ed t o publish in a field t hat t hey ex pect w ill be devalued by pr om ot ion and t enur e evaluat or s.
publicat ion t o advance t eaching and lear ning ar e t r uly valued and pr ovide r ecognized benefit s t ow ar d inst it ut ional gr ow t h. For m al facult y handbook policies t hat include st at em ent s of suppor t for SoTL as r elat ed t o r ev iew s and pr om ot ion and t enur e, as w ell as depar t m ent al, school, and univ er sit y m ission st at em ent s or st r at egic planning docum ent s t hat include SoTL, w ill clar ify v alues and suppor t for SoTL facult y dev elopm ent .
My SoTL Journey
As a gr aduat e st udent t aking a qualit at iv e m et hodology cour se, I em bar k ed on a r esear ch pr oj ect t o exam ine t he w ay s Whit e st udent s engage and disengage w it h cour se m at er ials addr essing r ace and r acism ( Case & Hem m ings, 2005) . That fir st st udy of classr oom int er act ions, r esist ance, and t he im pact of bot h on lear ning led m e int o a new w or ld of scholar ship I had never consider ed. Dur ing m y t im e as a lect ur er t eaching r ace and gender cour ses, I began a ser ies of pr e/ post - t est st udies t o det er m ine w het her st udent s’ at t it udes changed as a r esult of t ak ing t hese cour ses ( Case, 2007a; Case, 2007b; Case & St ew ar t , 2010a; Case & St ew ar t , 2010b) . Despit e t hese endeav or s and int r insic int er est s, I had nev er ev en hear d of t he “ scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning” or “ SoTL” and w as only int r oduced t o t he field w hen I j oined t he facult y at UHCL. I n r eading “ The Scholar ship of Teaching and Lear ning, Pr ofessional Gr ow t h, and Facult y Dev elopm ent ” ( O’Mear a et al., 2011) , I r epeat edly t hought , “ They ar e t elling m y st or y .”
My official SoTL st or y began w it h m y ar r iv al at UHCL w hen t he t eaching cent er dir ect or encour aged m y applicat ion t o becom e a SoTL scholar at t he CASTL I nst it ut e, w her e I r eceived except ional m ent or ing fr om How ar d Univ er sit y law pr ofessor Alice Thom as, as w ell as fr om m y peer scholar s and confer ence par t icipant s. This int er disciplinar y ex posur e pr ov ided m et hodological and pedagogical insight s I sim ply w ould not hav e gat her ed fr om pr ofessionals in m y ow n field. The facult y developm ent suppor t fr om t he univer sit y’s TLEC dir ect or challenged m e t o div e int o SoTL w it h not only collegial support , but also essent ial t r avel funding and peer m ent or ing t o pr epare m y pr oj ect . That exper ience led t o m y ow n ent husiast ic recruit m ent of new SoTL scholar s and t o m y posit ion as Dir ect or of TLEC t w o y ear s lat er . As O’Mear a et al. ( 2011) point ed out , “ t he scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning has been, and cont inues t o be, a t r ansfor m at iv e concept in higher educat ion” ( p. 45) . I n suppor t of t heir ar gum ent , t he only w ay t hat I can accur at ely descr ibe m y pr ofessional adv ancem ent as an academ ic is t o say t hat SoTL w as t r ansfor m at ional in t er m s of m y ow n car eer .
My exper ience and t hat of t he CASTL I nst it ut e par t icipant s illust r at es t he need for a new appr oach t o SoTL facult y dev elopm ent . I n m ov ing aw ay fr om t he out dat ed nar r at iv e of const r aint t o a suppor t iv e nar r at iv e of gr ow t h, a new gener at ion of SoTL scholar s can be dev eloped t o t r ansfor m t he cult ur e t hat dev alues t his w or k . Wit hout access t o SoTL m ent or ing and an inst it ut ional cult ur e of SoTL suppor t , I am confident m y car eer w ould hav e been m uch less pr oduct iv e and less r ew ar ding.
Conclusion
42 V olu m e 8
●
2 0 1 3 w ill m ax im ize t he pot ent ial of t his int er sect ion of int erest s and goals. When univ er sit y r esear ch and gr ant offices begin t o t ak e SoTL ser iously w it hin t he m ission and v ision of suppor t for facult y developm ent , t hey m ay see incr eases in facult y gr ant - w r it ing, int er disciplinar y scholar ship, and academ ic publishing. Br eak ing dow n t hese socially const r uct ed w alls bet w een t eaching and r esear ch w ill yield long t er m benefit s for t he indiv idual facult y , facult y dev eloper s, and t he inst it ut ion it self. The m y t h t hat fram es research and t eaching as m ut ually ex clusiv e is not only out dat ed, but also har m ful t o univer sit y goals. Fut ur e r esear ch docum ent ing t he im pact of new ly int egr at ed SoTL init iat iv es, adm inist r at ive view s, and effor t s t o for m ally inst it ut ionalize SoTL on facult y engagem ent in r esear ch t o enhance t eaching and lear ning w ill aid facult y dev eloper s in m or e effect iv e SoTL scholar r ecr uit m ent .References
Bain, K. ( 2004) . What t he best college t eacher s do. Cam br idge, MA: Har v ar d Univ er sit y Pr ess.
Boy er , E. ( 1990) . Scholar ship r econsider ed. San Fr ancisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.
Br ook field, S. ( 2012) . Teaching for cr it ical t hink ing: Tools and t echniques t o help st udent s quest ion t heir assum pt ions. San Fr ancisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.
Case, K. ( 2007a) . Raising m ale pr ivilege aw ar eness and r educing sexism : An ev aluat ion of div er sit y cour ses. Psychology of Wom en Quar t er ly , 31, 426- 435.
Case, K. ( 2007b) . Raising w hit e pr ivilege aw ar eness and r educing r acial pr ej udice: Assessing diver sit y cour se effect iv eness. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 231- 235.
Case, K., Bar t sch, R., McEner y , L., Hall, S. P., Her m ann, A., & Fost er , D. ( 2008) . Est ablishing a com for t able classr oom fr om day one: St udent per cept ions of t he r ecipr ocal int er v iew . College Teaching, 56, 210-214.
Case, K., & Hem m ings, A. ( 2005) . Dist ancing st rat egies: Whit e w om en pr eser v ice t eacher s and ant i- r acist cur r iculum . Ur ban Educat ion, 40, 606- 626.
Case, K., & St ew ar t , B. ( 2010a) . Changes in div er sit y cour se st udent pr ej udice and at t it udes t ow ar d het er osex ual pr ivilege and gay m ar r iage. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 172- 177.
Case, K., & St ew ar t , B. ( 2010b) . Het er osex ual pr ivilege aw ar eness, pr ej udice, and suppor t of gay m ar r iage am ong diver sit y cour se st udent s. College Teaching, 58, 3- 7.
Her m ann, A. D., & Fost er , D. ( 2008) . Fost er ing appr oachabilit y and classr oom par t icipat ion dur ing t he fir st day of class: Ev idence for a r ecipr ocal int er v iew act iv it y . Act iv e Lear ning in Higher Educat ion, 9, 139-151.
hook s, b. ( 1994) . Teaching t o t r ansgr ess: Educat ion as t he pr act ice of fr eedom . New Yor k , NY:
Rout ledge.
Huber , M. T., & Hut chings, P. ( 2008) . The advancem ent of lear ning: Building t he t eaching com m ons. San Fr ancisco, CA: Jossey - Bass.
O’Mear a, K. A., Ter osk y , A. L., & Neum ann, A. ( 2011) . The scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning, pr ofessional gr ow t h, and facult y developm ent . I n P. Hut chings, M. T. Huber , & A. Ciccone ( Eds.) , Scholar ship of t eaching and lear ning r econsider ed: I nst it ut ional int egr at ion and im pact ( p. 45- 68) . San Fr ancisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.
Pausch, R. ( 2008) . The last lect ur e. New Yor k , NY: Hy per ion.
Shulm an, L. ( 1993) . Teaching as com m unit y pr oper t y: Put t ing an end t o pedagogical solit ude. Change, 25, 6- 7.
Shulm an, L. ( Ed.) ( 2004) . Teaching as com m unit y pr oper t y : Essay s on higher educat ion. San Fr ancisco, CA: Jossey- Bass.
