Monday, 20 July 2009

QotD, I need more "real" pubs edition

From today’s Inside Higher Ed, reporting on a survey of department chairs in The Discipline™:

[T]he survey found that the “scholarship of teaching” ideas of Ernest L. Boyer—in which colleges would see research and publication related to pedagogy or teaching as “counting”—has not been embraced by a majority of departments in any sector, and by relatively few at doctoral institutions. Asked if they agreed that “teaching publications and substantive publications are equal” in tenure reviews evaluating research, only 11 percent of chairs at doctoral universities agreed. (The figures were 32 percent for master’s institutions and 43 percent for bachelor’s institutions).

I guess I’d better get back to that “substantive” paper I’ve been cogitating on…

1 comment:

Any views expressed in these comments are solely those of their authors; they do not reflect the views of the authors of Signifying Nothing, unless attributed to one of us.
[Permalink] 1. Jennifer wrote @ Mon, 20 Jul 2009, 10:54 pm CDT:

There is no way my department would count an article about teaching towards tenure, and frankly I’d be concerned that if I had “too many” teaching articles, they might even count against me, even if I have a “sufficient” number of “research” articles in the “top tier” journals. Not saying this is good—it just is…..
I’m using a lot of quotation marks. Time for bed!

Comments are now closed on this post.