Positioning the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Firmly in the Center of Health Promotion Pedagogy

IF 1.1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Heather L. Henderson, M. Sendall
{"title":"Positioning the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Firmly in the Center of Health Promotion Pedagogy","authors":"Heather L. Henderson, M. Sendall","doi":"10.1177/23733799211061281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Historically, the work of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) scholars has been grounded in multidisciplinary connections to educational psychology and pedagogical research. SoTL research and commentary intends to answer questions about what is, what is possible, what works, and what conceptual frameworks explain learning, teaching, and pedagogy (Hutchings, 2000). Pedagogy in Health Promotion provides examples of the rich variety and scope of the scholarship of teaching and learning. SoTL work observes and comments on teaching practice (Flores et al., 2021; Kratzke et al., 2021), develops and tests theories and evidence-based frameworks (Kuganathan et al., 2021; Miller et al., 2021), provides quantifiable explanations (Blavos et al., 2022; Foutch et al., 2022), pursues qualitative explorations (Muzaffar et al., 2020), engages in experimental research (Djulus et al., 2020), increases our ability to be compassionate and inclusive (James et al., 2020; Mezuk et al., 2021) and shares deep reflections about our collective experience of teaching and learning (Derreth et al., 2021). Combined, these scholarly endeavors help us to better understand how to provide effective and supportive education to health promotion and public health students, develop and challenge critical skills for health promotion and public health practice and ultimately, benefit communities and populations, and improve health outcomes. The scholarship of teaching and learning is grounded in rigorous empirical methodologies and underpinned by attested theories and frameworks. Commonly, SoTL scholars take cues from educational psychology, sociology, or behavioral psychology. Learning theories generated from these disciplines are logical companions for health promotion and public health pedagogy because they offer a structure to drive empirical enquiry and better understand learning and teaching in health promotion. As a community of scholars, we are obliged to challenge our learning and teaching practice. However, failure to situate our learning and teaching within a theoretical context, fails to uphold standards of rigor expected from a research community. Consequently, it is bequest us all to ensure health promotion and public health pedagogy is embedded in learning and teaching theories and frameworks. As SoTL scholars, we are curious about our practice. We use our intuition, anecdotes, and observations to pique questions about how and why we learn and how to better our teaching practice (Chick, 2018). We begin by asking meaningful questions, reviewing the SoTL literature, making connections between educational research and practice and thinking about theories of pedagogy which can inform our learning and teaching practice within the context of our disciplinary field. We select the theory or framework which best resonates with our enquiry to help revise and clarify our question. Reviewing educational theorists such as Weber, Marton, Bandura, and others helps shape the questions we ask. Theoretical models such as ecological, health belief, social cognitive, reasoned action, and others help shape how we design our programs. These refined and focused questions inform the most appropriate methodology, ensure the intended questions are answered, and the findings are relevant, useful, and valuable. Observations, interviews and focus groups, experimental methodologies, and case studies as well as reflexive practice of teaching and learning help us to explore what works, understand what is, learn what is possible, whether theories hold up over time and help us to act. When we use the most appropriate methodology to explore a theory or framework which underpins our empirical enquiry, we gain a deeper understanding of how we can improve our teaching and student outcomes. In doing so, we aspire to graduate students who remain inquisitive, are imbued with sense of robust and critical inquiry and are not afraid to challenge the status quo of current health promotion and public health practice. 1061281 PHPXXX10.1177/23733799211061281Pedagogy in Health PromotionHenderson and Sendall editorial2021","PeriodicalId":29769,"journal":{"name":"Pedagogy in Health Promotion","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pedagogy in Health Promotion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23733799211061281","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Historically, the work of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) scholars has been grounded in multidisciplinary connections to educational psychology and pedagogical research. SoTL research and commentary intends to answer questions about what is, what is possible, what works, and what conceptual frameworks explain learning, teaching, and pedagogy (Hutchings, 2000). Pedagogy in Health Promotion provides examples of the rich variety and scope of the scholarship of teaching and learning. SoTL work observes and comments on teaching practice (Flores et al., 2021; Kratzke et al., 2021), develops and tests theories and evidence-based frameworks (Kuganathan et al., 2021; Miller et al., 2021), provides quantifiable explanations (Blavos et al., 2022; Foutch et al., 2022), pursues qualitative explorations (Muzaffar et al., 2020), engages in experimental research (Djulus et al., 2020), increases our ability to be compassionate and inclusive (James et al., 2020; Mezuk et al., 2021) and shares deep reflections about our collective experience of teaching and learning (Derreth et al., 2021). Combined, these scholarly endeavors help us to better understand how to provide effective and supportive education to health promotion and public health students, develop and challenge critical skills for health promotion and public health practice and ultimately, benefit communities and populations, and improve health outcomes. The scholarship of teaching and learning is grounded in rigorous empirical methodologies and underpinned by attested theories and frameworks. Commonly, SoTL scholars take cues from educational psychology, sociology, or behavioral psychology. Learning theories generated from these disciplines are logical companions for health promotion and public health pedagogy because they offer a structure to drive empirical enquiry and better understand learning and teaching in health promotion. As a community of scholars, we are obliged to challenge our learning and teaching practice. However, failure to situate our learning and teaching within a theoretical context, fails to uphold standards of rigor expected from a research community. Consequently, it is bequest us all to ensure health promotion and public health pedagogy is embedded in learning and teaching theories and frameworks. As SoTL scholars, we are curious about our practice. We use our intuition, anecdotes, and observations to pique questions about how and why we learn and how to better our teaching practice (Chick, 2018). We begin by asking meaningful questions, reviewing the SoTL literature, making connections between educational research and practice and thinking about theories of pedagogy which can inform our learning and teaching practice within the context of our disciplinary field. We select the theory or framework which best resonates with our enquiry to help revise and clarify our question. Reviewing educational theorists such as Weber, Marton, Bandura, and others helps shape the questions we ask. Theoretical models such as ecological, health belief, social cognitive, reasoned action, and others help shape how we design our programs. These refined and focused questions inform the most appropriate methodology, ensure the intended questions are answered, and the findings are relevant, useful, and valuable. Observations, interviews and focus groups, experimental methodologies, and case studies as well as reflexive practice of teaching and learning help us to explore what works, understand what is, learn what is possible, whether theories hold up over time and help us to act. When we use the most appropriate methodology to explore a theory or framework which underpins our empirical enquiry, we gain a deeper understanding of how we can improve our teaching and student outcomes. In doing so, we aspire to graduate students who remain inquisitive, are imbued with sense of robust and critical inquiry and are not afraid to challenge the status quo of current health promotion and public health practice. 1061281 PHPXXX10.1177/23733799211061281Pedagogy in Health PromotionHenderson and Sendall editorial2021
把教学学术定位在健康促进教育学中心
从历史上看,教学奖学金(SoTL)学者的工作一直以教育心理学和教学研究的多学科联系为基础。SoTL的研究和评论旨在回答关于什么是、什么是可能、什么有效以及什么概念框架解释学习、教学和教育学的问题(Hutchings,2000)。《健康促进教育学》提供了丰富多样性和范围的教学和学习学术的例子。SoTL的工作观察和评论教学实践(Flores等人,2021;Kratzke等人,2021),开发和测试理论和循证框架(Kuganathan等人,2021年;Miller等人,2021,提高了我们富有同情心和包容性的能力(James等人,2020;Mezuk等人,2021),并分享了对我们集体教学经验的深刻反思(Derreth等人,2021年)。综合起来,这些学术努力有助于我们更好地了解如何为健康促进和公共卫生学生提供有效和支持性的教育,发展和挑战健康促进和公众卫生实践的关键技能,最终造福社区和人群,改善健康结果。教学学术以严格的实证方法为基础,并以经过验证的理论和框架为基础。SoTL学者通常从教育心理学、社会学或行为心理学中获得线索。这些学科产生的学习理论是健康促进和公共卫生教育学的逻辑伴侣,因为它们提供了一个结构来推动实证研究,更好地理解健康促进中的学习和教学。作为一个学者群体,我们有义务挑战我们的学习和教学实践。然而,未能将我们的学习和教学置于理论背景下,未能坚持研究界所期望的严谨标准。因此,确保健康促进和公共卫生教育学融入学习和教学理论和框架是我们所有人的遗产。作为SoTL的学者,我们对我们的实践感到好奇。我们利用我们的直觉、轶事和观察来引发关于我们如何学习以及为什么学习以及如何更好地进行教学实践的问题(Chick,2018)。我们首先提出有意义的问题,回顾SoTL文献,将教育研究与实践联系起来,思考教育学理论,这些理论可以为我们在学科领域的学习和教学实践提供信息。我们选择最能与我们的调查产生共鸣的理论或框架,以帮助修正和澄清我们的问题。回顾韦伯、马顿、班杜拉等教育理论家有助于形成我们提出的问题。生态、健康信念、社会认知、理性行动等理论模型有助于塑造我们设计计划的方式。这些精炼而集中的问题为最合适的方法提供了信息,确保预期问题得到回答,并且调查结果是相关的、有用的和有价值的。观察、访谈和焦点小组、实验方法、案例研究以及反思性的教学实践有助于我们探索什么是有效的,理解什么是可能的,学习什么是可能,理论是否会随着时间的推移而成立,并帮助我们采取行动。当我们使用最合适的方法来探索支撑我们实证研究的理论或框架时,我们会对如何改善教学和学生成绩有更深入的了解。在这样做的过程中,我们渴望研究生保持好奇心,充满强烈和批判性的探究感,不怕挑战当前健康促进和公共卫生实践的现状。1061281 PHPXXX10.1177/23723799211061281健康促进教育学Henderson and Sendall编辑2021
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
33.30%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信