Disciplinary Styles in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: Exploring Common Ground.

223 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Universities as centres of non-learning (2008, methodology): “It is this confusion that we are addressing here by augmenting an existing model of the scholarship of teaching in a way that will empower academics to take ownership of it within their own disciplines, as discussed by Huber and Morreale (2002), using language that will increase its credibility.”
Decoding the Disciplines: A Model for Helping Students Learn Disciplinary Ways of Thinking. (2004, background): “This concern with the disciplinary nature of learning has been one of the primary motivations for the development of a scholarship of teaching and learning in which faculty from across universities make contributions to pedagogical literature (Hutchings and Shulman, 1999; Huber and Morreale, 2002).”
A New Disciplinarity: Communities of knowledge, learning and practice (2002, background): “…such as the Carnegie ISSN 1356-2517 (print)/ISSN 1470-1294 (online)/02/040373-14 Ó 2002 Taylor & Francis Ltd DOI: 10.1080/1356251 Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching are organised on disciplinary lines; the new movement of the Scholarship of Teaching likewise (Huber & Morreale, 2002).”