Empirical Research in Teaching and Learning E-Book

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 398

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2011

Beschreibung

Empirical Research in Teaching and Learning: Contributions from Social Psychology draws upon the latest empirical research and empirically-based theories from social psychology to inform the scholarship of teaching and learning. * Provides an accessible theoretical grounding in social psychological principles and addresses specific empirical evidence drawn from teaching and learning contexts * Features concrete strategies for use in the classroom setting * Includes contributions from experts in both social psychology and the scholarship of teaching and learning

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Cover

Title Page

Copyright

Contributors

Preface

Our Vision of the Volume

Content Contributors

An Emerging Sub-Discipline?

Chapter 1: How Can Social Psychology Galvanize Teaching and Learning?

What is SoTL?

A Brief History of a Movement

Champions of PR-Working Across Disciplines

Champions of PR-Discipline-Specific Activity

Current Controversies in doing PR and SoTL

The State of SoTL: A Disciplinary Example

Sub-Disciplinary Contributions to PR: Cognitive Psychology

What is Social Psychology?

Methods of Social Psychology

The Social Psychology of Teaching and Learning

Agenda Setting

In Conclusion

References

Chapter 2: A Social Look at Student–Instructor Interactions

Social Connectivity

First Impressions

Expectations

Conclusions

References

Chapter 3: Self-Construal, Culture and Diversity in Higher Education

The Changing Profile of Higher Education Students

Institutional Challenges

Self-Construal Orientation

How Does Culture Influence Individual Differences in Self-Construal?

Self-Construal in Higher Education Institutions

Self Construal in the African Diaspora

Cultural Discontinuity in Higher Education Settings

A Limited Model and Exploratory Investigation

The Current Study

Recommendations

Conclusion

References

Chapter 4: Unintentional Prejudice and Social Psychology's Lessons for Cross-Racial Teaching

Unintentional Prejudice

Understanding Our Students' Experiences

Toward a More Systematic Understanding of Our Students' Perspectives

Conclusion

References

Chapter 5: Teaching in Ways that Support Students’ Autonomy

Part 1. Theoretical Foundation: Understanding Students' Motivation and Teachers' Motivating Styles

Part 2. Application to Classroom Practice: How to Become More Autonomy Supportive

Epilogue. Appreciating Carl Rogers: Solving a Key Dilemma of Teaching

References

Chapter 6: Achievement is an Attitude: The Importance of Help-Seeking Attitudes when Predicting Academic Achievement

A Prospective Study

Help-Seeking Attitudes Predict GPA

Explaining the Findings

Recommendations for Educators

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 7: Applying the Science of Learning to the Art of Teaching

What is Critical Thinking?

Principles of Learning that Promote Transfer

Vary Learning Activities

Conclusion and Future Directions

References

Chapter 8: Which Strategies Best Enhance Teaching and Learning in Higher Education?

The Achievement Continuum and the Appropriate Reference Point

Three Claims for Higher Education

Conclusions

References

Chapter 9: Understanding Faculty Reluctance to Assess Teaching and Learning: A Social Psychological Perspective

Assessment, Evaluation Apprehension, and Social Psychology

Evaluation Apprehension as Faculty Response to Assessment

Faculty Freedom Threatened? Psychological Reactance and Establishing Assessment Practices

Constructive Persuasion: Maintaining Faculty Autonomy while Opening Minds to Assessment

A Social Psychology of Assessment

Acknowledgments

References

Chapter 10: Applying Social Psychology in the College Classroom: Teachers and Learners Need (Your) Scholarship

Scholarly Teaching and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Reflections on the Chapters

Conclusion

References

Index

This edition first published 2011

© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Blackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwells publishing program has been merged with Wileys global Scientific, Technical, and Medical business to form Wiley-Blackwell.

Registered Office

John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ,

United Kingdom

Editorial Offices

350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148-5020, USA

9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK

The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, PO19 8SQ, UK

For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services, and for information about how to apply for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/wiley-blackwell.

The right of Debra Mashek and Elizabeth Yost Hammer to be identified as the authors of the editorial material in this work has been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior permission of the publisher.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic books.

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks.

All brand names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Empirical research in teaching and learning : contributions from social psychology /[edited by] Debra Mashek, Elizabeth Yost Hammer.

p. cm. — (Blackwell/claremont applied social psychology series; 3)

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-1-4443-3719-8

I. Social psychology—Study and teaching. I. Mashek, Debra J. II. Hammer, Elizabeth Yost.

HM1033.E534 2011

302.071′1—dc22

2010042202

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

This book is published in the following electronic formats: eBook 9781444395310; Wiley Online Library 9781444395341; ePub 9781444395334

Contributors

Suzanne C. Baker, James Madison University

Stacy Boyer, Moravian College

Kathleen C. Burns, University of Wisconsin-Green Bay

Jessica Clevering, Dordt College

Shelley DeFord, Harvey Mudd College

Dana S. Dunn, Moravian College

Regan A. R. Gurung, University of Wisconsin-Green Bay

Amy A. Hackney, Georgia Southern University

Jane S. Halonen, University of West Florida

Diane F. Halpern, Claremont McKenna College

Elliott D. Hammer, Xavier University of Louisiana

John Hattie, University of Auckland

Eric Alexander Hurley, Pomona College

Shelva Paulse Hurley, Claremont Graduate University

Debra Mashek, Harvey Mudd College

Maureen A. McCarthy, Kennesaw State University

Karen Z. Naufel, Georgia Southern University

Johnmarshall Reeve, Korea University

Randolph A. Smith, Lamar University

Clayton L. Stephenson, Claremont Graduate University

Janie H. Wilson, Georgia Southern University

Tasia Yamamura, Scripps College

Elizabeth Yost Hammer, Xavier University of Louisiana

Preface

Debra Mashek & Elizabeth Yost Hammer

Dr Stuart Oskamp envisioned the Claremont Symposium on Applied Social Psychology as a venue for scholars to examine “topics crucial to our understanding of human relationships and the building of a healthy, diverse society” (cgu.edu/pages/4513.asp). Since its inception in 1986, the Symposium has time and again achieved this aim by interrogating timely issues such as extremism, the integration of work and family, community engagement, stigma and prejudice, psychological aspects of the legal system, the prevention of risk behaviors, intimate relationships, and cross-cultural relating.

Feeling that research in social psychology offers many lessons for higher education, we sought to continue this tradition by organizing the 2009 Claremont Symposium around issues of central importance to each of our colleagues and all of our students: teaching and learning. Once the conference theme was selected, it was clear that a collaboration was in order. To organize a high-quality and topical conference, the organizers should have a foot in both the social psychology and the teaching and learning worlds. Luckily, over several days of grading AP Psychology exams (and a few beers), we made a connection and the planning began.

Our collaboration includes two social psychologists. We are from different parts of the country, different types of institutions, and have focused our careers on different content matter. However, we have a similar passion for our students and classroom experiences and we both recognize the value of viewing education in social psychological terms. Debra Mashek specializes in close relationships and the application of close relationship theory to issues of community connectedness and community engagement. She is an Assistant Professor of Psychology at Harvey Mudd College, a liberal arts college in Claremont, CA, and has received national recognition for her teaching. Elizabeth Yost Hammer has spent her career exploring issues related to teaching. She is currently a Kellogg Professor in teaching and serves as the Director of the Center for the Advancement of Teaching at Xavier University of Louisiana, the only historically Black and Catholic university in the country.

Our Vision of the Volume

In our initial conversations about the array of topics we would like represented in the symposium and ultimately this volume, it became clear we both felt strongly that social psychology offers more than merely interesting insights into the form and function of teaching and learning. Indeed, social psychology offers concrete tools for enhancing teaching and learning.

Thus, we wanted contributors to both the Symposium and this volume to draw upon empirical research and empirically-based theories from social psychology to inform the scholarship of teaching and learning. Chapters begin by providing an accessible theoretical grounding in the social psychological principles most relevant to the authors' area of expertise. Chapters then describe how this theoretical lens informs our understanding of teaching and learning (i.e., demonstrating how we can see these processes through a social psychological frame). In addition to providing specific empirical evidence drawn from teaching and learning contexts, chapters provide concrete strategies for translating this evidence “on the ground.”

Importantly, we see this volume as a resource for all who are interested in enhancing teaching and learning in the higher education setting. The emphasis on applying social psychology—in conjunction with a solid empirical approach—makes this volume relevant to scholarly teachers from all disciplines. Although all chapters focus on social psychological questions, the answers to these questions are relevant to all classrooms. Likewise, we anticipate the people who staff centers associated with faculty development initiatives designed to advance the art and science of teaching will find value in the empirically-validated tools offered in these chapters.

Content Contributors

Social psychology examines the many ways we are influenced by both social and non-social contexts. As the table of contents of any social psychology textbook reveals, the topics within social psychology are vast and varied, ranging from self-perception to other-perception, helping to hurting, and self-identity to group identity. Rather than attempt an exhaustive survey of the many ways social psychological theories bear on teaching and learning, the contributors we invited crafted chapters highlighting what is possible in this domain.

We knew that we needed someone to set the context of the volume—to establish the usefulness of researching and applying social psychology in the classroom. Regan Gurung quickly came to mind. He recently co-authored a book, Optimizing teaching and learning: Practicing pedagogical research, directly calling for an increase in the scholarship of teaching in learning. We knew his voice would make the case for our theme.

When considering social psychology in the classroom, one of the first things that comes to mind is the student--teacher relationship and classroom interactions. Because of her work on immediacy behaviors, Janie Wilson was a natural for our theme. She is one of the first scholars to do empirical, classroom-specific research on issues such as touching (in an appropriate context, of course) and first impressions of faculty formed via a pre-semester email.

The study of stereotyping and prejudice is one of the most enduring areas of social psychology. Obviously the applications to higher education are vast. We recognized that Shelva Hurley would make a significant contribution given her work on the impact of different cultural expectations on the educational experiences of students at the institutional level. In contrast to Hurley's consideration of students of color at majority White institutions, Elliott Hammer examines cross-racial teaching from a unique perspective. He—a White male teacher at a predominantly Black university—surveyed students about their experiences with faculty and applied many of the concepts from the stereotyping and prejudice literature to his findings.

Questions about the interactions between people sit at the heart of social psychology. Johnmarshall Reeve asks and answers such questions in the context of interpersonal motivation. In particular, how do teachers motivate students? He draws from self-determination theory, and his extensive work with educators at all levels, to advocate for autonomy supportive classrooms.

As with the study of stereotyping and interpersonal interaction, attitudes likewise are a cornerstone of social psychology. Thus, we wanted to include some research examining the influence of attitudes on behaviors in higher education settings. Jessica Clevering's work on help-seeking seemed like a perfect fit. She found that attitudes about asking for help, more so than help-seeking behaviors, are related to academic achievement.

Although not a social psychologist, Diane Halpern is a recognized expert on learning and teaching. She has been a leader in expanding the scholarship of teaching and learning, and applying theories and tools from our content disciplines to student learning and educational experiences. We knew her contributions would both energize the discussion and offer a prime example of how to “do” the scholarship of teaching and learning.

Building on his expertise in academic self-concept and quantitative methodologies, John Hattie tackles a fascinating predicament in the teaching and learning literature: evidence exists demonstrating the efficacy of most all educational interventions. Yet, as all students know, not all teachers or forms of instruction are equally effective. With an eye toward pinpointing the elements of effective teaching, Hattie offers a synthesis of over 800 meta-analytic studies to identify teaching strategies that result in the greatest gain in student achievement.

One topic we knew would be of value to readers is that of assessment. In the current academic climate, all faculty are exposed to issues related to assessment, and many are resistant. Can social psychology speak to this faculty resistance? We asked Dana Dunn to explore this question.

Finally, we wanted a capstone chapter to wrap up or summarize the entire volume. We wanted someone with a broad view on the empirical literature and its potential for enhancing teaching and learning. We needed someone who could see the big picture, someone who was familiar with the scholarship of teaching and learning, but also had social psychological expertise. Of course, Randy Smith came to mind. As the editor for Teaching of Psychology for 12 years, he was exactly who we needed. His critical eye and keen insights led to a capstone chapter that is both useful and inspiring.

Of course, there were many others who have important work that would have made a great contribution to this volume (for instance, Joshua Aronson's work on stereotype threat, Carol Dweck's work on implicit theories, Don Forsythe's work on groups, to name a few). When one really starts to examine the field of social psychology, almost all of it has implications for teachers. What important territory for social psychologists to explore!

An Emerging Sub-Discipline?

We hope this volume spurs what we see as an emerging sub-discipline within social psychology: the social psychology of teaching and learning. By empirically testing classroom practices using methodology from social psychology, the scholarship of teaching and learning becomes more relevant, more useful, and more scholarly. Classrooms and campuses provide real-world settings for testing social psychological theories, thus this emerging sub-discipline promises to enhance the discipline itself while also enhancing the pursuits that sit at the center of institutions of higher education: teaching and learning.

Chapter 1

How Can Social Psychology Galvanize Teaching and Learning?

Regan A. R. Gurung & Kathleen C. Burns

Psychology instructors are lucky people. Social psychologists are particularly lucky. Psychology in general is fun to teach, but social psychology truly takes it up many notches. Social psychology is the study of how we are influenced by other people and the situations we find ourselves in. Is there a more relevant area to help study how teachers and the learning environment can influence learning? Some introductory instructors often move the social psychology section to early in the semester to grab their students' attention. Others look forward to the social psychology segment at semester's end to provide a booster shot of adrenaline to tired students. Social psychology is captivating, exciting, often counter-intuitive, and vastly underutilized in the very context where it is first exposed to students—the classroom. Whereas researchers have successfully used social psychology to tackle many contemporary problems (e.g., Abu Ghraib, Zimbardo, 2007; implicit prejudice, Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998), social psychology's potential contributions to teaching and learning have not been sufficiently mined. There is a sizable literature in the general area of scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) but little of this literature explicitly capitalizes on social psychological theories or is firmly grounded in theory at all (Hutchings, 2007). There are also many books that provide teaching tips (e.g., Davis, 2009) or offer advice on how to face challenges of teaching (e.g., Palmer, 2007), but these books only implicitly (if at all) draw on the richness of social psychology as it pertains to the classroom. This volume should begin the process to rectify these wrongs. In this chapter we set the stage for the launching of a new area, the social psychology of teaching and learning. First, we provide a brief history of the general area of SoTL. Then we review the scope of the field of social psychology. Finally, we review existing social psychological forays into SoTL and directly link key areas of social psychology to teaching and learning. We hope the latter provides a valuable heuristic to optimize teaching and learning as well as to guide future research in this arena.

What is SoTL?

Over the past few years there has been much said about what to call research done on one's teaching. The most commonly used phrase is the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, more often referred to by its acronym SoTL (though the pronunciation of said acronym varies as one moves across the globe). We define SoTL as intentional, systematic reflections on teaching and learning resulting in peer-reviewed products made public.

In addition to SoTL, one also may hear terms such as Scholarly Teaching and Pedagogical Research. A scholarly teacher is someone who intentionally and systematically reflects on and modifies her teaching to enhance student learning (evaluating whether enhancement took place). A scholarly teacher who shares the evidence collected in a peer-reviewed public format, presentation, or publication, is doing what is traditionally referred to as SoTL. If the person does not share their findings it is still scholarly teaching. Pedagogical research (PR) (Gurung & Schwartz, 2009) is a more general term that captures the essence of scholarly work conducted to enhance teaching and advance learning. PR encompasses SoTL and scholarly teaching, and does not imply the results are published or presented (a key part of being labeled SoTL) but by the same token implies a rigorous methodological investigation that goes beyond scholarly teaching. For more on definitional quibbles, the interested reader is urged to peruse Irons and Buskist (2008), Pan (2009), or Smith (2008).

In this chapter we opt for the more general term, pedagogical research, in our discussion as it has less of the negative connotations often associated with the term SoTL (e.g., “SoTL is not real research”). The bottom line is that when one is investigating one's own teaching and one's own students' learning, universities and disciplinary departments tend to see the work as falling under the realm of teaching but are beginning to recognize the work as scholarship (or research versus teaching). Some have argued that pedagogical research of this sort should be seen as part as one's professional responsibility as a teacher (Bernstein & Bass, 2005). Whereas this is not the venue to debate this particular issue further, we hope that the use of the term pedagogical research will make this form of scholarship more likely to be taken as seriously as research on other topics. In addition, we support its consideration as another indicator of excellent teaching. Research is only one part of what we do as educators in academic settings. We all teach. We all step into classrooms (or virtual realities if teaching online) and help quasi-captive audiences of our students to learn a little something of what we know and what we have jurisdiction over. Those who teach hence carry a great responsibility. It is upon them we rely to convey the basics about our various disciplines. How do we know if the students are learning? Beyond the simple rubric of exam grades and appreciative nods of understanding lies the challenge we all face as teachers. The challenge is to establish that our teaching is working and our students are learning. Pedagogical research (PR) helps face this challenge. There are other reasons to do PR as well. PR increases our understanding of how and why people learn, gathers evidence of productive teaching and learning, and develops more effective ways to help learners learn better (it is also fun and helps solve vexing mysteries such as “Why did that class go so badly?”).

A Brief History of a Movement

Although the term SoTL is a somewhat relative newcomer to the scene, people have been thinking about how to improve teaching and learning for centuries. As Kuh (2004) notes, this “new” line of research, is really a new spin on what researchers in certain fields of study have focused on for decades. It is time for a short excursion into the history of pedagogical research.

In a history of the field of educational psychology, Berliner (2006) traces the modern trend of thinking about individual differences, development, the nature of the material being taught, problem solving, and assessment, to the ancient Jewish rite of the Passover. The leader of the Passover service told the story of the Passover each year but differently to each of his sons according to the sons' own specific aptitudes. This reflects the modern day trend to focus on individual students' learning styles. Plato and Aristotle are said to discuss such topics as the role of the teacher, the relations between teacher and student, and the means and methods of teaching (Wason, 1960). Writers down the centuries from the Roman Quintilian (1st century), Juan Luis Vives (15th century), Comenius, Herbart (18th century), to the philosopher Joseph Schwab (1973) have also addressed education (Berliner, 2006). Education psychologists have identified a “father of research on teaching,” Joseph Mayer Rice (1912) who conducted empirical classroom-based research and a “grandfather,” William James (1842–1910) who was asked to present Cambridge educators with lectures on the new psychology (Talks to Teachers on Psychology, 1899). Other psychologists have tackled education. G. Stanley Hall, the first president of the American Psychological Association was professor of psychology and pedagogy at Johns Hopkins University. John Dewey, like Hall, was a former classroom teacher who respected the complexity of teaching and also contributed greatly to the methodological study of education (Dewey, 1910).

SoTL catapulted into the national higher education consciousness in 1990. It is not that this type of work did not exist before then, but Boyer's (1990) Scholarship reconsidered catalyzed extensive examination of the work done on teaching and learning and flexed the political muscle of organizations such as the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. The results are staggering. Today enough universities and colleges pay attention to SoTL that books document how the scholarship of teaching and pedagogical research is fostered nationwide (O'Meara & Rice, 2005) and numerous international conferences convene yearly to advance the field.

It has been 20 years since Scholarship reconsidered was published and today SoTL is a well-known phrase driving multiple national and international organizations such as the International Alliance for Teaching Scholars (IATS) and the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL). Labels are empowering entities and having a phrase such as SoTL with its conferences and journals has helped further this form of research. Akin to the political force, visibility, and ownership that the politically correct terms such as Asian American and African American gave members of the related ethnic groups, SoTL has provided faculty interested in pedagogical research with a unifying banner to organize around. With the publicizing of the phrase SoTL in response to Boyer and subsequent work of his Carnegie colleagues (e.g., Shulman and Hutchings) among others, this type of research has only been recently recognized in most disciplines as a legitimate area of scholarship, worthy of recognition equal to that of more traditional lines of research and inquiry.

Champions of PR-Working Across Disciplines

There are many champions of SoTL. Since 1905, The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching has carried out a wide range of activities and research that has helped to support and advance the work of teachers at all levels. In 1997, the Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (CASTL) was established when Lee Shulman became president of the Carnegie Foundation. The Lilly Foundation has long been a supporter of teaching enhancement and has been funding faculty scholars nationwide since the 1970s. It also supports an international as well as four national conferences around America. More recently, academic institutions have taken on the mantel of leader by starting up specialized journals. A recent example is the International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (IJSOTL), a peer-reviewed electronic journal published twice a year by the Center for Excellence in Teaching at Georgia Southern University whose first issue hit the electronic airwaves in January 2007.

Others who have greatly contributed to pedagogical research are not linked to foundations such as the Carnegie and Lilly foundations. Maryellen Weimer for example, one time associate director of the National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, and editor of the Teaching Professor newsletter on college teaching, has greatly helped guide and foster pedagogical research (see Menges, Weimer, & Associates, 1996; Weimer, 2006). Going beyond the previously discussed traditional sources, it is important also to include a look at how SoTL is done outside America. For example Hounsell and Entwistle spearhead the British Enhancing Teaching and Learning (ETL) Project which seeks to develop subject-specific conceptual frameworks to guide institutional and faculty or departmental development of teaching–learning environments. This group has developed a number of useful tools for pedagogical research and has also mapped out key variables that influence learning (see Entwistle, 2009 for a review).

Champions of PR-Discipline-Specific Activity

The disciplines whose names exemplify the topic of interest, Education and Educational Psychology, provide wonderful starting points for a look at how to examine teaching and learning. In addition, many other disciplines and a work of a wide array of scholars (e.g., Calder in history, Hake and Hestenes in physics, McKinney in sociology, Nelson in biology) have conducted research on teaching and learning. PR in various disciplines has been taking place for more time that many may imagine and is more widespread than one may have imagined. In a recent review of the history and diversity of pedagogical research, Weimer (2006) notes that almost all the major disciplines have pedagogical journals. In perhaps one of the most comprehensive listing of publication outlets for pedagogical research, Weimer's work clearly shows that if one is interested in learning more about how to optimize teaching and learning, there are many places to look (e.g., Journal of College Science Teaching; Active Learning in Higher Education).

As a testament to the (mostly unknown) longevity of pedagogical research, the earliest journal articles on teaching and learning were published back in 1924 with the first edition of the Journal of Chemical Education, a publication still in press today. Many of the journals that began a long time ago started as newsletters (e.g., Teaching of Psychology) and conversely, many pedagogical publications are not “published” on paper at all. There are a number of outlets that exist in the electronic World Wide Web only.

An example of the extent to which different disciplines are doing PR can also be seen in Exploring signature pedagogies: Approaches to teaching disciplinary habits of mind (Gurung, Chick, & Haynie, 2009). Authors in each chapter in this collection first provide a description of the unique content and characteristic pedagogies in their disciplines. What pedagogies are most often used in the classrooms of the field? They then review and evaluate the pedagogical research related to their discipline, paying special attention to how faculty collect evidence of effective teaching and learning and highlighting what future pedagogical research is needed. What does the pedagogical literature of the discipline suggest are the optimal ways to teach material in that field—and verify that learning? Finally, authors assess how the common pedagogies within their disciplines reflect and engage students in the ways of knowing, the habits of mind, and the values used by experts in the field.

Current Controversies in doing PR and SoTL

By now, many faculty have at least heard about SoTL. Many faculty are doing some form of pedagogical research, and it is time to move on to new frontiers. Using social psychological theory is one such frontier that we will expand on shortly, but it is prudent to be aware of two major issues raised about SoTL. First, is the issue of where it should be published to count as “SoTL” and how does it count for merit, tenure, and promotion. Many psychologists who conduct pedagogical research write up their work for the premier journal in the teaching of psychology (of the same name). This is commendable given that for many psychologists this may be the first place to look for discipline-specific information, and given the journal has an exceptional reputation with a rejection rate of approximately 85%. But some scholars argue that pedagogical research should be more generally applicable. Weimer (2008) “raises some concerns about positioning scholarship on teaching and learning within the disciplines” and argues that much is “lost when the preference is for pedagogical scholarship owned by the disciplines” (p. 1). Indeed there are many outlets (e.g., the International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning) that span disciplines and one could argue (as Weimer does) will do more of a service to the field. The question of where to publish directly links to how PR counts for merit and promotion. Some may argue that publishing in one's own field (even in a pedagogical journal) will count more towards promotion than publishing in a general SoTL journal (perhaps we do not trust “peers” from other disciplines?). Whereas departments and campuses vary on their attitudes towards how SoTL is viewed towards merit and tenure, the good news is that national surveys show that more and more campuses do look favorably towards PR (Gurung, Kerns, Ansburg, Alexander & Johnson, 2008; Huber & Hutchings, 2005). Furthermore, a number of publications now provide models of ways tenure and promotion committees can, do, and should consider PR (Gurung & Schwartz, 2009; McKinney, 2007).

The second issue relates to the need for better theoretical work. Hutchings (2007) identifies this issue seeing “the role of theory in the scholarship of teaching and learning as the elephant in the room” (p. 1). Reflecting on the 2007 annual meeting of the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSOTL) Hutchings notes how many presentations lacked a theoretical base. She called for a greater grounding of pedagogical research in theory. Social psychological theories may provide just the answer.

The State of SoTL: A Disciplinary Example

Halpern et al. (1998) first attempted to broaden the construct of scholarship to include activities that investigate pedagogy and student learning for the field of psychology. Halpern et al. provided the field of psychology with a “paradigm for the twenty-first century” (p. 1292)—a five-part definition of scholarship that included (a) original research, (b) integration of knowledge, (c) application of knowledge, (d) the scholarship of pedagogy, and (e) the scholarship of teaching in psychology. What is the status of SoTL in psychology now over 10 years since this conceptualization? A task force of the Society for the Teaching of Psychology (Division 2 of the American Psychological Association) conducted a survey to ascertain the degree to which psychology departments and the institutions of higher education that house them have enacted the scholarship of teaching (Gurung et al., 2008). Findings regarding departmental and institutional support for SoTL presented a mixed picture. The field of psychology seems to recognize SoTL better than higher education as a whole (i.e., when compared to the results seen in a survey of higher education by Huber and Hutchings, 2005). For example, 60% of the survey respondents reported having colleagues involved in SoTL, and 78% reported that departmental policies encourage SoTL. That said, doing pedagogical research is clearly not without obstacles for psychologists. Three quarters of survey respondents did not view SoTL as part of their normal scholarship activities, and 75% of the participants indicated they themselves fail to understand what constitutes SoTL. A recent spate of publications (e.g., Gurung et al., 2009; Gurung & Schwartz, 2009) including a special issue on SoTL in the journal Teaching of Psychology (Smith & Buskist, 2008) should help alleviate the issue over definitional confusion and we hope this volume provides the necessary catalyst to further pedagogical research.

A number of recent reviews and meta-analyses provide insight into the wide breadth and exact nature of pedagogical research being done in psychology. More importantly, they provide us with key items for our pedagogical research agendas. For example, Peden and Wilson (2009) observe that whereas national guidelines for learning outcomes in psychology suggest how to think like a psychologist, the guidelines do not articulate how to teach it. Peden and Wilson (2009) reviewed back issues of the Teaching of Psychology (2003 to 2007) and made many observations that can provide jumping off points for PR in teaching psychology. In a slightly different vein, Tomcho and Foels (2008) conducted a meta-analysis of 197 studies published in the Teaching of Psychology from 1974 to 2006. They found that, on average, studies evidenced a medium effect size across types of learning outcomes. Given the effectiveness of the published teaching activities, the authors suggested that researchers should address (a) the potential confounding role of teacher rapport, immediacy, and alliance in evaluating teaching effectiveness; (b) the ethics of teaching activity development; and (c) the appropriateness of using course grades to assess teaching activity effectiveness. In a content analysis of the same years of content, Tomcho and Foels (2008) identified 15 general teaching strategies in 681 teaching activity articles and coded strategies' potential impact on student development of scientific inquiry skills. The authors found that authors of articles reviewed had consistently used learner-centered strategies and significantly increased their use of active evaluation strategies. In perhaps the grand-daddy of meta-analyses, Hattie (2009; see also Hattie this volume) analyzed over 800 meta-analyses of studies relating to achievement (a meta-meta-analysis as it were) and lists 131 factors that influence learning. Most recently, Bernstein et al. (2009) and Chew et al. (2010) provide comprehensive pictures of what is known about the processes surrounding teaching and learning and provide general models that can guide future pedagogical research.

Sub-Disciplinary Contributions to PR: Cognitive Psychology

Within the field of psychology, cognitive psychology is the next major contributor to studies of teaching and learning (after or perhaps in parallel to the area of educational psychology). Cognitive scientists, who have perhaps the most to offer through well-researched principles of learning and memory, have only recently begun to get involved in classroom research (Metcalfe, Kornell, & Son, 2007). For example, the theoretical characteristics of metacognition have dominated research since the 1960s; however, only recent research has produced research with a focus on educational application. According to Hacker, Dunlosky, and Graesser (1998, p.17) “many researchers [are] convinced of the educational relevance that metacognitive theory has for teachers and students, [and] are shifting their attention from the theoretical to the practical, from the laboratory to the classroom.” A number of lab studies have explicitly demonstrated the benefits of monitoring of one's thinking (e.g., Dunlosky & Nelson, 1997; Koriat & Bjork, 2005) and cognitive research on metacognition is now beginning to move into real world settings and the classroom. Metacognitive theory can help teachers create classroom environments that foster flexible and creative, strategic learning (Borkowski & Muthukrishna, 1992). This culmination of research suggests students will benefit from teachers who indeed utilize the instruction of metacognitive processes to facilitate learning (see Dunlosky & Lipko, 2007; Hacker et al., 1998; Metcalfe & Greene, 2007 for reviews).

Akin to metacogntion, there are many cognitive concepts that can apply to teaching and learning. Some include, temporal spacing (Cepeda, Pashler, Vul, Wixted, & Rohrer, 2006), using self-generation rather than reading (Slamecka & Graf, l978), multimodal and contextual variability, spaced practice (Bahrick & Hall, 2005; Pashler, Zarow, & Triplette, 2003), corrective feedback (Butterfield & Metcalfe, 2001), repeated testing (Roediger & Karpicke, 2006), and introducing “desirable difficulties” (Bjork, 1994) such as spacing rather than massing study sessions; interleaving rather than blocking practice on separate topics; varying how to-be-learned material is presented; reducing feedback; and using tests as learning events. Many cognitive concepts have explicit pragmatic implications. For example, because research has shown that retrieval produces robust mnemonic benefits that exceed those of additional study (Kang, McDermott, & Roediger, 2007), testing (i.e., requiring retrieval) may be an especially effective method for improving learning (Karpicke & Roediger, 2008; McDaniel, Anderson, Derbish, & Morrisette, 2007; McDaniel, Roediger, & McDermott, 2007), and have recommended that instructors introduce more quizzing into their courses (Pashler et al., 2007). Work such as this has led to the development and testing of specific strategies for students (e.g., the 3R, read-recite-review strategy, McDaniel, Howard, & Einstein, 2009).

As is evident, cognitive psychologists have made explicit attempts to ensure the work from the cognitive laboratory is considered in the classroom. Perhaps one of the best examples of this collection of cognitive theory can be seen in a special issue of the New Directions for Teaching and Learning series dedicated to “Applying the science of learning to university teaching and beyond” (Halpern & Hakel, 2002). Whereas research from the tradition of cognitive psychology identifies core principles that constrain how people learn, the recommendations for teaching that have emerged from this tradition do not always work (Daniel & Poole, 2009). What works in the lab does not always directly succeed in the classroom (Gurung, 2009). Although researchers have started taking cognitive science into the classroom (e.g., McDaniel & Einstein, 2005; Roediger & Karpicke, 2006), the link between making the theory and practice suggested by research applicable to teachers and learners is not complete. Many of the recommendations from controlled lab studies are yet to be translated into practices for the classroom. Furthermore, as much as the areas of educational and cognitive psychology seem to have the corner on SoTL, researchers in these areas primarily treat the classrooms of others as their laboratory (educational psychology) or primarily work in the lab (cognitive psychology). The pedagogical research we advocate puts one's own classroom, teaching, and learning, under the microscope (see also Smith, 2008).

It is also time for social psychology to follow in the footsteps of educational and cognitive psychology. Although social psychology does not at first seem to be as relevant to learning as the areas of education and cognition (relevant almost by definition), it is an area that is perfectly primed to contribute to our understanding of pedagogy. To be fair, this book is not the first time an area of psychology has been applied to teaching and learning or the parallels between an area's focus of study have been mapped onto teaching and learning. Some clinical psychologists have noted the parallel between the client–therapist and the student–teacher. Prieto & Meyers (1999) introduced the concept of the Scientist-Practitioner-Educator in the psychology teaching assistant (TA) training literature to extend a model of counseling (the Boulder model) to teaching, view teaching as professional practice, and identify the need for theory-driven, evidence-based teaching of psychology (Prieto & Meyers, 2009; see also Snyder, 2005). At the APA National Conference on Undergraduate Education in Psychology, Bernstein et al. (2009) offered an expanded view suggesting that the discipline of psychology needs to recognize teaching as a form of professional practice, requiring sufficient preparation to perform competently and ethically, and with training beginning at the graduate level. Similar to the basic call for scholarly teaching, Prieto and Meyers (2009) advanced the notion that training in psychology should adopt the scientist-educator model (similar to the Boulder Model of scientist-practitioner for clinical practice) that involves theory-based teaching, continuous reflection on teaching practices, application of evidence-based instructional strategies, and multifaceted evaluation of teaching and learning outcomes. Using the language of clinical psychology the authors go on to suggest that the essential preparation elements for a scientist-educator qualified to teach at all levels and in all kinds of positions and settings should include a deep knowledge of core psychology, course work in teaching and learning, supervised practicum experience in teaching, and learning how to reflect on and evaluate teaching in a scholarly, theory-driven manner. In direct line with the suggestions of the current volume, Prieto and Meyers (2009) advocate the use of social psychological theory to help explain the effects of TA training (e.g., social cognitive approaches such as self-efficacy). We take this work many steps further to push for the explicit use of social psychological theory and theorizing in pedagogical research. To catalyze this process, we next provide a brief description of the sub-discipline of social psychology and highlight specific ways theories, concepts, and methodologies from it can enhance PR.

What is Social Psychology?

Social psychology is the study of how we are influenced by other people. Gordon Allport summarized social psychology as “what we think, feel, say, or do is often affected by what other people are thinking, feeling, saying, or doing” (1985, p. 3). This definition may at first sound like peer pressure, and while social psychology does study conformity, it is much more than that. From persuasion to romantic relationships, social psychologists investigate a myriad of ways that we are impacted by our social environment. Consider the following scenario which makes social psychology's relevance for teaching clearer: Jenny is sitting in a crowded classroom. She raises her hand and answers a difficult question posed by her professor. How did the professor's expectations of Jenny affect her desire to raise her hand? How difficult did Jenny believe the question was? How did the other students influence the likelihood that Jenny would answer the question correctly? All of these questions are of interest to the social psychologist.

Social psychology focuses on how the situations we are in influence our behaviors. People often take for granted the situational forces influencing their behavior and see themselves as independent individuals accurately perceiving their social world. Passersby decide not to help someone on the side of a busy road because they think someone else will. In the classroom, teachers believe that they are treating students fairly, but are often unaware of the role that their prejudices, expectations, and past experiences may have in shaping their students' behaviors. Students may think that they formed their friendships based on their interests or hobbies, but fail to appreciate the role of proximity (i.e., living next door to each other) in their relationships.

A Brief History of Social Psychology

Social psychology is an area of study housed primarily within psychology but with ties to sociology as well. Psychology can be differentiated from sociology in its emphasis on the individual. Even when group behavior is studied, the focus is on the individual in that group. Sociologists study macro-level variables, such as social class, in accounting for our thoughts, feelings, and actions.

Social psychology can also be differentiated from other branches of psychology, such as clinical, cognitive, and personality psychology. Clinical psychology focuses on abnormal behavior and psychological disorders whereas the majority of social psychology focuses on normal behavior. Cognitive psychology studies mental processes such as memory, attention, and language. While social psychology is also interested in thought processes, it analyzes these within the context of social interactions. For example, how do people remember information about a person that they just met? Personality psychology is concerned with individual differences such as extroversion and conscientiousness and predicts that people's behavior is relatively consistent from situation to situation. Social psychologists would expect more flexibility in people's behaviors depending on the situation that they were in at the time.

Often credited as the first social psychology experiment, Triplett (1897) investigated the role of other people in improving performance. Children wound up a fishing reel either alone or with other children present. The children were impacted by their social environment and wound up the fishing reel faster when others were there, showing the first evidence of social facilitation. The first textbooks followed in the early 1900s to further establish social psychology as an area of study.

The field did not really take off until World War II. World War II inspired such research questions as how to convince families to eat less desirable cuts of meat (attitude change), how soldiers' morale depended on the other soldiers in their unit (social comparison), and how an atrocity such as the Holocaust could have been carried out (obedience). The war provided the catalyst that social psychology needed to encourage research in a variety of areas beyond its early beginnings in group processes.

Today social psychology has grown in scope to study several areas of our everyday lives, including aggression, romantic relationships, helping behavior, prejudice, attraction, impression formation, and many more. Today's researchers ask questions like what factors predict marital satisfaction or how do our emotions shape our impressions of others? Because of its broad applicability, social psychology is often utilized in other domains such as education, law, and health. It contributes to interdisciplinary questions such as how to manage classroom groups, how eyewitness memory can be biased, and how social support buffers one from stress.

Social psychology focuses its lens at three different levels of analysis. Individual processes are at work when considering phenomena such as impression formation, attitudes, and persuasion. Interpersonal processes are at the foreground for romantic relationships, friendships, and helping behaviors. Finally group processes are considered when studying conformity, group decision making, and jury behavior. These levels of analysis demonstrate the breadth of social psychology as well as the different forms of influence that social processes can take. All these levels of analysis, individual, interpersonal, and group, can be used to study teaching and learning. The instructor and student each have intrapersonal factors that influence their teaching and learning. The teacher and student interactions yield emergent properties that contribute to learning (as will be discussed further below). The classroom environment involves group processes (e.g., group work and group presentations) that influence learning.

Methods of Social Psychology

The methodological strengths of social psychology provide great tools to stimulate classroom discussion but also lend themselves very well to doing pedagogical research. For example, on the first day of class, both of us present students with several nuggets of common sense wisdom and ask them which are true and false according to the research. This activity usually generates a lot of discussion and interest in the field because many of our common sense preconceptions are wrong. In fact, many of these preconceptions even contradict each other such as birds of a feather flock together vs. opposites attract. Social psychologists use the scientific method to determine under what conditions these various ideas are at work. When is it that people will be attracted to similar others? When is it that opposites will be a good match? At first glance, social psychology can seem like common sense: It seems so obvious that people will slack off on group projects. Subjecting such seeming commonsense to scientific examination often yields intriguing results. More importantly, it can yield answers and have significant implications for how we design and teach our classes. Social psychologists are also well-suited to inspire the scholarship of teaching and learning because their typical research participants are college students.

Social psychologists use the scientific method to separate fact from fiction. While many of the topics in social psychology have real world implications, what sets it apart from philosophy, common sense, or speculation is the scientific method. Hypotheses must be formed before data are collected. Ideas must be tested with robust research methods. Experimenters randomly assign participants to different experimental groups. Random assignment ensures that participants have an equal chance of receiving an experimental condition and that it is the experimental treatment that is causing the effects observed. Participants do not know the specific hypotheses that are under study and may even be deceived about the study's true purpose to ensure truthful responding. Results must be replicated in order to establish their reliability. These rigorous procedures ensure the empirical basis of social psychology.