2025探索高校利用“学术型教学”的策略研究报告

Exploring strategies forinstitutions to leverage theScholarship of Teachingand LearningThematic Peer Group Report Chair: Philippe EmplitUniversité libre de Bruxelles, BelgiumEUA Coordinator: Cecilia Biaggi April 2025 This publication is licensed under the Creative CommonsAttribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC This information may be freely used, copied and adapted for non-commercialpurposes, provided that the source is acknowledged (European UniversityAssociation). European University Association asbl Avenue de l’Yser 241040 BrusselsBelgium+32 (0) 2 230 55 44 Rue du Rhône 114Case postale 31741211 Geneva 3, Switzerland+41 22 552 02 96 www.eua.eu · info@eua.eu LEARNING & TEACHING PAPER #25Exploring strategies for institutions to leverage the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Ensuring the quality of educational provision has become challenging for universities, which arenavigating increasingly disruptive landscapes, with technological advancements, demographic shiftsand political crises. This adds to the pressure from a growing number of stakeholders urging highereducation to prepare graduates for a future defined by economic, social and environmental challenges.The European University Association (EUA) chose to explore ways to help students, staff and institutionsbecome resilient participants in constantly evolving environments, including evidence-based approachesto the evaluation of the fitness-for-purpose of learning and teaching. As a result, one of the three 2024Thematic Peer Groups (hereafter “the group”) focused on strategies for institutions to leverage theScholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL). SoTL provides an approach to mobilising and capitalising on the expertise, competence and professionalnorms and core values of scholars for the enterprise of teaching and for the benefit of learning. Itcombines the rigour of scientific approaches and peer review with the practical relevance of insightsgained from within and for the context in which learning and teaching takes place. It promotesownership and agency for both academic teachers and students. In addition, it is sustainable, insofaras it establishes lasting procedural and learning skills among instructors, while being at the same timeeasily documentable and thereby accessible to peers, and available for organisational development.This helps institutions to justify the respective investments and meet accountability requirements. Theessence of SoTL, then, is to confer value upon individual development towards academic teachership,and to reinforce the quality of educational provision at all levels of higher education. The group was composed of representatives of nine EUA member universities, covering a diversity ofinstitutional profiles (see Annex). Over the course of three day-long meetings, the group identifiedcommon challenges characterising the implementation of SoTL, drafted suggestions based onsuccessful practices and approaches, and discussed examples of institutional policies in support ofSoTL initiatives. This report represents the outcomes of the group’s work. Furthermore, the reportproposes a definition of SoTL formulated by a task group of four members and approved by the wholegroup. It is hoped that these reflections may provide inspiration for institutions across the EuropeanHigher Education Area. Context and definition of SoTL I. OVERVIEW OF MEMBERS The members of the group represented a variety of disciplines and institutional roles, includingeducational developers, teachers, directors of learning and teaching services, international liaisonofficers, academic leaders and students. Although almost all the institutions to which the groupmembers belonged have at least five years of experience with SoTL, there are remarkable differencesin institutional approaches, as the examples of good practices in this report demonstrate. There arecases in which SoTL requirements are nationally and institutionally mandated to be considered forcareer progression. While some institutions provide individual faculties with the necessary support (e.g.Uppsala University, University of Tartu), in other cases educational developers integrate SoTL into theirtraining initiatives to help faculties enhance and evaluate their teaching practices, often without formalrecognition from the universities themselves (e.g. Comenius University Bratislava, University of Vienna).The different institutions adopt different approaches to evidence collection activities, which are carriedout at different levels including at course, programme, department or faculty and institutional level. Thekind of evidence collected also varies, from teachers’ performance assessment by students (collected atall institutions) to teachers’ performance assessment by peers (used in only two institutions). All these differences did not seem to have any major impact on the process of identification of challengesand potential responses, but they did contribute to generating the varying