The University of British Columbia introduced the rank of Professor of Teaching into the teaching stream in July 2011.This new rank reflects the commitment of the University to support educational leadership, outstanding teaching, and curriculum innovation. Since the guidelines related to this novel rank are suggestive in nature and not intended to be exhaustive or directive, evidence supporting a promotion vary, depending on the discipline and the Faculty.I am positioning my work as a blended case possessing all three elements of scholarly activity:traditional scholarship, scholarship of teaching and learning, as well as professional contributions (Guide to Reappointment, Tenure and Promotion Procedures at UBC, 2014/15, 4.1). My dossier will expand on these three types of activity as they relate to educational leadership, teaching excellence and curriculum innovation.
My expertise resides firmly in the scholarship of teaching and learning and is, logically, an integral component of my work in a Faculty of Education. In my case, I have over 25 years of teaching experience in the K-12 system as well as in the various contexts of Higher Education institutions. I began my career as a French immersion Middle School and Senior High School teacher. As I completed my graduate degrees, I lectured as teaching assistant at l’Université de Montréal in Québec, at the University of Manitoba and l’Université de Saint-Boniface in Manitoba, and finally at UBC’s Okanagan campus. As an assistant professor, I spent seven years in a tenure-track position in the Faculty of Education at UBC’s Okanagan campus.
Established in 2005, UBC’s Okanagan campus initially struggled to establish its identity as it embarked on the transformation from a university college to a small campus within a large research intense post-secondary institution. Confronted with the inherent complexities of this transitory period, I recognized that my work aligned more closely the newly available rank of Professor of Teaching. I sought, and received, tenure and promotion in this rank in July 2012. Acknowledging this new focus, I consider myself to be a scholar-practitioner whose educational leadership is ensconced in the praxis within and across the myriad of academic and professional contexts bridging theory and practice.
A Scholar-Practitioner
As I wrestle with the dynamic interconnectedness (Wheatley, 1999, p. 25) of the diversity of conceptual, theoretical, philosophical and methodological paradigms which shape my life for the Mind of Practice (Sullivan & Rosin, 2008), I recognize the import of not only molding my own identity but as Jenlink (2003) observes enabling ‘Others’ to develop identities (p.5-6). Bridging the delineations of academia and professional knowledge, a scholar-practitioner’s identity is firmly rooted in the development of a robust inquiry stance (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2009) in order to better understand the deep and complex meanings of phenomenon (Mullen, 2003, p.4). Acknowledging the interplay between theory and practice as well as the multiplicity of interactions with others, this dynamic interconntectedness promotes change and transformation responding to emergent complexities, struggles, and demands of a scholarship that is in flux. The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) and Reflective Practice Acknowledging that Dewey (1938) called for teachers to engage in reflective action and that Schön (1983) depicted professional practice as a cognitive process of posing and exploring questions relating to pedagogy, my personal philosophy relates directly to the epistemological traditions of the SoTL with a focus on narrative inquiry. My three edited books assemble an international community of scholar-practitioners from across disciplines, methodologies, and ideological perspectives exploring and examining contexts that support the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) in Ireland, Iceland, China, Taiwan, Japan, Hawaii, U.S.A. and Canada. Collectively, these chapters document and analyze the opportunities and challenges within pedagogical sites and discuss how SoTL can impact educational practice and praxis.
The value of reflection and reflective practice has long been recognized in educational circles as an integral component relating to professional growth (Clandinin, 1998; Schön, 1983; Loughran, 1996). In particular, narrative and reflective writing provide me with the ability to unpack hidden narratives by analyzing the stories that emerge from the diverse contexts of my practice. My academic publications and conference presentations emphasizing narrative inquiry as a methodology for studying lived experience (Clandinin, 1990), encompass a diversity of inquiry stances relating to personal history, biography, and autobiography. Gay (2003) states that stories are fundamental for understanding our approaches to teaching and learning, as ‘narratives are essential to the purpose of communicating who we are, what we do, how we feel and why we ought to follow some course of action rather than another’ (p. 5). In this respect, narrative inquiry as a research methodology, in the context of the Professor of Teaching stream, becomes tantamount to understanding, engaging in and accepting difference and otherness in educational contexts (Ragoonaden, 2014a, 2014b, 2014c, 2015a, 2015b). The courses that I teach at the post-baccalaureate and graduate levels all incorporate different traditions of reflection and reflective practice (See syllabi EDST 498U; EDUC 427, 488, 491, 526, 592).
Shulman (2004), a renowned SoTL scholar, hypothesized that pedagogical content knowledge is imperative for the creation of a knowledge base of teaching generated through research, experience and reflection. His concept of signature pedagogies emphasizes the importance of creating learning environments that engage learners in personal change. Shulman (2004) suggests that place-based, contextualized, trans-disciplinary content that integrates the intellectual, moral and practical imperatives of society transforms teaching and learning from the mundane to a dynamic, engaging activity. This is in particular relates strongly to my work in Teacher Education. In order to develop the pedagogical content knowledge of prospective French immersion teachers, I have been teaching the EDUC 488 and EDUC 491 courses in French as a second language schools and collaborating with teachers, vice-principals and principals to provide critical and creative learning spaces. This is in keeping with the Faculty of Education’s conceptualization of developing Professional Development Networks (PDN) to support its own signature pedagogy (Macintyre Latta, 2015; Macintyre Latta & Crichton, in press).
The following discourse is framed as evidence as to how I, as a scholar-practitioner in a Faculty of Education, attempt to comprehend and to conceptualize the practical application of the academy’s educational formative mission: to develop intellectual and cultural resources to prepare ourselves and our students for lives of significance and responsibility (Sullivan & Rosin, 2008) and to transform teaching and learning in a higher education institution.
Within this context, I consider myself as a committed agent of change advocating for practices that benefit society at large as well as emergent transformative scholarly cultures in academia in order to build just, inclusive, democratic communities. For example, as an evolving position, the professor of teaching validates and acknowledges the importance of the scholarship of teaching and learning at a micro-level in Faculties of Education, and at a macro-level across the university campus (Boyer, 1990; Shreeve, 2011). By publishing, presenting and providing service in international, national, provincial and local educational contexts, I am able to emphasize and to validate the universal mandate of all Faculties of Education: to cultivate a mind for the practice and praxis of teaching and learning (See CV).
Boyer (1990), states that the work of a professor is, unequivocally, the scholarship of teaching and learning. The former president of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching perceived the traditional definition of scholarship to be restrictive and prohibitive. He identified the four domains of scholarship as discovery, integration, application, and teaching. Acknowledging the importance of reflecting analytically on knowledge about teaching and learning, Boyer (1990) suggests that scholars must respect the fact that knowledge is not only acquired through research but also through synthesis, through practice, and through teaching (p. 24). In fact, he postulated that scholarship should be conceived as a juxtaposition of both teaching and research where engaged scholars apply and disseminate knowledge to academia and to society at large through an informed practice. If scholarship is not reconsidered in this manner, Boyer warns that the academic culture will lose sight of what it means to view teaching as a scholarship. This focus on discovery, integration, application and teaching is what drew me to the rank of Professor of Teaching. This freedom, as stated in the Guidelines forPromotion (UBC, 2011)to go over and beyond the technical act of teaching and to fully explore the multiple perspectives and dimensions of diverse educational contexts, has provided me with the necessary parameters to publish books, chapters and articles, to participate and present my work at conferences, to perfect all aspects ofmy teaching, and to engage in my life long quest to be a public intellectual, learning, gathering and assimilating knowledge as I move in and out of the interplay between research and teaching in higher education.
Similar to the above, Hansen (2005) emphasizes teaching as a moral and intellectual practice positioned as an opportunity to construct meaningful experiences. By virtue of these emergent intentional experiences, creativity can arise only through the unfolding of substantive attention and responsiveness to the present moment. This is the pathway toward innovative, novel approaches leading to educational leadership, teaching, and curriculum development; all important criteria in the career progression of the professor of teaching stream. As the Coordinator of the Summer Institute in Education and Professional programs, I am able to conceptualize critical and creative themes for the Institute in Education. Positioned within the intellectual work heralded by the Faculty, these themes inform the Summer course syllabi and the Guest Speaker Series. As the member-at-large for the executive of the Canadian Association for Teacher Education (CATE), I brought this same expertise to the coordination of the Preconference, the Keynote Speaker and the Panel presentation: an emphasis on teaching and learning as a moral and intellectual practice.
In keeping with my stance as a scholar-practitioner and following the traditions of renowned educators, my philosophy is anchored in the examination of how narrative inquiry combined with the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) affects personal, professional, and academic integrity and identity.
A Reflective Community of Practice
On a practical level, in keeping with my new career path, I recognized the changes that I had instinctively wanted to bring to my practice and now, based on my professional and academic progression, would implement. I contemplate my own practice through the lens of Bourdieu’s (1977, 1991) assertion that educational institutions legitimize the privileging of dominant discourses to the detriment of the multiplicity of alternative perspectives. Reflecting on this, I acknowledge the centrality of the concept of practical wisdom or phronesis in pedagogical contexts (Dunne, 1993). Taken from Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, practical wisdom, that is, the ability to deliberate well and to make appropriate judgments, is the kind of knowledge and capacity that guides action. Dunne (2005), a neo-Aristotelian author, reflecting on the concept of practical wisdom in education, states that education has been lured into a technical orientation accentuating predictability and dispensing measures which aim to control (p. 377). He sees this reductionist movement in education as being a part of a larger western cultural trend to rationalize and constrain not only societal practices but also educational practices (pp. 7–8). This technocratic approach impedes practical wisdom and the emergent knowledge arising from praxis. The above considerations have impacted my work on the Design Committee for a renewed Teacher Education Program. As the committee moves forward with a new paradigm, I am consciously aware of the necessity to co-create, collaborative spaces in which criticality and innovation reign.
Faced with this possibility, how would I, within dominant academic discourse, validate democratic and equitable practice for professors of teaching? Since this type of transformative work cannot occur in isolation, I realized that it would be important to develop a reflective community of practice among interdisciplinary university educators. For example, Sullivan and Rosin (2008) suggest a new agenda for higher education by shaping the mind for practice. Within the context of the professional knowledge in higher education, they carefully considered the role of theoretical and professional knowledge in higher education. Recognizing the need for change in teaching and learning in postsecondary education, an interdisciplinary four-person study group was formed to discuss how liberal arts disciplines should be oriented toward careers of professional practice. Acknowledging the role of philosophy and its relationship to social understanding, this valuable initiative provided me with the impetus to change the campus-wide perceptions regarding the professional practice of professors. Through my editorial work on three books, I have attempted to reproduce this paradigm of validating the scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education institutions by co-creating and collaborating with provincial, national and international contributors.
I have been responding to this new agenda, by spearheading campus wide, provincial, national and international initiatives in developing and sustaining the mind for educational practice through scholarship and through signature pedagogies (Boyer, 1990; Shulman, 2004). For example, my administrative position as Coordinator of Professional Programs and the Summer Institute in Education, have allowed me to conceptualize and to develop definite signature pedagogies mobilizing knowledge funds which respond to place-based contextual realities as well as the published scholarship of myself and my colleagues. The 2015 Summer Institute in Education theme focused on Transformative Teaching and Learning and the 2016 theme centers around Designing Creative and Critical Experiences. Courses and invited lecturers in the Summer Speaker Series integrate the yearly theme into pedagogical content knowledge and their own signature pedagogies.
My Signature Pedagogy
Signature pedagogies are representative of how particular, specific types of knowledge are defined, analyzed, and recognized or not recognized (Shulman, 2004). Serving as parameters to determine scholarship, signature pedagogies, when adopted by individuals, can influence the vision and design of educational programs, thereby validating the characteristic forms of teaching and learning of a profession and/or a specialization. Likewise, scholarship is representative of the sharing and application of knowledge and the engagement of scholars with students, colleagues, and communities, supported by an examination of teaching praxis. Campus-wide reflective communities of practice, positioned into inquiry-based models and sustained with contributions from interdisciplinary colleagues, can provide spaces where pedagogical practices can be carefully planned and continuously revised, curriculum can be renegotiated to be representative of the diversity of society, and knowledge can become imbued with practical wisdom. This is my signature pedagogy and this is how I intend to enact and embody my own scholarship of teaching and learning.
When supported by critically conscious communities, the scholarship of teaching and learning can generate rigorous, intellectual praxis favouring the development of criticality and creativity (Hansen, 2005). By virtue of critical reflection focusing on my philosophy, I acknowledged that my university identity is deeply implicated in classical European traditions that prioritize research and productivity. Innovative teaching and learning, community-based service learning experiences, cross-cultural field experiences, and collaborative initiatives between interdisciplinary professors are important initiatives to counter the existing status quo in universities.
I recognize that as a scholar practitioner, I possess the ability to shape and to explore the influences of institutional benchmarks in reconceptualizing and redefining the scholarship of teaching and learning in the new rank of Professor of Teaching. As so many wise minds have stated (Boyer, 1990; Dewey, 1938; Hansen, 2005; Kanpol, 1993; Kincheloe, 2004; Shreeve, 2011; Schön 1983, Shulman, 2004; Sullivan & Rosin, 2008), critical, sustained reflection and engaged action in pedagogical contexts can serve as platforms to generate and share knowledge influencing educational leadership, community engagement, and contributing to the emergence of innovative practices and informed curricula.
In keeping with my career progression towards becoming a Professor of Teaching, this teaching portfolio serves as an overview of the cumulative stance of my work in the area of Educational Leadership, Curriculum Innovation, Teaching Excellence and Service to the University of British Columbia’s Okanagan campus.
As previously indicated, the diversity inherent in my scholar practitioner identity has promoted innovative habits of mind and creative ways of thinking about educational leadership, excellence in teaching and curriculum innovation. Serving as a forum for boundary crossing and generative conversations, this type of scholarship has incited me to move beyond the traditional and orthodox views educational practice by positioning scholar practitioners as cultural workers and social actors in pedagogical contexts (Freire, 1968/1970/2006)
In an attempt to demonstrate evidence-based distinction at the International, National and Provincial levels in the above areas, I have delineated each of the above categories and provided evidence of these achievements. Please refer to my CV for specific details.
References
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction. In J. Karabel & A. Halsey(Eds.), Power and ideology in education (pp. 487–511). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.
Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton,NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Clandinin, D.J. (1998). Teacher education as narrative study. In D.J. Clandinin, A. Davies, P. Hogan & B. Kennard (Eds), Learning to teach, teaching to learn:Stories of collaboration in teacher education (pp.1-15). New York: Teachers College Press.
Cochran-Smith, M. & Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as Stance: Practitioner Research for the NextGeneration.New York: Teachers College Press.
Freire, Paulo (2006). Pedagogy of the Oppressed, 30th Anniversary ed. New York: Continuum.
Gay, G. (2003). Becoming multicultural educators: Personal journey toward professional agencySan Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hansen, D. (2005). Creativity in teaching and building a meaningful life as a teacher.The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 39(2), 57–68.
Kanpol, B. (1999). Critical pedagogy: An introduction (2nd ed.). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Kincheloe, J. (2005). Critical pedagogy: Primer. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Jenlink, P. (2003). Identity and culture work: The scholar-practitioner as public intellectual. Scholar-Practitioner Quarterly: A Journal for the Scholar-PractitionerLeader, 1(4), 3–8.
Loughan, J. (1996). Developing reflective practice: Learning about teaching andlearning through modeling. London: Falmer Press.
Mactintyre Latta, M. (2015). Faculty of Education. Design Committee. Research Notes.
Macintyre Latta, M. & Crichton, S. (In Press).Innovation’s Renewing Potential: Seeing and Acting Mindfully within the Fecundity of Educative Experiences, Education & Culture, The Journal of the John Dewey Society.
Mullen, C. A. (2003). What is a scholar-practitioner? K–12 teachers and administrators respond. Scholar-Practitioner Quarterly: A Journal for the Scholar-Practitioner Leader,1(4), 9–26.
Pinar, W. (2004) What is curriculum theory? New York, NY: Jossey Bass.
Ragoonaden, K. (2014a). Transformative praxis: Barry Kanpol and the quest for a publicidentity. In S. Totten, & J. Pederson (Eds.), Educating about social issues in the 20th and 21st centuries: Critical pedagogues and their pedagogical theories (vol. 4, pp. 186–211). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Ragoonaden, K. (2014b). Mindful teaching and a pedagogy of well-being. SIG Holisti Education. Paper presented at the American Association of Educational Research. Philadelphia, April 3–7.
Ragoonaden, K. (2014c). Contested sites in higher education. Canadian Association for Teacher Education (CATE), and Canadian Society for the Study of Education (CSSE). Paper presented at the Congress of the Social Science and Humanitiesn Brock University, St. Catharines, ON, May 24–28.
Ragoonaden, K. (Ed.). (2015a). Contested sites in higher education: The quest for the public intellectual, identity and service. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Ragoonaden, K. (2015b). Setting the path towards emancipatory practices: Professor of teaching. In K. Ragoonaden (Ed.), Contested sites in higher education: The quest for the public intellectual, identity and service (pp. 9–20). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Ragoonaden, K. (2015c). Ethical teacher educational dilemmas in a neo-liberal age. In K Ragoonaden (Ed.), Contested sites in higher education: The quest for the public intellectual, identity and service (pp. 1–8). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. SanFrancisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Shreeve, A. (2011) Joining the dots: The scholarship of teaching as part of institutionalresearch. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(1), 63–74. doi:10.1080/07294360.2011.536973
Shulman, L. S. (2004). The wisdom of practice: Essays on teaching, learning, andlearning to teach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Sullivan, W. M., & Rosin, M. (2008). A new agenda for higher education: Shaping a lifeof the mind for practice. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
UBC Human Resources. (2011). Guidelines for promotion to professor of teaching. Retrieved from the University of British Columbia website: http://www.hr.ubc.ca/faculty-relations/files/Guidelines-for-Promotion-to-Professor-of-Teaching.pdf
Wheatley, M. J. (1999). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.