Developing a quality culture through the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
Abstract
The critical features of a strategy to promote improved teaching and learning are explored in this article from a socio‐cultural perspective in a research‐intensive institution. The paper presents theoretical underpinnings and implications as well as an empirical case study of such a strategy and its seemingly successful results. The strategy builds on Scholarship of Teaching and Learning beyond individual development and aims at cultivating a culture of continuous improvement of teaching and student learning. The case study describes a number of co‐ordinated and interrelated activities at various institutional levels to support the strategy. The results are discussed in terms of academic engagement. Important aspects such as academic freedom, professional identity and leadership are also discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Top-down measures such as legislation rarely lead to meaningful shifts in teaching and learning cultures.
“Research on organizational change emphasizes that 'top-down' measures (such as legislation) rarely lead to meaningful shifts in teaching and learning cultures (Mårtensson, Roxå and Olsson 2011;Henderson, Beach and Finkelstein 2011).”
From Charting the Landscape of Accessible Education for Post-secondary Students with Disabilities (2016) · cites this paper as Mårtensson, Roxå and Olsson 2011
Academic fields exert a considerable influence on the thinking and practices of their members.
“Since academic fields exert a considerable influence on the thinking and practices of their members (Fanghanel 2013;Mårtensson, Roxå and Olsson 2011), change efforts must take disciplinary contexts and cultures into consideration.”
From Charting the Landscape of Accessible Education for Post-secondary Students with Disabilities (2016) · cites this paper as Mårtensson, Roxå and Olsson 2011
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 30 · Cited by 132
- Authors
- Mårtensson, K., Roxå, T., & Olsson, T.
- Affiliations
- Lund University (SE)
- Corresponding author
- Mårtensson, Katarina
- Venue
- Higher Education Research & Development
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2011-02
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 51-62
- ISSN
- 0729-4360 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8366
- OpenAlex
- W2053926914
- Cited by
- 132
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 21.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Higher Education Research & Development (publishedVersion)
- Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Lunds Universitet
- Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Evaluation of Teaching Practices
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Higher Education Governance and Development
- Social Sciences › Education › Higher Education Practises and Engagement
- Keywords
- scholarship of teaching and learning, quality culture, continuous improvement of teaching, student learning, academic engagement, academic freedom, professional identity, academic leadership, research-intensive institutions, institutional strategy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
