What constitutes high quality higher education pedagogical research
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractOver the last 20 years there has been significant growth in the volume of higher education pedagogical research across disciplines and national contexts, but inherent tensions in defining quality remain. In this paper we present a framework to support understanding of what constitutes internationally excellent research, drawing on a range of conceptual frameworks, international and national performance-based research funding systems, discipline/professional body frameworks, and research council guidance. While acknowledging the contested nature of excellence in higher education pedagogical research, we provide criteria to guide discussion and to support individual and organisational learning. A key premise is that if learning and teaching in higher education are to be enhanced, considerable investment is required in supporting the development of integrated academics where emphasis is on both research and practice to inform pedagogy. Research and evaluation are essential aspects of teaching and need to be embedded within it. The framework is designed to enable colleagues to develop the necessary tools and approaches to support understanding of educational research and adapt these within their disciplinary context.
CitationEvans, C., Kandiko-Howson, C., Forsythe, A. and Edwards, C. (2020) What constitutes high quality higher education pedagogical research? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1790500
PublisherTaylor & Francis
JournalAssessment and Evaluation in Higher Education
DescriptionThis is an accepted manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education on 27/08/2020, available online: https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1790500 The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Book of Abstracts: 2nd Faculty of Science and Engineering (FSE) Research Conference. Theme: Festival of Research (FoR) and Research during the COVID-19 PandemicSuresh, Subashini; Aggoun, Amar; Burnham, Keith (University of Wolverhampton, 2021-03-26)
What is the optimal number of researchers for social science research?Levitt, Jonathan M. (Springer, 2014-10-19)Many studies have found that co-authored research is more highly cited than single author research. This finding is policy relevant as it indicates that encouraging co-authored research will tend to maximise citation impact. Nevertheless, whilst the citation impact of research increase as the number of authors increases in the sciences, the extent to which this occurs in the social sciences is unknown. In response, this study investigates the average citation level of articles with one to four authors published in 1995, 1998, 2001, 2004 and 2007 in 19 social science disciplines. The results suggest that whilst having at least two authors gives a substantial citation impact advantage in all social science disciplines, additional authors are beneficial in some disciplines but not in others.
Does female-authored research have more educational impact than male-authored research?Thelwall, Mike (Levy Library Press, 2018-10-04)Female academics are more likely to be in teaching-related roles in some countries, including the USA. As a side effect of this, female-authored journal articles may tend to be more useful for students. This study assesses this hypothesis by investigating whether female first-authored research has more uptake in education than male first-authored research. Based on an analysis of Mendeley readers of articles from 2014 in five countries and 100 narrow Scopus subject categories, the results show that female-authored articles attract more student readers than male-authored articles in Spain, Turkey, the UK and USA but not India. They also attract fewer professorial readers in Spain, the UK and the USA, but not India and Turkey, and tend to be less popular with senior academics. Because the results are based on analysis of differences within narrow fields they cannot be accounted for by females working in more education-related disciplines. The apparent additional educational impact for female-authored research could be due to selecting more accessible micro-specialisms, however, such as health-related instruments within the instrumentation narrow field. Whatever the cause, the results suggest that citation-based research evaluations may undervalue the wider impact of female researchers.