Difference between revisions of "Plowing through Bottlenecks in Political Science"
(init) (Tag: Visual edit) |
(Changed categories.) |
||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt16gh5wx.9 | http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt16gh5wx.9 | ||
[[Category:PublishedWork]] | [[Category:PublishedWork]] | ||
+ | [[Category:2013]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Article]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Political science]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Bernstein, J]] |
Latest revision as of 18:23, 5 December 2024
Abstract
As a political scientist, I am a fortunate participant in the scholarship of teaching and learning field. Scholars in some disciplines face a stark divide between their disciplinary research—what Ernest Boyer (1990) called the scholarship of discovery—and their scholarship of teaching and learning work. For example, biologists studying the behavior of certain amino acids gain no leverage from that research on increased understanding of how their students learn biology, nor does their research on teaching and learning inform their work on amino acids. In my case, however, the line between “teaching” and “research” is blurrier. Research on how...
Bibliographic data
BERNSTEIN, J. L. (2013). Plowing through Bottlenecks in Political Science: Experts and Novices at Work. In K. McKinney (Ed.), The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning In and Across the Disciplines (pp. 74–92). Indiana University Press.