Reading Deeply, Connecting Broadly: Reflections on Engaging Together with SoTL’s Grand Challenges

By Maria Gallardo-Williams (North Carolina State University, mtgallar@ncsu.edu) and Nancy Chick (Rollins College, nchick@rollins.edu)

In the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL), we often find ourselves exploring research practices, methodologies, and frameworks to enhance teaching. But sometimes, we’re called to go even deeper. Recently, as part of the ISSOTL Grand Challenges for SoTL Interest Group, we had the opportunity to read and evaluate articles focused on Grand Challenge #5—centered on inquiry into the practice, use, and growth of SoTL. This experience is part of the Interest Group’s larger effort to map relevant articles in Teaching & Learning Inquiry onto each of the five Grand Challenges for SoTL.  Our task led us to two thought-provoking articles:

• “A Pedagogy of Slow: Integrating Experiences of Physical and Virtual Gallery Spaces to Foster Critical Engagement in SoTL” by Briony Supple and James G.R. Cronin (2023)
• “A Case Study on the Value of Humanities-Based Analysis, Modes of Presentation, and Study Designs for SoTL: Close Reading Students’ Pre-Surveys on Gender-Inclusive Language” by Sarah Copland (2023)

Our approach was straightforward yet impactful: read each article individually, reflect together on how each article engaged with Grand Challenge #5, and then write a summary and a few keywords characterizing that engagement. This shared reflection via Zoom turned into something more than a standard academic task: it became a collaborative experience that deepened our understanding and appreciation for diverse perspectives in SoTL and reminded us of the richness of cross-disciplinary conversations in SoTL and in ISSOTL.

Embracing a Pedagogy of Slow

The “Pedagogy of Slow” article, which invites SoTL practitioners to explore teaching and learning through slow, deliberate engagement with art, struck a chord. The article presented an alternative to the often fast-paced and goal-oriented structures that dominate academic life, advocating for “slow looking” at works of art as a way to foster deep, reflective thinking about teaching, learning, and SoTL practice.

In our conversation, we talked about how this idea of “slowness” is powerful—both as a method and as a potential practice for promoting equity. By encouraging educators and students to observe and appreciate learning’s finer details, unhurried and unpressured, we open space for a more inclusive and reflective environment. The authors’ approach inspired us to consider how “slowness” might help us and our students appreciate the subtle, sometimes hidden, dimensions of learning. It became clear that, in this context, “slow” is not just a pace; it’s a profound shift in how we view the learning process itself.  We were so inspired by thinking about this practice in our support for faculty doing SoTL that both of us used their slow looking art activity that same week. 

Finding Resonance in Humanities-Based Analysis

Copland’s article “A Case Study on the Value of Humanities-Based Analysis…” was just as impactful, though in a different way. Written as a scholarly personal narrative, it offered a close, humanities-centered view of SoTL that spoke directly to us. For Nancy, a literary scholar in SoTL, the author’s choice to embrace a flexible, humanities-based approach—relying on close reading of student writing rather than pre-set hypotheses—felt authentic and liberating.  But for Maria, a chemistry scholar in SoTL, reading the article felt quite uncomfortable and removed from her own experiences, which led her to look for ways to bring that flexibility to her own research projects.

Most of our conversation about this article focused on our differing reactions and what we learned based on each of our reactions. We talked about how SoTL has room for approaches beyond the dominant social science frameworks. Copland’s article illustrated how we can welcome humanities scholars by valuing narrative depth and the exploration of meaning over rigid structures.

Inspired to Engage

Our reflections didn’t end with each other; they led us to engage with the authors themselves. After our conversation, we reached out to the authors of both articles to express our gratitude for their work and for adding meaningful layers to our shared field.  Reaching out allowed us to extend the conversation beyond the page, connecting with fellow SoTL scholars in a way that felt deeply human and rewarding. This experience reminded us of the value of community in scholarship—how acknowledging the people behind the work and engaging with one another’s ideas can broaden our own perspectives and foster a stronger, more connected SoTL community.

Reading with such intentional focus and sharing our insights with each other (and then with the authors) transformed this assignment into a discovery process, not only of their work but of our own values within SoTL. This experience reaffirmed the power of collaboration, the richness of interdisciplinary approaches, and the importance of reaching out when something moves you. In this way, SoTL becomes more than a field of study; it’s a community of thinkers connected by curiosity and a commitment to making education better.

References

Copland, Sarah. 2023. “A Case Study on the Value of Humanities-Based Analysis, Modes of Presentation, and Study Designs for SoTL: Close Reading Students’ Pre-Surveys on Gender-Inclusive Language.” Teaching & Learning Inquiry 11 (December). https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.11.34.

Supple, Briony, and James G. R. Cronin. 2023. “A Pedagogy of Slow: Integrating Experiences of Physical and Virtual Gallery Spaces to Foster Critical Engagement in SoTL.” Teaching & Learning Inquiry 11 (January). https://doi.org/10.20343/teachlearninqu.11.2.