Curiosity Across Contexts: Conversations on SoTL in Kenya

By Karen Lander and Jen McBride

University of Manchester, School of Health Sciences, Division of Psychology, Communication and Human Neuroscience

Correspondence: Karen.lander@manchester.ac.uk

During our recent work visit to Kenya, we discussed the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) during professional development sessions with leaders from the University of Manchester in the UK and several Kenyan higher education institutions (Daystar University; Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology; KCA University; Kenyatta University; University of Embu). The term “SoTL” was unfamiliar to many Kenyan participants, but one comment really captured the spirit of the discussions: “I don’t know anything about it [SoTL], but I would like to know more.”

This colleague’s comment stood out because it articulated something important about how SoTL often begins – not with formal expertise or fully developed research questions, but with curiosity grounded in practice. This idea resonated strongly throughout our discussions.

Making Sense of SoTL Across Contexts

We saw that SoTL, even when unnamed, was already present. Colleagues across institutions connected SoTL to questions emerging in their own classrooms:

• Why are students struggling with particular concepts?
• How can we boost students’ engagement, especially in large classes and online learning?
• What kinds of assessment genuinely support learning?
• How do we effectively balance teaching and other priorities such as leadership, or research commitments?

Assessment was a particular focus, with shared concerns about how to make it fair and supportive of learning rather than only evaluative. Technology also featured prominently, with generative AI viewed as both an opportunity and a challenge, and as a site of uneven implementation and guidance.

These shared questions created a sense of connection across differences in institutional structures or culture, and the dialogue allowed us to learn with and from one another and name our shared challenges. 

The desire to “know more” was central to scholarship.

What These Conversations Made Visible

We identified several key points from our discussions. First, SoTL is inherently relational, with educators across both UK and Kenyan higher education engaging with similar practical teaching challenges.  For example, how to support student participation, respond to diverse learning needs, and make excellence in teaching more visible and valued. This shared ground helped participants recognise that, although their institutional contexts differed, many of their pedagogic questions were familiar across settings.

Second, the value of learning across borders was clear. For example, UK colleagues were prompted to question assumptions about the availability of institutional support, time, and infrastructure for SoTL. Kenyan colleagues highlighted how inquiry into teaching may already be taking place in locally meaningful ways, even when it is not formally named or recognised as SoTL. The sharing of these perspectives expanded participants’ understanding of what counts as SoTL, encouraging recognition that it can be a formal, resource-intensive activity as well as something that can emerge from everyday practice-based inquiry.

This prompted colleagues to reflect on their assumptions and reconsider how such practices are defined and recognised. These exchanges encouraged participants to ask what counts as SoTL, who gets to define it, and how it can be recognised in different higher education systems. These discussions showed that SoTL is not a fixed model to be applied universally, but a flexible approach that evolves in response to context.

Finally – and perhaps most importantly – curiosity emerged as a powerful entry point into SoTL, which often begins by noticing, questioning, and wanting to understand teaching and learning. The initial comment, “I would like to know more,” is not just an expression of interest but an invitation, opening the door to dialogue and engagement. For some participants, this curiosity centred on how students experience learning; for others, it raised questions about how teaching knowledge is shared, evidenced, and valued within their institutions.

Abramson outlined the CLEAR model in a previous ISSOTL Blog, emphasising the move from curiosity to structured inquiry. The model emphasises connecting questions to theory, selecting appropriate methods, and reflecting critically on impact and outcomes. This reinforces the view that curiosity is a necessary foundation for SoTL. Curiosity helps educators reflect on what works and what does not, while staying open to change. At the same time, SoTL creates space for educators to share questions rather than just solutions, inviting collaboration and fostering communities of practice that extend beyond institutional and national boundaries. 

Continuing the Conversation 

SoTL is not a destination or a fixed set of methods; it is a way of thinking about and engaging with teaching and learning that evolves over time.

Our conversations in Kenya highlighted the value of conversations, returning to questions, revisiting practices, and learning from one another. Colleagues’ curiosity took centre stage and reminded us that SoTL begins not with certainty, but with a willingness to ask questions and explore them together.