Working with Faculty Writers

2. The Scholarly Writing Continuum: A New Program Model for Teaching and Faculty Development Centers

DOI: 10.7330/9780874219029.c002 2 T h e S c h o l a r ly W r i t i n g C o n t i n u u m A New Program Model for Teaching and Faculty Development Centers Brian Baldi, Mary Deane Sorcinelli, and Jung H. Yun In troductio n Since 2000, faculty roles and responsibilities have changed profoundly, with new patterns in faculty appointments, expanding workloads, and greater pressure to seek funding and publish scholarly work (Gappa, Austin, and Trice 2007). These new demands heighten the need for flexible professional development opportunities so that faculty with different needs can succeed in a more complex workplace. A large-scale study of the field of faculty development indicates that most teaching and learning centers focus on supporting faculty in their role as teachers (Sorcinelli, Austin, et al. 2006). At the same time, research shows that faculty members encounter challenges beyond teaching that, if not overcome, can hurt their productivity and stall their careers. In particular, women faculty commonly report that a lack of support for scholarly writing is a key obstacle to a successful academic career (Grant and Knowles 2000). In response, some centers for teaching and faculty development have created scholarly writing programs. Typically, these programs offer structured writing retreats or writing groups, both of which receive high ratings (Ambos, Wiley, and Allen 2009; Elbow and Sorcinelli 2006; Gray and Birch 2001; Sorcinelli, Gray, and Birch 2011). In fact, most of the literature on the benefits of academic writing programs focuses on intensive, highly structured interventions (Dickson-Swift et al. 2009; Grant and Knowles 2000; Gray and Birch 2001; Moore 2003; Murray and Newton 2009; Swaggerty et al. 2011). What is largely absent from The Scholarly Writing Continuum   39 the literature is a framework for scholarly writing programs that allows faculty to participate in their own development, according to their own needs, in a variety of times and formats. At the University of Massachusetts Amherst’s Center for Teaching and Faculty Development (CTFD), we have developed an innovative and comprehensive continuum of writing programs designed to accommodate the diverse needs of our faculty. In this chapter, we briefly discuss why supporting scholarly writing is important, why some teaching and/or faculty development centers are extending their programming into this arena, and how they are designing their offerings. We then describe the breadth of our faculty development programs for scholarly writing, which range from low-commitment, low-interaction spaces where faculty can work on their writing to personal consultations and intensive writing groups that help faculty better understand and improve their approach to writing. Our participation rates and ratings of overall effectiveness suggest that customized writing programs can better meet faculty members’ unique needs and preferences for contact, structure, and commitment, and help them produce more scholarship. The Cas e f or Su pp o rti n g S ch o lar ly Wr it ing The literature on faculty professional development offers compelling reasons to support faculty as writers. Many campuses are putting more emphasis on research, and reappointment, tenure, and promotion are increasingly linked to publications or successful grant writing (Mikhailova and Nilson 2007). At the same time, for many faculty, studies suggest that writing effectively and productively can be quite difficult. New faculty, for example, may have little experience with scholarly writing beyond their doctoral dissertations (Boice 2000). Publishing a book or article often requires technical as well as writing-related advice to navigate the publishing process (Dickson-Swift et al. 2009). For faculty at every career stage, finding time to write is a struggle. This is especially true for women faculty, who may have wider commitments at work and at home (Grant and Knowles 2000; Dickson-Swift et al. 2009; Misra et al. 2011; Moore 2003) Though faculty developers praise scholar-initiated writing interventions, they concur that faculty benefit from institutional support (e.g., time and space to write, formal structures and programs, access to peer mentoring and writing editors) that helps sustain scholarly writing habits (Elbow and Sorcinelli 2006; Gray and Birch 2001; Moore 2003; Sorcinelli, Gray, and Birch 2011). 40   Brian Baldi, Mary Deane Sorcinelli, and Jung H. Yun Undoubtedly, strategic support for scholarly writing can enhance individual and institutional prestige. The extrinsic rewards for writing and publishing scholarly work are self-evident: reappointment, tenure and promotion, professional recognition, and salary or merit increases (Mikhailova and Nilson 2007). These rewards can extend to the institution because more and better publishing...