Boyer’s Dimensions of Academic Scholarship

The centre of academic scholarship has been defined as the "ability to think, communicate, and learn" (Boyer, 1990, p. 15). Being considered 'professional' scholars gives "legitimacy to [our] academic work", enabling us to "move beyond the tired old 'teaching versus research debate'" (p. 16).

Five dimensions of scholarship have been proposed as "separate, yet overlapping" academic work functions (Boyer, 1990, p. 17; Le, 2022, p. 73). They are:

1. The scholarship of discovery. This is "the commitment to knowledge for its own sake, to freedom of inquiry and to following, in a disciplined fashion, an investigation wherever it may lead" (Boyer, 1990, p. 18). Discovery may mean that we ask "what is to be known, what is yet to be found?" (p. 18), so we undertake research in order to find out (Le, 2022).
2. The scholarship of integration. Integration is about scholarly contribution and standing on the shoulders of giants. Our peers "give meaning to isolated facts, putting them in perspective" (Boyer, 1990, p. 18), requiring us to interpret and "fitting one’s own research—or the research of others—into larger intellectual patterns". Collectively and individually we make "connections across the disciplines, placing the specialties in a larger context, illuminating data in revealing ways" (p. 18). The resulting interdisciplinarity assists us to solve complex problems (Le, 2022).
3. The scholarship of application. Application illustrates the academic community's importance in defining how “knowledge [can] be responsibly applied to consequential problems", how academe can "be helpful to individuals as well as institutions", and if "social problems themselves [can] define an agenda for scholarly investigation" (Boyer, 1990, p. 21). Providing we remember that research to discovery to application is not necessarily linear, delivering "socially relevant contributions" is seen as a 'normal' part of academic work (Le, 2022, p. 73; Boyer, 1990) in most countries, usually because it is paid via the public purse.
4. The scholarship of teaching. Teaching in tertiary institutions "both educates and entices future scholars" (Boyer, 1990, p. 23), by being a dynamic transfer where "knowledge is [...] transformed and extended" (Le, 2022, p. 74). What is particularly interesting about this explanation is how short it is! As if - as is often assumed - that teaching is the least important thing that higher educational institutions deliver. Personally, I feel that the clue is in the name: higher EDUCATIONAL institutions. But hey.
5. The scholarship of engagement. Engagement with society - particularly when academics are often paid from the public purse - is needed to prevent a potential detachment between academia, industry, and the general public (Boyer, 1996; Le, 2022). If institutions divorce their work - their application - from "societal concerns [they are likely to] receive less societal support; [with the result that] society receives fewer intellectual benefits; and the civic culture [may] decline" (Le, 2022, p. 74), and academics are seen as being siloed in their 'ivory towers'. Engagement supplies continuous, creative communication which in turn assists the achievement of university goals (Boyer, 1996; Le, 2022). And let's not forget the whole 'us' and 'them' culture on non-engagement which blossomed during the height of the covid-19 pandemic. The general public was less able to understand research-speak; this meant they were effectively cut out of the research loop by dint of non-deliberate obfuscation. With the ramparts of academic writing proving unscalable, the simplification of TikTok and Telegram was so much more seductive (if rarely correct... but hey, what did that matter?).
   

These five elements are interesting, as is the apparent emphasis placed on each via the depth of discussion. What is also interesting is that a path can be seen through three of these elements: that we move from discovery to integration to application. Then perhaps we have two outcomes: those of teaching; and engagement. 

I think this model needs more thought, and perhaps some diagramming. 

Sam

References:

Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate [report]. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED326149.pdf

Boyer, E. L. (1996). The Scholarship of Engagement. Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 49(7), 18–33. https://doi.org/10.2307/3824459

Le, P. A. T. (2022). The academic profession from the perspectives of aspiring academics. [Doctoral thesis: University of Melbourne]. https://rest.neptune-prod.its.unimelb.edu.au/server/api/core/bitstreams/3981b6f3-8c08-4608-a4e4-54dbce1b96a6/content