Search

Heightened pressures to publish prolifically and secure external funding stand in stark contrast to the slow scholarship movement. This article explores ways in which research funding expectations permeate the "figured worlds" of 16 mid-career academics in education, social work, sociology, and geography in seven universities in Ontario, Canada. Participants demonstrated a steady record of research accomplishment and a commitment to social justice in their work. The analysis identified three themes related to the competing pressures these academics described in their day-to-day lives: funding, challenges, and the fast professor. Participants spoke about their research funding achievements and struggles. In some cases, they explained how their positioning, including gender and race, might have affected their research production, compared to colleagues positioned differently. Their social justice research is funded, but some suspect at a lower level than colleagues studying conventional topics. Challenges might be located in the backstage (personal and home lives) or the frontstage (university or funding agency policies or embedded in the research itself). In aiming for the impossible standards of a continuously successful research record, these individuals worked "all the time." Advocates claim that slow scholarship is not really about going slower but rather about maintaining quality and caring in one's work; yet, participants' accounts suggest they perceive few options other than to perform as "fast professors." At mid-career, they question whether and how they can keep up this aspect of their figured worlds for 20 or more years.

Purpose: This paper aims to identify the documented effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on early career researcher (ECR) activity, development, career prospects and well-being. Design/methodology/approach: This is a systematic literature review of English language peer-reviewed studies published between 2020 and 2021, which provided empirical evidence of the impact of the pandemic on ECR activity and development. The search strategy involved online databases (Scopus, Web of Science and Overton); well-established higher education journals (based on Scopus classification) and references in the retained articles (snowballing). The final sample included 11 papers. Findings: The evidence shows that ECRs have been affected in terms of research activity, researcher development, career prospects and well-being. Although many negative consequences were identified, some promising learning practices have arisen; however, these opportunities were not always fully realised. The results raise questions about differential effects across fields and possible long-term consequences where some fields and some scholars may be worse off due to priorities established as societies struggle to recover. Practical implications: There is a need for revised institutional and national policies to ensure that sufficient measures are implemented to support ECRs' research work in a situation where new duties and chores were added during the pandemic. Originality/value: This paper provides insights into the impacts of the initial societal challenges of the pandemic on ECRs across disciplines that may have long-lasting effects on their academic development and well-being.

Despite now long-standing recognition of the value and importance of the scholarship of teaching and learning, questions continue to be raised about how to satisfy the hybrid responsibilities of teaching and research. The key message of this paper is that instructor-researchers, educational developers, and research ethics personnel should consider two key guidance documents in tandem: the Society for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education's statement on Ethical Principles in University Teaching (Murray, Gillese, Lennon, Mercer, & Robinson, 1996) and the Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical Conduct for Research Involving Humans (Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, & Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, 2014). Together these documents provide much needed guidance for teaching and researching ethically.

An increasingly large number of courses in Canadian postsecondary institutions are taught by contingent instructors who hold full- or part-time positions for contractually limited time periods. Despite strong commitments to advancing teaching and learning, the labour and employment conditions for contingent instructors affect the incentives and possibilities for them to engage in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL). Through a collaborative writing inquiry, the 9 authors examine the influences of three key conditions of contingency: institutional knowledge, status, and role; invisibility and isolation; and precarity. Four composite stories demonstrate the ways varied conditions of contingency may play out in contingent instructors' lives and typically undermine the possibilities for them to pursue SoTL. Institutions present contingent instructors with a mixed message: research and SoTL are desirable and frequently encouraged, yet contingent instructors are often ineligible or hindered from engagement.

The global pandemic has forced academics to engage in remote doctoral supervision, and the need to understand this activity is greater than ever before. This contribution involved a cross-field review on remote supervision pertinent in the context of a global pandemic. We have utilised the results of an earlier study bringing a supervision model into a pandemic-perspective integrating studies published about and during the pandemic. We identified themes central to remote supervision along five theory-informed dimensions, namely intellectual/cognitive, instrumental, professional/technical, personal/emotional and ontological dimensions, and elaborate these in the light of the new reality of remote supervision.

Although the contemporary research environment encourages knowledge generation through research collaboration rather than individualized projects, limited scholarly attention has been devoted to the practice of collaboration within research teams. This paper presents a qualitative analysis of team dynamics and learning opportunities within four social science research teams. The findings reveal similarities and differences in leadership style and interaction approaches that affected how research was undertaken and the possibilities for team members to learn from each other. The snapshots provide models for other research teams that extend situated learning theories and the existing research base about collaboration, research teams, and research leadership.

Within the current higher education context, early career researchers (ECRs) face a "risk-career" in which predictable, stable academic careers have become increasingly rare. Traditional milestones to signal progress toward a sustainable research career are disappearing or subject to reinterpretation, and ECRs need to attend to new or reimagined signals in their efforts to develop a researcher identity in this current context. In this article, we present a comprehensive framework for researcher identity in relation to the ways ECRs recognise and respond to divergent signals across spheres of activity. We illustrate this framework through eight identity stories drawn from our earlier research projects. Each identity story highlights the congruence (or lack of congruence) between signals across spheres of activity and emphasises the different ways ECRs respond to these signals. The proposed comprehensive framework allows for the analysis of researcher identity development through the complex and intertwined activities in which ECRs are involved. We advance this approach as a foundation for a sustained research agenda to understand how ECRs identify and respond to relevant signals, and, consequently, to unravel the complex interplay between signals and spheres of activity evident in struggles to become researchers in a risk-career environment.

Copyright of Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning is the property of Society for Teaching & Learning in Higher Education and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)