Abstract
The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) offers substantial promise for enhancing instructional quality and talent development in application-oriented universities; however, factors that influence the SoTL engagement remain inadequately explored. The oversight hampers the advancement of SoTL in these universities, necessitating systematic inquiry. In this qualitative study a thematic analysis was undertaken of semi-structured interviews with 17 faculty members and four interdependent determinants of SoTL engagement were identified: (a) attitudes and cognition (interests, teaching beliefs, identification, perceived benefits), (b) SoTL competencies (knowledge structures, systematic integration, communication skills, teaching experiences), (c) significant others (peers, colleagues, students, mentors), and (d) SoTL environmental context (resource availability, cultural support). Engagement arises from the dynamic interplay among these dimensions, and intricate interactions were revealed among driving, enabling, reinforcing, and context-restructuring mechanisms. The faculty members reported demonstrating strategic agency by leveraging external professional networks to navigate institutional constraints, thereby sustaining professional growth despite resource limitations. These findings affirm key components of the Theory of Planned Behavior while expanding its application to behavioral maintenance mechanisms within constrained environments. The study findings advocate integrated interventions including: cultivating intrinsic motivation, building SoTL capability, and restructuring organizational environment, especially formalizing external community integration and reshaping internal incentives, in order to foster sustainable engagement.
Plain Language Summary
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning could greatly improve how teachers teach and help students learn better in application-oriented universities. However, we don't fully understand what motivates teachers to get involved in this kind of research. This lack of understanding makes it harder to promote teaching research in these universities. In this study, we talked to 17 teachers to understand what influences their participation in teaching research. We found four main factors that affect whether teachers engage in this work: 1. Personal attitudes and thinking: This includes their interest in teaching research, their beliefs about teaching, how much they identify with being a researcher, and what benefits they think they'll get. 2. Skills and knowledge: Teachers need to understand research methods, know how to combine different ideas, communicate well, and have teaching experience. 3. People around them: Support from other teachers, colleagues, students, and mentors makes a big difference. 4. The work environment: Having enough resources and a supportive culture at the university is important. We discovered that these four factors work together in complex ways. Teachers often use professional networks outside their university to overcome problems at their own institution, which helps them keep growing professionally even when resources are limited. Our findings support existing theories about what motivates people to act, but also show how people maintain their behavior in challenging situations. Based on what we learned, we recommend three main approaches to encourage more teachers to do teaching research: Help teachers develop genuine interest and motivation, Build their research skills and knowledge, Improve the university environment by connecting with outside professional communities and changing internal reward systems These changes working together can help create lasting engagement in teaching research.
Keywords
Introduction
Accelerated industrial upgrading and the evolution of higher education have amplified the strategic importance of application-oriented universities in cultivating innovative applied talents and fueling regional economic development (Gellert & Rau, 1992; Schomburg, 2000; Wu, 2020). In China, the implementation of the Guidance on Transforming Local Ordinary Undergraduate Universities into application-oriented universities has spurred hundreds of universities toward this transition, a tendency to emulate the academic trajectory of research universities has, however, resulted in homogenized talent cultivation and a structural misalignment with labor market demands, thereby trapping these institutions in a state of “academic drift” (Gao & Zhao, 2019; Jiang, 2024; Z. J. Liu & Sun, 2023; Shi, 2011). The national policy emphasizes revitalizing undergraduate education through reforms anchored in “student-centeredness” and the “return to basics,” aiming for comprehensive development by enhancing classroom teaching and quality in talent cultivation. Within this context, faculty members, as the core agents of teaching and research, play a pivotal role in elevating undergraduate education quality. The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning is conceptualized as a dynamic process integrating inquiry and reflection (Boyer, 1990). SoTL is recognized as a systemic endeavor crucial for advancing pedagogical expertise, that fosters faculty professional development, deepens teaching evaluation, and ultimately enhances the quality of talent cultivation (Fanghanel et al., 2016; Major & Braxton, 2020; Ouyang & You, 2025; Wang & Yang, 2024; Xu et al., 2025). Xiong and Wei (2023) further argue that active faculty engagement in SoTL is not only instrumental for pedagogical innovation (“classroom revolution”) but also foundational for establishing effective teaching quality monitoring systems. The SoTL gains wider recognition (Mårtensson et al., 2011) and is increasingly encouraged by policy under the “student-centered” paradigm (Hu, 2023; Z. Liu, 2022; Yan et al., 2022). Significant barriers persist in application-oriented universities. A research-performance-dominated evaluation system has been found to exacerbate the “middle collapse” dilemma, which severely constrains the development of a robust SoTL ecosystem (Chen & Zhou, 2020). Furthermore, divergent perceptions of value, entrenched teaching traditions, and uneven resource allocation pose substantial challenges for faculty when attempting to engage in SoTL (Shang & Wang, 2023; Zhang, 2019).
Crucially, existing research often examines factors influencing SoTL engagement through individual or institutional lenses (Manarin & Abrahamson, 2016; Zhang, 2019) and largely neglects the dynamic interplay among faculty, students, and the organizational system. This gap leaves the attitudes, enabling conditions, and context-specific barriers faced by faculty in application-oriented universities inadequately explored and systematically understood. Specifically, a systemic perspective capable of capturing the mutual constitution of individual perceptions, interpersonal relationships, institutional policies, and broader socio-cultural influences on SoTL participation is notably absent.
To address this issue, in this study, in-depth interviews were employed to gather primary data in order to investigate the factors driving faculty engagement in SoTL through the lens of systemic mutual constitution. Our research aims to provide theoretical foundations and practical guidance for application-oriented universities seeking to design targeted incentives and foster more profound faculty commitment to SoTL. The focus is on the following core questions:
(1) What are the key factors influencing faculty engagement in SoTL within application-oriented universities?
(2) How do these factors interact systemically to effectively activate their mechanisms for promoting SoTL engagement?
Literature Review
Conceptual Foundations and Theoretical Frameworks of SoTL
The conceptual underpinning of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning traces back to Boyer (1990), who introduced the notion of the Scholarship of Teaching to address the prevalent divide between research and teaching in higher education and its adverse effects on undergraduate quality. He posited that teaching should be esteemed as a scholarly pursuit on par with research, and emphasized the creation of knowledge through inquiries into learning and practice. His initial conceptualization, however, lacked a detailed articulation of teaching’s specific scholarly nature. This gap was addressed by Hutchings and Shulman (1999), who significantly advanced SoTL by placing student learning at its core and established rigorous scholarly standards, defined by an explicit focus on learning outcomes, systematic inquiry, and public discourse, with the crucial criteria of being public, peer-reviewed, that could be built upon. Subsequent scholars elaborated on SoTL’s processes and outcomes. Glassick et al. (1997) emphasized rigorous inquiry and critical reflection as essential hallmarks; Trigwell et al. (2000) formally defined SoTL as the study of teaching and learning, and identified the core dimensions of knowledge creation, critical reflection, scholarly communication, and perceptual awareness; Felten et al. (2013) refined understanding through principles that emphasize student-centeredness, disciplinary grounding, and contextual responsiveness. Contemporary Scholarship consequently converges on defining SoTL as the systematic investigation of teaching/learning practices coupled with dissemination to build shared knowledge (Bishop-Clark & Dietz-Uhler, 2012), fundamentally reconceptualizing teaching as scholarly work demanding inquiry, self-assessment, and dissemination to legitimize pedagogical innovation akin to traditional research (Canning & Masika, 2022). This study posits that SoTL embodies the crucial components necessary for attaining educational excellence and fostering industry-education synergy through rigorous scholarly inquiry and effective teaching practices. Engagement in the SoTL endeavors to create a virtuous cycle wherein scholarly frameworks and pedagogical effectiveness reciprocally bolster one another.
Despite its robust theoretical legitimacy and conceptual maturation, the widespread adoption and sustained engagement of faculty in the SoTL practice remain persistently challenging. The defining characteristics of SoTL, such as systematic inquiry, public sharing, peer critique, and communal knowledge contribution, represent departures from traditional teaching norms and often conflict with institutional reward structures that prioritize disciplinary research outputs. As a result, SoTL leaders and advocates promote the concept of “glocalization,” which refers to the concrete implementation of global principles within local contexts (Webb, 2020). This chasm between SoTL’s established theoretical stature and its fragmented implementation underscores a critical imperative and a need for a comprehensive understanding of the complex interplay of individual, institutional, and contextual factors that either facilitate or constrain faculty participation is essential to bridge this theory-practice divide and fully realize SoTL’s transformative potential for enhancing higher education pedagogy (Healey & Healey, 2023; Kensington-Miller et al., 2024; Manarin & Abrahamson, 2016).
The Multidimensional Determinants of SoTL Engagement
Current Scholarship perceives faculty involvement in the SoTL as a complex, multifaceted process, intricately influenced by dynamic interactions across individual and institutional dimensions (Brew & Ginns, 2008; Harrington et al., 2021). In the following synthesis, we critically examine these interconnected determinants and identify persistent research gaps.
At the micro-level, the aim of teachers’ motivations for engaging in Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) is to enhance pedagogy and student learning (Felten & Chick, 2018), however, career stage mediates priorities: senior scholars often pursue SoTL for academic recognition, while early-career faculty prioritize skill acquisition (Happel & Song, 2020). Fundamental psychological needs, particularly autonomy in pedagogical inquiry, competence in research design, and disciplinary relatedness, have been found to significantly boost engagement (Taggart et al., 2024); thus, participating in SoTL inherently demands specific academic competencies. Brookfield (2017) emphasized that reflective practice is crucial for meaningful academic engagement in SoTL. Similarly, Kreber (2005) stated that effective teaching scholarship demands that educators transform the reflective wisdom gained from classroom practice into actionable research topics, thereby reconceptualizing everyday classroom observations as valuable research data. Nevertheless, substantial barriers endure that encompass methodological tensions that arise where disciplinary disparities generate epistemological conflicts (Tierney et al., 2020), and identity dissonance manifests as role conflicts between researchers and educators (Chick et al., 2023). Contextual variations are pronounced, and teaching philosophy and prior training disproportionately constrain junior faculty members in Chinese application-oriented universities (Zhang, 2019), while self-directed development drives engagement in Northwest China (Y. Liu & Li, 2021). English teacher educators further illustrate how foundational beliefs scaffold participation (Deng et al., 2023).
Sustainable engagement necessitates robust institutional ecosystems. Teaching development centers play pivotal roles through methodological support and dissemination mechanisms (Happel & Song, 2020). However, Chinese application-oriented universities reveal critical dysfunctions: (1) fragmented infrastructure with ambiguous center objectives; (2) evaluation systems misaligned with SoTL’s scholarly nature; and (3) underdeveloped communities hindering knowledge diffusion. These constraints coalesce into a “weak support ecosystem” that fails to incentivize participation (Gan, 2023; J. S. Zhao, 2021; J. M. Zhao & Gao, 2020). Compounding this, disciplinary paradigms erect epistemic barriers. The dominance of SoTL by social science methodologies, therefore, marginalizes other traditions (Raffoul et al., 2021) and necessitates deliberate methodological pluralism (Chng et al., 2020). Crucially, institutional devaluation constitutes a structural barrier as promotion systems frequently position SoTL as secondary to disciplinary research (Manarin & Abrahamson, 2016), which exacerbates resource scarcity and promotes recognition deficits for teaching-focused faculty members (Simmons et al., 2021).
From existing research, it is evident that in the process of shaping SoTL concepts into action, teachers and organizational systems play a joint role, and disciplinary characteristics and group profiles also exhibit differences in influencing factors (Deng et al., 2023; Y. Liu & Li, 2021; Zhang, 2019). These findings provide direction for analyzing the influencing factors of teaching and academic participation, but limitations still remain.
The research perspective needs to be expanded. Teachers and students form bilateral or multilateral relationships in university teaching activities, therefore student collaboration in teaching academic research projects is of great importance, particularly when guided by experienced researchers, where students can assume core roles such as data organization and analysis (Felten, 2013; Matthews et al., 2018; Popovic et al., 2021). This requires us to not only focus on the study of teaching itself but also explore how teaching scholarship emerges in teaching by focusing on the learning characteristics and traits of groups.
There is also a need to strengthen the in-depth exploration of application-oriented universities. Previous studies have shown that the explicit or personalized characteristics of SoTL are not sufficiently concrete, and the appropriateness and specificity of problem responses are inadequate. Application-oriented universities emphasize technical rationality, industry-academia integration, and the transformation of practical knowledge, which aligns with the traditional social science-dominated paradigm of SoTL (Potter & Raffoul, 2023), and interdisciplinary collaboration models (Popovic et al., 2021) may lead to deeper tensions. The SoTL engagement is a dynamic and ongoing process influenced by complex factors. Current research exhibits significant contextual deficiencies. Systematic investigations targeting application-oriented universities as a specific domain lack an integrated framework that comprehensively considers multi-level factors, and there is insufficient exploration of the dynamic nature and interconnections of influencing factors. In the present study in-depth interviews were employed to directly capture the firsthand experiences, perceptions, challenges, and coping strategies of application-oriented university faculty members regarding their participation in SoTL. The aim of the study is to enhance the explanatory power of SoTL within the evolving landscape of higher education by identifying the most critical influencing factors in this specific context.
Research Design
Research Samples
In this study we employed purposive sampling to recruit and interview 17 faculty members from application-oriented universities. We adopted “saturation” as the key criterion for determining participant numbers (Guest et al., 2006). In other words, we ceased data collection when additional information from participants became unavailable. Respondents were assigned letters “A,”“B,” and “AM” to denote their academic qualifications (including teaching titles, teaching reform projects, teaching quality initiative, and teaching achievement awards) and managerial roles as expanded in Table 1. The full-time teacher group (n = 13) was stratified by academic achievements, where levels A1-A8 represent national/provincial teaching award recipients. Levels B1-B4 include departmental recognition awardees, and levels AM1-AM4 (n = 4) represent the teaching management group comprised deans and deputy deans overseeing teaching innovation. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in Mandarin. All participants were actively involved in SoTL in their respective schools, although they differed in terms of position level, years of teaching experience, and professional titles.
Profiles of Semi-Structured Interviewees.
Data Collection and Analysis
Relevant data was gathered via semi-structured interviews. An interview outline, as shown in Appendix A, was developed following a comprehensive literature review. Before the interviews, participants were provided with a copy of the ethics report and informed consent form, and confidentiality principles were explained. Upon giving their informed consent, the research focus and study objectives were briefly outlined. Formal interviews were conducted according to the prepared outline, each lasting approximately 40 to 90 min. The interviews were recorded and post-interview all recordings were transcribed promptly, and the interview outline was refined and supplemented. The total transcribed material amounted to approximately 140,000 words.
The reflective thematic analysis method proposed by Braun and Clarke (2006) was employed to explore the core factors influencing teacher participation in teaching Scholarship in application-oriented universities. This research design complements the semantic analysis of explicit narratives by revealing the contextual settings of teaching academic activities. Thematic analysis is a specialized method for identifying, analyzing, and reporting potential patterns and themes within data (Braun & Clarke, 2006). This method effectively organizes and interprets complex datasets and provides robust support for decision-making. Through the in-depth analysis of large volumes of information, hidden structures and connections within the data can be uncovered, thereby helping scholars better understand the meaning and value of the information (Boyatzis, 1998). Data analysis is an iterative, recursive, and ongoing process, primarily consisting of six steps: familiarization with the data, initial coding, theme search, theme review, theme definition and naming, and report generation (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Saldana, 2009; Strauss & Corbin, 1998).
The data was analyzed using MAXQDA software. The audio recordings were transcribed and organized, and then the interview data were summarized and interpreted, yielding 173 original statements and keywords. These initial key pieces of information were then extracted, merged, and categorized into similar concepts, forming 36 initial codes. After ensuring that each code contained sufficient and meaningful information, cluster analysis was conducted to identify 14 sub-themes and four themes. A sample result is shown in Appendix B. Finally, a new round of coding was conducted on the two reserved interview materials, but no new codes or themes were found. The themes remained consistent with the original logical relationships, and therefore, the theme analysis results passed the saturation test.
Results
Through thematic analysis of teacher interviews, 14 constituent elements were identified. In the context of application-oriented universities, these elements interact with each other to reveal the key factors that influence the academic engagement of teachers and can be divided into four broad categories. The coding and themes of the research results are based on the views of the interviewees, as well as on relevant literature and emerging thematic characteristics.
Attitudes and Cognition
Interest in SoTL
Teachers’ passion forms the intrinsic motivation for their ongoing engagement in SoTL. Teachers who are passionate about teaching actively invest time and effort to explore new teaching methods and research teaching content. For example, I am passionate about SoTL. Optimizing teaching can be achieved by designing controlled experiments, collecting operational data, and truly identifying which teaching interventions are most effective in cultivating engineering judgment. Although it takes a lot of time to research and conduct experiments, analyzing data is always fascinating, like solving a puzzle to explore students’ learning states, collect information, and find answers (A5).
Additionally, individuals interested in SoTL report that they frequently participate in relevant training and discussion activities to continually refine their understanding of SoTL. For example, Participant B4 noted that she had participated in three international conferences focused on SoTL in recent years. Each conference had a different theme, deepening her understanding of the concept of SoTL and providing new insights into teaching practice, thereby sparking a desire for deeper exploration and research interest. She also mentioned, however, that to make more progress in SoTL, one must put in the effort oneself. Driven by personal interest, this suggests teachers are motivated to participate in SoTL and actively enhance their teaching scholarship capabilities.
Teaching Beliefs
Teaching beliefs are teachers’ preferred teaching and learning styles and reflect their psychological state toward teaching (Chan & Elliott, 2004). According to the interviews, teachers engaged in the SoTL continuously adjust their methods based on actual teaching outcomes, in order to ensure that classrooms remain dynamic and innovative. Teaching beliefs fundamentally stem from the dialectical negotiation between institutional requirements and personal teaching philosophies, emphasizing that teachers achieve their goals through research, reflection, and innovation. I’m not a fan of teaching alone in the classroom. I love sharing real-world industry cases and leading interactive discussions to make learning more engaging and dynamic (AM2). In application-oriented universities, classrooms should therefore not only explain traditional theorems and formulas but also integrate socio-economic development and industry demands to enhance students’ cognitive abilities. I particularly enjoy trying new ideas in class to see if these methods are effective and can help students learn better (A6). I focus on giving students plenty of chances to grow, making sure each step is even better than the last (A2). Students in application-oriented universities vary significantly from those at research-focused universities, necessitating educators to invest greater effort in discerning individual student traits. This ongoing journey of discovery and innovative problem-solving constitutes the essence of SoTL competence.
Identification of SoTL
The involvement of teachers in the SoTL is profoundly shaped by their understanding of the principles guiding academic practice, a trend especially noticeable in disciplines like engineering. For example, Respondent A8 stated, This is definitely a scientific thing. In our engineering program, we focus on helping students develop real-world skills, which go way beyond just learning from textbooks. To pass on knowledge and abilities, it is crucial to study different teaching methods. This has made me realize how important SoTL is. Recognition serves as the wellspring of meaning and experience for educators. It encompasses how teachers integrate academic research methodologies into their pedagogical practices and how this integration impacts their teaching philosophies and actions, as elaborated by Respondent A7. I see SoTL as a bridge that connects theory and practice. By getting involved in teaching Scholarship, I can keep exploring and improving my teaching methods to better serve my students’ needs. Such recognition, therefore, not only boosts teachers’ enthusiasm for participating in the SoTL but also spurs them to proactively seek ways to enhance teaching quality. Consequently, identification of SoTL serves as a pivotal motivator driving teachers to partake in the SoTL.
Acknowledgment of their efforts by peers also fortifies individuals’ professional identities, as commented by Participant AM4. It is gratifying to see my teaching methods being adopted and shared by my colleagues. It solidifies my identity as both an educator and a researcher. This perspective resonates with Kreber’s (2002) assertion that the validation of teaching and learning necessitates the redefinition of teaching as “public, peer-reviewed community property.”
Perceived Benefits
Teaching achievements serve as the medium through which educational and scholarly endeavors are realized. Unlike research outcomes, rewards derived from teaching achievements are typically long-term and less immediately apparent. SoTL work can often be very detailed and specific, but it demands much time. Meanwhile, promotion evaluations usually focus on high-level, representative projects, which can be tough……(B4) Many teachers therefore only want to complete their basic teaching duties and are reluctant to invest too much in teaching and academic activities. This is the result of weighing the benefits and costs in the dynamic negotiation process with the school. If teachers were, however, to experience the benefits of teaching and academic activities, they would be more willing to invest more effort, thereby forming a virtuous cycle of teaching and academic activities, and their enthusiasm for participating in such activities would also continue to increase. If we think of a research proposal as a contract, the research process is like fulfilling that contract, and just like any contract, it needs a firm commitment. My project, backed by data and practical results, got an excellent final evaluation, meeting several goals (A1). The advantages of educational accomplishments extend beyond the mere aggregation of quality within the classroom for by integrating the principles of applied academic advancement and implementing instructional innovations. They can be transmuted into concrete scholarly and pedagogical achievements, such as publications, research initiatives, and authored works.
SoTL Competence
Knowledge Structure
Educators endowed with profound subject mastery and pedagogical acumen are more adept at pinpointing issues within the realms of instruction and learning, and pursue effective resolutions, and engage in scholarly pursuits related to teaching. Respondent A5 emphasized that to effectively participate in teaching Scholarship, teachers need to focus on current issues and use various methods to share their research findings. This means going beyond just writing and using visual aids like charts and checklists to make their research more transparent and more impactful. In addition, the results section of SoTL should present specific, actionable findings rather than merely discussions or explanations.
Systematic Integration of Knowledge
The capacity to integrate and innovate is vividly illustrated by numerous advancements that seamlessly blend industry, academia, research, and practical application, thereby creating an environment where educators can purposefully immerse themselves in SoTL. Right now, most textbook knowledge is organized by subjects, with not much input from businesses or industries in designing courses or writing books. This creates a gap between what’s taught and what companies need. As a result, students from application-oriented universities often do not have the skills that companies are looking for, making it hard for them to contribute to the local economy. When I taught “Optical Engineering,” I made sure to align the course content with professional certification requirements, so that what students learn directly supports their career goals. However, there is still a long way to go in improving teaching and academic quality (A1). There is a significant “time lag” between current industrial technical standards and the updating of application-oriented universities’ curricula, resulting in inadequate knowledge alignment and delayed knowledge transfer. The collaboration between schools and enterprises in talent cultivation remains superficial. Lately, our university has hired a bunch of young PhDs, but we have not seen much talent from the business world. These new teachers are super enthusiastic about research, but they are finding it tough to connect with teaching and practical applications. There is a clear gap between classroom theory and real-world scenarios. When it comes to SoTL, blending industry data, classroom practices, and theoretical insights is key for creating innovative teaching methods in application-oriented universities (AM1). Whether you are applying for teaching reform projects or joining teaching competitions, it is all about building up your teaching innovation practices, diving into relevant literature, getting expert advice, and reflecting on your teaching to keep improving (AM4).
Communication Skills
Effective communication stands as a pivotal element in the realm of teaching and academic endeavors. Educators must convey their ideas with clarity and precision to diverse audiences that span various institutions and professional domains, and thereby advance educational and scholarly pursuits. Be able to clearly explain teaching practice findings and describe teaching issues in simple terms (A8). SoTL endeavors prioritize dialogue and exchange among diverse scholarly disciplines, in order to distil intricate educational theories and practices into accessible language. Proficient engagement in these activities demands not only adept oral communication skills but also exceptional written proficiency, especially in crafting academic research papers and when compiling project outcome reports. A6, who has participated in teaching achievement award applications three times, shared: Explaining “hybrid teaching reform” clearly and highlighting its innovations took much effort. I revised my application 10 times to get the language and wording just right, indeed! Strong communication skills enable teachers to clearly articulate their teaching philosophies and research findings and to effectively share their insights and outcomes.
Teaching Experience
Teaching experience profoundly influences a teacher’s instructional behavior. Having students work in groups to tackle issues and document the process would be a great idea. Why did I set it up like this? I’ve noticed that some students solve problems super fast, while others need more time. By looking at their records, I can see if the problem got solved and also check out how they handled it and how the group worked together. This gives me really valuable insights into my teaching methods. If I hadn’t taught so many students and seen how they collaborate, I probably wouldn’t have come up with this activity, and even if I did, I might not have pinpointed the important parts. Teachers’ experiences and observations often spark (A3) Research questions in the SoTL. What mistakes reveal students’ knowledge gaps and cognitive struggles the most? Moreover, what level of difficulty is just right? These aren’t questions you can answer off the cuff; they require teaching experience. Over the years of teaching, I’ve learned exactly where students usually trip up, which concepts they struggle with, and which steps they often get wrong. These insights, gathered over time, help me create “error simulation” scenarios. Without the experience of watching students year after year, I wouldn’t be able to spot these fundamental issues, let alone come up with targeted research plans (A8). Accumulated teaching experience empowers teachers to comprehend students’ needs better and tackle educational challenges.
Significant Others
Peer Modeling
SoTL encompasses both interdisciplinary academic inquiry and the practical dissemination of teaching practices. Peer Modeling has emerged as a teaching strategy for sharing and implementing the efficacy of educational Scholarship. Participant AM3 described this experience, stating, Back then, there was a fresh engineering project, and I went to lots of conferences. I picked up some advanced concepts and practices fast, which were super helpful for me. Interviewee A2 echoed this sentiment, highlighting the profound influence of participating in workshops. This immersive experience deepened her grasp of the evolution of SoTL, broadened her knowledge, and enabled her to continue her SoTL journey with enhanced continuity. She played a pivotal role in enlightening more educators about the paradigm of SoTL through engaging with exceptional peers who championed supportive and advocacy-driven teaching concepts and case studies.
Colleague Collaboration
The collaboration among colleagues vividly illustrates the profound impact of significant others on academic engagement in teaching. The synergistic effects that emerge from such teamwork offer invaluable insights and empower educators to address and surmount academic challenges with greater efficacy. I’m grateful for the award I received for my outstanding performance in the ideological and political education teaching demonstration. It was thanks to the brainstorming sessions with my colleagues—they were super helpful! (A4). Collaboration with colleagues can break through individual cognitive limitations, facilitate the resolution of complex teaching challenges, and accelerate teaching development. As teachers have experienced, the “leveraging” effect of such collaboration is crucial. I think on-campus teaching observations are valuable. They’re easy to follow and super practical for learning (A2). Previously intangible practical experiences can become visible, learnable, and actionable through conducting rigorous and in-depth teaching research activities.
Student Responsiveness
SoTL integrates students as active participants and partners into educational practices, which represents an innovative and participatory approach. In reality, resistance from some students toward pedagogical innovations presents a significant challenge, which simultaneously catalyzes instructors to identify potential research within SoTL. B4 noted, The Flipped classrooms have become popular lately, but let’s be real, students aren’t big fans. They think it just adds more to their workload. However, the context became the impetus for my own SoTL inquiry: a comparative study of innovative pedagogies versus traditional lecture-based instruction. Student learning experiences are paramount to SoTL research, serving not only as a measure of pedagogical effectiveness but also as a critical entry point for initiating faculty SoTL projects. Another instructor explicitly stated, Students have given fresh ideas, helping focus more on active learning and designing instruction that involves their participation (B3). At the operational level, some interviewees show another case, I’d have students collect honest feedback from their classmates during the practical training, like where they had trouble during practical training. Then, we can figure out why that part keeps causing problems. Let’s try some new methods hands-on, or see if simplifying the steps makes things smoother? (A2) Effective student participation not only enhances teacher-student interaction but also fosters a shared sense of responsibility for teaching research, thereby expanding the breadth of participation and fostering a collaborative teaching environment.
Mentor Guidance
The mentors discussed herein predominantly pertain to pre-service mentors. Despite feedback from AM1 indicating that application-oriented universities assign career mentors to newly hired faculty members, interviewees revealed that few educators cited the impact of career mentors on their teaching and academic engagement. In contrast, pre-service mentors, also known as academic mentors, were frequently mentioned. Professor Wan, as my postdoctoral co-supervisor, has had a profound influence on me. He often says that as academic researchers, our papers should not just remain on paper but should be written on the battlefield or training ground, just like theirs. For us, engineering faculty members, this means writing our papers in engineering practice and teaching. This has guided my involvement in the Scholarship of Teaching and learning (A1). For engineering faculty members, integrating engineering practice with teaching facilitates the creation of teaching and academic outcomes imbued with practical significance. This approach broadens academic horizons, redefines the value of instruction, and profoundly impacts faculty involvement in both educational and scholarly pursuits. My mentor had a profound impact on me. She always said that a great teacher isn’t just a good researcher; they’re also amazing educators who genuinely care about their students, pay attention to each one’s growth, and have the power to keep making a positive impact (AM4).
SoTL Environment
Resource Availability
Interviewees have revealed that resources within application-oriented universities exert relatively limited influence. Faculty engagement largely depends on platforms and opportunities provided by research-intensive institutions. A3 stated that there’s no dedicated SoTL research team here. The Center for Faculty Development only handles basic tasks and lacks professional guidelines. Our data platform is clunky, and funding is limited. We mostly come up with solutions like attending external conferences, using AI tools, or collaborating with faculty from other universities. A6 said, I joined the SOTER training camp at Shanghai Jiao Tong University, where I spent five days learning about teaching and scholarship. We covered key topics like selecting a suitable research topic, observing classrooms effectively, building theories, and validating methods. It was eye-opening! Institution-based academic community resources, typically furnished by education development centers or specific institutions, are meticulously crafted through well-planned teaching activities and abundant educational materials. These efforts actively foster the establishment of interdisciplinary networks among educators. Such interdisciplinary communities not only expand teachers’ academic vistas but also generate numerous opportunities for collaboration and research. A7 emphasized that resources are critical. With institutional backing such as stable teams and adequate funding, we’d readily engage in SoTL. It directly enhances both teaching quality and research productivity.
Culture Support
The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning offers a potentially effective solution to the conflict between teaching and research in universities (Kreber, 2005; Webb, 2020). Professor A8 mentioned, In recent years, our university has put more emphasis on teaching skills. However, the idea of SoTL is still uncommon, and our evaluation system remains heavily research-focused. The absence of a clear focus on SoTL has hindered its seamless integration into academic culture. In this scenario, educators prioritize formal research outcomes over authentic classroom exploration, creating a disconnection between the academic evolution of teaching and its core purpose. The deputy dean of the School of Foreign Languages also noted, The school puts too much emphasis on research and not enough on teaching. Even when they say they value teaching, they prioritize appearances over real effectiveness, which goes against their goal of developing practical skills. Teachers are mainly judged by their research accomplishments, which forces them to concentrate almost entirely on research, leaving little time for teaching-related research and innovation (AM4). Applied-oriented universities, shaped by deeply ingrained academic paradigms and skewed evaluation systems, display underdeveloped cultures of SoTL. As a result, faculty engagement in such initiatives largely depends on individual intrinsic motivation, given the lack of adequate institutional support. The pressure from evaluations and KPIs keeps the institution’s tolerance for teaching innovation low. Sure, soTL cases can inspire us conceptually, but solving real problems means redesigning tasks to match how my students think. Without proper support, even the best theories and practices might not fit well within our culture (A2).
Conclusion and Discussion
The aim of this qualitative study was to reconceptualize the determinants of application-oriented university faculty in SoTL engagement through a multi-tiered framework, and to elucidate the dynamic interplays among driving, enabling, reinforcing, and context-restructuring mechanisms. As depicted in Figure 1, engagement originates from agentic foundations where attitudinal-cognitive drivers (interesting, teaching beliefs, identification, and perceived benefits) activate participation intent. These are operationalized through SoTL competence (Knowledge structure, Systematic integration of knowledge, Communication skills), which functions as the critical enabler for determining engagement quality and scope, thereby equipping educators with the necessary capabilities to translate intention into effective practice. Simultaneously, significant others (peers, colleagues, students, mentors) amplify engagement through normative influence and socio-professional reinforcement. Organizational environments critically dictate the sustainability of SoTL engagement in application-oriented universities. Resource deficits (e.g., team/funding shortages) force faculty members to rely on unstable external support, while a teaching-research dichotomy culturally marginalizes pedagogical innovation despite growing institutional rhetoric. The findings not only validate the core elements of the Theory of Planned Behavior (attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral (Ajzen, 2002) but also enrich and deepen our understanding of the mechanisms that work to maintain professional behavior under conditions of organizational environmental deficits, by emphasizing teachers’ proactive strategies for reconfiguring the context.
The mechanisms driving SoTL engagement.
Attitude and cognition is the internal driving force for their intention to participate. When teachers show strong interest in SoTL, hold positive teaching beliefs, highly identify with the value of SoTL, and perceive significant personal and professional benefits from participating, their attitude toward SoTL will be more positive. This positive attitude, through a “motivating” effect, directly enhances teachers’ willingness to engage in SoTL. The initial phase of SoTL involvement requires the identification of pressing pedagogical issues within complex educational landscapes (Bishop-Clark & Dietz-Uhler, 2012). SoTL topics typically emerge from faculty members’ classroom observations and experiential insights, wherein research training transforms teaching practices into scholarly endeavors (Hutchings et al., 2011). As corroborated by the present findings, positive SoTL attitudes and cognition motivate methodological experimentation, active participation in academic exchanges, and enhanced scholarly capabilities, which is consistent with prior findings by Hodges (2013) that self-fulfillment and personal interest drive academic engagement. Identifications are crafted via a dynamic, context-sensitive process wherein individuals categorize themselves into diverse social groups, and subsequently evaluate both themselves and others based on the attributes inherent to their respective groups (Tajfel, 2010). Participating in SoTL therefore often necessitates confronting one’s social identity, as educators must adeptly navigate a novel lexicon of interdisciplinary communication. This new terrain may encompass an epistemology and methodology that are relatively uncharted for instructors within an application-oriented university. Consequently, crafting an academic identity for teaching can be challenging. Faculty members must master interdisciplinary communication protocols involving unfamiliar methodologies, thereby complicating academic identity formation (McCarthy, 2024). This necessitates continuous deconstruction of teaching practices and a transcendence of disciplinary boundaries. Effective SoTL engagement also demands a critical evaluation of the value and utility of feedback. Notably, perceived benefits serve as a significant motivator, as evidenced by their recognition as a key engagement facilitator.
SoTL Competences serve as a participation catalyst, which impacts the level of engagement. Individual competencies and prior experience have been found to significantly enhance teachers’ confidence and motivation to engage in SoTL, thereby encouraging their participation in SoTL activities. Despite the inherently open and inclusive nature of SoTL, its specialized terminology, theoretical assumptions, and distinct literature may create barriers for disciplinary researchers unfamiliar with the field (Raffoul et al., 2021). Consequently, the systematic integration of knowledge across various research phases, coupled with iterative refinement of pedagogical beliefs, becomes imperative. Meijerman et al. (2024) stated that teachers select pedagogically appropriate activities within specific instructional contexts, thereby initiating generative learning processes that foster effective learning outcomes in SoTL. Limited teaching experience may hinder innovative practices (Smith & Gillespie, 2007); however, our survey reveals that prior experiential learning and teaching practice significantly influence faculty willingness and capacity for participation in SoTL. Within applied education contexts, SoTL constitutes a process wherein faculty members employ rigorous research methods to address authentic teaching challenges, guided by applied talent development objectives. The findings from empirical interviews suggest that application-oriented university educators synthesize rich industry experience, technological foresight, and cutting-edge educational theories through persistent engagement in SoTL. This process systematically crystallizes their approaches to complex pedagogical problems into distinctive, high-level applied teaching expertise, which is a tangible outcome of deep immersion in SoTL.
The perceived social pressure or support from teachers’ social networks (peers, colleagues, mentors, students) constitutes their subjective norm for SoTL engagement. When teachers observe peers actively participating in SoTL and achieving success (peer modeling), or effectively collaborating with colleagues on SoTL, or receiving positive guidance and encouragement from mentors, as well as positive student responses to teaching improvements, they will feel a strong social expectation. This social expectation, through a “reinforcing” effect, encourages teachers to comply with social norms, thereby strengthening their intention to engage in SoTL. In the specific context of application-oriented universities, SoTL constitutes not merely professional development but an industry-aligned mechanism for enhancing student attainability (Luo, 2024). Students’ problems serve as the central core of the investigative process (Bass, 1999). They constitute a nexus of generative questions from which some creative activities and innovations emerged. Faculty teaching strategies directly shape student learning performances, while scenario-based formative feedback creates bidirectional validation loops for engagement in SoTL. Notably, Popovic et al. (2021) also have highlighted practical cases where undergraduates play a key role in collaborative research, which underscores the potential for co-constructing knowledge and expanding the scope of SoTL engagement at the operational level. From our survey, we found that students who are engaged in different learning activities exhibit distinct responses. For instance, those involved in project-based learning tend to develop stronger problem-solving and teamwork skills. Peer modeling, colleague collaboration, and mentoring are also identified as manifestations of significant others that substantially influence SoTL engagement. Structured activities, including teaching demonstrations, observational learning, and collaborative course design, amplify participation through actionable exemplars. Academic mentors play a pivotal role in shaping faculty members’ SoTL engagement by redefining the value and purpose of academic work, guiding them to integrate practical application with scholarly inquiry. Li et al. (2024) focus on how mentors’ direct research guidance and emotional support influence undergraduates’ research aspirations, self-efficacy, and interest. Our findings further state the academic mentors profoundly influence faculty identity formation by emphasizing the dual responsibility of being both excellent researchers and caring educators, thereby fostering a holistic approach to SoTL that encompasses both scholarly rigor and genuine student-centered teaching. Collectively, these normative forces reconstruct faculty professional identities and deepen immersion in SoTL.
The SoTL environment restructures the sustainability of engagement contexts in SoTL. The findings revealed that the current resource allocation and evaluation systems in application-oriented universities deter teachers from engaging in SoTL to some extent. Despite an increased focus on SoTL within higher education over the past 30 years, a zero-sum game culture persists between teaching and research, which marginalizes teaching, research, and innovation (Shang & Wang, 2023). Interviewees also indicated a weak internal culture of SoTL within campuses, implying a lack of institutional recognition. Teachers cannot obtain normative perceptions from within the organization, which weakens their influence on behavioral intentions. Teachers gain recognition of value from external reference groups by participating in academic conferences and inter-institutional collaborations, thereby reconstructing their normative cognition of SoTL. When institutional support is deficient, external resources may spark initial engagement, but ultimate implementation remains firmly constrained by the internal cultural environment: insufficient tolerance for experimentation or misaligned incentive structures impede the grounding of innovative practices, even when faculty acquire new methodologies through training. An inclusive cultural atmosphere embodies greater opportunities for faculty participation in SoTL (Dawson et al., 2019). Consequently, the organizational environment redefines the scope of SoTL engagement. These findings demonstrate that environmental factors not only directly influence faculty behavior but also moderate the relationships between individual psychological factors and engagement outcomes adequate resource provision strengthens faculty confidence in practice, while a healthy academic culture resolves normative conflicts. Deep institutionalization within SoTL culture necessitates organizational restructuring that requires simultaneous attention to both explicit environmental factors and implicit dimensions (Ginsberg & Bernstein, 2012).
Implications, Limitations, and Future
Implications
It not only identifies the key factors influencing teacher SoTL engagement but also, through its sophisticated pathway design, reveals how these factors interact, reinforce each other, and jointly drive the transformation from intention to behavior, ultimately forming a continuously improving SoTL ecosystem.
To elevate the sustainability of SoTL engagement, application-oriented universities must institute explicit requirements through pedagogical reform initiatives such as the “classroom revolution.” Teachers should enhance the SoTL competence, embrace student-centered approaches, and design curricula that align with students’ cognitive levels and applied skill needs. Such measures will foster SoTL and encourage the application of scholarly thinking to address teaching challenges. Our work reaffirms the value of SoTL partnerships as a good practice in that SoTL can provide to both students and teachers. Application-oriented universities can therefore enhance student engagement through research projects, academic competitions, and similar initiatives. Crucially, this process must embed mechanisms that intrinsically motivate faculties to enhance practical teaching capabilities and facilitate iterative growth, thereby strengthening behavioral intentions from within.
Optimizing institutional contexts is also key to bolstering the SoTL engagement, necessitating reforms to evaluation and incentive structures that reduce excessive reliance on quantitative research metrics while significantly increasing the weighting of teaching effectiveness, knowledge translation, and practice quality, as supportive environments can enhance perceived efficacy and autonomy and constitute fundamental bases for human behavior and motivation (Taggart et al., 2024). Strengthen curriculum design for university-enterprise cooperation and Incorporate industry feedback into teaching evaluations. Such reforms enable faculty members to derive stronger emotional belonging and professional value affirmation through their work. At the same time, a robust teaching culture provides the necessary support for the development of scholarly pedagogical skills and knowledge (Braxton et al., 2024), emphasizing that cultivating empowerment and support requires fostering conducive organizational environments. Concurrently, strengthening connections with external resources is vital, where application-oriented universities should promote collaborative communities, such as university alliances and interdisciplinary teams, and provide dedicated teaching research funding to establish continuous improvement networks as key drivers of knowledge production and resource sharing, which enable faculty to access professional support and expertise through peer exchange. Optimizing internal institutional culture is equally indispensable. Centers for Teaching and Learning (CTLs) must extend beyond their core functions, such as pedagogical training and course design support, by providing personalized professional development scaffolding to foster engagement in SoTL. Application-oriented universities can amplify this by integrating faculty from diverse disciplines and industry partners. Institutions can provide tailored research mentorship, resource coordination, and interdisciplinary collaboration support. Adopting an industry-academia integration perspective. This empowers faculties to conduct practice-grounded SoTL and facilitates the refinement and dissemination of Scholarship (Wright et al., 2018), while concurrently fostering an active academic culture through seminars, lunch lectures, and similar forums to strengthen collective engagement in pedagogical innovation and research, thereby integrating significant other support with positive organizational culture to reinforce faculty group identity.
Limitations and Future
While this analysis was developed to provide a thorough framework for enhancing engagement in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, the focus on application-oriented universities in China imposes certain limitations, constraining the applicability of the framework to regions with divergent academic cultures. The study findings are also predominantly derived from interview data of a small sample with a notably high SoTL involvement. The relevance and explanatory strength of the theoretical model across various disciplines and types of higher education institutions necessitate validation through extensive and more varied empirical research. Future investigations should therefore employ mixed-methods approaches to examine group disparities in SoTL practices in diverse university faculties, thus offering more tailored and precise support strategies for their professional growth. The validity of the framework must also be tested globally, especially in regions characterized by distinct academic evaluation systems.
Footnotes
Appendix A
Ethical Considerations
The current study is not an animal or human study.
Consent to Participate
Informed consent was gained from all participants. The participants were all adults, and their participation was entirely voluntary.
Funding
The author disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: We wish to acknowledge Department of Hunan Provincial Social Sciences for their funding (Grant number XSP24YBC447).
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data will be available upon request.