“We realized that if we could represent practice, then the possibilities for investigating and communicating about teaching and learning-by different communities-would be enhanced. Although others wanted to highlight our practice, what we needed to draw on was our knowledge of investigative practice, not our own evolving knowledge of practice itself. We understood this as a problem of representation and communication. How could the many complex layers of practice be represented? And how could practice be engaged and discussed by a wider range of people concerned with teaching and learning? – Deborah Loewenberg Ball and Magdalene Lampert
One telling measure of how differently teaching is regarded from traditional scholarship or research within the academy is what a difference it makes to have a “problem” in one versus the other. In scholarship and research, having a “problem” is at the heart of the investigative process; it is the compound of the generative questions around which all creative and productive activity revolves. But in one’s teaching, a “problem” is something you don’t want to have, and if you have one, you probably want to fix it.
Asking a colleague about a problem in his or her research is an invitation; asking about a problem in one’s teaching would probably seem like an accusation. Changing the status of the problem in teaching from terminal remediation to ongoing investigation is precisely what the movement for a scholarship of teaching is all about. How might we make the problematization of teaching a matter of regular communal discourse?” – Randy Bass
This book by author Thomas Baker makes a positive contribution to the scholarship and problematization of “Teaching Academic Writing“. Is there really a Passive Voice Controversy? Maybe, maybe not, but we won’t know until we open this problem for discussion about the best way to deal with this for a wide diversity of English language learners.