Scholarship of teaching and learning of nursing faculty members: a protocol for a scoping review

Abstract

Introduction

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) is emphasised more than ever in today’s higher education institutions. SoTL is crucial in enhancing nursing education and improving student learning outcomes, thereby preparing competent nurses to deliver high-quality healthcare. Despite its importance, the dimensions and defining characteristics of SoTL have not been adequately explored. This scoping review aims to clarify the concept of SoTL in nursing education, identify its key features and address existing knowledge gaps in this field.

Methods and analysis

The study adopts Arksey and O’Malley’s established scoping review methodology, as defined by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI). The research process is guided by five distinct phases: the initial formulation of research questions, identification of relevant studies, selection of studies, data extraction and compilation and, finally, synthesis and reporting of results.

The inclusion criteria will be based on the Population, Concept and Context framework. A comprehensive search will be conducted across PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ProQuest, Web of Science, ERIC and grey literature sources, with no time limitations and ongoing updates until the study concludes.

To ensure a comprehensive review, reference lists and citations of selected studies will also be examined for additional relevant sources. Duplicate studies and studies published in languages other than Persian or English will be excluded. Two independent reviewers will select studies based on eligibility criteria and screen the title, abstract and full text. Data extraction will be conducted using the standard JBI form. A directed content analysis will be undertaken to identify and clarify key concepts in the texts.

Ethics and dissemination

The Research Ethics Committee of Iran University of Medical Sciences has approved this study. The results will be published in scientific publications and presented at relevant conferences.

Study registration

The protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF; https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VN5GD).

STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY.

• A rigorous and well-established methodological framework will be employed to ensure the high quality of the study.

• A health sciences librarian will guide a comprehensive search of relevant databases to cover eligible studies fully.

• Two reviewers will independently perform study selection, data extraction and coding, carefully assessing inter-rater reliability using Cohen’s κ coefficient.

• The review is limited to English and Persian publications, which may result in the omission of other relevant languages.

Introduction

Higher education is essential for societal development, facilitating coordination across various sectors. Like other social institutions, universities and higher education institutions can perform diverse functions in response to society’s progress and evolving needs.¹ Improving the quality of education and fostering faculty development are essential for training competent professionals.² Education authorities must strive to improve the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the teaching-learning process by employing innovative educational approaches.³ In this context, the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) is a crucial mechanism for enhancing education by bridging the gap between teaching and learning.⁴

The primary mission of the university is its educational component. In contrast, the reward structure in universities is more focused on research, so research and publications hold a significant place in hiring and promotion decisions. At the same time, the role of teaching in evaluating academic activities is less prominent.⁵ Due to the emphasis on research in faculty evaluations, activities aimed at improving teaching quality often receive less recognition, discouraging faculty members from prioritising such efforts.⁶ This issue is more pronounced in medical universities.⁷

In 1990, Boyer introduced the concept of scholarship as a paradigm for the first time and proposed that scholarship includes four dimensions: exploratory scholarship, integrative scholarship, applied scholarship and the SoTL. In his view, ‘teaching is the highest form of understanding’, so the SoTL is considered pivotal for Boyer’s other three functions.⁸

SoTL has been an integral component of the transformation of medical education in recent decades.⁹ This concept applies to activities and functions that enhance education and teaching.¹⁰

Applying SoTL by scholarly professors leads to enhancements, comprehensive educational changes, the development of an academic culture, improvements in teaching and learning and the acquisition of practical knowledge.¹¹ This feature can lead to fresh insights, altered perspectives on teaching and enhanced teaching methods, ultimately benefiting students’ and the broader community’s learning.¹² Universities can create research-based teaching-learning opportunities and use them as a powerful tool to enhance excellence in the practical skills education of medical students.¹³

SoTL is an essential component of nursing education;¹⁴ therefore, it is crucial for faculty members in nursing schools to define the concept of SoTL in a professional context and to demonstrate evidence of SoTL activities within their institutions. By identifying the dimensions of this concept, the nursing faculty member can outline a framework for developing their short-term and long-term scholarly activities.¹⁵

Extensive studies have been conducted on the SoTL; however, limited studies have been carried out in nursing education on the SoTL.^{5 6} Studies conducted in Iran have identified the main reason for neglecting activities such as SoTL in universities as the unfamiliarity and vagueness of the concept of SoTL.¹⁶ Therefore, nursing faculty members are expected to identify the dimensions and characteristics of this concept and engage in it as one of their primary academic activities to train professionally competent nurses.¹⁷ Although the concept of SoTL is ambiguous, it continues to be emphasised more than ever because it is an integral part of the educational mission of universities.^{4 14 16} This ambiguity is reflected in the literature, which uses terms such as ‘scholarly’, ‘good teaching’, ‘higher education’ and ‘action research’.^{18 19} SoTL has always been interested in the progress of nursing education and improving the quality of learning. Accordingly, interested nursing researchers in this field defined SoTL and tried to outline its characteristics. Evidence suggests that, despite some commonalities, definitions of SoTL remain diverse and uncertain, resulting in the incorrect or incomplete application of this concept.^{5 14 20} In addition, the concept of SoTL is context-dependent.²¹ Therefore, it must be defined accurately and well within the academic community, specifically among nursing faculty members.

To address this gap, the present study aimed to conduct a scoping review that summarises and synthesises the existing literature on the SoTL among nursing faculty members in nursing schools. Establishing a well-defined scoping review protocol is essential to ensuring methodological rigour and consistency throughout the research process.²² This protocol is a foundational document that articulates the study’s objectives, methodological framework and search strategy, enabling a systematic and comprehensive approach. A meticulously structured protocol is crucial for maintaining research integrity and enhancing the reliability and reproducibility of findings.²³

The primary objective of this study is to clarify the concept of SoTL, identify gaps in the existing body of knowledge and contribute to a more nuanced understanding of its role in nursing education. The findings will inform future research directions and provide a valuable foundation for policy development and strategic initiatives aimed at improving educational practices and fostering more effective learning environments. Furthermore, this study highlights the role of SoTL in faculty promotion and tenure evaluations, advocating for its increased recognition in academic career advancement. By synthesising best practices related to faculty engagement in SoTL, this review provides a framework for designing structured faculty development programmes that enhance teaching competencies and improve the overall quality of nursing education. This study opens the door to more successful teaching and learning environments based on SoTL. In addition to enhancing the standard of instruction and learning, this research will foster a lasting culture of academic scholarship in nursing schools and produce skilled, qualified nurses who can adapt to society’s evolving demands.

Method and analysis

A scoping review is appropriate for this study, as it enables a comprehensive mapping of the existing literature, identifies key concepts and examples, and highlights gaps in research on SoTL among nursing faculty. This scoping review will be conducted in five stages, based on the latest methodological guidelines from Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI),²⁴ following the work of Tricco and colleagues:

1. Identifying the research question.

2. Identifying relevant studies.

3. Study selection.

4. Charting the data.

5. Collecting, summarising and reporting results.

The study reporting will follow the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR).²⁵

Stage 1: Identifying the research question

Formulating a research question is the foundational step in any scholarly investigation, guiding the development of search strategies and providing a structured framework for subsequent research stages.²⁴ In line with the overall aim of this study, this review addresses the following question:

What are the definitions and characteristics of the SoTL of nursing faculty members?

Modifications to the original framework

Given that the concept of the present study is very abstract, to clarify the question in line with the purpose of the study and to determine what examples of the activities and characteristics of nursing faculty members who are scholars in the literature the research team was looking for, stakeholders (in our study, students and nursing professors) were consulted to formulate the question.

Stage 2: Identifying relevant studies

Inclusion criteria

This scoping review follows the Population, Concept and Context (PCC) framework introduced by the JBI.²⁴ This framework is preferred for systematic reviews that gather evidence for a large-scale intervention.²¹ Table 1 summarises the PCC framework to be applied in the scoping review.

Table 1. Population, Concept and Context for determining the eligibility of the research question.

Criteria	Description
Population	Nursing faculty members are employed in nursing and midwifery schools. Clinical nursing faculty members work in teaching hospitals.
Concept	This review will include all articles and documents that examine the concept of SoTL as it applies to nursing faculty members.
Context	Schools of nursing and midwifery serve as key educational and research centres in the health sciences, contributing to workforce development, knowledge production and the advancement of healthcare quality. These schools function within the Ministry of Health’s policy framework, incorporating theoretical and practical education, conducting research and collaborating with healthcare centres for clinical training. This study will consider the educational context in nursing schools’ training centres.

SoTL, Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.

Types of resources

We will consider a variety of published sources and grey literature, given the limited research on SoTL among nursing faculty, without time constraints. In the present study, we will consider all relevant studies that employ different approaches and methodologies, meeting the inclusion criteria. Additionally, we will include grey literature—such as theoretical articles, editorials and reflective pieces—to ensure a more comprehensive synthesis of existing knowledge.

Exclusion criteria

All duplicate studies and published non-English and non-Persian-language publications will be deleted. Additionally, we will request that the authors of the selected articles, for which the full text was unavailable during the screening process, be contacted through ResearchGate and email. If they do not respond, we will not consider them.

Search strategy

The search strategy follows the JBI three-step search process.²⁴ It was developed in an iterative process, guided by an experienced librarian, and validated using the Electronic Search Strategy Peer Review Checklist.²⁶

As a first step, we searched the PubMed electronic database for studies. We carefully examined the titles and abstracts of the articles in the initial search. Our search strategy used medical and related terms from previous studies.

In the second stage, a search will be conducted across the following electronic databases: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ProQuest, Web of Science, ERIC and grey literature sources. Before this, a pilot search was conducted across the same electronic databases from 2 to 6 May 2025 to refine and test the search strategy. A health sciences librarian was consulted throughout the search strategy to ensure that all relevant studies were included and the topic was fully understood. It is essential to note that the search process will be continually updated to ensure that newly published studies are not missed. The search strategy is presented in online supplemental file 1.

In the third stage, a comprehensive manual search will be conducted using relevant keywords. All the articles identified in this stage will also be thoroughly reviewed.

As a final step, we will review the reference lists of the included studies to identify pertinent studies. The study selection process will be reported using the PRISMA-ScR flow chart. The PRISMA flow diagram is presented in figure 1.

Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram of searched results. The PRISMA flow diagram illustrates the search results in four main stages: identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion. PRISMA, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

Stage 3: Study selection

After the entire search phase, duplicate articles are removed in the first screening stage using EndNote V.X20 software. Two reviewers (HH and NS) will conduct a pilot screening process to assess the inclusion criteria and make necessary adjustments. Two reviewers (HH and NS) will conduct an initial pilot screening of 15 studies based on their titles and abstracts. Each study will be categorised as ‘include’, ‘exclude’ or ‘uncertain’ The reviewers will review any inconsistencies in the eligibility criteria and/or the selection process. If the agreement rate within the team is acceptable, selecting articles can continue. Inter-rater agreement will be assessed using Cohen’s κ coefficient to evaluate consistency between reviewers.²⁷ If the two reviewers cannot agree, a third reviewer (HP) will serve as an arbitrator.²⁶ Researchers can contact the study authors to clarify ambiguities.^{24 26} After the screening phase, articles are selected using a two-stage process. The first stage is screening based on the title and abstract of the studies. Then, two reviewers (HH and NS) will conduct a detailed screening of each full-text article. Depending on the research question, studies will be included or excluded based on the eligibility criteria. Articles that do not meet at least one criterion or whose full text is unavailable will be excluded. Reasons for each article will be recorded. A dispute between the two reviewers regarding whether to include a study will be resolved by mutual agreement or, if necessary, through consultation with the third reviewer (HP).

Consistent with the JBI guidance for scoping reviews, we will not assess the methodological quality of the included studies, as the aim is to map the available evidence rather than provide a synthesis and answer a question.^{24 26 28}

Stage 4: Charting the data

Data charting is essential in the scoping review for analysing included studies. This process involves extracting detailed information from relevant studies, including title, authors, journal, publication date, country of origin, sample size, study objectives, population, study approach, methodology and key findings. The data charting tool is presented in table 2. The information is then organised and categorised to identify key themes and questions. The data collected during the review is managed using Microsoft Excel software. To refine the form of the data graphs and ensure that all relevant information is covered, two independent reviewers (HH and NS) perform primary data extraction on three studies in an iterative process. The extracted data are carefully reviewed to resolve discrepancies between the two reviewers. Where the two independent reviewers disagree, a third reviewer (HP) reviews the studies. If necessary, authors are contacted for additional information.

Table 2. Data charting/extraction tool.

Study details
Title
Author (s)
Journal
Publication date
Country of origin
Sample size
Study objectives
Population
Study approach
Methodology
(Identify dimensions and features associated with SoTL in nursing faculty)

SoTL, Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.

Stage 5: Collection, summarisation and reporting of results

The results obtained are then summarised. We present them in an organised manner, in tables, graphs and a narrative summary report. This report will consist of the following two sections:

Descriptive analysis

The scoping review results will be shown through tables, charts and written descriptions to illustrate how the findings align with the review’s objectives. Data analysis will be conducted between August 2025 and October.

Directed content analysis

In this stage, we focus on the research question and objectives of the study. The results of the qualitative stage are combined by adopting the method of directional content analysis. Content analysis as a research method is a way to describe and explain phenomena. It helps generate replicable and valid inferences from data. The research team ensures that the findings possess the necessary validity, clarity and conciseness and that any ambiguities are resolved to facilitate a better understanding. The limitations of this study are identified. In addition, the gaps in this review topic are identified, guiding us in designing further review studies or future empirical research.

Ethics and dissemination

The study has received formal ethical approval (approval code: IR.IUMS.REC.1402.909) from the Research Ethics Committee of Iran University of Medical Sciences. The results will be disseminated through scientific publications and presentations at relevant conferences.