Ernest L. Boyer (1928–1995) served as the president of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, the United States Commissioner of Education, the chancellor of the State University of New York, and held a wide variety of other faculty and administrative roles at colleges and universities such as the University of California, Santa Barbara, and Upland College. During his time as president of the Carnegie Foundation, Boyer and his colleagues produced a wide array of influential reports on topics ranging from early childhood education to an international study of the professoriate. The original edition of Scholarship Reconsidered was produced during that time.

Boyer was raised in Dayton, Ohio, and earned his undergraduate degree at Greenville College in Greenville, Illinois. Following graduation, he and his wife, Katherine Boyer, moved to Orlando, Florida, where Boyer served as pastor of a Brethren in Christ church. The Boyers then moved to Southern California, where Boyer began his career in education as an administrator at Upland College. After earning his PhD at the University of Southern California, Boyer conducted postdoctoral work at the University of Iowa.

After Boyer lost a three-year battle with lymphoma in 1995, William H. Honan wrote in the New York Times that Boyer had “never tired of his role as an evangelist of education.” Through his later years he remained a sought-after speaker on higher and adult education and the importance of civics education. Boyer also held some 140 honorary degrees and numerous awards, including the Charles Frankel Prize in the Humanities, the Horatio Alger Award, and the Britannica Achievement in Life Award.

Drew Moser (PhD, Indiana State University) is dean of experiential learning and associate professor of higher education at Taylor University. Drew has written extensively on the life and legacy of Ernest Boyer and is coauthoring (with Todd C. Ream) Ernest L. Boyer: A Cultural Biography for SUNY Press. He is also co-director of The Vocation in College Project, a multiphased research project examining vocation formation in the college student experience. Drew writes frequently on his website, HigherEdReconsidered.com, and can be reached via his Twitter account, @drewmoser.

Todd C. Ream (PhD, Pennsylvania State University) is professor of higher education at Taylor University and a research fellow with the Institute for Studies of Religion at Baylor University. Todd has contributed articles, editorials, interviews, and reviews to a wide range of journals, magazines, and newspapers. His books include Christian Faith and Scholarship: An Exploration of Contemporary Developments (with Perry L. Glanzer, Jossey-Bass); Christianity and Moral Identity in Higher Education (with Perry L. Glanzer, Palgrave Macmillan); A Parent's Guide to the Christian College: Supporting Your Child's Mind and Spirit during the College Years (with Timothy W. Herrmann and C. Skip Trudeau, Abilene Christian University Press); and The Idea of a Christian College: A Reexamination for Today's University (with Perry L. Glanzer, Cascade Books). Todd also serves as the book review editor (with Perry L. Glanzer) for Christian Scholar's Review.

John M. Braxton (EdD, Pennsylvania State University) is professor of education in the Higher Education Leadership and Policy Program at Vanderbilt University. His research interests center on the study of college and university faculty members and on the college student experience. He has contributed publications in the form of refereed journals, book chapters, edited books, and books. His books include Professors Behaving Badly: Faculty Misconduct in Graduate Education (Johns Hopkins University Press); Faculty Misconduct in Collegiate Teaching (with Alan E. Bayer, Johns Hopkins University Press); Rethinking College Student Retention (with William R. Doyle and associates, Jossey-Bass); Understanding and Reducing College Student Departure (with Amy S. Hirschy and Shederick A. McClendon, Jossey-Bass); and Institutionalizing a Broader View of Scholarship through Boyer's Four Domains (with William Luckey and Patricia Helland, Jossey-Bass). John currently serves as editor of the Journal of College Student Development and as associate editor (faculty issues) for Higher Education: A Handbook of Theory and Research (Springer). He is also a past president of the Association for the Study of Higher Education.

Ann E. Austin (PhD, University of Michigan) is professor of higher, adult, and lifelong education at Michigan State University, where she held the Mildred B. Erickson Distinguished Chair from 2005 to 2008 and again in 2014. Beginning in January 2015, she is serving as a program director in the Division of Undergraduate Education at the National Science Foundation. Her research concerns faculty careers and professional development, teaching and learning in higher education, the academic workplace, organizational change, and doctoral education. She is a fellow of the American Educational Research Association and past president of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, and a Fulbright Fellow in South Africa (1998). Ann has published extensively, including Educating Integrated Professionals: Theory and Practice on Preparation for the Professoriate (with Carol L. Colbeck and KerryAnn O'Meara, Jossey-Bass); Rethinking Faculty Work: Higher Education's Strategic Imperative (with Judith M. Gappa and Andrea G. Trice, Jossey-Bass); and Paths to the Professoriate: Strategies for Enriching the Preparation of Future Faculty (with Donald H. Wulff, Jossey-Bass).

Andrea L. Beach (PhD, Michigan State University) is associate professor of educational leadership, research, and technology and director of faculty development at Western Michigan University. Her research centers on organizational change in higher education, support of innovation in teaching and learning, faculty learning communities, and faculty development as a change lever. She has been primary investigator and co-primary investigator on NSF-funded grants that have produced several articles on instructional change strategies. She is a coauthor of Creating the Future of Faculty Development: Learning from the Past, Understanding the Present (Jossey-Bass) and is currently lead author on a ten-year follow-up to that work, Faculty Development in the Age of Evidence. She is most recently director of a $3.2 million project funded by the US Department of Education's First in the World program to undertake, document, and measure outcomes of institutional transformation aimed at improving the persistence and academic success of students from low-income families and disadvantaged backgrounds.

Mary Taylor Huber (PhD, University of Pittsburgh) is senior scholar emerita at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Since joining the foundation in 1985, she has written widely on cultures of teaching in higher education, integrative learning, and faculty member rewards and roles. Author of the influential Carnegie Foundation report, Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate (with Charles E. Glassick and Gene I. Maeroff, Jossey-Bass), her recent books include Disciplinary Styles in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (with Sherwyn P. Morreale, Stylus Publishing); Balancing Acts: The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Academic Careers (Stylus Publishing); The Advancement of Learning: Building the Teaching Commons (with Pat Hutchings, Jossey-Bass); and The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Reconsidered: Institutional Integration and Impact (with Pat Hutchings and Anthony Ciccone, Jossey-Bass).

Melissa McDaniels (PhD, Michigan State University) is assistant dean of the graduate school and director of the Teaching Assistant Program at Michigan State University. McDaniels has more than twenty years of experience in graduate student and faculty development, undergraduate and graduate teaching, and learning and organizational change. From 2008 to 2012, McDaniels served as director of Michigan State University's NSF ADVANCE Grant (in the Office of the Provost), where she spearheaded the institution's efforts to diversify the faculty in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Prior to 2008, she held full-time positions at Northeastern University, Boston College, and the National Geographic Society. She has consulted domestically and internationally on topics related to programmatic and learning assessment in higher education, graduate student research capacity development, and graduate student teaching development. The primary focus of McDaniels's research is graduate student, postdoctoral, and faculty professional development.

KerryAnn O'Meara (PhD, University of Maryland) is professor of higher education, co-principal investigator, and co-director of the Advance Program, and an affiliate faculty member in women's studies at the University of Maryland. KerryAnn spent two years working as a research associate at Harvard University's Project on Faculty Appointments and six years on the faculty at the University of Massachusetts Amherst before joining the faculty at the University of Maryland College Park in fall 2007. KerryAnn's scholarship explores organizing practices that support diverse faculty members and diverse forms of scholarship, especially within academic reward systems, faculty development, and in the careers of women and engaged scholars. She has consulted with individual campuses and nationally since 2000 on ways to reform promotion and tenure policies to acknowledge broader definitions of scholarship, including engaged scholarship.

Cynthia A. Wells (PhD, Ohio State University) is assistant professor of higher education, director of the Ernest L. Boyer Center, and program director for the master of arts in higher education program at Messiah College. Cynthia served for several years as a fellow in the Boyer Center and in that capacity provided leadership for the Boyer Partnership Assessment Project—a Fund for the Improvement of Post-secondary Education (FIPSE) funded research project that examined student affairs and academic affairs partnership programs. Her current scholarship focuses on general education and common learning, vocational formation in higher education, and personal narrative pedagogy. Cynthia recently served as a NetVUE Scholar through the Council of Independent College's Network for Vocation in Undergraduate Education (NetVUE).

Any record of the debts we owe must first and foremost begin with Ernest L. Boyer and his family, in particular his wife, Kay, and their four children—Ernie Jr., Beverly, Craig, and Paul. Ernest Boyer's leadership in education contributed mightily to the vision, completion, and eventual success of Scholarship Reconsidered. Those ideas, combined with his charisma and relentless work ethic, resulted in seismic changes in academe. This work does, and always will, belong to him and the colleagues who assisted him with it. Through many subsequent efforts Kay and the Boyer children have sought to honor their husband and father through their own efforts to serve the needs of a wide variety of people in places as different as New Hampshire, California, and Belize.

This edition of Boyer's work would have proved impossible without the wisdom offered by its contributors—Ann Austin, Andrea Beach, Mary Taylor Huber, Melissa McDaniels, KerryAnn O'Meara, and Cynthia Wells. Thank you for your efforts and for your willingness to share your wisdom with a new generation of audience members for Scholarship Reconsidered. In the face of so many declension narratives attacking higher education, we find hope that the academy is led by such bright, committed scholars.

Our colleagues on our own respective campuses continue to also serve as a means of hope. Drew and Todd specifically want to thank colleagues at Taylor University: Skip Trudeau, Tim Herrmann, Scott Gaier, Steve Bedi, Dan Bowell, Bill Ringenberg, Tom Jones, Felicia Case, Steve Morley, Kevin Diller, Jess Fankhauser, Jeff Aupperle, Kelly Yordy, Heather Sandlin, and Emily Bryan. We thank our Taylor colleagues for embodying the best of what Boyer envisioned for academic community. John offers heartfelt thanks to his colleagues in the Association for the Study of Higher Education community along with his colleagues in the Peabody School of Education at Vanderbilt University.

Our families are the ones to whom we likely owe the greatest debt. Scholarship is a consuming endeavor with ill-defined boundaries and, at times, uncertain rewards. Through it all, our families have been unwavering in their support and encouragement.

From Drew: Thanks to my wife, Rebekah, for her love and care throughout this process. To echo Ernest Boyer's words to his spouse, Kay, in High School, “Words fail.” Thanks to my children, Benjamin, Eloisa, Samuel, Stella, and William. As the beginning of your own higher education journeys draws near, with apparent acceleration, I am increasingly aware of the very personal nature of my work. That work in higher education, symbolized in part by this book, is for you and your future. Thank you for your inspiration, your imagination, and your unconditional love for your father.

From Todd: My thanks to my wife, Sara, for the gracious ways she keeps me focused on what is truly important. To our children, Addison and Ashley, who draw closer every day to being the direct recipients of what Boyer envisioned for higher education–when you arrive, I will be filled with the mixed feelings of pride over your accomplishments and sorrow over knowing experiences such as our Saturday conversations over breakfast (for Addison) and sushi (for Ashley) will be reserved for your precious trips home. In between those trips, I hope the best of Boyer's words find their way to educators striving to cultivate your created potential.

From John: Thanks to my wife, Dr. Ellen M. Brier.

We now entrust Boyer's words into your hands—a new generation of readers. We hope that anything we and our fellow contributors offer here only enhances your appreciation of Boyer's ideas. In order to appreciate those ideas, please remember Boyer did not intend for them to be passively accepted but to become part of a lively dialogue that draws together colleagues who are willing to disagree without succumbing to being disagreeable. Please take, hold, read, discuss, and, if needed, discuss again.

Drew Moser
Todd C. Ream
John M. Braxton

In today's seemingly frenetic publishing world, it is rare to find a work that persists beyond its first printing. The year 2015 marks the twenty-fifth anniversary of Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate by Ernest L. Boyer (1928–1995). Boyer, an internationally known educational leader, was best known for his leadership as chancellor of the SUNY system (1971–1977), United States Commissioner of Education (1977–1979), and president of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1979–1995). As his stature as an educational leader became more pronounced, so did his inclination and ability to draw scholars together. This is arguably best evidenced in Scholarship Reconsidered.

Written by Boyer and his Carnegie Foundation colleagues (most notably Eugene Rice), Scholarship Reconsidered has sold more than thirty-five thousand copies since Jossey-Bass took over its publication in 1997. It has also been cited over 6,675 times, according to Google Scholar. Sales and citations aside, it remains a text germane to the conversation about scholarship in the academy. When Scholarship Reconsidered was released in 1990, it sparked conversations that have only grown in strength and complexity to this day. These conversations expanded beyond the traditional research agenda to include four domains: application, discovery, integration, and teaching. In honor of this work's twenty-fifth anniversary, what you hold in your hands is an edition that not only critically engages that legacy but also offers space for speculation about its future. Given the challenges and opportunities facing higher education today, we believe Boyer's work will prove to be even more relevant over the course of the next quarter century.

Determining the veracity of this claim of Boyer's continued relevance is, in many ways, up to you, your colleagues, and the communities you serve. The essays provided offer you a host of ways to think through the legacy of Scholarship Reconsidered and its relevance to your work as higher education scholars, administrators, and policy makers.

The text begins, appropriately, with a foreword from Mary Taylor Huber, entitled “Scholarship Reconsidered's Influence in Later Carnegie Foundation Work.” Huber was with the Carnegie Foundation as a senior scholar for the duration of Boyer's tenure as president. She was a pivotal voice in Carnegie Foundation work and continued the conversation Scholarship Reconsidered launched after Boyer's untimely death in 1995. She is perhaps best positioned to write on the impact of Scholarship Reconsidered on the Carnegie Foundation's later work. Think of Huber's contribution as primary source account of Scholarship Reconsidered's development and impact, providing a Carnegie Foundation perspective to serve as a contextual backdrop for assessing the report's influence over the past twenty-five years. This foreword is followed by five chapters from Boyer scholars that focus this exploration through five important lenses: history, faculty development, institutional type and academic discipline, doctoral and professional education, and promotion and tenure.

The first chapter, “The Origins of Scholarship Reconsidered,” is authored by two of us (Drew Moser and Todd C. Ream). It examines the lesser known influences and experiences that shaped Ernest Boyer's development of Scholarship Reconsidered. It chronicles his early life and career and the context, events, and key individuals that shaped this new domain of scholarship.

The second chapter, authored by Andrea L. Beach, is titled “Boyer's Impact on Faculty Development.” It provides a helpful perspective into the role Scholarship Reconsidered played in the emergence of the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) and faculty development. It also highlights potential trajectories for these movements into the future.

Third, John M. Braxton contributes “The Influence of Scholarship Reconsidered on Institutional Types and Academic Disciplines.” It is a technical examination of how institutions and disciplines have responded to the expansive view of scholarship provided in Scholarship Reconsidered. By analyzing scholarly activity through the delineation of Scholarship Reconsidered's four domains, you can read the extent to which certain types of institutions and certain academic disciplines have embraced this framework.

Ann E. Austin and Melissa McDaniels collaborated on this book's fourth chapter, “Scholarship Reconsidered's Impact on Doctoral and Professional Education.” Austin and McDaniels explore the influence of Scholarship Reconsidered on doctoral education, with specific attention to hallmark professional programs such as law and medicine. They provide important insight into Scholarship Reconsidered's relevance for these modes of learning.

The fifth chapter, written by KerryAnn O'Meara, examines what is often the most contentious conversation surrounding Scholarship Reconsidered: promotion and tenure. “How Scholarship Reconsidered Disrupted the Promotion and Tenure System” argues for the prominent place this work holds in the revision of promotion and tenure guidelines over the past twenty-five years. O'Meara explores how Boyer provided a new language for a new approach to promotion and tenure.

Last, Cynthia A. Wells, director of the Ernest L. Boyer Center at Messiah College, provides an afterword at the end of expanded edition. Appropriately titled “Advancing the Conversation around Scholarship Reconsidered,” Wells conducts the many voices of this edition into a chorus that collectively assesses the relevance of Ernest L. Boyer's views to the present and future of higher education. She also provides an understanding of how the Ernest L. Boyer Center seeks to continue the dialogue Scholarship Reconsidered began in 1990.

Twenty-five years provides many avenues for exploration, too many to consider in one book. Collectively, these seven contributions attempt to examine twenty-five years of influence, and in so doing, refocus our view of Scholarship Reconsidered for many years to come. The text of Scholarship Reconsidered, of course, is included in this book and remains unchanged. However, as with the first twenty-five years, Boyer's work is at its best when it is read and debated by communities of scholars. To support such efforts, we also provided a discussion guide. In the end, however, we leave it up to you to decide how to use this book. Some may read it from cover to cover and then add their own questions to the discussion guide. Some may read only the essays and selections from the text that prove to be most relevant to them at a particular point in time. Others may find its use as a reference work to prove most beneficial. Regardless, we hope you find that engaging this work is of great benefit to your vocation as a scholar. Ernest L. Boyer is perhaps remembered most for being a scholar of scholars. He consistently tried to determine how to best draw scholars together into relationships that would enable them to flourish. It is our hope that this new book cultivates generative, robust conversations among scholars on the very nature of scholarship.

Drew Moser
Todd C. Ream
John M. Braxton

Mary Taylor Huber

We believe the time has come to move beyond the tired old “teaching versus research” debate and give the familiar and honorable term “scholarship” a broader, more capacious meaning, one that brings legitimacy to the full scope of academic work.¹

The publication of Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate in 1990 propelled Ernest L. Boyer, author of the report and president of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, onto another of his many ambitious speaking tours. Keynoting events on campuses and at conferences around the country, Boyer would speak engagingly and persuasively about Scholarship Reconsidered's major theme. As suggested in my epigraph, Boyer believed that the term “scholarship” had come to be too narrowly interpreted in American higher education. Only by broadening its scope beyond basic research could colleges and universities fulfill their wide range of institutional commitments.

The ideas presented in Scholarship Reconsidered have enjoyed a long history as a potent inspiration for reform—but not entirely on their own. What force they've had has been enhanced by the work of many colleagues who have elaborated on their meaning, explored ways to institutionalize them, and provided exemplars of what it looks like to embrace a broader understanding of the scope of scholarly work. Not least among these efforts has been continuing work at the Carnegie Foundation itself—my topic in this foreword. As a member of the teams that Boyer assembled at the Carnegie Foundation to help with Scholarship Reconsidered and its follow-up report Scholarship Assessed,² and as one who continued at Carnegie in President Lee Shulman's Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning,³ I look at Carnegie's role in keeping Scholarship Reconsidered vital and alive.

Let's go back to the late 1980s, when formal work on Scholarship Reconsidered began. Higher education was at a crossroads. After years of explosive growth in the 1950s and 1960s, American colleges and universities were suffering from a decline in public confidence. With the Second World War, the Cold War, and the social programs of the Great Society receding into the past, academic scholarship no longer wore the halo of public service. Yet rewards increasingly flowed to institutions and individuals engaged in ever-more-specialized research, giving little support to developing other kinds of scholarship that would prove increasingly important in the years to come. What about the growing needs of society for expertise in clinical work and community development? What about connecting the results of ever-more-specialized research and giving academic knowledge a wider public address? What about the growing challenge of educating a more diverse set of students in an era of requiring ever-higher levels of academic preparation?

Scholarship Reconsidered argued that higher education's working definition of academic scholarship had become too narrow to effectively address these questions and proposed that the notion of scholarship be broadened to bring “legitimacy to the full scope of academic work.”⁴ As Boyer went on to explain:

Surely scholarship means engaging in original research. But the work of the scholar also means stepping back from one's investigation, looking for connections, building bridges between theory and practice, and communicating one's knowledge effectively to students. Specifically, we conclude that the work of the professoriate might be thought of as having four separate, yet overlapping, functions. These are: the scholarship of discovery; the scholarship of integration; the scholarship of application; and the scholarship of teaching.⁵

Although Scholarship Reconsidered provided only brief sketches of these four functions, the idea of rethinking faculty member roles and rewards in terms of a “broader, more capacious” notion of “scholarship” caught the attention of reformers across higher education. The book's impact was amplified in forums provided over the next decade by the American Association for Higher Education, where leaders from campuses across the country exchanged ideas about campus policies and practices that might encourage and support the “newer” scholarships suggested in Boyer's report. Scholarship Reconsidered had resonance, too, at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, where later work elaborated several of Boyer's themes and took them in new directions—some falling closer and some farther from the proverbial tree.

Boyer himself was aware that there was more work to be done. Audiences at his talks on Scholarship Reconsidered were clearly intrigued by the general idea, but they were also puzzled by (and some were even dismissive of) the particulars. The “scholarship of discovery” posed no real problem if understood as a gloss for “original research.” But what was the justification for using the term “scholarship” to refer to application (now commonly referred to as “engagement”), integration, and, especially, teaching? And if, indeed, some work in these areas could be seen as scholarly, how could its quality be evaluated?

Boyer returned from these trips inspired. And in no time at all, plans took shape for the follow-up report, Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate. We began with a survey of provosts of four-year institutions, which established that colleges and universities were already in the midst of rethinking their systems of faculty member roles and rewards. Recognizing that revising formal guidelines can be a lengthy process, we also asked them to send us copies of reports emerging from their campus deliberations, and these too suggested that a vigorous conversation was underway and that Scholarship Reconsidered was playing a role in shaping that debate.

Drafting the new report began with special attention to identifying standards that could be helpful in assessing the quality of particular examples of academic work. Aided by our study of guidelines used by campuses, scholarly journals, university presses, granting agencies, and the like, we identified a set of six standards that were widely used across disciplines to evaluate basic research, applied work, interdisciplinary projects, and teaching. Together, these standards map a common arc of intellectual endeavor: clear goals, adequate preparation, appropriate methods, significant results, effective presentation, and reflective critique. With appropriate adjustments, we argued, these standards could be applied equally well to the four kinds of scholarship identified in Scholarship Reconsidered.

Boyer was able to present this idea in a speech at the American Association for Higher Education in early 1995 but passed away before Scholarship Assessed could be completed. Charles Glassick, Gene Maeroff, and I continued to work on the book, expanding its scope to address the standards' implications for documenting scholarship and establishing a trustworthy process of evaluation. Published in 1997, many readers found the standards we proposed useful in thinking through what made a piece of work scholarly. Scholarship Assessed added a level of specificity to the broad brushstrokes of Boyer's earlier book, contributing to the vigorous development both in theory and in practice of all the “new” scholarships in the years that followed.

Indeed, when Carnegie's new president, Lee Shulman, took office in fall 1997, one of his major lines of work was to further develop the idea of a scholarship of teaching. Through the auspices of the Cultures of Teaching program (1998–2003) and the Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching, or CASTL (1998–2009), we explored how this work was playing out in the disciplines, in academic careers, and on campuses. CASTL, in particular, supported the development of leadership for the scholarship of teaching and learning through a national fellowship program for individual scholars, and separate programs for disciplinary associations and campuses. Carnegie was also influential in the formation of the International Society for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (ISSoTL), which continues as a major forum for exchange among practitioners and advocates for this work.

Throughout this period, Scholarship Reconsidered and Scholarship Assessed grounded the effort historically. These books had introduced some of the language and ideas that helped map a new path for college and university teaching. They connected that path to those being cleared by participants in the other new scholarships (integration, especially interdisciplinary work; application, now better known as the scholarship of engagement; and even the older one, the scholarship of discovery). It may not be too much to say that they also helped leaders in all these pursuits to keep an eye on the larger prize: how the priorities of the professoriate can be better aligned with the full range of missions of higher education. This was what had inspired Boyer, with the help of those of us privileged to work with him, to write Scholarship Reconsidered in the first place.

To be sure, times have changed. The professoriate is no longer the predominantly tenure-track career that it once was, nor is the professoriate as singlehandedly responsible for fulfilling higher education's mission as once it had been. Yet this does not mean that the capacious vision of scholarship proposed by Scholarship Reconsidered is less relevant. Quite the opposite. Over the last twenty-five years of effort by faculty members, students, and other academic professionals, work that is not strictly speaking (or only) the scholarship of discovery has gained understanding and respect, developed strong communities of practice, and produced extraordinary results.

The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching has moved on to other programs and priorities, as foundations do. But for over twenty years, the Carnegie Foundation remained active in the field, publishing reports, designing programs, developing leadership, and convening participants in the effort to broaden and deepen the range of scholarly academic work. This ensured that Ernest Boyer's, although likely the first, was not the only influential and inspiring voice to urge colleagues to think about the possibilities opened up by thinking more capaciously about scholarship.

Part One

The Impact of Scholarship Reconsidered on Today's Academy