14 Loops, badges, and remixes: How CTLs support documenting scholarly teaching

Introduction

College instructors today face mounting pressure to document and demonstrate teaching excellence, but too often they confront ambiguous requirements disconnected from teaching values. However, what if the future of scholarly teaching depended on making instructors feel visible, validated, and valued in how their teaching is documented and shared? In the current climate, where burnout and disconnection run high, instructors need more than compliance checklists, they need structures of support that affirm their professional identity and invite them into a community of inquiry to support scholarly teaching.

This chapter is for instructors navigating documenting teaching excellence and Centers for Teaching and Learning (CTLs) looking to build autonomy-supportive systems. As the founding director of a CTL, I’ve spent over a decade developing systems that help instructors thrive through the ambiguity of the teaching documentation process, not only supporting their professional learning journey, but also helping them to document along the way. Readers will be introduced to a practical model known as the Architecture of Engagement (AoE), evidence-based scholarly teaching loops (engage-implement-contribute), and other practical approaches (digital badges) to make the work of teaching visible, valued, and agentic. This AoE model helps instructors move beyond transactional workshop attendance into a holistic journey of professional growth. By weaving this framework with digital badges and stackable microcredentials, CTLs can make visible the intentional work of teaching by empowering instructors to articulate their pedagogical decisions, and curate meaningful narratives of their professional development over time. In this chapter, I argue that CTLs are uniquely positioned to guide and remix this critical work of supporting instructors as reflective professionals and scholarly teachers while reimagining what teaching excellence can look like in a humanized AI-enhanced future.

Foundational Theories Supporting Scholarly Teaching Loops

CTLs play a crucial role in creating an environment and culture that supports and motivates instructors to engage in the work of scholarly teaching. One foundational theory for structuring a motivational environment of support is self-determination theory (SDT), which emphasizes the psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness as drivers of intrinsic motivation (Deci & Ryan, 2014). Research indicates that instructors are more likely to invest in scholarly teaching when they feel empowered to make pedagogical choices (autonomy), gain confidence in their teaching expertise and skills (competence), and engage in a community of practice that values teaching as scholarly work (relatedness) (Jaramillo-Baquerizo, et al., 2021; Smith & Wyness, 2024).

In parallel, the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework offers a valuable lens for understanding how teaching development happens through social presence, teaching presence, and cognitive presence (Vaughan & Garrison, 2006). When instructors experience social presence, they feel a sense of connection, care, and mutual investment—fostering relatedness, one of the core psychological needs in SDT (Deci & Ryan, 2014). Teaching presence supports autonomy, as instructors take ownership in co-creating knowledge, designing learning spaces, and mentoring peers through collaborative facilitation. Meanwhile, cognitive presence invites instructors into reflective meaning-making and evidence-informed dialogue, supporting their sense of competence as scholarly teachers. As shown in Table 1, the scholarly teaching loops in an architecture of engagement draw conceptual alignment from SDT and CoI, and aligns with Kreber’s (2002) scholarly teaching taxonomy including teaching expertise, teaching excellence, and the scholarship of teaching and learning.

Table 1
Alignment of Scholarly Teaching Loops with Motivation, Presence, and Professional Growth

Architecture of Engagement	Engage Loop	Implement Loop	Contribute Loop
Motivation Deci & Ryan (1987) Self-Determination Theory	Competence	Autonomy	Relatedness
Presence Vaughan & Garrison (2006)  Community of Inquiry Framework	Cognitive Presence	Teaching Presence	Social Presence
Professional Growth Kreber (2002) Teaching Taxonomies	Teaching Expertise	Teaching Excellence	Scholarship of Teaching and Learning

Table 1 shows important parallels between Kreber’s (2002) taxonomies, Deci and Ryan’s SDT (1987), and Vaughan and Garrison’s (2006) CoI framework. Specifically, teaching expertise reflects competence and cognitive presence, as instructors refine their pedagogical approaches through workshop learning, reflection, and faculty learning communities or learning circles. Teaching excellence connects with autonomy and teaching presence, as instructors identify which instructional approaches fit best for their context and make intentional choices that align with their values and students’ needs. The scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) fosters relatedness and social presence for instructors, as they engage in scholarly conversations, share their work through the CTL, and contribute to the broader SoTL community. When institutions support instructors through these three scholarly teaching loops, they create an environment where instructors are not just engaging in professional development, but are intrinsically motivated to engage in a continuous, autonomy-supported process of professional growth.

Instructors are more likely to engage in professional development and scholarly teaching when they feel visible, validated, and valued, as these conditions reinforce their psychological needs and sense of agency, and they are motivated not only by improving their own practice but also by a desire to foster equity and support meaningful learning for all students (Bryson, Masland, & Colby, 2020; Neuhaus, 2022). Unfortunately, the ever-increasing demands on instructors’ time has resulted in large-scale burnout. Research has shown that one way to help mitigate instructor burnout and enhance job satisfaction is by aligning institutional expectations and CTL supports with instructors’ motivations, values, and needs in ways that support both instructor and student success (Dewey, Pautz, & Diede, 2024; Feldman & Paulsen, 1999). To address these needs, CTLs must function as a catalyst for institutional change, fostering environments where professional development is not an isolated event but an ongoing iterative process that provides relevant support through structures like digital badges and microcredentials.

Scholarly Teaching as a Remix

Scholarly teaching in the digital age is less about invention from scratch and more like a remix. It’s a thoughtful blend of theory, context, and student voice, sampled and reassembled to meet the moment. Just like a DJ draws from different tracks and weaves them together to craft something new, today’s instructors remix evidence-based strategies, digital tools, and classroom experience to create learning that resonates with students. ​In the documentary, Everything is a Remix, Ferguson (2023) explores artificial intelligence (AI), music, video games, and other forms of digital media by arguing that creativity stems from three fundamental actions: copying, transforming, and combining. Ferguson argues that no creation is entirely original, and instead, new ideas are built upon existing ones, making every creative work a remix. By copying, creators learn from the best of existing works, laying the foundation for future innovation. Through transforming, they modify and adapt these works, adding personal touches or insights learned along the way. Finally, by combining different elements, they synthesize new creations that are greater than the sum of their parts. Ferguson claims that all creative endeavors are, in essence, remixes of prior ideas. Teaching is no exception.

Instructors don’t step into the classroom as blank slates or siloed inventors. Instead, they build on what works: they copy. Copying proven evidence-based techniques, such as Think-Pair-Share or retrieval practice, can be copied directly from the research and implemented into classroom practice. However, teaching isn’t a one-size-fits-all endeavor, so by necessity instructors often transform those techniques, tweaking the structure of a peer discussion, adjusting an active learning activity, or modifying an assessment to fit the needs of their students and the learning objectives of their course. And then there’s the real magic in remixing: combining strategies. Maybe an instructor takes a flipped classroom approach and layers in pauses for retrieval-based learning, or blends case-based discussions with reflective writing exercises to deepen student engagement. This remixing of approaches is at the heart of scholarly teaching, highlighting how teaching excellence is an ongoing remix of experimenting, iterating, and refining.

Instructors know that scholarly teaching is more like tending a garden than flipping a switch. It requires patience, ongoing care, and a willingness to remix methods season after season based on what grows, what withers, and what insights are found in the process. Figure 1 captures this nonlinear, ongoing process of scholarly teaching. The open arrows around each loop illustrate multiple entry points and show how instructors move through the scholarly teaching loops of engage, implement, and contribute: not in a straight line, but in a dynamic, flexible process. This allows instructors to identify relevant pathways that align with their professional learning goals. Each loop in the cycle connects to the others: attending a workshop (engage), trying a new teaching technique and analyzing its impact (implement), or sharing insights with the community (contribute). At every stage, this model emphasizes collaboration among a broader network of stakeholders, including students, instructors, librarians, and instructional designers.

Figure 1

Scholarly Teaching Loops in an Architecture of Engagement

A scholarly teacher embraces teaching as an iterative process of inquiry, where small, intentional changes can lead to long-term impacts on student learning. Lang (2021) describes this remixing approach to teaching as small teaching whereby instructors engage in a form of intentional tinkering to make small, incremental, research-informed adjustments to their teaching rather than overhauling their entire teaching approach all at once. This implementation aligns with the principles of scholarly teaching, which emphasizes experimentation, reflection, and ongoing refinement. Many scholarly teachers engage in small teaching innovations, however, without formal or structured institutional support, this reflective practice can feel like an isolated and unrecognized effort toward student success and teaching excellence. This is where CTLs serve as essential partners, providing instructors with the resources, frameworks, and recognition mechanisms to transform tinkering into intentional scholarly teaching. Most notably, digital badges can serve as powerful guideposts within an architecture of engagement to document the journey of scholarly teaching.

I designed the architecture of engagement and the scholarly teaching loops as a structure to provide relevant, flexible pathways for professional development. Whether new to teaching or seasoned SoTL scholars, instructors are guided by these loops through learning communities, peer mentoring, co-created knowledge, and shared ownership of pedagogical innovation. Just as learning communities are a high-impact practice for our students, learning communities are also the heartbeat of professional development for instructors. And when we build a system that welcomes everyone, including instructors, librarians, designers, developers, and students-as-partners, we don’t just support teaching and learning, we transform it together. This structured approach ensures that professional development is not only ongoing and reflective, but also includes instructional design support from the institution and provides embedded mechanisms, like digital badges, to document teaching excellence (Brazill, Thurston & Munday, 2025; Thurston & Schneider, 2019). Each of the three scholarly teaching loops are designed to provide opportunities for different aspects of the teaching excellence journey, and instructors can utilize these loops to frame their documentation.

In the engage loop, instructors build professional learning intentionally with the understanding that true teaching expertise emerges through consistent reflection, remixing strategies, and iterative adaptation rather than by chance or instinct alone. The implement loop challenges instructors to taking action by testing and refining evidence-based strategies directly in their classrooms through thoughtful experimentation and adjustment, all the while recognizing teaching excellence as a process of continuous improvement. Lastly, the contribute loop encourages instructors to openly share their journeys—the successes, setbacks, and scholarly remixes—in ways Felten (2013) describes as “appropriately public,” thereby strengthening the teaching community. Together, these loops provide a clear, meaningful framework for documenting the iterative journey of scholarly teaching, helping instructors make their growth visible, validated, and valued.

Be the human in the loop: Leveraging AI to remix

In an era where algorithms can draft essays, generate quiz questions, and synthesize feedback in seconds, the true power of teaching lies in what only we can provide: empathy, presence, and care. As Pacansky-Brock (2020) reminds us, humanizing learning means crafting communities where students feel seen, supported, and invited into vulnerability and trust. AI tools, when framed through student choice and critical inquiry, can strengthen autonomy and connection among students. The key, as Mollick (2024) reminds us, is to be the human in the loop, because AI is not our replacement, it is our coworker, coach, and collaborator. When we lean into this partnership, we can automate some of the routine while investing more deeply in the human side of teaching: listening to student voices, fostering curiosity, and adapting learning to real-time relevant needs.

For example, in an undergraduate course, Babits (2024) invited students to use ChatGPT to makeup missed assignments, but with a twist: they had to interrogate its outputs, critique citations, and reflect on any hallucinations. This flexible assignment not only supported diverse learning paths but also honed students’ critical-evaluation skills and kept them centered as active collaborators. By foregrounding open-ended reflection and centering student voice, Babits demonstrated how instructors can intentionally implement AI to deepen meaningful learning while remaining unmistakably human.

In other words, teaching is less about content delivery and more focused on human connection and curiosity. AI can draft a rubric, generate quiz questions, or even summarize feedback, but it can’t build trust and cultivate belonging with others. The future isn’t AI or humans, instead it’s a thoughtful remix where AI handles the heavy lifting of specific tasks, and instructors act as the human in the loop by bringing content knowledge, human experience, and teaching expertise to collaborating with AI. With thoughtful guidance from CTLs, instructors can harness AI to enhance course design, personalize learning for students, and expand what’s possible in the classroom, all while keeping human connection at the core. CTLs can scaffold this “human-in-the-loop” approach by embedding AI digital badges and microcredentials in ways that foreground teaching presence and humanized learning experiences.

Digital Badge Remix for Documentation

Digital badges offer a flexible yet structured way to document the iterative, reflective, and often chaotic journey of scholarly teaching. Just as instructors remix teaching practices by engaging, implementing, and contributing within the architecture of engagement, digital badges serve as guideposts or visible markers that capture learning, experimentation, and community contributions over time. Each badge reflects a meaningful step in the process: building pedagogical knowledge, applying it in context and assessing its impact, and sharing insights with others. In this way, digital badges transform the invisible labor of teaching into verifiable, valued evidence of professional growth. When CTLs thoughtfully integrate badging systems into autonomy-supportive professional learning pathways, they don’t just recognize participation, they highlight reflection, remixing, and scholarly contribution. Badges become the artifacts of a teaching journey grounded in curiosity, purpose, and care. In other words, they are how we make visible the work of being the human in the loop.

CTLs utilize the learning loop to create flexible, just-in-time opportunities for instructors to pursue and earn microcredentials or digital badge clusters on emerging and relevant topics (Yilmaz, et al., 2022). As instructors progress in their teaching excellence journey, they can remix their badges by organizing them thematically, chronologically, or around specific teaching competencies to craft a narrative that highlights their growth, values, and impact over time. Whether showcasing innovation in a single course, documenting long-term engagement across the engage–implement–contribute scholarly teaching cycle, or aligning achievements with institutional goals, instructors can remix badges to turn a collection into a cohesive story of reflective, intentional, and scholarly teaching. The key is to determine what story you want to tell. Your digital badge remix should reflect the journey you’re most proud of and that aligns with the teaching values and identity you want to make visible.

Teaching Documentation Process Questions

CTLs play a key role in supporting this journey through guided consultations, customized digital badging pathways, and reflective conversations. Whether you’re pursuing inclusive pedagogy, redesigning a course, or contributing to the scholarship of teaching and learning, CTLs help you align your badge choices with your core teaching values and goals, making your professional learning purposeful and personally meaningful. The following process questions are designed to help you curate digital badges and your scholarly teaching activities as more than just a checklist of workshops attended, but a thoughtful remix portraying your teaching values and evidence of how you support student learning into a cohesive story. As you review these process questions, consider how your teaching excellence documentation can be remixed to be more visible, validated, and valued.

Making Teaching Visible. Clarify and develop inclusive value systems that make visible the work of supporting all learners:

• Which badges or scholarly activities best showcase my commitment to inclusive and student-centered teaching?
• Which teaching activities (emotional presence, accessibility design, community care) can I make more visible through my documentation?
• How do my digital badges reflect a journey of growth and transformation (not just my achievements)?
• What elements of my teaching philosophy show up most clearly in the badges I chose to pursue?

CTL tip: Amplify autonomy by choosing badges that resonate with your own identity, goals, and values.

Feeling Validated in Teaching. Recognize the lived experiences and ways of knowing are valid and valued in your professional learning journey.

• How have my lived experiences shaped my approach to teaching and my own professional learning?
• How do my achievements reflect growth in a teaching approach, inclusive practice, or scholarly engagement?
• How have I challenged myself as a scholarly teacher, and how did I overcome uncertainty?
• What stories do my badges tell about my ability to create change in my classroom or community?

CTL tip: Strengthen your sense of competence through tangible evidence of success and celebrating progress.

Feeling Valued in the Teaching Community. Build rapport and connection by trusting teachers and learners both cognitively and relationally in the community.

• What contributions have I made to the teaching community, and how are they recognized through badges or scholarly artifacts?
• How have I celebrated my teaching milestones, and what feedback or affirmation has been most meaningful?
• How do my badges and scholarly teaching choices create bridges between my teaching practice and my colleagues or institutional mission?
• In what ways does my teaching documentation build a sense of belonging for myself and for those I support?

CTL tip: Deepen relatedness by anchoring your growth in relationships, collaboration, and shared success.

Sample Teaching Documentation Remixes

After engaging with the reflective process questions, the remix that best showcases each instructor’s unique narrative should be determined. In each example provided, a core theme is centered, and corresponding digital badges are paired with that theme to highlight pivotal moments in the teaching journey for a relevant scholarly teaching remix.

Thematic Remix. Badges should be organized around pedagogical themes that are aligned with teaching values and institutional priorities such as: inclusion, assessment, active learning, generative AI, or humanized learning. Through this remix, an identity as a values-driven instructor is affirmed, and the idea that excellent teaching is rooted in curiosity, care, and clarity of purpose is reinforced. Earlier discussions on designing autonomy-supportive learning spaces are connected, in which visibility and value are felt by instructors, and space is provided to highlight emerging themes such as the responsible use of AI.

Sample badges: Culturally Responsive Pedagogy, Transparent Assignment Design, UDL Foundations, Humanizing with AI Workshop, Learning Circle or Faculty Learning Community

Chronological Remix. Badges should be arranged using a timeline format so that teaching evolution can be traced over semesters or academic years. Through this remix, the importance of ongoing scholarly teaching is underscored, as is the broader concept that sustained professional development can be illustrated by digital badges over time. It is considered an excellent option for tenure and promotion narratives, as sustained, intentional development is demonstrated and a commitment to continuous inquiry is reflected.Sample Badges: Teaching During Disruption, Midterm Feedback Cycle, Learning Circle Facilitator, AI in the Classroom, SoTL Writing Retreat

Course-Based Remix. Badges should be mapped to specific course redesign efforts or instructional innovations. Through this remix strategy, the engage–implement–contribute scholarly teaching loops are built upon, and the direct impact of professional learning on student success is demonstrated. It is highlighted how theory is transformed into practice, reflecting the iterative “small teaching” approach.

Sample Badges: Course Redesign Institute, Inquiry-Based Learning in Gen Ed, Using Pauses for Active Learning Retrieval Practice, Small Teaching Learning Circle

Engage-Implement-Contribute Remix. Badges should be framed through the scholarly teaching loops: what was learned (engage), what was applied (implement), and what was shared (contribute). Through this remix, the scholarly teaching model introduced in this chapter is directly supported, and the reflective, remixable cycle of professional development is mirrored. This approach tells a holistic story of inquiry, action, and community contribution.

Sample Badges:

• Engage- Workshop on TILT Framework, Learning Circle: AI & Pedagogy
• Implement- Peer Evaluation, Mid-Semester Student Reflections
• Contribute- Faculty Showcase Presenter, SoTL Publication

UDL and Inclusive Design Remix. Principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL), inclusive pedagogy, and Indigenous ways of knowing are centered by this remix, and the badge collection is aligned with efforts to design for equity, flexibility, and belonging. The chapter’s call to humanize learning, recognize multiple ways of knowing, and support student agency through diverse instructional strategies is echoed. The values of relationality, care, and cultural responsiveness are affirmed by this remix as core elements of teaching excellence.

Sample Badges: UDL Certificate, Indigenous Pedagogy Learning Series, Inclusive Syllabus Design, Place-Based Education Workshop, Decolonizing Course Content

Institutional Alignment Remix. Badges should be aligned with the institution’s teaching effectiveness frameworks, mission statements, or strategic goals for student success. This remix is made to resonate with Stommel’s (2020) argument in The Urgency of Teachers that dehumanizing systems must be resisted, and meaningful, values-driven teaching must instead be centered. When the teaching documentation remix is connected to larger institutional goals, a story is told that is personally reflective and demonstrates the impact on students’ access, equity, and belonging within institutional constructs.

Sample Badges: Student Belonging and Connections, Critical Pedagogy Certificate, General Education Course Redesign, Course Accessibility & Usability

Conclusion

The future of scholarly teaching isn’t about checking boxes but about cultivating environments where instructors feel seen, supported, and empowered to grow. CTLs continue to serve as hubs of relational innovation, guiding instructors through the scholarly teaching loops with care, clarity, and community. By remixing digital badges to chart individual growth over time, experimenting with human-centered AI, and contributing to the broader SoTL conversation, instructors don’t merely navigate the future of education—they shape it. When institutions prioritize autonomy-supportive structures, validate lived experience, and make space for curiosity and collaboration, the story of teaching evolves—one loop, one badge, one connection at a time. As CTL leaders and instructors, let us commit today to human-centered documentation so that the future of scholarly teaching and documenting teaching excellence is visible, valued, and ours to define.

 

References

Babits, C. (2025). Where are the citations? ChatGPT discussions in the History of Sexuality. Teaching History: A Journal of Methods, 49(1), 5-9. https://doi.org/10.33043/a2az53dz2

Brazill, S., Thurston, T. N., & Munday, P. (2025). Leadership in higher education instructional design. In S. Wa-Mbaleka, B. Chen, G. Petre, & A. deNoyelles (Eds.), The Sage handbook of higher education instructional design (pp. 229-243). SAGE Publications.

Bryson, B. S., Masland, L., & Colby, S. (2020). Strategic faculty development: Fostering buy-in for inclusive excellence in teaching. The Journal of Faculty Development, 34(3), 107-116.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2014). The importance of universal psychological needs for understanding motivation in the workplace. In M. Gagné (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of work engagement, motivation, and self-determination theory (pp. 13-32). Oxford University Press.

Dewey, J., Pautz, M. C., & Diede, M. K. (2024). How do we address faculty burnout? Start by exploring faculty motivation. Innovative Higher Education, 49(3), 521-539. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-023-09685-2

Felten, P. (2013). Principles of good practice in SoTL. Teaching and Learning Inquiry, 1(1), 121-125. https://doi.org/10.2979/teachlearninqu.1.1.121

Jaramillo-Baquerizo, C., Valcke, M., Vanderlinde, R., & Aelterman, N. (2021). Exploring the consideration of university teachers’ basic psychological needs in the design of professional development initiatives. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 43(3), 315-329. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2020.1812021

Kirby Ferguson. (2023, Mar 21). Everything is a remix [Video]. YouTube https://youtu.be/X9RYuvPCQUA?si=8F2DvFwKayBD2O4uL

Kreber, C. (2002). Teaching excellence, teaching expertise, and the scholarship of teaching. Innovative Higher Education, 27(1), 5-23.

Lang, J. M. (2021). Small teaching: Everyday lessons from the science of learning. Wiley.

Morris, S. M., & Stommel, J. (2020). Critical digital pedagogy: A definition. In S. M. Morris & J. Stommel (Eds.), An urgency of teachers: The work of critical digital pedagogy. Hybrid Pedagogy. https://pressbooks.pub/criticaldigitalpedagogy/chapter/chapter-1/

Neuhaus, J. (Ed.). (2022). Picture a professor: Interrupting biases about faculty and increasing student learning. West Virginia University Press.

Potter, M. K., & Kustra, E. D. (2011). The relationship between scholarly teaching and SoTL: Models, distinctions, and clarifications. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 5(1), 23.

Smith, B., & Wyness, L. (2024). What makes professional teacher development in universities effective? Lessons from an international systematised review. Professional Development in Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2024.2386666

Thurston, T. N., & Schneider, K. (2019). Structuring personalized faculty development programming with autonomy-support and microcredentials. In A. Elçi, L. Beith, & A. Elçi (Eds.), Handbook of research on faculty development for digital teaching and learning (pp. 140-159). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Vaughan, N., & Garrison, D. R. (2006). How blended learning can support a faculty development community of inquiry. Internet and Higher Education, 9(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2005.11.003

Wright, M. C. (2023). Centers for teaching and learning: The new landscape in higher education. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Yilmaz, Y., Papanagnou, D., Fornari, A., & Chan, T. M. (2022). The learning loop: Conceptualizing just-in-time faculty development. AEM Education and Training, 6, e10722. https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10722