Scholarship is an ongoing process that builds and changes over time. Not everyone agrees on answers, even within a single field, much less different disciplines. Students have to learn a lot about a particular field before they will be considered a part of that discipline and allowed to join the process.
What is nice about this frame is that it brings scholarship to the forefront much more than the Standards did. Teaching students about scholarship and scholarly sources is a key component of information literacy in higher education, especially at the advanced undergraduate and graduate levels. Some librarians don't particularly like the word 'conversation' that was selected to describe scholarship since the word implies something a bit more informal than the scholarly process usually is. By focusing on scholarship as discourse, it downplays the fact that while every academic discipline engages in scholarship, there are big differences in how that scholarship is made and distributed.
In the Standards, scholarship (and actually the word scholarly is the one used) appears only once (Standard One, Performance Indicator 2, Outcome d). There are nods to methods and source types that are specific to particular disciplines, but those are scattered throughout the Standards. During the process of mapping the Standards to the Framework, I actually made the most connections to Scholarship as Conversation from Standard 3, but I was a bit shocked at how small a part scholarship/scholarly sources had in the Standards.
Students will be able to identify characteristics of scholarly sources.
Students will be able to differentiate between various scholarly formats/creation types.
Students will be able to identify characteristics of scholarship in discipline X.
Students will be able to distinguish between scholarly and non-scholarly (popular) sources.
Students will be able to match citations with the represented format.
Students will employ correct citation usage in style X.
Students will be able to explain the characteristics of scholarly works.
Students will be able to discuss the potential venues for scholarship available within discipline X.
Students will be able to give examples of how scholarly discourse occurs in discipline X.
Students will be able to identify journals (or publishers) important to discipline X.
Students will be able to describe research methods that are commonly used in discipline X. Also listed under Research as Inquiry.
Students will be able to describe how the conversation around a particular topic have changed over time within a discipline (or across multiple disciplines).
A lot of this frame is about specific disciplinary knowledge that isn't introduced to students until upper-level undergraduate classes or even graduate school (e.g., critiquing scholarly sources, identifying the contribution of a particular scholarly source, changes in scholarship over time). For lower-level classes where professors may just want students to find a few scholarly sources, I would suggest looking at the learning outcomes for Information Creation as a Process or even Authority is Constructed and Contextual.
Students will be able to describe potential scholarly sources that might be available (in terms of disciplines, types of research, and formats/delivery methods).
Students will be able to describe aspects of the scholarly discussion(s) related to their research topic.
Students will be able to evaluate/critique specific scholarly works (based on knowledge of methods, standard practices, theories, and types of format/creation processes and authority that are valued in discipline X).
Students will be able to integrate appropriate scholarly sources into their assignment.
Students will be able to identify the contributions of specific scholarly works to the scholarly discourse surrounding their topic.
Students will be able to connect their research topic/question to the larger scholarly conversation.
Students will be able to follow the conventions of discipline X and citation style X in in paper format, citations, and bibliography.