June 19…Ed. Research and the Question of Quality
Chapters 8 and 9 together raise a lot of interesting
questions about just how objective we can hope to be with social
science/educational research and, consequently, about the potential worth or
these sorts of inquiry. He also discusses action research as a potential way to
do work that matters…discuss.
Michael Here:
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 8, Pring mentions the need for opening up research to public scrutiny, now this may invalidate some of the research claims within specific studies, but it has the possibility to be incredibly powerful. If research were more readily readable to the general public there would be more excitement and attention paid to educational research. Also, if educational researchers did a better job of informing the populace then politicians couldn’t confuse them with their nonsensical rhetoric.
One of the best practices I did while a teacher was incorporating an Action Research project into my classroom. It was incredibly informative and changed the way in which I viewed my role as a teacher. There should be more research which works alongside teachers to improve their practices. Unfortunately, it is not seen as an legitimate research method, but it should.
Shannon
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter 8, Pring introduces teachers as researchers to help solve problems of objectivity with outside researchers in education. At the same time, he also raises several questions around the possibility for this to be theoretical research and moves into a discussion of action research, which is focused instead on improving practice. Perhaps I’m too bound by my own perspective, but I think Pring’s most important point is at the end of the chapter: “But there is a middle way. No situation is unique in every respect. Educational practices are conducted or engaged in within societies of shared values and understandings. There are national, indeed global debates, which create common understandings. And there are generalizations about how people are motivated to learn, however tentative these must be and in need of testing the circumstances of particular classrooms.”
Again, I think trying to draw a line around a type of research that is most objective or “right” is rather foolhardy. As Pring mentions, it leads us toward unnecessary false dualisms: couldn’t a comparison of observer and teacher reports also be telling research?
I agree with you. I think this whole idea of ER vs. er makes it seem like one is better than the other. They are different and there is certain a world for both. Few people know it but there is a whole Journal of Teacher Action Research. http://www.practicalteacherresearch.com/ While it might not be a preferred research philosophy for University Professors, it cannot be discounted. Teachers (not all, just as not all Professors are quality) have an uncanny ability to see things that people who do not thrive or work in that environment cannot understand or interpret particularly the culture and social context. Pring says that action research is NOT aimed to produce new knowledge but to improve practice. He goes on to say that the conclusion is not a set of propositions but a practice or set of transactions or activities which is not true or false but better or worse. If you are a practitioner, or were one for more than five years, think of where you went for ideas. It was to other practitioners. I would go out on a limb and say that the majority of practitioners don't go to a college campus and research articles, and many may not have access. With all of that said, University professors in an ivory tower must be able to translate that research into something practitioners can understand and assist Action Researchers with the Objectivity. I went to a conference workshop yesterday where the Professor did a BEAUTIFUL job of breaking down theoretical frameworks and paradigms so that people could understand Ethics, Leadership and Collaboration. If teachers are looking for strategies, do we really want them spending their time reading volumes, or do we want them spending their time educating children. In universities, research is valued over service, but in K12, service is valued over research. I still believe there is space for them both.
DeleteAction research allows teachers to contribute towards the creation of knowledge. It also allows teachers to have a say in what they do instead of feeling like decisions are made at a level far removed from the classroom. Pring makes a good point in that since teachers are the ones who are the ones doing the teaching and applying the curriculum, they are in the best position to form reflexive insights on what works and what doesn't. I do wonder, with everything else that a teacher has on his/her plate, how would one find time to conduct such research? Would this be part of their everyday responsibilities as a teacher? Would this be something the teacher would do after hours? I can see how some teachers may want to engage in action research but don't have the time to do so. Nonetheless, encouraging action research among teachers also leads to a kind of democratic participation in education research.
ReplyDeleteI also liked Pring's summary of what makes quality research in chapter 9. I think that there is still an obsession (at least in higher education) with quantitative research, with the assumption that research conducted with empirical data is irrefutable and therefore good quality. From a practical perspective, practitioners also found it easier to rely on quantitative research to advance their own agendas. However, I don’t think that it is a one size fits all thing. Quality research should be more than just research using quantitative means.
Josh here:
ReplyDeleteMy experience with action research was through an educational camp I used to run at the Smithsonian for teens with intellectual and developmental disabilities. I was the lead teacher for about five years, so I partnered with the Hirshhorn museum and their ArtLab+, as well as the Smithsonian digital learning team. Over the years, we tried to improve aspects of the process, the curriculum, the partnership with other museums, etc. To help with this, and as part of the grant reporting, we brought in external evaluators for three of the programs--an action researcher out of the UK, a qualitative researcher from Brazil, and a more methodologically traditional self-determination specialist from a Big 10 university for the third. My personal experience was that the action researcher, because she was embedded in our group and understood the nuances of the students, the content, the volunteers, and all of that rich context, was able to give much more insightful results. The qualitative researcher also had some interesting findings and uncovered a few things we missed through some activity based assessments that used different modalities to capture participant perspective. The traditional methodologist used a very well-established scale that is widely used in self-determination research and was almost embarrassed at how little useful data she collected. This being a unique and anecdotal experience, I don't pretend that it serves as an overall ranking of useful methodology, but at the same time, it serves as a lesson to me that objectivity doesn't always live up to its billing.
Josh again...
DeleteThere's also an excellent Norwegian comedy that shows what a fool's errand pure objectivity is in social science research. It's called "Kitchen Stories," and it's about Swedish IKEA engineers who travel to rural Norway to study the behavior of bachelor fishermen without formally interacting with them. Both hilarious and insightful...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-NquE1ttjs
Interesting Josh.... I may have to search for this whole movie. All they did was eat chocolates in this clip....or is that the point?! ha!
DeleteHannah Sions
ReplyDeletePring advocates action research in educators because of the access that we have as we are within the practice, versus observing it from the outside. But of course, as teachers, we are in a power position (experimenter effects, anyone?) and must always be considerate of the effect that we have on the data and nature of the research. I believe that our experience as educators fuels the desire to find solutions, but it also can cloud our perspectives. Of course, the challenge is to be objective as possible in these situations. This ties into Pring's guidelines on what makes an effective researcher.
Melissa Cuba
ReplyDeletePring describes a need for teachers as action researchers given their unique perspective and role, which gives them the opportunity to question their practice and the agenda that constrains it. Action research also contributes to the production of knowledge, one that is to serve a community and be open to public scrutiny. Sadly action research doesn’t happen as often as we would like given constraints and contextual factors.
I first learned about action research through my M.Ed. because it was required as part of the program. My project was on using visual cues to support reading comprehension, and it was based on an observed need in a reading remediation class. I worked on this project with two other ESOL teachers because they had similar questions, but we designed our own visual aids and assessments for our lessons yet collaborated on ideas and grading. I was able to use a researcher lens to think about my practice as a teacher and also look at the reading program (READ 180) with a critical lens.
Virginia here:
ReplyDeleteFor whatever reason my master’s program did not require us to complete an action research project, but the more I learn about it the more I am a proponent for it. Teachers are constantly engaged in some form of action research whether they know it or not. They adjust their teaching methods, the way they transition, the length/timing of activities, their tone of voice, etc. to find out what works best in their classroom. It makes sense that knowledge production of educational practice originates in the classroom with teachers. I like the quote Shannon included above, because it states that even though situations are unique there are underlying common characteristics.
When I taught elementary school, the teachers I worked with shared strategies and ideas that worked in our individual classrooms in hopes they would also work in someone else’s. We strove for better educational practices in hopes they would help us reach the ultimate goal in teaching – helping our students succeed. There are many critiques of action research, and I don’t think they are going to go away any time soon. For example, teachers embedded in action research can be a problem for objectivity. Perhaps this is when university professors and researchers should take part in the process to step in or train a team of teachers with the critical judgment piece/active reflection by the public for which Pring advocates. Regardless of that criticism, action research helps teachers do what matters; thus, all teachers should be researchers in their own classrooms. The knowledge teachers learn from conducting their own action research projects far outweighs the knowledge produced in journals they cannot even get their hands on to read.
It was interesting reading some of the responses from the past teachers on her (which almost all of you are). It was interesting seeing Cuba's post about the requirement of doing action research for her masters and then Virginia's response saying she was not required but wish that she had been. As Pring states, theorizing about practice first, allows in discussion amongst colleagues to share problems with each other and build a body of professional knowledge and build curriculum off of other people's ideas (p.151).
ReplyDeleteThis moves to what Pring describes as action research. In my own field and (discipline) of collegiate athletics this would be for administrators and coaches to "examine the implementation of a curriculum (I thought of coaching philosophy), involves, therefore, a critique of the values which are intrinsic to the practice. When coaches and teachers attend professional conferences and share their ideas, it makes me think they are taking part in this action research. I think more conferences could be set-up in this manner because a lot from my experience allow on a few experts in the field to share their knowledge (lesson plans/coaching philosophies and strategies).
Action research seems logical. The idea of opening research to more public scrutiny (particularly the K-12 audience) would, I believe, be helpful in teaching because it would give opportunity to have discussion with parents and administrators about perception and experience while the research is taking place. It may also engage the public more, which would be advantageous for students. I agree with Michael in that I don’t know how well teachers would be able to implement reliable results given the likely internal and external threats associated with projects in one’s own classroom. I would consider another concern with action research is the teacher’s knowledge of research in general. I have no classroom experience and am unfamiliar with teaching research methodology in the school of education in preparing teachers; from a practitioner perspective, I know that my knowledge of research has grown enormously since studying at the doctoral level and I am wondering whether classroom teachers with general training are equipped with the ability? I don’t know.
ReplyDeleteMorgan DeBusk-Lane
ReplyDeleteI get where Pring is coming from, at least the disparity and conceptual distance between a teacher’s perspective and a researcher and that too of a researcher’s findings and a teacher’s ability to have access. By and large the distance between the two is confusing, but perhaps that is because I was never a teacher. I can imagine how distant research could be.
That said, I also find it difficult to understand how it is that a teacher is purported to be a researcher and have fluent knowledge of current educational research. To me, this is like saying that I need to understand how the memory chip within my iPhone 7 interacts with the camera to provide a smoother transition to the graphics chip. I have no earthy clue how that works, but I sure can manipulate the iPhone fluently. I do not expect a teacher to understand my statistical gibberish, as it is synonymous with the inner workings of an iPhone, but I do expect them to understand and by their own volition be able to find my findings and interpret them accordingly. This is, in large part, on my own shoulders to write the abstract and discussion clear enough that explains what it is I have discovered or elucidated.
My perspective, which is likely full of holes and will likely be ignorant, is that teachers don't take much effort to understand current research—I don't blame them. I often compare teachers to doctors, whereby their profession is inextricably connected to the welfare of their constituents. Doctors are required to have continuing educational credits, likely similar to professional development for teachers. There are far too many disconnects in this analogy, such as time and money, to truly make a case here. If teachers were, perhaps more globally prestigious, paid more, and respected more, perhaps the standards for which we require of them would be higher also. But at not time do the requirements we set for doctors impede their ability to provide adequate care.
Much of what Pring speaks of seems lofty and dreamy, but likely also transpires in different shapes and forms. This, “professional knowledge” that he speaks of exists, but to what degree teachers view it is likely up for debate. There is a medium for which could optimize how research connects with teachers and how teachers connect with research. This argument could traverse into policy, federalized educational influence, and how “organized” education must be. It does seem, however, in rather unclear terms, that the larger we make the educational system or the more we “standardize” the process of education, the less general it actually becomes and the more common themes lack generalizability, contextual efficacy/needs, and all around influence. Education needs to be flexible, attuned to conditions, and appropriate.
Ashlee:
ReplyDeletePring advises that "to attempt to think of practice, including an educational practice, as though it is devoid of theory would seem to create an unreal dualism" (p.150). I think this speaks to the critical question of objectivity in research. Every researcher approaches their practice of research with certain theoretical underpinnings and assumptions. Thus, there is inherently some level of subjectivity that clouds the conclusions that arise from research. This inherent subjectivity speaks to the need for critical judgments from others in a research culture in which scholarly criticism is the norm. He suggests that objectivity "lies in the systemic and open attempt to check" your interpretations with the data and with others (p. 157). Therefore, even though all research, including educational research has some level of subjectivity, steps can be taken towards objectivity. Within academia, peer review serves as this check on the objectivity of research. However, other forms of research such as action research could benefit from similar systems that promote scholarly critique.
In my opinion, this difficulty with objectivity is likely not unique to the educational research community. In fact, in seems that even scientific researchers likely experience some level of bias in their work such as experimenter effects. My view is that this bias in inherent in the world of research, and therefore does not discredit or devalue research. Instead, it necessitates critical and careful conduct and consumption of research.
Knowing I am just beginning my journey as an educational researcher, I know that I may have some bias. However, after reading chapter 8, and reflecting, I feel that what Pring is calling action research is vital to what we do. I see this as part of the ivory tower effect, much like those in policy making or are at a higher level in the district, that have not been in education (at the classroom level) or it has been a long time. As Pring said, teachers/educators are in the trenches – they are the best people to give us the data. Without that, would our research be trustworthy? At what level are we getting at the problems? Who are we solving them for – really and truly?
ReplyDeleteCassandra
DeleteI agree. I think Action Research should be a combination of both...practitioners and researchers. I think teachers bring an aspect to the field that those in higher ed who have been removed for so many years don't have, and would not know. But I think ed researchers bring some knowledge of why "things" work that teachers and practitioners may not know. In my own personal career, I have a ton of my own theories and anecdotal evidence, but now I am learning that this is more than just a "thing". I do think the field should be dominated by practitioners, which is contrary to the discussion we had about Education Leadership degrees.
Jen U.
ReplyDeleteI thought similarly to Shannon in regard to potential benefits of action research and outsider/observer research. Pring made a great case for the benefits of action research not only to individual teacher practice but also in the quest to build the educational research knowledge base. As a non-teacher, I've never engaged in action research and do not know much more about it than what Pring described. However, it seems somewhat time consuming to do it well/correctly. I wonder how many teachers feel confident in their action research skills and (somewhat related to one of the points I think Morgan was making), how many teachers feel like they have the time to conduct action research. This is not to say that teachers should not be doing action research, or that teacher-led research isn't "real" research. Rather, building the ed research knowledge base should not rest solely on the shoulders of teachers. Back to Shannon's point, I think that more research perspectives, more viewpoints, and more methodologies related to the same issue would help us all understand that issue more broadly and more practically. When teachers share results of their action research, especially outside of their school, the educational community can find themes throughout projects. Those themes could then be compared to themes found in broader/larger scale research. This could then lead to findings that provide more practical help to a larger number of people.
I found Pring's description of the nature of action illuminating:
ReplyDelete"To pick out a particular event as an action logically implies reference to the intentions of the agent, and through a clarification of those, to the theoretical framework of ideas to which the teacher is committed. The distinction which is essential here is that which give two senses to he question 'Why did you do it?'. Taken is one sense, this could be asking for a causal explanation of the type "What made you do it?' or " What was it that happened to you?' Taken in another sense, however, the questioner would be asking for the reasons why one did it. The questioner could be asking for the teacher to make his behavior intelligible in terms of the goals, beliefs and values. To ask for reasons in this sense is not to ask for causes. Rather, it presupposes a framework of rules and norms, of aims and purposes within and according to which behavior is directed- and made intelligible to the outsider. The questioner is seeking to find out the theory behind the practice" (150).
To describe the intentions of an actor it is not necessary to ask that this person make their norms, aims, and purposes "intelligible to the outsider." I don't think it is necessary to ask the actor any questions at all. One can observe the behaviors of the actor and model their dispositional state. This model could have an equal relationship to objective reality to the model proposed by the actor when asked questions. Action research doesn't need to be published to be considered research. However, when a teacher conducts action research, they should attempt to collect evidence that accurately describes the reality of their classroom if they wish to make a meaningful attempt to improve their practice. One should acknowledge that there is an objective reality from which all stakeholders involved in the action research derive their subject experiences. Regardless of whether such objective reality is truly knowable or such objectivity is possible, one should make the attempt. This is honesty. Without honest intentions action research may or may not lead to improved outcomes for those involved. There would be no way to know what has occurred, or if there is an intervention, what its effects were, if the research is a subjective, creative expression of the researcher. There is a distinction between good intentions and honesty.