"Educational Psychology" by Jeanne Ellis Ormrod, 5th ed.....says this about research in the very first chapter:
"Conduct your own research. The research literature on learning, motivation, development, and instructional pracice grows by leaps and bounds every year. Nevertheless, teachers sometimes encoutner problems in the classroom that existing research findings don't address. In such circumstances we have an alternative: We can conduct our own resarch. When we conduct systematic studies of issues and problems in our own schools, with the goal of seeking more effective interventions in the lives of our students, we are conduction action research.
"Action research is becoming an increasingly popular endeavor among teachers, educational administators, and other educational professionals. It takes a variety of forms; for example, it might invovle assesing the effectiveness of a new teaching technique, gathering information about students' opinions on a schoolwide issue, or conducting an in-depth case study of a particular student. ... Many colleges and universities now offer courses in action research. You can also find inexpensive paperback books on teh topic (e.g., Mills, 2003; Stringer, 2004)"
Barry forgot to mention that Omrod's subtitle is "Developing Learners."
"Action research"
ReplyDeleteThey have to make common sense sound scientific.
There is a lot of talk, but the question is what, exactly, goes on at school during the day. They go through the motions. Schools accept very little responsibility for learning.
ReplyDeleteThere was a parent-teacher discussion about the limitations of EM at the beginning of the school year. What's different now? Nothing. The class hasn't even gotten to Volume 2 and it's March.
Talk, talk, talk, talk. Blah, blah, blah, blah. It's up to the child and the parents.
Didn't realize I had made so many typos in copying over that discussion from Ormrod. My apologies.
ReplyDeleteSteveH: I think it's a bit more worrisome than coming up with a scientific sounding term for "common sense". The passage suggests that subjective observation with no controls can be considered and used in the same way as peer-reviewed scientific research. There are some things that are common sense which don't need extensive research; we don't need research on parachutes for example to tell us that jumping out of a plane without one will result in death. Similarly, it is common sense that students do not learn what they are not taught. But "action research" can result in a teacher concluding that his/her "discovery learning" technique is just great: "I tried it in my class and it worked!" I'm afraid that type of thing will pass as research.
Case in point: A physics teacher gave her class a project in which they were given materials to make a model car with a certain type of engine (I think spring). The assignment was to design the car/engine so that the car ran exactly ten feet, no more, no less. This was a hands on discovery project, ostensibly to get them to discover concepts such as work, energy, acceleration, velocity, etc. But without mastery of these concepts (i.e., working problems that use these concepts), they are expected to get them "on the fly" and design the experimental car. The teacher reports the students all did well, with cars stopping between 7 and 15 feet. Students reported they learned more in that year than in any other class they had. This is "action research". Missing is a control group, in which they have a unit on mechanics for four weeks or so, master the concepts and procedures so they can work with calculations concerning energy, mass, acceleration, force, etc, and then being given the assignment to apply the concepts thus learned. Taking the teacher's word for it and some good sound bites from students does not qualify as "research" in my opinion.
"I think it's a bit more worrisome than coming up with a scientific sounding term for 'common sense'."
ReplyDeleteI agree up to a point, but I see this as just one more vacuous ed school idea. Maybe it's a form of constructivism for teachers. Teachers discover solutions and then get to call it research. This is just one more pseudo-scientific thing they can throw at parents along with "superficial knowledge" and "higher-order thinking".
I guess my point is that a lot gets lost in the translation to reality. They don't even do what they say they are going to do, and when they do it, they don't do it well, and anyways, the student has to take ownership of his/her learning.
Even if they do research well, there are still the assumptions and low expectations. I don't want to argue with them. That would mean that I agree that they should be in charge. I don't want to argue. I want choice.
Teachers discover solutions and then get to call it research. This is just one more pseudo-scientific thing they can throw at parents along with "superficial knowledge" and "higher-order thinking".
ReplyDeleteYeah. What he said.
Many colleges and universities now offer courses in action research.
ReplyDeleteReally? Any besides ed schools?
What exactly would count in action research to "assess the effectiveness of a new teaching technique"?
I'm pretty sure we had a lot of very positive action research before we launched into that spelling program where kids use little tiny chalk boards and hold them in the air. That was an effective teaching technique 8 years ago. Of course, we abandoned that program and now we do something else. What is wrong with good research? How can you conduct any research at all, action or otherwise, if you don't even know what good research looks like?
Teachers fall for this sort of thing all the time. "I'm conducting action research" sounds like you actually know something about research.
Teachers and administrators should be required to take a non-ed school course on how to evaluate the quality of research that they rely on.
well....I'm no expert in this, but I'd bet money that there exists peer-reviewed "qualitative" research that really is research.
ReplyDeleteCertainly historical research counts; historians have rules of evidence & interpretation in which they are trained and which they follow throughout their careers. Their work is peer-reviewed.
I asked a friend of mine, a sociologist, how a sociologist would study a school district.
Same thing there: sociologists are trained in a mode of research relying on multiple interviews with administrators, teachers, support staff, students, parents, etc.
The problem with ed school, as always, is that it has no content: it isn't a "discipline."
Ed schools don't have a long, time-tested tradition of research to teach grad students.
That would mean that I agree that they should be in charge. I don't want to argue. I want choice.
ReplyDeleteThat's the point I've come to.
Since I'm stuck here in this district I need choice within my own district.
Barry -- is that a real example??
ReplyDeleteThe teacher assigned that project??