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.
I enjoyed reading chapter 8. The idea of action research in education makes sense to me. If teachers examine educational practices at the classroom level, they are able to provide a much richer description and explanation of what they did, if it worked or did not work, and why they think this is the case. Finding things that actually work in practice should be the goal of educational research. As practitioners, teachers are in the perfect position to find what actually works. I think educational researchers should be encouraging teachers to engage in action research. There should be partnerships between educational researchers and teachers to make sure that quality work that makes a difference is being done in the field.
ReplyDeleteAllison on Ed. Research: Pring (2015) states, "The notion of teacher as researcher is important" (p. 163). Pring (2015) attributes educational research as "crucial" to the the "growth of professional knowledge" (p. 163). Pring (2015) also states, educational research requires a "context of openness, public scrutiny and criticism" (p. 163). On the other hand, Pring (2015) describes action research as reflective. I think teacher's are capable of more than action research, and Ed. Research could make teaching and learning richer and more satisfying to practitioners', students', and stakeholders'.
ReplyDeleteRachel: In chapters eight and nine, Pring proposes several interesting ideas about action research and objectivity within education research. He describes action research is used not to "produce new knowledge but to improve practice", but I think by improving one's own practice a teacher maybe adding to their own personal knowledge about a student or strategy in their classroom, it may just not be "public" knowledge. I agree with Samantha when she says that teachers "are in the perfect position to find what works", they have knowledge that researchers do not. Information and perspectives developed through teachers as researchers and action research could drive further, highly relevant, theoretical/ academic research.
ReplyDeleteBrittany: I really enjoyed these two chapters in Pring. Like Rachel and Sam, I enjoyed his discussion on action research. As a former teacher and future researcher, bridging the gap between research and practice is very important to me. I think action research is one of the possible solutions to this problem. However, Pring opened my eyes to possible “caveats” (as he calls them) to this type of research. In his discussion of caveats, he states, “Research is more than intelligent action or reflective practice. It more even than and extension of these. It requires a context of openness, public scrutiny, and criticism. What is often claimed to be teacher research does not match up to these criteria” (p. 163). Therefore, because I think this is an important type of research, teacher preparation programs need to be changed to better equip teachers to do and buy into the importance of action research.
ReplyDeleteTiesha: According to bring, in objective research, the researcher should be somewhat distant from what is being researched due to certain biases, conflicts of interests and other prejudices that the researcher might have. This idea contradicts Elliot (1991) and Stenhouse's (1975) suggestion that teachers should be researchers and involved in formulating hypotheses based on their experiences. It also contradicts the idea of action research in which the goal is not to produce new knowledge in the field, but to influence/improve practice. Action research, Pring argues, might be translated into practice, but it has to be constantly tested out, reflected upon, and adapted to new situations. Thus, there needs to be a network of teachers that are constantly critiquing action research. Based on this, I don't think action research can or should be objective.
ReplyDeleteFatemah- Since the beginning of this semester, I was and still arguing that there is a gap between theory and practice. In chapter 8, Pring talks in depth about the action research as a way to might help to fill in this gap. He thinks that Educational research often seems removed from the realities of the classroom. In his opinion action research would help to build up “science of teaching” by addressing these realities. Where the theory can be tested and refined based on the practice.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the use of the action research. However, that does not mean it should be the only way to approach educational research. action research would help to build up “science of teaching” by addressing these realities. Where the theory can be tested and refined based on the practice.
I agree with the use of the action research, however that does not mean it should be the only way to approach educational research.
This chapter for me mostly hammers home the idea that one should not narrow their research into a particular box or frame. Teachers should serve as researchers, but impartial researchers have a place too that contributes. Qualitative research has a place, as does quantitative, and both benefit from each other. Without teachers on the ground as research plays out, research would fail to benefit from the nuances and fluidity of working with students. At the same time, as this is not an objective practice, things too can be learned from impartiality. Action research has it's place, among many other types, that when all taken together can create a more well rounded approach to bettering the educational system.
ReplyDeleteOf Chapters 7, 8, and 9, I was most enthralled with Chapter 7, particularly its discussion of the 'isms.' With tonight's blog about Chapter 8 and 9, several passages stood out. On p. 147, Pring writes: "it was as though those who prescribed the curriculum (e.g. the govenment), distant from the transactions within each classroom, knew best." Action research is quite the opposite of large-scale government-knows-best research. I consider myself a practitioner first, and researcher second, so action research is appealing to me. But, it reeks of a popular contemporary political irony: "get your government hands off my medicaid!"
ReplyDeleteAnother question that I wondered whether is true or false is the sentiment on p. 150 that "economists and political philosophers...are more powerful than is commonly understood." I have heard this before, but I really do wonder to what extent our lives are determined by "defunct economists." Perhaps this is yet another false dualism.
One final thought. In the education that I have "received" the most, namely that of a music conservatory, action research seems to be the standard, because "by sharing the problems, the questions and the tentative conclusions, the teachers were able to build up a body of professional knowledge" (p. 151). This is precisely how artists critique students and share their expertise. And as art is constantly changing with the times, like technology, it seems logical to conclude that educational research may be headed in this direction. That said, one of my goals has been to develop a more "scientific" approach to arts education... and I am becoming more convinced that I should abandon that goal.
Veronica Shuford - Chapters 8 and 9 reminds me of a recent class discussion where Samantha and other peers who were P-12 teachers discussed the challenges they faced as teachers with policies being implemented and decisions made by educational researchers who were far removed from the classroom. Pring’s statement on Page 144 that educational practice consists of a range of complex and dynamic transactions between teachers and learners which makes it challenging for an “outside” researcher to understand supports this statement from my peers. The Stenhouse perspective of the teacher as the researcher is very logical, but presents challenges as well, particularly public scrutiny and criticism. I value and appreciate action research as a way to improve educational practice. However, there is a place for objectivity in educational research to minimize or eliminate bias and to be fair on all sides of an argument. Pring states that educational research should focus on those the ways in which learning is encouraged, nurtured, planned, and brought about. A question that I raise is whether teachers, given how close they are to what they are researching, can maintain objectivity? A takeaway from these chapters and this book, in general, is that educational research is contextual, and your approach to research depends on upon your research questions and the purpose of your research.
ReplyDeleteSecond comment to make up for missed class: Veronica's comment raises a great question, as to wether teachers can maintain objectivity, and how close it too close for a researcher. Sometimes I've read about researchers, who are not teachers, but are still embedded in a community for a long duration time. And while they may be rather impartial, then there is the issue as to how the presence influences the behavior and outcome of others. So, a researcher can be impartial and objective to a great degree, but on the flip side, what about the participants?
ReplyDelete