Note something from this article
with which you disagree (note: I assume that reading this paper was a different
experience for those with P-12 experience and those without. That said, he made a sufficient number of
bold claims so I’m sure everyone can disagree with something he said). Why do
you disagree with it? Did Labaree give
words to any tensions that you feel as you head down the road of the
educational researcher? If so, explain.
The point of researchers and teachers being at two ends of the spectrum is true. However, I disagree that teachers resent curriculum research because we feel it lacks impersonal aspects (although it does to a degree). But having previously taught I think that part of hesitation to implement new research-backed curriculum change was the fact it has become a business, and was ALWAYS CHANGING.
ReplyDeleteIt was as if researchers had cornered the business on marketing new ideas to administration, and admin goes with the brightest, shiniest object lobbed its way every season, placing teachers in a place lacking continuity. And students prey on that inconsistency. Then as an instructor you’re left in a defensive position because you’re the first person students (and unhappy parents) interact with.
Changing instructional methods is not something to be treated like a new line of shoes came into style—Out with the old, in with the new, over a weekend. It’s not the premise of research that as a teacher I was at odds with, it was the way it was always being rolled out. Again. And again. And again.
Similar to what Melissa said, I agree that the two are at different ends of the spectrum and that as a prior teacher to now "researcher" my ways of thinking did have to change--and I like it.
ReplyDeleteI see the point made in the article (p.17) where the author discusses the role of the researcher being they are to make sense of the way the schools works and the ways they don't as well as not fixing the problem but better understand it. I think coming from the classroom, there were a ton of problems I identified that I would want changed and there was research out there that recognizes these problems but don't provide a solution per say, or there was not a policy to back my findings, so my ideas would get rejected, which made it difficult for me as a teacher.
The author discusses (p.18) the teachers often being reluctant to embrace the analytical practice of educational scholarship. I was never reluctant to it, but as a previous educator, I was never educated on the best way to implement these changes. As a special educator, it was also presented that these new interventions, devices, teaching strategies, etc. "will solve all of your problems," but again was never presented in a way I knew how to implement it into my classroom.
Also, if a new curriculum came out for example to "improve reading," (like Melissa said, it always seemed like something new was coming out and it was just bigger and better), they would give us the materials but never gave guidance or trainings on how it should be implemented, so I would end up not using the "research based" materials and use what I knew how to implement. So I disagree that teachers are reluctant to embrace the analytical practices, I just think a gap needs to be filled between the research and practice to benefit the students.
The aspect of the two ends of the spectrum is both interesting and relatable, it is something I had experienced upon entering the doctoral program. Yet my experience with this shift in thinking between the two different worlds was not as drastic or resistant as described in the article.
ReplyDeleteThe point I most disagree with is very similar to the second one introduced by Lauren in her post. The idea that a teacher is not analytical and is prone to just react to fix a problem in a classroom is not, in my opinion, entirely accurate. Specifically in special education teachers are constantly using functional behavior analysis, designing behavior intervention plans, collecting data and analyzing trends, and intensifying interventions based on need. All of these are research and analytically oriented. While maybe not at the same level of research design and "quality" you would see from a doctoral researcher it still qualifies as analytical. The difference to me is the big picture versus small picture in research focus, with special educators focusing on a smaller picture. In education however, as pointed out by Labaree, it is difficult to do big picture generalizable research, individualization is the nature of education.
I agree with what both Lauren and Melissa discussed in their posts. As I was reading the article, I connected with many of the new doctoral students' experiences Labaree described.
ReplyDeleteI disagreed with his discussion on moral differences among teachers and researchers. I think he overstates the amount of power teachers impose on students by neglecting to discuss the lack of control teachers often have over state policies and school rules/procedures that directly affect students' "liberty". I also think he understates the role morals play in research. Ethical considerations should drive and be present at every level of the research process.
However, in offering solutions to "narrowing the cultural divide", I liked how he described the way teachers and researchers are similar in the area of morals. He states, " Like teachers, researchers take moral responsibility for the consequences of education, and their work in trying to understand this institution is in large part motivated by their desire to rectify the harm done by dysfunctional education." (p. 21).
Veronica Shuford -- I begin this post with full disclosure that I have no professional experience in P-12 education. However, as with other posts to this blog, I agree that there is a cultural clash between the worldviews of teachers and researchers. However, I am not convinced that the differences in these worldviews cannot be easily eliminated. Given that many disciplines are evidence-based driven, and accountability for student learning seems to be central to education, I see a rise in evidence-based teaching, which implies an understanding of data, research, and scientific findings. Evidence-based teaching or evidence-based practice can focus on both qualitative and quantitative research or mixed-methods. I believe it is important for teachers as practitioners to have a solid understanding of research. Larabee suggests that faculty must be willing to talk more about how they carry out their research with students in doctoral programs. However, I think what is as important as talking with Ph.D. students about how they carry out their research, is why and how faculty become interested in the areas of research.
ReplyDeleteI can relate to what Labaree says about doctoral work causing teachers to think and act in a different way (p. 18). I have experienced this. My natural instinct is to see a problem and fix it. I am learning that as a researcher, I need to do a great deal of work between seeing the problem and fixing it. My advisor talks about putting on different hats – there are times when you need to wear your teacher hat, and other times when you need to put on your researcher hat.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I think Labaree does not give teachers enough credit. He talks about teachers resisting the new perspectives found in graduate school because they are more intellectual than personal (p. 19). While I am sure that this is true for some teachers in Ph.D. programs, I doubt it is true for the majority. I think that a teacher who decides to return to school understands that her way of thinking will be challenged, and she will value learning enough to be willing to try something new.
Author Allison: I disagree with Labaree's (2003) sentiments on teaching as the "largest and least esteemed of the professions" (p.13). Teachers' educate Americans. So, the moral is don't bite the hand that feeds you. If a historical and negative teacher/teaching stereotype exists we must work not to perpetuate it but to change it. I also find irony in the "cultural divide" (p. 21) between researchers and teachers. As from a theoretical perspective everything a teacher does is evidenced based. Perhaps, researchers should explain their "analytical, intellectual, theoretical and universalistic orientations" maybe a teacher might understand.
ReplyDeleteAs I do not have any experience teaching P12, it is difficult for me to make any assertions about whether what Labree says in this article is true or not. Through my observations and conversations with people, it is likely that teachers and scholars fall on two ends of the spectrum when it comes to perspective, but I'm not sure that that's a bad thing. He mentions that a popular education journal called for different perspectives within the field.
ReplyDeleteI disagree most with the claims that he makes trying to discount schools of education and the teaching profession as a whole. I agree with Sam, I think he's not giving teachers enough credit. He's especially not giving education faculty enough credit. He makes the claim that unlike doctors and lawyers, education professors are not looked at as learned and respected and thus have difficulty establishing their authority over students and spurring emulation. Having not been a P12 teacher, this is only my opinion, but I honestly believe that if someone were a teacher and made the conscious effort to return to an academic setting within a school of education, they would have respect for their professors. His logic just did not make sense to me.
Tiesha- Unknown at 8:01 was me.
ReplyDeleteAs I do not have any experience teaching P12, it is difficult for me to make any assertions about whether what Labree says in this article is true or not. Through my observations and conversations with people, it is likely that teachers and scholars fall on two ends of the spectrum when it comes to perspective, but I'm not sure that that's a bad thing. He mentions that a popular education journal called for different perspectives within the field.
ReplyDeleteI disagree most with the claims that he makes trying to discount schools of education and the teaching profession as a whole. I agree with Sam, I think he's not giving teachers enough credit. He's especially not giving education faculty enough credit. He makes the claim that unlike doctors and lawyers, education professors are not looked at as learned and respected and thus have difficulty establishing their authority over students and spurring emulation. Having not been a P12 teacher, this is only my opinion, but I honestly believe that if someone were a teacher and made the conscious effort to return to an academic setting within a school of education, they would have respect for their professors. His logic just did not make sense to me.
Fatemah - On page 18, Labaree give two different arguments that have been raised recently in educational research. First one (Anderson) believes that education Doctoral studies should use teacher research to filling the gap between theory and practice. On the other hand, the second one ( Metz and Page) argues that research is essential to professor job but not the teacher and how much load that could add to a teacher, and the efficacy of the work. I agree and disagree somewhat with both of them. That make the answer of how we could teacher practices and theory benefit from each other without having conflict between the role of teacher and a researcher? Although, I am leaning toward Anderson argument more.
ReplyDeleteLike those posting before me, I agree that a cultural divide does exist between teachers and educational researchers and like Larabee I believe that the best way to tackle this is to “acknowledge it explicitly” (21). By acknowledging the cultural divide both sides are able to engage in open communication and respect each other’s viewpoints. As Larabee points out, even the basic set-up of one’s day continues the cultural divide between the two groups.
ReplyDeleteThroughout this article Larabee maintains that teachers must change to become educational researchers. That without this change they will not have learned what they need to in their PhD program. Throughout the article it is implied that teachers who cannot change their perspective enough to become educational researchers, are not worthy. My question is: Why is it only teachers who must change to become educational researchers, why are educational researchers not being encouraged to enter a classroom and become teachers to better their understanding for their researcher.
Larabee starts out his article talking about how the field of education is seen as being “lowly,” however through his insistence that teachers are the ones that should change rather than educational researchers, or even both parties, he continues the rhetoric that places teachers at a “lowly” status.