Okay, well I hope this entry isn’t as solipsistic* as the title sounds… (*WORD OF THE DAY: solipsistic: adj., characterized by extreme preoccupation with and indulgence of one's feelings, desires, etc.; egoistic self-absorption).
Before I get to those thoughts, though, I want you to stop and read the posting immediately below this one because it includes the reading schedule and an overall sense of how I think this online book club thing can work.
Are you finished reading that post yet? Okay, on with today’s reading…
I originally asked you to read this chapter for two reasons: 1) to see how a teacher-research (t-r) question can stretch out and morph over a number of years, and 2) to see my transition from basic reflective teacher to more deliberate teacher researcher.
After re-reading the chapter myself today, I still wonder what you think about how this chapter sheds light on those two topics. Do teacher research questions ever really get answered in some definitive way? In your opinion, what makes someone a bonafide teacher researcher?
You know all those times you wanted to ask the author what she really meant to say? Well, now’s your chance. Post a comment, and let’s start talking ☺.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
14 comments:
Maybe no one has posted because they don't want to be the first homework nerd! :) So having no fear, here's my post. I figure if you post first, there's no chance of anyone stealing your ideas!
Re: Looking Back
I've always known Cindy was highly interested in book clubs; I even participated in one at the Mind Center at FCHS. Yet, I never knew where the idea stemmed from -- now I know! It's been a long process that I'm sure contained moments of brilliance as well as moments of WTF am I doing! Yes? :) Teaching is full of those moments, and I wouldn't see why researching wouldn't be that way as well.
It seems to me that all teachers are researchers to some extent. We all think of how things can go better next year; maybe it's just a little tweak or a complete overhaul. How does one go from basic reflective teacher to a bonafide teacher researcher? I must say, I’m not sure myself. I really don’t see a huge difference in the two. Inevitably, when I’m working on a unit, I complete research (what have others done—in my building, in my circle of teachers, and on the net? what do I need to be knowledgeable about before I teach this to students? do I need to read a text? brush up on a grammar rule?) I analyze the data to not only make sense of it but to also break the information into smaller chunks for students to understand, and then I share it with students. Sometimes, I even share it with colleagues – verbally or written.
Is genuine teacher researcher one who is cognizant of this process? One who “officially” publishes this information? One who connects his/her work to bigwigs in the profession? I’m still not sure. I look forward to others’ thoughts.
Since this is my first official post for the project you’ll all excuse me if I stray from the subject at hand. Not intentional I assure you. Before I wrote this I did have to go back and re-read the directions, now I’m more confused than ever. But I’ve never been on to be overly concerned with direction, just feel that movement must be the first step so here I go.
When I look at the question “what makes someone a bonafide teacher researcher” have to say I’m not sure. The growth that occurred over the course of the book club travelogue seems a natural course that a “good” teacher takes. By “systematically and intentionally inquiring into how I teach and how my students learn” a teacher is looking inward, acting as a stewart for the soul of a teacher. It’s always seemed to me that a teacher is never static, but always looking for dynamic new ways to get ideas across. And not just any idea. Not ideas about teaching the facts of the subject, but helping students fully embrace what the subject had to say. I loved the question “Which was more important, getting kids to read and respond, period, or getting them to read and respond critically.” This is the heart of the matter for me. A good teacher will try to tune in to what the kids want without losing sight of the need for critical thought. Apparently a good teacher is one who naturally pursues the open-ended questions. Someone who questions their teaching everyday and is always out to find better ways to help students connect with the deeper ideas. So in my mind the concept of “good teacher” and “teacher researcher” are one in the same. Because the fun in teaching isn’t getting students to learn facts and figures, but to teach them to question every assumption they make – about everything they see.
Well it took me 24 hours, an email to Bud and a few deep breaths to figure this out - but I am here!!! This may be my biggest accomplishment of the entire class - let's hope not.
First I want to comment about smb's entry. I do think in order to be a t-r you do need to be aware of the process and have the goal of sharing. Most teachers change things in their curriculum, but some become protective of THEIR lessons, class, etc. I think that without being aware of the ultimate goal (ok, ultimate may be a strong word, but you know what I mean) teachers lose track of the idea that it is "what is best for students" that counts. It is easy to get addicted to control and order in a classroom, but I don't think that is what leads to discover, new ideas etc.
Now for Natalie - I highlighted the same quote when I read. It is so important to ask what the purpose is and somehow I have the feeling Natalie might agree if I said I believe sometimes you have to thrown something out there.
As for the chapter itself, I was amazed at how much of it seemed to ring true to my own experiment at hand. Trying to link teaching reading to teaching writing is an evolving process/ question. Trying to get students to make that connection is a challenge.
Interesting comments so far. Not only were there a lot of times when I wondered what was going on in terms of book club, but I felt the same way when I first started exploring teacher research. That's a story for another day, but suffice it to say that journey was a classic writing project pursuit. You know what I mean: "This sounds really cool, so even though we don't know exactly how everything will turn out, let's go for it!"
When my other WP buddies and I decided to start a teacher research group, that's pretty much the approach we took. Pretty early on, though, we began reading lots of the now "classic" t-r authors, and all of them, without exception, distinguished teacher research from reflective teaching. As Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Susan Lytle explain it in a book called _Inside Outside_, while there's a good deal of reflection in teacher research, you can be a reflective teacher without being a teacher researcher because t-r takes the extra step of making that reflection "intentional and systematic."
In reference to the chapter, the shift for me came with the last class. I started with a definite question. I decided I would collect their work as usual, but look at it in a different way. I observed and took fieldnotes directed specifically toward my inquiry. And so on.
Even now, even though I reflect every single time I teach, I'm not always conducting teacher research.
What about the rest of you? Do you distinguish between these activities?
At lunch today we were talking about this year's crop of PDS student--from Cindy's CSU flock (yes, I was one of them not long ago), and I found it very amusing to hear stories about so many kids who are out to change the profession, replace the "old" teachers who are so bad at what they do, change their students lives, and basically be the next Erin Gruwell. So I found it quite amusing to read Cindy's first paragraph.
Unfortunately, Erin Gruwell, just like Robin William's brilliant Dead Poet's Society character whom Cindy mentions, doesn't teach anymore. One burned out and the other flamed out--not exactly a model for those of us who are still in the trenches (bad metaphor??).
Thank you smb, all teachers (at least all the ones I know) are teacher researchers. And I agree completely with Natalie's idea that "a 'good teacher' and a 'teacher researcher' are one in the same". I couldn't say it better myself.
Respo, I've had the same experience, and I agree. Teachers who don't want to share their best stuff are frustrating, but the key to solving that problem is vertical teaming so that no one takes your good idea and scoops it. It doesn't hurt anyone if the other sections of the same year are following the same "best" practice just so long as it's not the year before you that's using your awesome idea so that the kids groan when you introduce it.
Over the years I've really come to appreciate Cindy's ability to find "consistently reliable" ideas and to share them with other teachers. What I'm wondering is, what is the difference between "qualitative research" and anecdotal evidence (a logical fallacy)?
This chapter presents a very reasonable, very applicable, practical idea for developing book clubs that could apply to just about any teacher. But so much of the teacher-research I've read is either self-aggrandizing ("gloss[ing] over the complications" I think Cindy very graciously calls it) or full of self-deprecating anecdotes that really don't do much for me (which is my attempt at saying nicely that they're mostly B.S.).
Every school is different, every classroom is different, every day is different, every student is different, and every teacher is different. Cindy does things that wouldn't work for me in my class, and I hope I'm not being too much like . . . well . . . me, when I say that I do things in my class that wouldn't work for Cindy.
So, no, I don't think t-r is about finding definitive answers because that's a mathematical impossibility.
Finally, in answer to the question, "what makes someone a bona fide teacher researcher?" I would have to say that it's the ability to boil it down to the essence of what is consistently reliable while avoiding the temptation to try to write the next Freedom Writers.
No, my apparent obtuseness is not a result of trying to ignore Cindy, it's just that I had to put my four-year-old back to bed and never refreshed the page before I posted.
Still, though, I'm not sure that the idea of "intentional and systematic" reflection is the difference. I still think that all good teachers intentionally reflect upon their teaching practices and systematically improve them (now if there is a specific system that we have to use to be t-r, please don't keep us in suspense anymore;-) It's clear to me that we all use different "systems" and my method may be your madness, but it's still systematic.
Is respo closer to the mark? Does t-r have more to do with sharing your ideas? I just found a great teacher blog from a teacher in Maine that helped me a lot with the next blog post that I'm working on. That's t-r at work.
Reading Cindy’s chapter was an interesting experience for me as she has been doing teacher-research in my classroom with book clubs for the last couple of years (and I hope for the next couple of years too). :)
I must admit that despite this “hands-on experience” I too find the concept of teacher-research elusive or at the very least a slippery concept. In watching Cindy and through my own (albeit slow) evolution as a teacher-researcher, I do think that the distinction between a teacher-researcher and a reflective teacher comes from the deliberate process of collecting and analyzing data. Over the last couple of semesters I have been surprised when I returned to the work students completed and noticed a trend or observation that simply grading or reviewing the work did not reveal to me. Focusing my examination with a specific question in mind does make a difference.
My questions have also evolved across semesters and across groups of students. This has made a difference to me too. Just as Cindy explains, with each attempt at book clubs my question has narrowed and my understanding of the complexity of conducting both book clubs and teacher-research has been clarified.
This said, I would also say that conducting research on book clubs WITH Cindy has made mine a unique experience. Starting with Cindy’s experience and insights while also being able to collaborate and mull over ideas with her has made book clubs a rich learning experience for me. I wonder if my exploration of book clubs would be as fruitful if I were attempting it alone.
Working with Cindy has also raised for me other questions about how objective we can be in our own classrooms about the events that take place there. Cindy at times makes observations about students or the process that I miss entirely or have explained away for another reason simply because she does not have the classroom relationship I do with these students or because her perspective varies from mine. By that I mean Cindy sees the students in the moment while I see Joe goofing off just like he did yesterday and the day before that and the day before that or I assume that Sally isn’t talking because she never talks due to being painfully shy. Cindy is able to see more possibilities than I can at times. Similarly, the students are much more likely to ignore Cindy’s presence on the fringe of their book club while I receive “teacher” questions (i.e. Can I still turn in my homework from yesterday?) or students noticeable change the direction of their conversation due to my presence (i.e. insert awkward pause, shifting glances—“Ah, I thought it was interesting when…”. Cindy assures me that with time and a more deliberate explanation that I am conducting research this behavior will decrease. I’ve got my fingers crossed. Of course, my question assumes that one must be objective to conduct research. Maybe you don’t have to be. What do you think?
I do distinguish between reflection and research. One, I do calmly with interest, kind of like a hobby. The other I agonize over...
Do you need to be objective when doing teacher research???Wow! Good question. One side of immediately thought "I hope not!" and the other part of me feels the objectivity needs to be about MY participation vs the students. Don't we have to be aware of their personalities to share successes or failures? We can't just say student A, student B, student C, can we? No, it wouldn't work with differentiation, test scores, IEPs, ILPs....now I am thinking out loud (or is that typing out loud?). Again - very thought provoking question.
In response to Rebecca's question about whether or not it is possible to remain "objective" when conducting research...oh, boy, there's a whole body of theory on that question alone, but in a nutshell, qualitative researchers (and teacher researchers, by extension) generally are quite up front about their subjectivity in all stages of the research process from the question that gets chosen to the data that gets collected to the way it gets analyzed and reported. They acknowledge that there's a "man behind the curtain," in other words and that this subjectivity--when framed with and tempered by a sound theoretical and methodological framework--is a STRENGTH as opposed to a flaw. Unlike most quantitative research, qual stuff devotes A LOT of time time to the fine-grained examination and description of context.
In teaming up together, Rebecca and I may have the best of possible worlds. Because we have 2 sets of eyes in one classroom, she sees things I couldn't possibly understand the significance of in her classroom context and vice versa. She gets student histories, relationships between students, and so on, for instance.
If you think about participant-observer and observer-participant on two ends of a continuum, Rebecca would definitely be on the former end and I'd be on the latter one.
I think that's why a lot of teacher researchers team up to observe one another's classrooms at some point. That's what a couple of people from my Oklahoma t-r group did, and I was always fascinated by the conversations that resulted.
Maybe some of you would like to figure out how to do that at some point?
Gosh, now I don't exactly know where to start with my response. But the biggest thing I'm learning when I read the responses is that it appears that we needed a clarity of vocabulary! My term for a good teacher just happened to coincide with other's term for teacher researcher. The step of collection and analysis of data seems a natural part of what I've always done as an art teacher. Collect their artworks - look critically at them - ask myself to determine, by looking at the work (perhaps I should refer to this as data) if they understood the big picture concept. If not, what went wrong and what needs to change. How many of my students "got it" and how many are struggling. By struggling I guess I mean students who clearly understand and have met the lesson objectives - but continue to produce work that has little depth. For in an artwork, the depth is what we strive for.
I have seen teachers out there who do the same thing year after year because the kids are successful with the imagery - but still aren't connecting to the content. And because the work looks good the lesson never seems to change. Then there are other teachers who are never satisfied until the student 'connects' with the work. Teachers who read and research other ways to approach the problem - teachers who are beyond reflective. I think these teachers are inadvertantly doing a less formal kind of teacher-research. The analysis is there, deeper research of contemporary approaches is there - as is a constant refinement of strategies to move students past those objectives that are measurable, into a gray area. An area where we know in our teacher-hearts that a student "gets-it" finally.
So - I will now view the teacher-researcher as the teacher who formalizes this step and does it with purpose - and not coincidentially. No judgements attached to that prior statement - just an acknowledgement that this seems to be the accepted definition of teacher-researcher.
For me the vocabulary is always an important step. Because it so often seems that once I "really talk" AND listen to what my colleagues are saying we're seldom very far apart on our thinking. What creates the chasm between us seems to be that basic vocabulary. I think this is a good thing for all - I KNOW it's a good thing for me to clarify the term teacher-researcher. Right, wrong or indifferent - at least I'm feeling like I'm at least in the right book now to find the same page as everyone else!
I agree with Natalie that semantics are often at the root of disagreements. I've looked back at the inquiry cycle, and at Cindy's chapter and I think that I am closer to understanding the distinction--at the very least I understand now that it is an important distinction to make.
On the issue of objectivity, which I think is a fascinating one: In one of my earlier comments I remarked that every teaching situation is different, even from minute to minute in the same classroom. That constantly evolving situation cannot be seen objectively, even by outside observers. My book explores this idea extensively, it's way too big of an issue for this forum, so I'll just leave it at that.
The classroom dynamic is so interrelated, we have to acknowledge the impossibility of seeing things objectively--which is why I agree with Cindy that one of the strengths of the teacher research I've read is that it acknowledges the subjectivity of the data and uses that as an advantage rather than an impediment.
I still have my reservations about the usefulness of collections of anecdotes--I've read too many of them already, and I've expressed my opinions about them above. But when a writer is able to use qualitative data to really generate some specific, practical, reliable ideas for the classroom (like book clubs, body biographies, cubing, etc.) it is a very useful and I think worthwhile adventure.
Wow! When I fall behind, I reeeally fall behind! What an exciting discussion about Cindy's piece! Well, as I read, I was struggling, as was Rebecca, with objectivity. I wondered how often I might "excuse" or overlook a glitch in my classroom activities because a student is "labeled" special ed or is receiving extra services in our school. As I read, I also replaced the book club idea with writing groups. I have and still continue to struggle with parallel issues in my classes in terms of groups, but with writing, rather than with reading. And because of that, I wonder what exactly the field notes looked like on the actual page. What did you record, exactly. I like the idea of the participation record since that is the nature of our kids---prove that you were there and involved. I also found it fascinating that when the teacher gave the question, the kids saw it as a task to finish and when the question was indeed answered, the kids saw themselves as "done" and no further discussion really ensued. So interesting. I wonder if I do that with my kids' writing groups and how I can alter or mimic what Cindy did to aleviate some of that "answer the question and be done" mentality. I wonder how to instill some sort of intrinsic need to continue with writing groups even after everyone has read and the group sees themselves as "done."
I like the idea, however, of t-r because it organizes my own observations and hunches. It forces me to review my thoughts, rather than just thinking them and then moving on to the next crazy class entering my classroom. It forces me to write something down and reflect on it. But this is also where I can easily get lost in the process. What should I be writing down? What is valid info? The article for this week (hello, I'm a week behind!!!) sort of walks us through the process of observing and then taking the next step, so that gives me some direction. But I still struggle and wonder about exactly what to collect? I don't want a "right" answer, but rather some direction, I think. In Cindy's piece, I saw her wonder this, too. That gave me some idea that maybe it's different for everyone and every situation. I am in the situation much like Cindy where, though they are in 8th grade and not 12th, some kids this year will finish their very first book ever, cover to cover. I could relate to that notion and population.
I agree with Natalie and JC Clarke in the sense that it seems that t-r is a 24-hour process. I also agree with them about doing what is best for kids. My hope is that my reflection on the t-r will redirect my lessons in a way that is more tailored for the kids I have at different times of the year. I wonder if it can happen that fast: can I observe and change what I'm doing quick enough after observing/researching to make an impact?
Lots of questions! Not a lot of answers! But, as respo said, I definately don't want to lose sight of what's best for kids, either.
Post a Comment