This weekend I had the opportunity to participate in the Webheads In Action Online Covergence. Fellow edublogger, teacher, and doctoral student, Konrad Glogowski, and I hosted a discussion focusing on teacher professional development and the Read/Write Web in TalkShoe, a “talk cast” application that neither of us had previous experience with (details regarding our discussion can be found here). I believe we found the application easy to use with the exception of the chat feature which handles a bit oddly and I am not sure how easy is was to participate directly if you were dialing in outside North America.
Nonetheless, Konrad has done a marvelous job summarizing his presentation ideas on his weblog.
For me, this was a great opportunity to use the Read/Write Web to collaborate on a topic that both Konrad and I are quite passionate about. I felt as if I was able to take much of what I have read about constructivism and connectivism and tie them together, bridging my self, specific academic/professional content, and other learners into an experiential whole. While I cannot speak for others who participated both in the TalkShoe and WorldBridges environments, I felt as though I learned quite a bit which I have attempted to describe below.
Konrad is quite versed in action research and spoke directly to the advantages of adopting such an inquiry stance in his practice. Since I have been spending time working with practitioners in support of their inquiry projects, I was curious to hear Konrad’s perspective. What struck me is that Konrad mentioned receiving little support or guidance as he embarked on this process. While I have found this to be the case with many educators, I find myself feeling disappointed or frustrated with the lack of support that educators in general report receiving in terms of sustained mentoring or coaching that should be a part of teacher research and other forms of professional development.
I find myself wondering how many educators would adopt such a practice such as action research if they were not working toward a specified goal like an advanced degree or national certification?
A question was raised during the discussion that asked if action or teacher research could be intuitive, as in something an educator does naturally without formally documenting the process. Such practice is possible but it wouldn’t really count as research if nothing is documented. This leads me to believe that there are still a number of questions around what action research or teacher research really is, what it entails, and why it might be useful.
Basically, action research is about examining one’s own practice, i.e., practitioner research, teacher research or research with a “little r” as opposed to “Big R” research. While it embodies many formal elements associated with scientific method, starting with a hypothesis, a wondering, and leading through periods of observation, empirical data collection, measuring evidence, and reporting conclusions, practitioner classroom research often lacks the rigor associated with conducting formal reliability studies that are an integral part of most formal research (Big R). Not to say such studies cannot be conducted; however, the idea has typically been to get educators to systematically and intentionally examine elements of their practice in a way that can be clearly documented and openly shared with other practitioners.
Action research is not about being “right,” which is a difficult concept for many educators. Action research is part of larger stance that researchers Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Susan Lytle (1999) have dubbed an “inquiry stance.” Inquiry as stance is essentially a framework or a way to think about teacher learning that embodies all the elements of competent practice. These elements include subject matter knowledge, knowledge about the disciplinary foundations of education, human development, classroom organization, pedagogy, assessment, the social and cultural contexts of teaching and learning, and knowledge of teaching as a profession.
Lytle & Cochran-Smith argue:
Teacher research … makes visible the ways teachers and students negotiate power, authority, and knowledge in classrooms and schools. As a way of knowing, then, teacher research has the potential to alter profoundly the cultures of teaching—how teachers work with their students toward a more critical and democratic pedagogy, how they build intellectual communities of colleagues who are both educators and activists, and how they position themselves in relationship to school administrators, policy makers, and university-based experts as agents of systemic change (p. 470; cited in Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999, p. 275).
Action research/teacher research and teacher inquiry is part of a new vision of teacher education and personal/professional development. It suggests that what educators need are opportunities to explore and question their own and others’ interpretations, practices, and ideologies (C-S & L, 1999). This notion of teacher practice also reminds us that the way most schools are currently configured is nowhere near to approaching such a vision. While my idealism is still in tact, I aspire to work towards rebuilding and recreating a vision of teacher practice that wholly embraces an inquiry stance which includes working with administrators and district policy makers to see how schools as they are currently operating are doing a disservice to students and teachers alike. Teachers will never embrace such a stance if their working environment leaves them no time to focus on anything but producing outstanding test takers. I believe the Read/Write Web and the social and educational affordances of the Internet have ushered in a new era in how we think about our world, our connections, they way we learn, and our relationships to others. Given this grand opportunity, now is the time for us to rethink what school and what learning are really all about and to take action in making our vision a reality.
For me personally, the connections and learning made possible via the Internet has not been a difficult undertaking, required no superhuman skills—except a desire fueled by curiosity and yearning to know more about myself and the people/world around me. The Webheads in Action Online Convergence reminded me that I am not alone in my desire to bring about changes to the practice of teaching and learning.
And as such, Konrad and I are thinking about hosting such conversations about teacher professional development on a regular basis in an attempt to keep the fire stoked, as it were. If you are interested or would like to join in on the fun, please let me know. The challenge, of course, remains to stay focused and keep working toward the vision as outlined above. This is part of my motivation to complete my graduate studies--so that I can approach policy makers in a way that allows me to speak with conviction and authority while remaining deeply connected to practitioners and the university community. I feel like this process is similar to a calling one feels in one’s bones. And I’m in for the long haul.
As always, thoughts and comments are most welcome.
Reference:
Cochran-Smith, M. and S. L. Lytle (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Educational Research in Education 24: 249-305.
Keywords: action research, Cochran-Smith & Lytle, computing, conference, convergence, educational technology, inquiry, inquiry stance, Konrad Glogowski, learning, practitioner research, professional development, Read/Write Web, research, social media, social software, TalkShoe, teacher inquiry, teacher professional development, teacher research, teaching, Web 2.0, webheads, wiaoc2007
Comments
I think one of the big obstacles to developing valuable teacher development strategies is assessment and evaluation. As a teacher who embraced blogging and community-building in my classroom, I have been struggling to develop assessment and evaluation practices that reflect and complement the kind of cognitive engagement that occurs in my classroom and do not reduce learning to a single letter grade. I know from experience that most teachers, when encouraged to use Web 2.0 tools in their classrooms, often reply by saying "How do I assess and evaluate this?" It often seems to me that this emphasis on assigning grades dominates teacher professional practice. Traditionally, teachers have always been in charge of judging and evaluating. Today, the world of Web 2.0 allows us to become participants and learners, along with our students. The grading practices, however, have not changed and many of us struggle to reconcile this traditional approach to evaluation and a new approach to teaching and learning.
The "inquiry stance" can be very helpful but even the most engaged, reflective, critical, and inspiring educators are often forced to adopt the existing policies on assessment and evaluation. I think that your comment about getting administrators and policy-makers involved in teacher education is extremely important. As you rightly point out, "Teachers will never embrace such a stance if their working environment leaves them no time to focus on anything but producing outstanding test takers." Well said.
Kelly,
I would be really interested in learning about your point of view - the point of view of an administrator. What role do you see yourself playing in all this? What role would you like to play?
from one thinking blogger to another… thankful for words that make the synapses fire
http://devel2.njit.edu/serendipity/index.php?/archives/327-Thinking-Bloggers.html
Konrad, I've been thinking about assessment and evaluation since you mentioned how you were wrestling with it in your Webheads In Action Online Covergence presentation the other day.
As long as there's a mandated provincial report card, I think we're going to have to play the school game in terms of student evaluation. At least in Ontario that may not be as bad as it seems. I find that there is room to manoeuvre within the prescribed Achievement Charts. First and foremost, students must be active participants in designing the performance assessments, setting the criteria and evaluating the products. This both "demystifies" evaluation and shares ownership of the process. This has always been good assessment practice and can find a place within a Web 2.0 classroom.
Let's look at an example. Suppose grade 8 students decide they are going to demonstrate their speaking skills through the production of podcasts. If you look at the Language Arts curriculum you can easily come up with appropriate expections:
Since in performance assessment the goal is to create rich demonstrations of learning, criteria should be established for as many of the categories of knowledge and skills as possible. So let's see if we can match the expectations to the (pre-defined) categories. Including students in this process gives them a framework for looking at their own learning. Here's one way to organize the expectations.
Category: Knowledge of content
Category: Thinking (use of planning skills)
Category: Communication
Category: Application (of knowledge and skills)
The next step is to negotiate (with the students) the criteria for each category. If we start with the Knowledge of Content category, we can come up with criteria such as varying pace, editing out pauses, modulating volume levels etc. When we add the descriptors from the Achievement Chart we should get a description of the performance e.g. Through production of her podcast "abc", student x demonstrated considerable knowledge of vocal effects by varying the pace of delivery in the recording phase, editing out the long pauses and modulating the volume levels in the production editing phase. The process is of course continued through the other categories, adding richness to the description.
The descriptor "considerable" (according to the Ontario Achievement Chart) translates to "B" on the report card. While the "B" is meaningless in itself; it's not arbitrary. There is at least a description of the performance. I think the principles of performance assessment can point us in the right direction in terms of evaluation in a Web 2.0 classroom; it's the communication piece - the report card that has to go.
Thanks for the wonderful post.
The need to evaluate students with a grade definetely makes adopting web 2.0 practices a bit difficult for a teacher.
I am planning to create a class blog and encourage students of my Java course to participate by creating their own blog (which will be blogrolled from the class blog) , and also on a newsgroup.A simple guideline may be to post perspectives, tips, and examples, project progress reports on the blog and use the discussion forum for questions and doubts. I personally think, this process will aid the students in reflection, and conversation, but I still have to figure out how to grade them in a fair manner. If I do not grade their online participation, they may not participate at all. yes, it's sad how heavily students are still driven by grades.
To be able to grade the students fairly I will have to follow each and every post that they have posted, and asses each on quality (also need to find out if the post has been copied from elsewhere on the net). I am not sure of it is possible to do this considering time pressures. One thought that has come to my mind is to have a seperate test, the questions for which will come from the students blogs and newsgroup interaction. This way those who participate are in a way preparing for that test. I am not sure if this is a good idea and will work out well. Does anyone have any thoughts.
However, I do not think the evaliation ends with an objective grade. It's only the school's evaluation that ends with a grade. The blog will allow students to be evaluated by the community as well as future employers. Off course, these are non quantifiable benefits. Students can include their blog in their resume for prospective employers to actually see what work they did in the course. Also good posts will get linked by other practioners, thus increasing their reputation in the community. Finally the blog will serve as a tool for self assessment (I also hope to encourage the students to use Konrad's self assessment progress report), which will help students map their progress, and fine tune their learning process to learn better and deeper.
Just some thoughts that I have been having from some time...
By the way, I will be glad to participate in your conversations on teacher professional development.
--
Regards
Parag
http://www.adaptivelearningonline.net
Action research is enlightning since it entails being open to revise our own methods, goals etc while looking for change and innovation and, perhaps, to adopt a different perspective of teaching and learning.
Regards