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?
Labaree asserts a number of blanketed statements with authority to which I find absent of vastly important considerations. First, he assumes doctoral students “have already lived a life.” Such a generalization lacks depth and presents as so widely subjective that it lends little significant value to the dialogue of scholar-practitioner development. The experiences and obligations of adult life Labaree mentions may vary intensely from person to person as do the communities, students, and school cultures in which we teach; thus, the sweeping mentions in this article form what often congeals into rhetorical debate rather than meaningful action regarding pedagogy, practice, and worthwhile research and application. The “calm certainty” Labaree notes that new doctoral students express in the “future of their country and its children” must have left me out of that exchange as it is the lack thereof that propelled me to pursue doctoral studies in addition to actualizing that the future generations of our country rely on a great deal more than simply the quality of teaching and learning in schools.
ReplyDelete-Sandy Ting
One assertion Larabee makes is that teacher-doctoral students often "feel that the programs are challenging the legitimacy of their own teacher-based perspectives on education" and this causes them to act by "resisting key elements of the research training process." This has not been my experience at all. I think that how a doctoral student reacts to the research process probably has a great deal to do with their mindset going into the program. In my experience, the people who embark on this journey are doing so because they want to step beyond their classroom mindset. At least, this has been my experience thus far.
ReplyDeleteJoy
First, I did not fully realize that my status as a teacher was considered “lowly.” A big thank you to Labaree for pointing this out! (sarcasm). I will try to temper my enthusiasm at work from now on. I could go on but I will spare my classmates.
ReplyDeleteIt appears that Labaree feels it is difficult for teachers to grasp the nature and use of methodology in the pursuit of knowledge. Teachers grapple with complex issues and problem solving strategies daily. Methodology is just another flex of the brain. I am confident there are scholars who experience the same level of difficulties in this area as well.
I found it interesting that he labels teachers who are doctoral students as “grownups.” Years in age do not equal intellectual maturity or curiosity. This is fairly insulting to those outside of the teaching profession.
Labaree’s assertion that for teachers to shift to the mindset of researcher requires a change in orientation underestimates the fluid nature of those who join such programs of study.
I do not perceive an existing struggle between teaching and research. The two do and should complement each other. As a teacher I do not see new ideas as a threat to what I am already doing. Good teachers welcome a different opinion. Good researchers should as well.
Labaree claims that education teachers often have difficulties transforming into education researchers because of the cultural clash between teacher and academic cultures. Although I agree that education is often viewed as less prestigious field and is less respected in comparison to other professions, I do not believe that this exclusively leads to the abandonment of teacher cultures in research. Furthermore, this process is not so black and white—we, as educators, rather build upon former knowledge throughout our doctoral careers and gain insight on diverse, and, perhaps new, perspectives as a result of morally-driven ideologies. Thus, there is no “one or the other” or “us versus them;” instead, teachers and researchers, with our different roles and responsibilities, constitute a single community of professionals striving for positive improvements to the field.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, I also disagree with Labaree that age means maturity. In doctoral programs, students come from dissimilar backgrounds and with a variety of experiences that have guided them to their doctoral education. My experiences have shaped my doctoral path, and yet, I just turned twenty-four last weekend. Unlike what Labaree supposes, my young age does not define me as less mature than my peers. I admit that upon entering this program, I did feel some age intimidation, and at times I still do. However, this does not create an inability to “take charge,” but instead, it fuels my desire to succeed.
Katie Brendli
Labaree gave words to several points that I agree with. For one, I was drawn to the analogy of the spread-out and hard to build-upon nature of educational research as a “rural” form of research instead of the urban sky-scrapers of knowledge in other fields. I also recognized a challenge that I bring into doctoral studies as Labaree described the P-12 educator as one who is looking to find solutions before fully understanding the problem. His description of the optimistic educator looking to study the latest intervention seemed like it was written directly about me. Reading this challenged my approach and forced me to analyze how my perspective could be an obstacle to shifting into the role of researcher.
ReplyDeleteI must offer a slight critique, however, on Labaree’s claim that a teacher and a researcher must necessarily have different perspectives. The author correctly asserts that it would be wrong professionally (and given the nature of teaching as a moral endeavor, morally) for a teacher to divert large portions of his or her energy and time toward research. That should not, however, prevent a teacher or other educator from adopting the mindset of a researcher. Teachers should be heavy and skilled consumers of research. They should be approaching their craft like an action researcher each day. They should be plugged-in to local and global research communities to better inform their practice and to build upon the general body of knowledge in the field. While Labaree is correct that a teacher and researcher will not deal in the same volume of research, it does not preclude the two from having a similar perspective.
John Marshall
Labaree argues that there is a clash between K12 teachers and higher education researchers because of conflicting lenses regarding how to produce "effective researchers" without abandoning the culture of teaching. However, his knowledge regarding the dynamic appears to be limited to his own experiences over an 18-year span at Michigan State (the article was published before scandals in recent years). I have to disagree with the assumption he makes regarding the unlikelihood of a student over the age of 35 to be capable of allowing a doctoral program to shape their perspectives due to “already living a life.” In fact psychologist, Raymond Cattell alludes that during the early to mid-30’s many adults have both a high fluid and crystallized intelligence, meaning they can solve new problems, use new logic and identify patterns as well as stabilize knowledge learned. - N.S.
ReplyDeleteI read Labaree with a different perspective and one in which he he does not account for through his article. Labaree discusses and categorizes individuals who enter into a doctoral program in education into two groups, those who taught in K-12 and those who did not. However, he spends the majority of his time discussing those who did teach and the tension that surfaces between teacher and researcher. I read this article through the lens of a related service provider who worked in an elementary and secondary public school setting. Futhermore, because I witnessed education shortcomings firsthand, gained experience, and study and worked as a practitioner I still feel the tensions he discusses but differently. I feel this tension greatly build within me as I begin the difficult conversations with my advisors on what will come after the completion of this program. I entered the program believing that I would gain more knowledge, graduate, and march myself back into the school systems and attempt to make a change, attempt to make it better, and attempt to be the best advocate for public education. However, upon the completion of year one I am feeling a pull. I am feeling an immense pull towards academia, but with this my mind becomes muddied with difficult questions. If I stay in academia am I just one more person who leaves the public education system? Am I disappointing my students if I stay and do research and not stand by their side as their advocate and supporter? Will I become so far removed from what is actually occurring within the walls of a public school if I remain in academia? These are the types of questions that plague my mind as I feel myself desires shift into wanting to remain in academia. This is the tension I feel as I continue my journey into my doctorate degree.
ReplyDeleteWhile reading this article I felt a wide array of emotions, questions continued to pop up, and I felt myself shaking my head in agreeance and then rapidly shaking my head no as I strongly disagreed. One of the Labaree's ideas that caused my head to rapidly shake no, is the tone of generalization who had through out the entirety of the article. He generalizes the ideas that everyone in education demonstrates difficulty being a teacher and a researcher, that doctoral students have a " lived life", and that teachers are seeking to fix while researchers are study the why. I am going to discuss the latter point here; I do not believe that researchers and teachers are do not have overlapping grounds. I understand the tensions that arise but I see those tensions in a more moral realm as I discussed above. However, I do not believe that researchers too are not looking to make better and fix- is this not the reason research is completed? Yes, I understand researchers typically examine why a behavior is occurring; however, the reasoning behind why something occurs leads another researcher or a later study to then answer what is the best intervention to prohibit this intervention from stopping. In my opinion I do not believe there is such a great gap as Labaree portrays. I actually believe that the gap is fabricated and that there is a great strength and relationship between teacher and researcher. Therefore, lets stop paying more attention to the "gap" and start focusing more on how strong of an advocator, researcher, and teacher one can be when they have the background and experience of k-12 and the analytical knowledge of a Ph.D researcher.
Erin S.
Labaree makes several bold and overarching assertions throughout this article. Although I agree with his assertion that transitioning from being teachers in public schools to education researchers in universities may be challenging for many, I do not believe that one has to be either one or the other. Teachers transitioning from public schools to universities bring a plethora of practical experience and expertise which not only aids their understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of these practices, but also helps to evaluate these theories, recognize their exceptionalities and situate them in more appropriate contexts. Furthermore, Labaree's claim that teachers must also transform their cultural orientation from normative to analytical does not resonate with me. Even as practicing professionals in public school settings, teachers, mostly likely, rely on their analytical thinking skills on a daily basis. From problem-solving to step-by-step thinking to break down complex problems into more manageable portions are skills that teachers are expected to possess. Therefore, I cannot help but disagree with Labaree's assertion that teachers do not already possess these skills in their tool-kits and must learn them as doctoral students.
ReplyDeleteThe author takes a step further and claims that these teachers respond to cultural clashes by challenging the proffered research-based perspectives and resisting key elements of the research training process; I highly disagree with this over-generalized statement. From my own readings, experience as a doctoral student in Special Education, and dialogue with numerous teachers, I have found that they often embrace research- and evidence-based strategies to enhance their practice and capabilities as educators. Using personal experience and adapting research-based strategies to appropriate contexts seem to be common practice among several teachers in my professional circles. Viewing these two orientations in a stark black-and-white light seems unwarranted and extreme; finding the right balance to explain the realities and commonalities of the two roles is crucial.
It seems as though Labaree makes claims in a very extreme fashion, which reminds me of the bomb throwing that Kurt was talking about Tuesday. While yes, it is true that K-12 teachers have a major goal of doing what is right to benefit their students, this is not the opposite of the goal of educational research. Teachers, and school systems, do not make their instructional decisions based on their gut feeling or following their hearts. Research-based decisions play a huge part in the decision making of teachers and schools systems. It is important for the decisions being made in school systems to be sound and backed by research. I understand using the juxtaposition of a researcher and teacher to make points in the article, but I cannot imagine such a dramatic opposition to the two in the real world.
ReplyDeleteLabaree says “Teachers also bring to doctoral study a set of plausible and professionally tested understandings about what makes education work” (p. 16). From the way I read this statement, as if only teachers know what makes education work, I do not agree with it. The assumption he (Labaree) makes in this article is that only teachers become educational researchers or are the only people that understand what happens within the classroom (see the section on The Transition From Teacher to Researcher: What Makes It Easy). I think in this discuss, Labaree mostly leaves out other partners in the education landscape, the role they play in understanding what makes education work, and the likelihood that they too could chose to become educational researchers.
ReplyDeleteMany research studies have shown the overwhelming benefits that the involvement of family and community bring to the education of children. These partnerships enrich the learning process and improve overall educational achievement. Based on this, shouldn’t the field of educational research include non-teachers? A tension I feel with research in education is that it often leaves out the voices of those who are not directly involved/engaged in formal learning. Generally, educational researchers want answers to questions such as: What can help our children learn better, or what should our children be learning? Teachers alone cannot answer these questions neither are the answers found only in the teacher-student relationship. There is much information that the community can contribute to educational research, but not just as participants but as partners. Labaree’s article does not do a good job of acknowledging that not only teachers head down the road of the educational researcher.
While there are multiple parts of this article that I find troubling, one aspect that I especially disagreed with is the idea that teachers do no think that theories are useful in classrooms. He states, “They are also often trapped in another way, by their own experience-based sense of teaching as a radically particularistic practice, which means they may harbor a deep suspicion that there are no generalities about teaching—no ideas or theories or modes of practice—that will be of any use to them in dealing with their own unique pedagogical problems.” (p. 8). While I agree that each classroom is different and teachers do seek to adapt their teaching based on their classroom’s individual needs, I do not think that teachers dismiss pedagogical theories and see them as having no use in their classrooms. In contrast, I think teachers actually seek any and all advice or assistance in finding what could possibly work in all kinds of situations. Teaching can be isolating in many school climates in the U.S., but I do not feel the majority of teachers desire this. Most teachers I have worked with try very hard to work collaboratively to find what could work whether that is based on other teachers’ experience or based on research findings.
ReplyDelete- Brooke
After finishing reading Labaree's article, I found some of the things he talked about were difficult for me to relate since I never worked at a K-12 setting before. I was trained to be more theory oriented and I am more prone to how theoretical framework shapes the research we do. I definitely think educational research should be disciplined and determined by theory, because I do not agree with him completely when he asserted that, "The mission of the educational researcher is to make sense of the way schools work and the way they don't" (p.17). Yes, it is true that we want to know more about these issues and their thorniness, but we do not want to stop there, we do want to make changes or impacts on these issues. The researchers are the ones who have the resources and data, if they choose not to participate in these decision makings, then who else have more expertise and authority in making those decisions, The politicians?
ReplyDeleteMoreover, I find this statement on page 19 troubling, "The key argument to support this position is that there is nothing moral about the long tradition of pursuing educational reform based on sentiment rather than any evidence that the reform might make things better". I think this is a question relates to the validity and reliability of our research. I agree that how we carry out our research should be solely based on the supporting theories, the right methodology, and data analysis. However, as researchers, our sense of morality and responsibility to our community and people are equally important in the solutions or findings we will propose. For example, maybe I am making a very big deal out of this, but I just do not see offering breakfast is school's responsibility. Those who thought of this plan to provide food for low-income students probably thought this is righteous thing to do and it would be more effective for students to learn without an empty stomach. The efficiency to resolve poverty or temporary hunger and the intention to make teachers' job easy have other negative impact on the structure of our society and family. The schools or the governments who support this program actually perpetuate poverty which becomes a vicious cycle. In my opinion, it is a social worker's job to help and teach the parents to learn how to budgeting and balancing their monthly spending so that they can have food for their children.
Labaree’s screed challenging the qualities and experience education practitioners bring to their PhD programs apparently arises from a perspective that classifies the world into dichotomies, beginning with his thesis that one is either a teacher or a researcher, but not both. In his view, one is incapable of being a teacher and researcher at the same time without failing in both roles and shortchanging both professions. It also is quite clear that if one must choose a role, then one would of course choose to be a researcher, because it is clearly superior to teacher. It is telling that Labaree leads with slightly more than one column of text (on a two-column page) devoted to the strengths that teachers bring to PhD programs, but devotes 10 ½ columns to the weakness and challenges teachers face in their doctoral studies.
ReplyDeleteThe most revealing statement Labaree makes regarding his view of who should be in education is ultimately revealed toward the end of his manuscript: “We need people in education who have highly developed intellectual capacities for interpreting evidence, making arguments, and establishing valid grounds for action. Researchers are such people” (2003, p. 19). What ultimately undermines Labaree’s position is his complete misunderstanding of what skills competent, experienced teachers employ daily in their classrooms – evidence interpretation, argumentation, and action research. By presenting such an obviously agenda-driven (instead of evidence-driven) argument, Labaree fails to reveal any true challenges to education created by teachers moving from teaching to research, but he does expose his discomfort with experienced professionals bringing their practical knowledge to their doctoral programs and challenging researchers who likely do not know as much as they think they know.