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.
Also, feel free to weigh I on what, if anything, Mutter and Bryk relate to
Labaree.
I was not a big fan of the overall tone of the article. It seemed to be negative and at times even combative. It was well written and full of a lot of interesting information, it just seemed pessimistic to me. Also, I know that to some extent he needs to generalize in his writing, but it seems overly simplistic to assume there is going to be conflict or that teachers entering a program will not want to engage in research. This may be the case for some individuals but I think that teachers enter PhD programs for a myriad of reasons and will most likely be more open minded than this article suggests.
ReplyDeleteI did like that he suggested on page 21 that faculty members be more willing to talk about how they carry out their own research. Clarity goes a long way in creating understanding.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteChad, I agree that the tone of the article seemed pessimistic. I also found it very elitist in a few ways. Within the first page, he makes the claim that education schools produce "large numbers of teachers at minimal cost and with minimal attention to academic and professional quality" (p. 13). That's quite a statement to start an article...
DeleteI agreed with a lot of the points of the article, especially about research being soft but largely applied. However, I also agree with Chad, that the tone of the article was pessimistic. While I can agree that research in the education field is often trying to solve very large complex problems without discovering enough causation, I have seen researchers try to combat this in the field of education. You can see the power of the research that people are doing with the conversations we are having about standardized tests and if they are useful. The field of education is attempting to produce more rigorous research and better understand causation.
ReplyDeleteI also have seen in the program at VCU that understanding the limits of different research approaches is emphasized. I would disagree with Labaree that the academics are not acknowledging the limits of their work. In fact, I think that is largely frowned upon.
When I was growing up, I wanted to be a teacher. I never narrowed down the grade or subject, but I practiced many summers by forcing my brother and his friends to attend my "class." When I was in middle school, my mother went to college to become a teacher. She graduated at 50 years old with a bachelor's in teaching and became a Kindergarten teacher. As soon as I saw all the hoops that she jumped through on a regular basis that had very little to do with actually teaching the children, I immediately changed my career path. I am becoming an educational researcher having never taught in K-12 education.
ReplyDeleteI think that this article brought up a lot of valid arguments about educational research. It is a softer science that faces an uphill battle in gaining respect from other research areas as well as society as a whole. Educational researchers try to explain a lot, and also fail a lot because of the complexity of the field. However, Labaree's article works off of what I would call an elitist assumption that the educators becoming scholars are the ones that have the wrong perspective and it's up to the educators to bend as they become scholars. I think the focus should've been on working together, creating research opportunities that involve teachers and their real work perspectives, whether or not they are doctoral students. How can scholars be the experts if they're not the ones educating children or applying their "expertise"?
It is amazing how at some schools, teaching K-12, can be much more about class management, or standardized testing, than actually teaching the students.
DeleteEducation does face a lot of challenges because it is seen as squishy. Our textbook for 710 talks about this a lot in Chapter one. How do we prove ourselves as researchers in social fields.
I understand many of the points that he is trying to make with this article. I have had the impression that the school of education is on the bottom of the totem pole, especially with funding. I worked in the school of business last semester and my entire MA program. It is different there. Things seemed so important and funding wasn't an issue. Education is a helping profession, which does attract a lot of women and women haven't always been viewed as equal and educated. I think there are many truths in what he is writing; however, say what?!
ReplyDeleteResearcher bias is real and alive in this article. It is written from an obviously bias perspective that is very negative. I am surprised it was published. Many of the articles cited are out of date or he cites himself (I know this is okay, but in his case...). Agreeing with yourself doesn't convince me that the author is correct. Since this is the only article that I have read by him, I don't trust him as an author, so I don't trust his other works. I understand that the article is from 2003, so many of the articles that he cited were not out of date for when he published them. The article still seems dated.
I did get a kick out of some of the words he used to describe things, "mushy" or "can't get no respect"
I don't think that teachers are a bad pool of future researchers either. I think there might be some challenges in theory vs application, because theory is great and all, but man, when you get into the real world, it can be a wake up call for some professions. For example: teachers and classroom management. I have heard so many horror stories. There is probably not a one size fits all approach or even combo that works for all classes. So talking about classroom management in theory and writing papers on it is all well and good, but ask a K-12 teacher about it and I bet you would be in for some stories. I don't think this is a worldview difference necessarily.
On a different note:
"Not only are teachers imposing a particular
curriculum on students, then, but they are also denying them the liberty to do something else." I don't think this applies in higher education.
I'm glad you brought up his citations, I noticed that too. I also noticed that there were many broad and potent statements that he made about the profession and teachers that did not include a citation. Where did he get this information? What it only his own experience?
DeleteThis article intrigued me in many ways, mainly because of how shocking and assertive it was. It actually was quite entertaining at times, and frustrating at others…yes, I experienced a spectrum of feelings. The claims were bold, but much of it did make since. I grew up wanting to be a teacher, and still have that passion, and I see where the author is coming from. I loved the example used, where there is a fight in the classroom. The teacher wants to break up the fight to maintain classroom order, and the researcher wanted to understand why the fight broke out. This was a clear demonstration of the differences and shifts in perspectives. However, I disagree with how separate he made these claims.
ReplyDelete“I argue that the shift from K–12 teaching to educational research often asks students to transform their cultural orientation from normative to analytical, from personal to intellectual, from the particular to the universal, and from the experiential to the theoretical” (Labaree, 2003, p. 16).
While I understand the thought behind this quote, I disagree that there is a distinct shift. Instead, I would argue that these research perspectives are added, and the normative, personal, and particular orientations are still maintained. I still believe they influence educational research and it needs to still be a guiding light during doctoral programs. The final section of the paper FINALLY addresses this point, but the whole paper separates these orientations and creates a toxic divide between research and practice.
-Michael Deitz
While I agreed with the general premise of this article, that the education field is undervalued in the United States, I struggled with some other aspects. Having not been a teacher, I cannot speak to the mentality that teachers have when they choose to pursue a doctorate in education. I am, however, perplexed by the implied surprise that they had no idea that they would be shifting from practitioner to researcher. Is this something that is not discussed or disclosed in conversations about doctoral programs? Coming from a psychology and counseling background, I had been told be professors and even engaged in research since my undergraduate degree. Again, this may be my lack of experience of teaching, but this was difficult to relate with.
ReplyDeleteThe idea brought up in the article about education field being occupied mostly by women to me is true to my experienced in most of my classes. In the University where I did my undergraduate studies, I would say that 95% of the students in education were women, while men dominated in other fields.
ReplyDelete