How did Pring’s Ch. 1-2 and the Eisenhart
and Towne article leave you feeling about the possibility of educational
research to be scientific? What obstacles do you see to realizing the vision of
a scientifically-based ed. research and are they insurmountable?
I think that educational research does suffer in comparison to research done in medical fields and the like. Often times medical research results in direct tangible changes to treatments and best practice. This is not as often the case with educational research and I think the readings showed that is a big reason why there are skeptics when it comes to educational research.
ReplyDeleteI think that is a positive sign for educational research that these conversations about the quality of their research are being had by educational researchers themselves. To me that means they care about the quality of their work. I do think research needs to be careful to not be so theoretically minded that they are no practically good. To sum up what Pring says on page 11 of Chapter 1 educational research should draw upon the social sciences but should not be reduced to a social science.
Medical research typically uses p<.02 and larger numbers for N. I am curious if education researches used more rigorous research methods more often, if education research would be taken more seriously. I am also curious if we aren't trained to conduct rigorous research? Some program only require 4 classes in research. Does that really prepare students to conduct research in this manner? And if we were to conduct more rigorous research, would it not be "practically good?"
DeleteI think that education research can be more scientific. I suppose it might depend on how we define the construct of scientific. The way in which research is conducted is "supposed" to be scientific, to my understanding.
ReplyDeleteIn regard to Kennedy's concerns about educational research, I think there is a mix of helpful research that is relevant to practice; however, not always accessible. Teachers may not get access to journals. Even if they did, in what time are they reading best practices articles? Some teachers didn't go to school to be a teacher and may not have read about teaching while in school for the subject matter. Even if they had access and time to read articles, they might not understand the language of the article.
What I gathered from the Pring reading is that educational researchers need to focus on creating operational definitions of constructs, improve methodological rigor, and provide realistic implications of research results for those teaching (p. 10). I do not think this task is completely insurmountable, however I recognize that it would take a unification of the educational field, which right now appears very divided (as stated last week, there is no single accreditation body). With no sole standards of practice, who is holding researchers accountable? Just the academic journals? Even they have questionable standards. In fact, according to Journal Citation Reports, a majority of Education/Educational Research journals have an impact factor of less than 3, whereas other fields had much higher impact factors and a greater range.
ReplyDelete(https://jcr.incites.thomsonreuters.com/JCRJournalHomeAction.action?SID=A1-bcJELnm1nT1iZ7dnuFadSA221vulx2BPC1-18x2dh2x2BKvynnoUgeA24DqhpckAx3Dx3DKH58ITGi9436LcmMgmbZuAx3Dx3D-9vvmzcndpRgQCGPd1c2qPQx3Dx3D-wx2BJQh9GKVmtdJw3700KssQx3Dx3D&SrcApp=IC2LS&Init=Yes)
I think last week's and this week's readings have made it very clear that educational research faces an uphill battle in the research world. As we discussed in class, they suffer from person-centered research which is ever-changing, ambiguous, and often very specific, at best. The disconnect between the research world and the teaching world is one that continuously sticks out to me as problematic. Often the aim of educational research is not to uphold the status quo, but to better circumstances for schools, teachers, and students. Pring points out that policymakers snub their noses at educational researchers and make funding really, really hard (pp. 7-8; 10-11).
ReplyDeleteI'm anxious to learn more about the "defining what you mean" as discussed in Chapter 2. I have to admit that most of that goes over my head, but I think I understand the gist of it. I noted the passage on page 16 about knowledge and understanding. "A traditional analysis of knowledge is that it is (a) a belief, (b) which is true, and (c) whose claim to truth can be justified. But here lies the problem, for different sorts of beliefs have different sorts of justifications." With this obstacle, can we ever come to an understanding in the research and teaching worlds, even on very specific issues? Food for thought...
I liked the title of Chapter 2 "Doing Philosophy" because I think it embodies the biggest issue with educational research and the barrier educational research faces in regards to lack of rigor. It is difficult to make a case for educational research when definitions are not agreed upon and clarified. However, I do not believe that this issue is insurmountable. I think if programs put an emphasis on conceptualizing and defining educational concepts then it will put the programs at a better advantage to better explain behavior and outcomes.
ReplyDeleteFunding is an important topic of concern in educational research. Right now educational research is a risky investment because it is unclear what is being measured, what constructs mean, and the benefits of educational research. If there is a better emphasis on developing meaning then improvements in funding will come because policy makers will be able to interpret and apply educational research results.
I think from the readings; the quality of educational research has been subjected to criticism largely due to lack of connection between researchers and practitioners. Unlike other fields like medicine where doctors are involved in identifying research needs and formulating questions that respond to the needs and therefore coming up with tangible treatment to diseases and solving problems in the medical field. The lack of quality in educational research could also be due to lack of teachers applying existing research into practice; First, is because they may not identify with the research and second, the published research has been done out of their context, the teachers were not involved and therefore, they may find it inapplicable to their teaching practices. As recognized from the readings "teaching has not been subjected to the sustained, empirical and practice-oriented inquiry into problems and alternatives which we find in university-based professions” Pring, p. 3. I think solutions exist on the educational research in providing answers to the existing problems.
ReplyDeleteI believe educational research can be scientific, but there are many constraints at the current moment. One of the big reasons I feel educational research can feel “useless”, or “irrelevant” is because researchers have to stick to “grantable” guidelines, and miss out on potentially beneficially research because they do not have the funds. As Pring (2015) states “much research is dismissed as worthless, not deserving funding” (p. 5). This is a big obstacle contributing to the perception that it cannot be scientific.
ReplyDeleteAnother obstacle is the fact that the educational research relies on a lot of qualitative data. Quantitative data has long seen to be more factual and concrete, however, qualitative data can provide context and meaning. In counselor education, qualitative data has enabled researchers to understand perceptions and experiences of doctoral students and faculty members. But since this is a “soft” science, and based on feelings and emotions, it is not seen as scientific at times. Once we can break these views, and expand grantable opportunities, I believe there can be a shift in the perception of educational research.
-Mike Deitz
In my take on readings the semantics issue is a cornerstone for much of this discourse. Additionally I continue to maintain that attempting to apply the "scientific method" in circumstances which involve on-going moving targets (students/human beings) educational research will continue to struggle. On the flip side, I disagree with some of the criticisms cited in Pring (doesn't provide answers to questions, doesn't help teachers in professional practice) but certainly do see a great deal of fragmentation or lack of coherent and reliable base for practice/policy. I would have to question whether that fragmentation is a result of the changing scope of education (i.e. political motivations). While in last week's class discussion I actually referenced the medical field, I feel attempting to draw comparison between the two fields is a bit inappropriate. Medical research is likely around an agreed upon "problem" that is more easily defined (illness such as cancer). Problems in education are not as easily identified/defined ("educational illness" - does that mean difficult behaviors in a classroom, students not retaining information, generalizing concepts, poorly trained teachers, unmotivated leaders, etc.). The quality measurement section from chp 1 makes me exceptionally uncomfortable, as it would seem that type of situation has played out in public education - if students/schools don't reach a certain level of "quality performance" funding is potentially impacted. So again, you're not really getting to the root of the difficulty of a situation but instead applying a level of incentivizing that sets up false circumstances. Additionally, consider that while research within certain fields can be done with strict adherence to the scientific method, I don't believe that can exist in educational systems, thereby touching upon the morals/ethics piece of things. I do believe there are solutions to some of the difficulties - & I believe some of those solutions may well lie within those "in the trenches". One of the biggest problems I've seen in educational system, regardless of the type is the ivory tower. People climb in to positions of influence and then lose touch with those they are intending to assist. Almost a "ghost in the machine" but at a systems level, as opposed to a debate about body/brain. I don't think these problems or difficulties are insurmountable but I would suggest consideration for ed research as to whether we're looking at a moment in time research situation/research "problem" or a larger scale contribute to the overall body of knowledge research situation. - Phyllis
ReplyDelete