Personal Blogs

  identify a research problem and the questions which follow from this. This may involve a number of associated activities (e.g. observing practice, reading, surfing the internet, seeking other viewpoints).

This is where one’s mind suddenly goes blank. Now I know how my learners feel when I say ‘over to you’ and try to get them doing a task. Plenty of support needed first so using the points given in the course notes.

I am interested in online environments so would like to examine how teachers can harness the power of social media to encourage learners to interact and support each other’s learning through online forums. This is nothing new – plenty of research done around the topic. Would need to find a gap.

   Establish/identify a context within which to undertake the enquiry (e.g. a sports club, a work canteen, an office).

I have just been asked to deliver a teacher training course to 14 teachers in Libya via Skype. I would like to support this with a wiki, blogs, an Edmodo forum and Twitter group. I plan to design a series of tasks requiring the learners to contribute to different forums. I will ask them to keep a learning journal in their blogs, which they will share in the wiki.

My research question might be something like:

To what extent can online learning journals support learning?

Or: what are the barriers to participation in online learning and how can they be overcome?

   Learn what other people who have researched in a similar context have discovered about this question (if any) (i.e. undertake a literature search).

I took this idea from a colleague, who designed a distance learning course for English through a blog. Here is his example: http://tinyurl.com/narxwux

Literature might include Engestrom’s communities of practice and Fuller & Unwin (2003)’s work into knowledge use and creation in the workplace.

  Establish a view of the problem drawing on relevant theories about learning and knowledge. (You have seen how other researchers have done this in articles you have already read; you will develop your own understanding in Part 2.)

 Constructivism, communities of practice

  Establish a research approach which aligns with the view of the problem.

 Compare 2 populations; one studying without using social media, one with?

  Decide where the data to address the research question lie.

 Exam performance, evidence in online journals

  Think about how you will gain access to these data – this will probably involve identifying various options and thinking what the implications of each might be (e.g. why talk to A, B and C rather than D, E and F?).

 Learners will share a link to their blogs via a course forum. A questionnaire could also be used to establish frequency of use of/contribution to online forums.

  Study and analyse the data; this may take a long time as you try out different options.

  Derive findings from the data.

Research shows that multi-tasking in the online environment is detrimental to learning and adversely affects our ability to concentrate. However, sharing and synthesising information are the new skills needed in the online learning environment.

  Share the findings with the appropriate people. Who will be interested in them? Do the findings generate new knowledge, inform practice, test or measure something? Remember it is possible that the purpose of the investigation was to increase your understanding of something within your own practice, thus the data may not be of interest to anyone else.

As this is a pilot scheme, I need to produce a report about what worked/didn’t work for future trainers to use.

Note down your initial ideas as to what the research process might involve in your workplace or a community in which you are involved.

Analysis of blog contributions/interaction between group members.

Andrew Pollard interview (part a)

• The reason to launch the TLRP

Need for more engagement in educational research.

Need for reform – policy makers vs practitioners

'Too much social science research is inward looking, too piecemeal rather than helping to build knowledge in a cumulative way.. issues for research are too supplier driven rather than focusing n the key concerns to policy-makers, practitioners and the public at large.'

Blunkett (2000)

(This quote may be contentious in light of Ball's revelations about the wholesale marketing of research to form government education policy)

The criteria for funding

Practical projects. How to help specific learners e.g. SEN likely to gain funding.

• The sort of researcher that the Director hopes to attract

A combination of ‘blue skies thinker’ and pragmatist

• The way that Pollard perceives the role of the TLRP in disseminating research and influencing practice.

Clear communication of how to implement reform based on evidence

External: generating new knowledge about teaching

Internal: supporting the development of research

• What Pollard sees as the outcomes or purpose of the research

Complex factors to consider. Research is one element. Providing best advice possible, up to politicians to make judgements. Working rapidly to make statements/commentaries on particular issues to try to keep up with new policies.

• The specific contribution that research can make in contrast to practitioner experience, for example: the application of the research findings in different contexts.

Practitioner knows the context they are working in. Offering of evidence can help them to make better judgements.

• The way in which Pollard uses the word ‘evidence’

Helps to make judgements. Promotes understanding. Resolving dilemmas. Assisting decision making process.

• The effect of participating in research on the professional identity of the teacher.

Involvement of practitioners lends validity. Teachers are helpers, advisors, allies & advocates. People more willing to participate in meetings/seminars & distribute findings.

Mary James interview

• The way in which the research project emerged

Grew out of interests: formative assessment/changes in classroom practice directed towards learning rather than exam performance. Expanding scope of research from small groups to wider population but with limited resources. Scaled up, rolled out school wide.

2 areas of research:

Assessment for learning/pedagogy

Research on professional learning & school improvement

• The scope and structure of the project

Desire to study student outcomes as a result of their experience in the classroom rather than exam performance. 

Classroom observations

Interviews with teachers/groups of students

Questionnaires for students & teachers about learning practices

Interviews with head teachers about management strategy

Observation schedules had many categories (ticks etc, field notes (open ended)

Different audiences, different demands. TLRP tries to appeal to both.

Practitioners, research community, policy makers.

Practitioners need workable ideas that fit with own value system e.g. teaching ‘manual’

Obligation to make sure scientific warrant was there – papers peer reviewed & published in academic journals. Teaching manual hardly mentions research. Ts need ideas they can practically implement.

Policy makers want warrant but often interested in ‘does this work?’ measured in specific ways. Pressure to provide evidence of increasing standards (empirical evidence, positivism, results driven)

Re-professionalisation of teachers?

Not just about delivering curriculum but how sts can be helped to learn (promoting learning autonomy) encouraging questions.

• The way that different themes in the project grew organically

Accumulation of data.

Compare quantitative data (performance results) with qualitative:  learner experience.

Interrogate patterns of difference

Knowledge sharing via electronic network communities encouraged

• The way in which the data were analysed.

Practical criticism approach – treated video like a text – group watches lesson & identify areas of practice that are interesting to them. Enabled distinction between assessment for learning procedures (majority) on surface level or deeper internalisation of principle – better equipped to respond to unpredictable situations.

• Try to relate the situations that James describes to your own workplace or one you are familiar with.

James mentions that staff development and action research projects had to be stimulated through INSETT sessions and ‘critical friends’.

If teachers can see that something will work, they will use it. This has been my experience when running PD sessions on using technology for teaching. Staff are willing to participate if they knew the tools under discussion can make their life in the classroom easier. Finding a time when people can meet for informal learning sessions can be challenging. The ‘knowledge sharing via electronic network communities’ that James mentions is an effective way to disseminate information shared at conferences. This also provides an informal space for reflection and sharing of best practice. Informal, small scale staff generated PD sessions are generally more productive than big conferences. Observations by ‘line managers’, are often an exercise in paper filling for administrative purposes. Every teacher has their ‘stock’ lesson which they roll out when inspection time comes. This makes it hard to measure what James describes as more ‘deeply internalised principles’, which allow teachers to respond to and exploit serendipitous opportunities for learning. These kind of ‘flashes’ that James mentions having seen occasionally on video, are difficult to measure as they are spontaneous and arise out of complex, constantly changing  classroom dynamics. Trying to produce empirical evidence to prove that learning is happening is difficult as it may be intangible.  That could be why James struggled to convey the exact way that video data was analysed. The promotion of student generated content e.g. videos, posters, digital projects, in my experience, is one way for students to gather evidence of their own learning. This can then, if necessary, be shared with other stakeholders e.g. management or parents.

References

Blunkett, D (2000) Influence or irrelevance? Can social science improve government? Presentation at ESRC seminar February (London Department for Education and Skills)

Too tired to find the others...

Ball’s ‘stream of consciousness’ style of writing is quite hard to penetrate, but here is my attempt to answer the prompts:

1. How does Ball’s account differ from that of Bassey, and how it is similar?

Bassey argues that educational research should be treated with more respect. He says that it should stop drawing on the methodologies of other social sciences and ‘stand on its own ground’ (p.145). Ball seems to be more pessimistic about the fragmentation of educational research and argues that it is self-destructive. He criticises the use of ‘policy science’ e.g. management theory, to measure school effectiveness. This fits with Bassey (1995, p.144)’s despair at the idea that government quangos should decide which issues should be researched.

Both authors mention criticism of past theory as healthy for research. Ball (p.162) cites Faucalt (1977)

‘If (historical consciousness) examines itself and if, more generally, it interrogates the various forms of scientific consciousness in its history it finds that all these forms and transformations are aspects of the will to knowledge: instinct, passion, the inquisitor’s devotion, cruel subtlety and malice.’

This ties in with Bassey (p. 143)’s argument that examination of ancient texts stimulates thought on philosophical issues.

2. Is the dichotomy seen by Ball the same as Bassey’s?

Having read the course notes, I want to try to understand what is meant by Ball’s dichotomy (as described by Fay, 1975) between ‘policy science’ and ‘policy scholarship’. If policy science refers to choosing the best procedure for the implementation of technical goals, could an example of this be rating teacher performance according to pupils’ exam grades? If so, does policy scholarship pay more attention to the study of ‘fleeting qualities of the lived experience’ (p. 110) such as social context, class and gender? I wasn’t sure about this.

Note carefully the characteristics of ‘policy science’ (p. 109). (You might want to record these in your learning journal.) When you are introduced to the positivist paradigm in Part 2 you might want to return to your notes on Ball’s description and his words such as ‘technicist’ and ‘efficient’ to see how they fit

Policy science vs policy scholarship:

‘Policy science is a set of procedures which enables one to determine the technically best course of action to adopt in order to implement a decision or achieve a goal.’ ‘Policy scientists do not merely clarify the possible outcomes of certain courses of action, they usually choose e most efficient course of action in terms of the available scientific information.’ The purview of the policy scientist is limited to, and by, the agenda of social and political problems defined elsewhere and by solutions already embedded in scientific practice.' Brian Fay (1975)

What are the implications of the dichotomy that Ball sees?

If policy science means reducing research to league tables, this would obviously mean inequality due to the lack of attention to social context.

‘The idea that human sciences like educational studies stand outside or above the political agenda of the management of the population, or somehow have a neutral status embodied in a free-floating progressive rationalism, are dangerous and debilitating conceits.’ (Ball, p.113)

It is difficult to disagree with Ball’s point about the dangers of blaming schools for student performance (p.111), but in the section that suggests ‘policy entrepreneurship’ as an alternative, it is difficult to discern exactly what this means. Does this ‘post structural, post epistemological’ alternative mean small scale research projects? What exactly does he mean by ‘thinking otherwise’ (p.116)? I am not sure about this.

Are they the same as the implications from Bassey’s dichotomy?

Both authors stress the importance of theory, but both seem to advocate the need to disrupt established theory. Ball suggests working ‘on and against prevailing practices of ideological subjection’ (p.117). This seems a more radical approach than Bassey’s suggestion that elements of constructivism, motivation and social dynamics theory should influence the personal theories of individual practitioners.

I found all this quite hard to decipher and I am not sure if I am any the wiser!

References

Ball, S. (1995) ‘Intellectuals or Technicians: the urgent role of theory in educational studies’, British Journal of Educational Studies, Blackwell Publishing.

Bassey, M (1995) Creating Education through Research: a global perspective of educational research for the 21st Century (Newark: Kirklington Moor Press)

Foucalt, M (1991) Questions of Method. The Foucalt Effect: Studies in Governmentality. (Brighton, Harvester, Wheatsheaf) Cited in Ball (1995)

Fay, B (1975) Social Theory in Political Practice (Hammondsworth, Penguin). Cited in Ball (1995)

Gao, F. and Shum, M. (2010) ‘Investigating the role of bilingual teaching assistants in Hong Kong: an exploratory study’ [Tip: hold Ctrl and click a link to open it in a new tab. (Hide tip)] , Educational Research, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 445–56.

1. What is the research about?

This is a general investigation into whether bi-lingual teaching assistants help South Asian students to assimilate in the Chinese school system.

2. What are the research questions?

As suggested in the notes, the RQ seems to be:

'Do bilingual teaching assistants enhance the learning of pupils who are similarly bilingual?'

The exact focus of the research is not made explicit. The overall purpose is:

'To obtain overall understanding of the roles of bi-lingual TAs' (p.448)

3. Is there evidence of the authors’ values (i.e. what they think is important)? If you can find them, note them down.

The authors' main concern seems to be equality. They mention that South Asians are vulnerable, disadvantaged and discriminated against in Hong Kong society.

'The classroom as a community of practice involves conflicts and inequalities for linguistic minority students.'

They also note the beneficial influence of bi-lingual TAs in other schools:

'More and more schools notice the value and importance of teaching assistants inside the school'.

4. How did the researchers undertake the enquiry? Can you see any connections between this approach and any values you noted in (3)?

The research hinges on open ended questions asked in interviews of 2 TAs.

13 teachers were also interviewed, but there is very little mention of their responses.

5. To what extent did the authors acknowledge any previous research undertaken in this area?

Townsend and Parker (2009) on the isolation of SA learners.

Delpit (1995); Kubota (2004) on equality

Ku, Chan and Sandhu (2005); Loper (2004)  on the importance of language s a tool to facilitate adjustment into society.

6. Is it clear what sort of evidence the researchers produced?

Apart from the need for further research, the conclusions are quite general and seem to be a foregone conclusion. Bi-lingual TAs are, of course, bound to make a difference. Perhaps, to make it more scientific,the results of two sets of pupils, one with and one without a TA, could have been compared.

7. Did the data allow the researchers to address their original question/dilemma/ concern?

A series of quotes from teachers, students and TAs does reveal the need for better integration of minorities, which seems to be the underlying angle of the research.

8. What was the scope of the research?

As the course notes suggest, the research is

'small-scale and undertaken by practitioners within their own workplace'

The results of 2 interviews with TAs are discussed and quotes from students are included.. Not much information is given about the results of 13 teacher interviews.