May 23…On Labaree’s Scholar-Practitioner Tension
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?
Hi, it's me Herb. Tension certainly seems to be the theme… First, illustrated by the touchy relationship between qualitative and quantitative research, a dichotomy that Labaree frames within his discussion of the current state of educational research as soft, applied, and consequently, low status. “Thus, quantitative researchers in education are no more able to construct scholarly high-rises than their qualitative colleagues because both have to work the same marshy epistemological terrain”. The implication is that we are all in the same swamp, so why privilege a quantitative methodological approach when qualitative measures are a better fit for the complexities of educational research. I’m compelled to ask why scholars, who have freedom to pursue a variety of different questions, problems, and scenarios within their discipline, aren’t more likely to pick and choose the appropriate methodology that aligns with the problem/question at hand. Labaree does give some space to this idea, i.e. that researchers should be aware of the value of other approaches and consider the limitations of their own. But as doctoral students we are encouraged to narrow down, specialize. Part of this seems to relate to the culture of scholarship in general, that one must define their niche. Choose their orientation. Carve out a space for one’s inquiry. Maybe it’s fair to say that we do this intuitively as learners. When considering the criteria of a discipline, (as we’re encouraged to do via the Nixon article) we might reflect on the idea that disciplines are also structures. They define what is, and what isn’t. What belongs, and what doesn’t. I’m not sure whether I should be grateful to Labaree for a frank, unflinching, overview of the discipline or if I should be slightly suspicious of his estimation of the status quo. The author concludes hopefully with a call to narrow the cultural divide between researchers and practitioners, but his discussion also raises some interesting questions about the scholarly community and how its own divides and debates inform the direction of the broader discipline itself.
ReplyDeleteLabaree 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
Posted by Jacqueline:
ReplyDeleteIn contrast to Labaree, I believe teaching is one of the greatest professions. Without teachers and various modalities of teaching, there would be no other professions. Passing information from one person, from one generation to another is what enables society to continue to advance. Author, John Steinbeck (1955), effectively sums the value of teachers in the following quote:
I have come to believe that a great teacher is a great artist and that there
are as few as there are any other great artists. Teaching might even be
the greatest of the arts since the medium is the human mind and spirit.
With that said, I don’t understand why Labaree feels teaching causes a “status problem for education schools.” I will concede that the lack of quality teachers and the failure of education being equitably rendered to all children have resulted in the devaluation of education. Poor policy decisions have left those related to the field of education likened to a dog chasing its tail. Implementation of unresearched, unfounded reforms has been a setback for the profession. However, teachers that seek to join the academy can be valuable agents of change.
Labaree describes teaching as a “moral craft” that “puts a premium on doing what is best for the student.” Here is where teachers do themselves a disservice. When recent data (GAO) on exclusionary discipline practices and overrepresentation of minority students is considered and when students trapped into a system of tracking is considered, teachers relinquish the blanket morality Labaree associates with the craft. Maybe these “blind spots” suggest that more teachers are needed in doctoral programs to gain and understanding of the science that can better inform the craft as there is often a disconnect between theory and practice. Maybe the academy needs to do a better job of communicating the science in a practical and useful manner to the layperson. I feel there is ample room for both.
Christy Moore chiming in… On page 13, Labaree alludes to the education school’s “long history of producing large numbers of teachers at minimal cost and with minimal attention to academic and professional quality”. This article was written in 2003, and so the references to support this claim come from 1988, 1989, and 1996. I question whether this history holds true today. I graduated from my Masters program in 2005, and I would not describe my studies as being deficient in quality or rigor. I admit that my beliefs are rooted in a specific experience, and I also concede that I’m unaware of the expectations required for degree completion at other universities in other states. All that to say, I find that people make assumptions about education coursework that are all too often rooted in judgment. To some degree, I believe that people assume teaching is easy because it isn’t a high-paying position. The lack of prestige as reflected in both salary and reputation often causes outsiders to draw conclusions that may not be grounded in truth.
ReplyDeleteBetween the Labaree (2003) article as well as the Golde and Walker (2006) article, I was challenged to resist the urge to compartmentalize my roles. Labaree (2003) gave words to the tension I’ve felt over this last year, but I believe Golde and Walker (2006) (particularly through their inclusion of Table 13.1) invited me to reconsider my position as both practitioner and researcher. The “Habits of Mind Students Need to Develop” column challenged me to approach my experiences as a learner with fresh perspective. For one, they reiterated the need to welcome criticism throughout the research journey. This last semester, one of the best moments of growth I had came from a peer review session when a classmate challenged me to reconsider a theoretical framework I had included in an article. This pushed me and ultimately resulted in a stronger work. Labaree (2003) in a way validated my experiences as a teacher, but he also encouraged me to be more reflective and less rigid in how I use those experiences to shape my understanding of and my interaction with research.
Perhaps his greatest point was when he called attention to students who “frame their own research around educational success stories” (Labaree, 2003, p. 18). I don’t think I’ve had time yet to fully process the implications of this statement, but it’s certainly rattled me a bit as I think about the research I want to carry out. In scientific inquiry, not finding a causal relationship can be just as powerful as finding one, but I don’t think this is true to the same degree in educational research. Was anyone else captured by Labaree’s comment like I was?
I disagree with the framing of education as a “lowly” profession made up primarily of those “disadvantaged,” working within “tainted confines” and carrying out their work based on “mushy” research. On page 17 (right column), Labaree discusses the business of education - a jagged pill, but a reality. There was some truth to his statement about the return on investment for both teachers and students, but it felt so disingenuous..especially wrapped in the idea that teaching was a form of coercion. I am still unpacking a lot of this article, as I read it once thinking there was aspects that resonated with me...but on a second read I felt more distance. Where once I connected with the discussions of feeling isolated and underappreciated as an art educator, I then was frustrated because it felt like Labaree was giving that some credence. I think this will be an article I return to again after our discussion to see how it reads then.
ReplyDeleteHi. This is Vivian. I did not appreciate Labaree’s comments saying that doctoral students “have already lived a life.” This statement implies that there’s is no room to explore, learn or more forward because they are at the end of their development. I also consider that Labaree expressed a negative tone describing that doctoral students instead “take charge of their doctoral program and make it serve their own needs instead of them wanting the program to shape them.” I consider that as doctoral students, who spend several years in doctoral programs, we need to be active, mindful and involved in what we want to accomplish in the program. I don’t see why this needs to be negative. Another point that caught my attention is that Labaree questions the credibility of doing research in education because it lacks authority and prestige.
ReplyDelete