Action Research Lit Review

September, 2008  Just getting started ….

Studio Thinking: The Real Benefits of Visual Arts Education; Hetland, Lois, Winner, Ellen, Veenema, Shirley, and Sheridan, Kimberly, Teachers College Press, New York, 2007

• book to summarize the findings of research from Project Zero (Harvard University)
• identifies eight Studio Habits (what is taught in the studio classroom)
• lists three Studio structures (how teachers plan and carry out instruction)
• makes a case for the arts as a specialized way of thinking

Critical Links: Learning in the Arts and Student Academic and Social Development; edited by Richard J. Deasy, Arts Education Partnerships, Washington, DC, 2002

• a compendium of essays are part of the rigorous research project from Harvard’s “Project Zero” about academic and social effects of learning in the arts
• can the benefits of the arts be transferred to other areas?
• suggestions on how to restructure curriculum for maximum effect

Moving Toward a Culture of Evidence: Documentation and Action Research ; Burnaford, Gail, Chicago Arts Partnerships, 2006

• Artist in the schools partnerships documented through AR
• teachers learn to use evidence based learning and aesthetically interesting assessments
• using inquiry to delve deeper, through the arts

So They Can Fly … Building a Community of Learners; Gibson-Langford, Linda and Laycock, Dianne, 2007

• power of collaboration to engage people
• a framework for a community of practice, fundamental to innovation and change
• doctrine of shared creation, constructed knowledge

New Learning Environments for the 21st Century Brown, John Seely, presentation at the Forum for the Future of Higher Education’s 2005 Aspen Symposium

• outlines the changes we face, including challenges for education
• learning environment compared to a studio, where learning is made public
• differences between explicit and tacit knowledge
• “learning to be” as an epistemic frame (as opposed to “learning about”)

A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview; Krathwohl, David, Theory into Practice, Autumn 2002, 41, 4

• framework for understanding thinking
• revised list includes creating at the top of the heirarchy

Classroom Based Professional Development: Teachers’ Reflections on Learning Alongside Students, Mueller, Andrea and Welch, Malcolm, Alberta Journal of Educational Research, Summer, 2006, 52, 2 CBCA Education

• describes most significant leadership activity leading to professional change
• PD is about learning new skills and making new insights
• elements of effective PD
• applying a cylcle of learning/practice/reflection

EC&I 808 Instruction: Theory and Practice, Understanding Instruction
Through Inquiry Into Teaching and Teacher Narratives

“Keep a journal of course readings that expand on theoretical orientations to
instruction.”

April 27, 2008

Getting started:I just watched a video of Sir Ken Robinson speaking about creativity and schools to the National Assoc. of Independent Schools. It was similar to the other speech (that went viral) called “Are Schools Killing Creativity?”, but speaks directly about divergent thinking. He says it is a part of the creative process but not exclusively so. He says, “our capacity for imagination is fundamental to our well being as a whole.” This is in relation to how we will be prepared to deal with the changing world as participants, contributors and leaders. Will we have the flexibility of mind to meet the challenges of the future.

Creativity is:

• divergent
• analogy
• metaphor
• connections
• reinterpret
• see many possible answers

Watch the video at

http://www.nais.org/ac/movie.cfm?ItemNumber=150730

Professional Reflections and Reading Response Journal

Response # 1(a) :

Trying to Teach Well: a Story of Small Discoveries

P.J. Lewis

As a teacher of drama and the wife of a writer, I find myself immersed in story as a natural part of my daily life. Stories of all kinds – mythical, allegorical, symbolic, historical, hysterical, fantastic and dramatic – all with a well developed arc and conflicts rooted deep in character. How grand it is to lose oneself in the fiction. In this article, Trying to Teach Well: a Story of Small Discoveries, Lewis manages to slow down time, the morning ritual unfolding, each moment illustrated in detail. I was struck by “the authentic” voice and the close lens on the ordinary-ness of daily life. Quite suddenly the eyeglass was reversed, no longer scanning the approaching horizon but examining the minutiae of the nearby.

At first I found myself scanning ahead to find the naughty bits (a fight in the classroom or the demoralized teacher trembling in the hallway), until I read the line, “in teaching we experience the unknown-ness of the moment in the freshness that each group of children brings to us day-to-day…”. I stopped for a breath, taken in by the language and the memory it invoked of recent events in my own teaching. I made myself slow down, which in turn, allowed me to fall into the telling of his morning with grade 2/3 students and to enter into the memory. Lewis puts it best, “It is in my storying that I may discover those things at a personal level and through sharing these stories move from a personal knowing toward a public knowing.” The public knowing comes from reflection and an attempt to make meaning from one’s actions by sharing it with others. It takes courage to lay my practice on the table for all to see. It’s much easier to rely upon my traditional bag of tricks, tried and true methods, the old standards and strategies. Lewis describes the Zen of teaching, “Teaching is not about performance. It is about being present in the moment of everyday practice.” I felt called back to attention, becoming present as I read the article and then allowing myself to reflect upon my own story of practice.

Is it possible to open oneself up to scrutiny and judgment without feeling vulnerable? Lewis seems to feels this is an integral part of the profession – but is it reasonable to expect this of all teachers? One would need to feel confident, with a healthy self esteem in order to submit/invite the experience. As an Arts Education consultant my work with teachers often involves reflection upon practice, but rarely have I seen this kind of commitment by teachers to the process, nor would I expect it of them. I can only expect it of myself. So the question becomes – how willing am I to reflect deeply and honestly about my own practice? Will I write truthfully about my perceptions, attitudes and biases? I have long known that my own memory is weak and in those few periods I have managed to journal successfully (teen romances, birth of my children, traveling, and research) are a source of wonder to me. I read them and feel almost as if they were written by a stranger, images slowly coalescing as the memory returns. Does it become easier once the habit is ingrained? And if you have a plan to share it – to have public witness – does it impact the the end result? Do I write for an audience or for myself? As a teenager, my journal was private, like a diary; but with the popularity of Blogs, one’s most private thoughts can be read by anyone in the world. Does this change how we write? Are we as honest as we think? The very act of creating a narrative implies a manipulation of the words to move the listener/reader, and I must ask myself if this intention harms or helps the authenticity of the voice.

The title, In Trying to Teach Well: a Story of Small Discoveries, leads me to consider once again the ordinary journey we take as teachers. As consultant, I am focused on best practice, methodology and instructional strategies – as a teacher I am simply doing my best and trying to teach well. This article makes the case for slowing down, writing your story and for thinking deeply about the small moments of the day … for it is in those details we discover the true story.

Lewis, P. J. (2004). Trying to teach well: a story of small discoveries. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(3), 231-42. Retrieved April 21, 2008, from Wilson Education Abstracts database. (Document ID: 643878211).

Professional Reflections and Reading Response Journal

Response # 1 (b):

Storytelling as Pedagogy: an Unexpected Outcome of Narrative Inquiry

Coulter, Michael and Poyner

How do we come to know what we know? How do we manage to reach a deeper understanding of our experience and see it through an objective lens? In the article, Storytelling as Pedagogy: an Unexpected Outcome of Narrative Inquiry, the authors describe a narrative research methodology with pre-service teachers. We see how story allows us to hold our practice up to a mirror, not simply recording but seeing it through new eyes. When we use language that is personal and in present tense we are put in touch with something real and meaningful. Connections, not previously seen, are suddenly crystal clear and we are able to analyze the situation with new understanding and make sense of the world. In finding the right words to convey meaning, we deconstruct the events and reconstruct the plot to evoke a response in the listener/reader. We needn’t adhere strictly to what Tim O’Brien calls the “happening-truth” but can incorporate the “story-truth” in order to get at meaning though symbol, metaphor and literary license.

What is truth after all? At my family gatherings we always get around to reminiscing about our shared past. We laugh (or argue) as the same story is told from different perspectives. As the youngest, my memories of family events were always called into question. What did I know at five years of age? Or at age ten? What about now at 42 years of age – is my story valid? Does my white, middle-class background influence my version of events? As I tell my story I naturally see my actions/thoughts/feelings as central to the narrative – but what of the other? By co-creating and collaborating as participants and researchers we are in a better position to interpret the narrative and to gain meaning. Through collaboration, the participants Carmen and Paul, were able to share, discuss, review and revise their stories with Leslie (the researcher). They could identify common themes in their teaching pedagogy. The researcher is no longer a removed and distant observer. Polkinghorne (1995) describes how “… [the] creation of a text involves the to-and-fro movement from parts to whole…” looking for “consistency between the emerging plot and the database”; not a literal accounting, but rather a representation faithful to the experience of participants.

The article describes how Paul and Carmen gained a “meta-awareness of how their pedagogical understandings had changed”. I wonder if this level of self- knowledge can be maintained once the research process is completed. Will they, in fact, now be in a state of heightened awareness that will carry over into the daily life of a teacher? How have the act of collaboration and the luxury of having an avid listener/documenter present influenced their ability to reflect on their practice? Is storytelling dependent upon audience? It brings to mind my early years of teaching and the isolation one can feel as you stumble along, trying not to compromise your principles and somehow bring learning alive in your classroom. How those early years might have differed had I a collaborator with whom to share my story, and perhaps even more importantly, so that I could listen to their story.

After 15 years in the classroom, I am fortunate to be able to use my position as a consultant to provide opportunity for “co-enquirers and co-learners” to form relationships and to reflect, question and learn from one another. Our division has supported committee work and release time for teachers to come together with a common purpose. I would like to share this narrative practice and test how it might lead to insights and awareness of pedagogy through our shared stories.

Coulter, Cathy, Michael, Charles, Poyner, Leslie. (2007). Storytelling as Pedagogy: An Unexpected Outcome of Narrative Inquiry. Curriculum Inquiry, 37(2), 103-22. Retrieved April 21, 2008, from Wilson Education Abstracts database. (Document ID: 1307611731).

Professional Reflections and Reading Response Journal

Response # 1 (c):

The Education of Story Lovers: Do Computers Undermine Narrative Sensibility?

Gordon & Alexander

The title seems to say it all “do computers undermine narrative sensibility?”, revealing an obvious bias against technology, and leading me to set my own bias firmly on the table. I was surprised to discover the article co-authored by people on both sides of the argument and that they attempt to make a case both for and against computers and their place in education. They begin by defining what is good narrative and refer to Ricoeur’s work on “unmasking hermeneutics” in literature, as well as Aristotle’s notions of narrative. Using Postman and Bruner, they reiterate the case for the importance of narrative in education, with the caution to pay attention to individual interpretations by culture. Ultimately, they conclude that the “common uses of computers encourage superficiality” and develop a “taste for flat and shallow narratives” while students using computers learn in “unilayered and random” ways, as opposed to the structured and multilayered manner when using books. Computers, they maintain, may not deserve the sole blame for the downfall of our youth’s inability to find meaning in literature, but they are “one of the causes”.

This article, though lengthy in its effort to define, defend and explain the thesis, seems to be based on some erroneous assumptions. Why do they believe youth of today have an undermined narrative sensibility? Correlation is not causation and yet they contend there is a press toward a “one-dimensional shallowness in our culture”. Is this a tendency of the older generation to shake their heads at the disillusioned and apathetic youth while bemoaning how “things have changed since I was a child”? Times have changed, and none at a faster pace than the computer generation. Why do they assume research based on computer use from the 1990’s (or earlier) is still relevant when considering our current environment? Particularly in the case of the 2.0 world (a term not used in the article), where learning and pedagogy is evolving at a phenomenal rate with the proliferation of teacher blogs, open source software, the beginning understanding of how to use social networking within our schools and the scaffolding of ideas as we share our notions of learning across the world with our colleagues. We have moved from the Information Age to the Conceptual Age (Daniel Pink). In the reading I’ve been doing (both online and off) I’ve come to believe that students need a new literacy model, which includes: creative and critical thinking, synthesis of ideas and information, contextual work, team work, connectivity and is multi-disciplinary in approach. In the video “Learning to Change” (Digital Arts Alliance, Pearson Foundation, 2008) they make a case for change and celebrate the “death of education, and the dawn of learning”. I see this as deep, multi-textured and sophisticated learning.

My focus is on creating classrooms that are student centered with learning that incorporates both creative and critical thinking in a rich, mutli-layered and stimulating environment. As we engage with stories and create our personal narratives we will “unmask the hermeneutics” by delving into the text, relating it to our experiences, sharing it with others, connecting ideas and creating metaphors from our understandings. Computers or books, oral tradition or read, improvised or planned, the story will never end.

Gordon, David, Alexander, Gad. (The Education of Story Lovers: Do Computers Undermine Narrative Sensibility? Curriculum Inquiry, 35 (2), 133 – 159. Retrieved April 21, 2008, from Wilson Education Abstracts database.

Journal Response #2

Interplay of Theory and Practice: Understanding Teacher Professional Development

A Reflection on Three Articles:

Classroom Based Professional Development: Teacher’s Reflections on Learning Alongside Students, by Mueller and Welch, 2006

A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview, by Krathwohl, 2002

Teachers’ Continuing Professional Development: Contested Concepts, Understandings and Models, by Fraser, Kennedy, Reid, McKinney, 2007

In my experience, teacher professional development (PD) is a term that carries a lot of baggage; it is heavy laden with expectations by various stakeholders and coloured by attitudes and perceptions regarding effectiveness and value. Parents question the amount of time students are out of school, administrators set school direction and at times, demands for growth, school boards respond to provincial priorities and the “big picture” of the division, and Teacher Associations are always looking to fill the next convention program and respond to corporations pushing their message/product in the guise of scholarship. Where does this leave the teacher? Often with no voice, they are shuttled off to workshops, sat in front of speakers, experts who tell them how to become better teachers, shilling magic pills for creating better learners, provided with a binder of resources and finally, sent back to the reality of their classroom demanding attention. A rather sarcastic view perhaps, but its no wonder teachers are sometimes seen as non-compliant, overly skeptical or even openly derisive of PD. As a former PD chair for my school and division I have faced many frustrations trying to find the perfect combination of offerings to satisfy the demands of teachers.

The theme of Professional Development takes on new significance for me now in my role as Arts Education consultant as I am now responsible for the planning and delivery of Arts Education sessions in the division. It was with great interest that I read about the six step research project (Mueller, Welch, 2006) in which teachers were engaged in active classrooms, learning alongside the students. The research acknowledges teacher perceptions about PD and identifies a cycle for successful PD. Teachers need to learn the content, practice the methodology and most importantly, take time to reflect upon the experience. Sheppard (1996) describes PD as the “single most significant leadership activity” and credits it with increased teacher commitment to their schools, a greater interest in professional involvement, and more innovation shown in approaches. Fraser (et al, 2007) focused on the socio-cultural aspects to PD and placed great value on the personal, social and occupational dimensions to be considered when developing or presenting new learning. Teachers want to have a voice in identifying their PD needs, and to take ownership of the learning. In light of my own experience, I agree with this perspective; teacher attitudes towards PD are the greatest factor influencing success of any learning opportunity. If teachers feel empowered in the process of identifying their PD, they become engaged with the content, are more open to collaboration and can make connections between shared beliefs with their colleagues.

Effective PD challenges teachers to think differently about their frameworks, it is relevant to their teaching context, it allows for collaboration and supportive relationships within the school, and it allows for reflection (Mueller, Welch 2006). I have intuitively understood this to be true and have included these elements in my work with teachers, but I was not aware of the current research. My practice is commonly based upon a participatory approach, allowing for personal experience, individual ideas, and flexibility in response to teacher interest. In retrospect, I don’t believe I allow enough time or attention for reflection to occur on a deep level. I would like to better understand how to facilitate deeper understanding through reflection and inquiry. The revised Bloom’s Taxonomy provides a language useful to the planning process and helps me to deconstruct my questioning techniques. As I think about thinking, it opens up new levels of understanding about my pedagogy and allows me to examine my framework more closely.

The articles bring to mind several questions about teacher responsibility and openness to change. If teachers are indeed overwhelmed (as I believe to be true), and often view the request for change with suspicion (not trusting the motivation driving the request), how can we overcome the first hurdle of attitude and perception? How do we help teachers to take risks and to feel empowered in their own learning? How can we create students who are life long learners if we, ourselves are disdainful of learning opportunities? It seems to be a question of trust. Cynicism build up over the years in response to changing tides, flavor-of-the-month methodologies, weak leadership and most importantly, not having a strong voice. To have a voice one must overcome apathy and act on your beliefs – can this be instilled? What if teachers are happy to just close their door?

As I prepare for my Action Research project and plan for the coming year, I find myself rethinking the structure of my PD offering and considering how to incorporate a socio-cultural aspect to the committee. Time for reflection through an intentional process will be incorporated into each session. There is opportunity for teachers to engage in learning alongside students as I model the lesson, facilitate discussion and team teach in various classrooms. In the Fall we will host an Artist in the Classroom event which invites teachers to attend a workshop, alongside students, in a variety of disciplines. This will be the second year we do this event, but this time I will also provide a focused attention to reflection.

As a life long learner, a passionate facilitator and an “disruptive innovator” (to use DesRoches and Walter’s term), I refuse to allow myself to fall into despair about PD. Some may continue to mock the Professional Learning Community (PLC) model and may make snide comments about changing curriculum, but I will try to keep the conversation going. I will continue to play with the balance between theory and practice, finding my way through trial and error, discussion with teachers, and openness to analyzing my own practice.

References

Fraser, Kennedy, Reid, McKinney, 2007. Teachers’ Continuing Professional Development: Contested Concepts, Understandings and Models. Journal of In-Service Education, Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 153 – 169.

Krathwohl, 2002. A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview, Theory into Practice, 41, 4 p. 212.

Mueller and Welch, 2006. Classroom Based Professional Development: Teacher’s Reflections on Learning Alongside Students, Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 52, 2, pg. 143.

Journal Response #3

Arts-Based Research in Education

A reflection on three articles found in the journal:

Cahnmann-Taylor, M. & Siegesmund, R. editors (2008). Arts-Based Research in Education: Foundations for Practice. London: Routledge.

When we think of artists one might visualize the free-spirited, random thinking, rule- breaking maverick; while the term researcher brings to mind lab coats, glasses, calculators and Bunsen burners.  I realize I have a tendency to hyperbole, but I can clearly see the brain’s two lumpy hemispheres fighting it out for supremacy: left takes a swing at right, logic gets a leg over emotion, intuition pins down sequential … who will win the battle for legitimacy? What is the place of the arts in research? How far outside the boundaries can one go while maintaining scholarly integrity?

Eisner (2008) identifies major tensions that have arisen in the short history of Arts-Based Research in Education.  He writes about the artist’s need for creative expression (which is open to interpretation) in conjunction with the need for clear communication when presenting research. He likens art in research to a Rorschach test – but how then can one measure this personal interpretation? Is what I see more truthful than what you see? He also tackles issues with perceived legitimacy, artist/researchers whose work only serves to raise further questions instead of presenting answers, and the difficulty with research commonly drawn from particular, not random, instances, which do not include generalizations identified from trial runs.  It would seem that the language and culture of the research world creates a fortress; one that artists have somehow managed to infiltrate. The disciplines represented in research have come to terms with one another by agreeing to certain elements in their work.  I was encouraged to hear that though aesthetics must be considered in arts-based research, the drive to innovation must not, in turn sacrifice the useful in the data. The strength of arts-based research is in the ability to present a situation from another perspective; it is most often multi-voiced and post-modern in approach, raising “puzzlements” (Eisner, 2008) and “wide-awakeness” (Greene, 2001) in the audience.

The Journal, Arts-Based Research in Education: Foundations for Practice, provides many examples of the artist/researcher at work. Saldaña, as a playwright and theatre dramaturge, has grounded his research through ethnography by engaging personally “with passion, without apology” (Walcott, 1995). He believes in becoming a part of what you study and so, in studying the work of Walcott, Saldaña decided to take excerpt’s from Walcott’s research and put it in a play.  The artist mirrors the world, the world mirrors art. We see Walcott’s work in a new light, making personal connections to his words as we see/hear/feel them on stage. The theatre with its lights, music, creative staging, actors, costumes can somehow make things seem realer than real, by elevating the everyday and providing a spotlight on the meaning within.

When we use art to remember an event we are opening ourselves up to the experience as told through new voices and new memories. The theatre provides a view into the emotional nuances of a situation, relationships revealed in subtlety and words we speak take on the elegance of poetry. Who is to say which memory is true and whose voice is correct?  What is truth anyway? The audience must decide for themselves.  The audience experiences the research, they are shown not told, the work is “provocative not persuasive” (Saldaña).  Fieldwork is much more than the collection of data; it is the transformation of data with the focus not on methods, but on creating understanding in the audience.

As we seek to understand, we also need to express this knowledge to others. The Arts can offer a way to honor voice, personal narrative and experience through the process of research. If the task of arts-based research is to “see the world in a grain of sand” (Blake) and to “increase understanding” (Barone & Eisner), then as researchers we must also agree to the conditions of legitimate research. The aesthetics of a project must not over rule the rigueur of study; as the “vulnerable observer” (Behar, 1996) we are to be aware of how power and privilege can change relationships; we are to raise questions, invite the conversation and increase perception and new understandings in the audience.  It is reassuring to know that my identity as an artist can be integrated and acknowledged as integral to my process of research and scholarship.

Eisner introduces the concept of “consensual validation” which allows the group or audience to discuss and validate the work of the researcher. Through compelling conversations, shared understandings and collective auto-ethnography, the group discovers “publicly accessible transformations of consciousness” (1997).  If I understand this correctly, it invites one to think of your work as in the theatre, set on a stage for public dissection or consumption.  There is a risk involved – the work is vulnerable to misinterpretation, but one should also consider the greater benefit that comes from allowing the understanding to be constructed by the group and thereby made more personal in meaning.

If we work with passion (without apology) and engage personally with the research, are we in danger of losing our objectivity?  I will think about the role my own art might play in my research and consider just how objective I can be when incorporating an element so very personal. Is it crucial to have this rational distance or is that an assumption to be identified? Is it my goal to uncover truths? Maybe it is to simply tell a good story, taking my audience on a journey, and opening our eyes along the way.

References

Eisner, Elliot. Persistent Tensions in Arts – Based Research, Arts-Based Research in Education: Foundations for Practice. London: Routledge. (2008)

Saldaña, Johnny, The Drama and Poetry of Qualitative Method, Arts-Based Research in Education: Foundations for Practice. London: Routledge. (2008)

Siegesmund, Richard and Cahnmann-Taylor, Melissa, The Tensions of Arts – Based Research in Education Reconsidered: The Promise of Practice, Arts-Based Research in Education: Foundations for Practice. London: Routledge. (2008)