Practitioner enquiry

As the holidays beckon, I have been thinking about practitioner enquiry and how to support teacher to develop an ‘enquiry of stance’ mindset. I have sources research articles and a few books to help delve deeper into practitioner enquiry and improve my understanding. I am interested in the history of practitioner enquiry i.e. where and when did this concept emerge? I am also wondering about the costs and benefits of practitioner enquiry. Having undertaken research in my own classroom I know that it can have a massive impact on both the teachers learning and pupils learning, but how do we support and promote this professional learning activity with teachers? Here are some thought on practitioner enquiry as I continue to critically think through how GTCS can support teachers as part of professional learning in practitioner enquiry.

The purpose of any professional leaning activity should be related to increasing skills, knowledge or practice of the teachers but must also be linked to improved outcomes for learners. Practitioner enquiry should lead to deep transformative learning which significantly informs and influences professionals’ understanding, practice and impact on pupil experiences.

Practitioner enquiry is a key aspect in the professional learning of a teacher in Scotland and is embedded in the Standards. The Recent BERA study (2014 p6) discusses the need for teachers to be “equipped to engage in enquiry oriented practice” and have the “capacity, motivation, confidence and opportunity to do so”. By engaging in practitioner enquiry Brookfield feels this empowers teacher as “we become much less willing to give away our histories” (1995 p187) and take responsibility and pride of our own professional learning. When teachers become engage in practitioner enquiry and engage with research literature they benefit by becoming more confident in their own practice.

GTCS support practitioner access literature via an investment in EBSCO Educational Resource. EBSCO is an on-line resource providing registrants with access to a collection of over 1,700 journals, a selection of eBooks, and additional research resources in the field of education and a range of ebooks. There is also a Research Engagement Group (REG) which has been set up to help support, promote and facilitate critical engagement with research, as we know that teachers are 'research rich but time poor' and therefore appropriate resources to support engagement is critical. We are also in the processes of setting up a Teacher Network group to support the work of the REG.

Practitioner enquiry is given many names in literature, Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2009 p39) use the term practitioner inquiry as “a conceptual and linguistic umbrella term” for action research, participatory research, teacher research, self-study, the scholarship teacher and using practice as site for research. Although each enquiry method has their own important differences all have similar underlying principles as Cochran-Smith and Lytle put it they “share as sense of the practitioner knower and agent for educational and social change”.

Cochran-Smith and Lytle coined the term ‘inquiry as stance’ in the late 1990’s and have expanded on its meaning between then and now. ‘Inquiry as stance’, “positions the role of practitioner and practitioner knowledge as central to the goal of transforming teaching, learning, leading and schooling” (p119). The ‘inquiry’ part relates to engaging with research and questioning practice to develop a “critical habit of mind” (p120) while the ‘as stance’, “capture[s] the ways we stand, the ways we see and lenses we see through” (p120).

As defined by Menter et al (2011), practitioner enquiry is a ‘finding out’ or an investigation with a rationale and approach that can be explained or defended and then the findings shared so it becomes more than reflection or personal enquiry. Practitioner enquiry is usually undertaken within the practitioners own practice or in collaboration with others. Evaluation and reflective teaching are deeply bound into practitioner enquiry and within collaborative enquiry the group shares a common research question which can then be ‘investigated’ through different lenses to enhance knowledge creation and dissemination within the group and beyond. 

For teachers, regular engagement in practitioner enquiry supports professional growth by challenging or ‘disrupting thinking’ and ‘ingrained habits of mind’. Practitioner enquiry helps to create a space to stop and look again at existing ways of working. It is argued by McLaughlin et al (2004) that teachers who engage in research have ‘better understanding of their practice and ways to improve it’. For some teachers, enquiry may promote levels of critical reflection that are ‘transformative’. However, transformative learning can only occur when individuals have the opportunity and skills to really question and consider their underpinning beliefs, assumptions, values and practices. This goes beyond developing content knowledge and requires a criticality and questioning approach and as such the process of transformative learning can be challenging and 'uncomfortable'. The gains from transformative learning however, could be that it can lead to meaningful changes in practice which impact positively on pupil learning.

Practitioner research can play a major part in making change more systemic and indeed sustainable as practitioners become agents of their own professional learning. Systematic enquiry helps teachers to “‘let go’, unlearn, innovate and re-skill in cycles of professional learning throughout their career in response to changing circumstances” Menter et al (2011 p19).

Practitioner enquiry allow teachers the space to engage with research and create their own knowledge which is very pertinent to their students in their situation. Even more powerful yet is being part of an enquiring community, where all data and evidence is given consideration and the reliance on test scores and ‘what works’ is are included but critically reviewed to establish the best path for the establishment at that time to support student learning. When a community becomes an enquiring community it opens up the possibility to challenge assumptions, to articulate values, to make their practice problematic and to form partnerships with academics to engage in theory and research to further enhance the life chances of their students.

Claxton (2002 p15) discussed what students need to be ‘good learners’ which is;

“Being a good real-life learners means knowing what is worth learning, what you are good (and not so good ) at learning, who can help, how to face confusion without getting upset, and what the best learning tool is for the job at hand”

The same can be said for any learner, teachers who engage in practitioner enquiry will find themselves in the position of a learner and will have to as Claxton (2002) discusses have to have a strategic overview of their learning, plan and organise their learning, be flexible, make meaning of their learning, have self-knowledge and self-awareness and be effective at revising strategies. All of this takes time and need multiple opportunities to gain maximum learning but small incremental changes in practice, akin to marginal gains theory (http://marginallearninggains.com/about), should be supported, recognised and celebrated.

Bibliography

Brookfield, S.D. (1995) Becoming a Critically Reflective Teacher, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Claxton, G. (2002) Building Learning Power. Bristol: TLO Limited

Cochran-Smith and Lytle (2009) Inquiry as a Stance: Practitioner Research for the Next Generation Teacher College Press, New York

Menter, I Elliott, D Hulme, M. Lewin, J Lowden K. (2011) A Guide to Practitioner research in Education. SAGE publishing

Thoughts about STEM

In the last few weeks I have been thinking a lot about STEM and its impact. This has come around from a few things such as a meeting with the Royal Society of Edinburgh and GTCS’s Martin Osler (@MartinOsler) presenting the Partnership of the Year Award Sponsored by GTCS, which won this year by Dalziel High School and Amec Foster Wheeler for a five year project encouraging pupils into STEM subject. There has also been some coverage in press and I think I am missing teaching science (I am the only one who gets excited when I open the Chemistry of Christmas, today it was acetic acid (C₂H₄O), cool stuff).  So I had a look at the Education Source - EBSCO and pulled off three articles which all discuss different aspects of STEM subjects.

Let’s start with the bad press. In the last while there have been some disturbing notions about STEM subjects and some opinions are most unhelpful. For example, the twitter frenzy #distractinglysexy that was created after Jeremy Hunts comments about female scientists, see below;

Tim Hunt, an English biochemist who admitted that he has a reputation for being a “chauvinist”, said to the World Conference of Science Journalists in Seoul, South Korea: “Let me tell you about my trouble with girls … three things happen when they are in the lab … You fall in love with them, they fall in love with you and when you criticise them, they cry.”

Source: The Guardian (June 10^th 2015)

Unfortunately you don’t have to look far to find similar misguided campaign’s, for example, IBM’s ‘Hack a Hairdryer’ campaign, which has recently come in for criticism both in the media and on twitter and due to the negative media attention, IBM have pulled this campaign.  The aim of the campaign was sound, in that it was to "reengineer misperceptions about women in tech, and to focus on what really matters in science”, however the way this was then marketed was not as ‘sound’.

I would love to have been in that meeting,

“OK chaps, we have to engage more females in engineering, any ideas?”

“Well, what can we use that all women relate to?”

“I’ve got it! They all love playing with their hair so what about hairdryers?”

What a great opportunity missed.

Criticism in the press;

“IBM's "hack a hairdryer" campaign suddenly attracted a barrage of criticism by Twitter users who called it patronising and sexist”

(BBC website 7^th December 2015)

And on twitter;

There are also concerns that the implementation of CfE has narrowed the curriculum and had led to a fall in the uptake of STEM subject by 4% in 2015, reported in Holyrood, here.

There are good news stories as well, this week we see an astronaut from Britain launching to the International Space Station where he will spend six months carrying out experiments and research. This weekend sees the end of the 21^st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (#COP21) with a ‘historic’ climate change agreement being agreed to by around 200 countries. Aberdeen Council lead the way to support primary teachers move from feeling ‘trepidation’ to ‘science champions’ by investing in staff capabilities, reported in Holyrood, here. There is also lots of good resources and support through STEMNET and the learned Societies such as the Institute of Physics, Royal Society of Chemistry and the Royal Society of Biology.

Even with all of these supports and resources we are still not meeting the demand from industry for students with a focus on STEM subjects. STEM subjects are still seen as the way forward to keep the global workforce sustainable and economically viable in an ever changing and digitising world. In a recent Telegraph article (8-12-15), here, they discussed how mothers who were not fond of STEM subjects, for whatever reason, are also passing on this “preconceptions about science to their own daughters”. From my experience of parents evening, I can say I have witnessed this so many times. Parents coming into the science lab and starting the conversation with “I was never any good at science so I don’t think she/he will be either”, I always love that conversation! In the article by Wenger et all (2014, p37), they cite Toglia (2013) who discuss the “socio-economic status, their parents expectations, jobs and educational level and the influence of respective advice centres” as all factors which influence girls in continuing with STEM subjects. So the perception of themselves as learners and social influences could have a more direct effect on girls choosing or not choosing STEM subjects.

The way children learn through play also impacts on their learning through out there lives. Girls tend to keep their play within the confines of ‘game’ whereas boys tend to go outwith. I saw this with my own children when they played with Lego, my boy would build something then break it apart and make random things, which all had a purpose - usually destruction! Whereas my daughter always built what was on the box and was satisfied when it was finished. This leads me to wonder then if there is something in the way learning is constructed into already existing schema (Piaget, 1975) that supports different thinkers, whether boys or girls, as Wenger et al (2014, p39) states “STEM subjects demand high levels of abstract thinking from students because of the models and formulas the respective information is condensed in”. Wenger et al (2014) goes on to discuss the need for more ‘independent learning opportunities’ so girls can build mental models, self-esteem and view of themselves as being ‘good’ at STEM subjects.

Another aspect that influences whether students’ progress into STEM subjects is the ‘edutainment’. In science subjects in early years, through primary and into the first stages of secondary there has been a focus on making science ‘fun’ to engage students. While I do like this aspect, it can only best serve the STEM subjects if this is underpinned by scientific rigour and followed up with a discussion around ‘what do our results tell us?’ rather than ‘just for fun’. As Pittinsky & Diamante (2015, p 47) state “At first glance, it looks like the problem begins when the fun stops”.

Teachers also have a huge role to play. In a cluttered education system with various pathway options and subjects jostling for attention, it can be hard for students to make decisions about the best subjects to take. Teachers need to be ‘gender free’ with advice and it is worrying to read in a Telegraph article, cited above, “Too often, I hear stories of teachers and career advisers telling girls that science is not for them”. So maybe we have to re-culture teacher’s knowledge and expectations for all students. Within the STEM subjects we need to start working more collaboratively, instead of the subject silo’s, and in co-operation with each other to promote a STEM mindset as Morrison and Bartlett (2009) cited by Pittinsky & Diamante (2015) state we will have moved to a time when “the STEM subjects are to be seen as a collective curriculum, where their content can become integrated or fused as one subject”.

Studying STEM subjects for all students can stir curiosity and enhance creativity, innovation and support positive learning experiences. Coupled with non-gender specific advice and continuing to increase the awareness of the pathways and careers offered by studying STEM subject – not that I am biased!

References

Pittinsky, T.L.&  Diamante, N (2015) Going beyond fun in STEM: Kappan magazine.org p47- 51

Retrieved 15-12-07 p

Roberts, A. (2013) STEM is here, Now what? Technology and engineering teacher p22- 27

Wegner, C. Strehlke, F. Weber, F. (2014) Investigating the differences between girls and boys regarding the factors of frustration, boredom an insecurity they experience during science lessons:

Themes in Science and Technology Education, 7(1), pp 35-45

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-35027902

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/10/nobel-scientist-tim-hunt-female-scientists-cause-trouble-for-men-in-labs

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11848342/Barbie-and-Lego-Sexist-toys-put-girls-off-science.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/11288761/Just-one-percent-of-parents-want-their-daughters-to-be-engineers.html

https://www.holyrood.com/articles/feature/stem-striving-excellence

Useful websites

http://www.nationalstemcentre.org.uk/timpeake

http://www.iop.org

http://www.rsc.org/

http://www.rsb.org.uk/

Playtime and time to play

'We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing.'

(George Bernard Shaw, 1856--1950)

This week has had me thinking about play and the usefulness of play in social and academic development. I tuned into the #Scoteduchat this week which hosted questions around nursery primary transition but I think the thing that I was most take with was the use of play.

Each of these has led to me to thinking about how important play is in both social and academic development but also about how parenting and interaction through play is vital to childhood development and how this fits into the Scottish Attainment Challenge. I had a quick search in Education Source – EBSCO (https://www.gtcs.org.uk/GTCS-login.aspx - log in page) and found a paper by  Kanhadilok & Watts (2014) about Adult play-learning and I also had a quick look at the Education Scotland website for more information on play and came across the Play Strategy for Scotland: the vision.

I am playful and I used play in my secondary classroom with the students, from the more obvious games for learning but also in social interactions which were playful. Playfulness as discussed by Kanhadilok & Watts (2014) as “the predisposition to frame (or reframe) a situation in such a way as to provide oneself (and possible others) with amusement, humour, and/or entertainment”. Playful approaches to learning sit within constructivist theories of learning and can prompt learning especially when learning is driven by curiosity and creativity. Playfulness is a ‘mindset’ and is linked to the ‘pleasure principle’ so if it becomes a chore then it stops being play.

I love the idea of play as a medium for learning and watching children play, you can see creativity and social skills in action. It is interesting though that the research on childhood play is extensive according to Kanhadilok & Watts (2014) “some 3000 psychological research papers focused on children's play” in the last decade but at the same time “only around 40 have addressed play in adults”.

Children love to learn, from the Play Strategy for Scotland: The vision (p15)

“Play allows children to experience and make sense of their world, to challenge themselves, practise skills and manage their emotions, interact with others or enjoy time alone”.

This ties in with Dewey’s thinking around learning involving active discovery rather than the passive remembering of facts and figures. Sugata Mitra famous experiment Hole in the Wall (HIW) experiment (1999) gave children free access to a computer embedded within a wall between his office and an Indian slum at Kalkaji, Delhi. This and further experiments have shown that children want to, and love to learn and are not afraid to making mistakes. Some adult have a fear of being wrong and are shamed by being wrong, children are far more like Edison;

“I have not failed, I have just found 10,000 ways that won’t work”,

Article 31 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child states that “every child has the right to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to the age of the child and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts”. So not only is it a ‘right’ but we also tacitly know that play is a ‘good’ thing and the benefits go beyond fun, into aspects of resilience, creativity, problem solving and make significant contributions to children ‘well-being’, a key aspect of the GIRFEC agenda. Through play children interpret their world and negotiate risk taking, challenge and manage themselves and learn co-operative and collaboration, all of these skills are being heralded by employers. Play remains important “throughout infancy, childhood, the teenage years through adolescence, and beyond into adulthood and at all ages, stages and abilities” (p13).

The recent emphasis on outdoor learning has been a step forward and the use of natural materials to support ‘academic learning’ is laudable. Early years practitioners are crucial in developing children who are curious about the world around them and using outdoor play experiences to support children’s development. According to the Play Strategy for Scotland: the vision (p19) “the greatest potential to develop free play in schools is outdoors, before and after school, during break times and, through out-of-school care”, but how to achieve this?

In the current climate where the perception of risk to children playing outdoor is often higher than the reality, this raises issues of children not having opportunities to practice their skills, experiment and to challenge themselves out with the ‘control’ of adults.  The Play Strategy for Scotland: the vision (p21) states that “children and young people who play outdoors more often have better social networks, are more confident and are more involved in their local communities than those who are outside less often” and I agree with this, that children need to time to develop skills through play and being independent which will support them as they grow up.

Play is not just for the little ones but through play in early years children can start to develop neural pathways that support learning. It was fortuitous that just as I am finishing writing this post that the EIS have put out a press release commenting on Professor Siraj’s Review of Early Learning and Childcare, Larry Flanagan is quoted to have said;

"It is welcome that the Scottish Government has acknowledged the essential nature of teacher involvement in the nursery sector, while restating its own commitment to ensuring that all children in nurseries have access to a teacher."

So play is important and should be nurtured as “play is the universal language of childhood” and beyond, so who wants to go jump in some puddles!

References

Aubrey, K. & Riley, A. (2016) Understanding and using educational theories: Sage publishing

Kanhadilok, P. & Watts,M.(2014) Adult play-learning: Observing informal family education at a science museum: Studies in the Education of Adults, Vol. 46, Issue 1

Review Of Early Learning & Childcare: EIS Comment

http://www.eis.org.uk/public.asp?id=3185&dbase=2

last retrieved 15-12-04

PLAY STRATEGY FOR SCOTLAND: OUR VISION: Scotland's first national play strategy. (2013)

http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0042/00425722.pdf

last retrieved 15-12-04

Education Research and Educational Research

Linking back to last week’s post where I was thinking about the process of researching and having attended the Scottish Education Research Association (SERA) conference in Aberdeen this week, I and now grappling over questions relating to research and teacher research.

A useful distinction in starting to think about research is between research which is generated through ‘insider’ researchers (practitioners researching their own work) and ‘outsider’ researchers (which are researchers carrying out research in a place beyond their employment situation), these definitions coined by Cochran-Smyth & Lytle (1993). However, Foreman-Peck & Winch drawing on Elliott’s work use a distinction between ‘education research’ and ‘educational research’, with ‘education research’ being research “on or about education” (p32) and ‘educational research’ being carried out by practitioners in their own setting.

Drawing on Chapter 3, ‘What is Education Research Anyway?’ of Foreman-Peck & Winch’s book ‘Using Educational Research to Inform Practice’ I have outline below the differences they describe between education research and educational research;

Education Research	Educational Research
Uses scientific (technical or theoretical) terms	Is common sense theorising, characterised by a critical stance toward problematic situations
Has law-like generalisations	Supports a better understanding of the situation and their likely consequences
The explicit intention is improving practice or policy by those engaged in the practice	The explicit intentions is to improve practice within their own setting
The purpose is to contribute to a disciplinary body of knowledge and education and educational topics	The purpose is bases on a ‘felt dissatisfaction in current state’
There is no immediate or explicit practice or policy improvement intention (no particular interest in the pedagogical implications of the research)	Is conducted to solve problems or become better informed about practical problems
May inform policy decisions, but this is not necessarily the prime motivation for the research	Is distinctively practical in orientation, reflection and reflexive and bound by ethical norms

These differences can be explained by the ‘stance’ of the researcher. The education researchers are contributing to the discourse about education but is not directly involved in the pedagogical implementation of theory or findings, whereas, educational researchers are interested in solving problems or becoming better informed about their practice. However, this does not mean that practitioners who engage in educational research are “merely concerned with efficiency” (p33) by making things better but are more likely conducting a ‘professional noticing’ or ‘intervention’ that is underpinned by theory to improve outcomes for young people.

Educational researchers also have a different view from education researchers in terms of values. Since educational researchers are part of the system that is being researched then “they need to be aware of their own values and pre-suppositions” (p33) and thus they are “inevitably concerned with ethical or normative concepts” (p33) which is not always the case with education research. Since any intervention will require young people to be the subjects of the research all educational research must be both “morally and educationally defensible” (p33).

Since teaching and thus educational research are situational and these settings are “complex and unpredictable” (p40), to have ‘street credibility’, the research must be conducted in a systematic and critical way. To become more than ‘common sense theorising’ educational research, which “is characterised by a critical stance towards problematic situations” (p35), must be underpinned by theory. This is where education research can support educational research to help practitioners to “reframe problems” (p37) and “to fulfil its promise of building an educator’s professional and pedagogical judgements in a credible way” (p37). For research to be more than ‘common sense theorising’ there must also be reference to the current discourse about the topic the practitioner has made ‘problematic’. Using literature in educational research can support practitioners to produce ‘quality data’, which can then be analysed and interpreted, and lead to changes in practice that have positive outcomes for young people.

In discussing the dichotomy of education research and educational research I have polarised the situation which may in practice be more fluid. However these two distinct terms are supporting my understanding of the term ‘research’ and have moved my thinking on in how to discuss engaging with research with teachers. Teaching Scotland’s Future (2010) uses Cochran-Smith &Lytle’s (2009) argument that “if we are to achieve the aspiration of teachers being leaders of educational improvement, they need to develop expertise in using research, inquiry and reflection as part of their daily skill set”. At this point in time, I would argue that this is still an aspiration, although there are pockets of good and excellent research practice across schools in Scotland. I believe we still have a long way to go for the teaching professional as a whole to have developed the approach of ‘enquiry as stance’.

References

Cochran-Smyth, M. & Lytle, S. L. (1993) Inside Outside: Teacher Research and Knowledge. New York and London: Teacher College Press

Cochran-Smyth, M. & Lytle, S. L. (2009) Inquiry as a Stance: Practitioner Research for the Next Generation Teacher College Press, New York

Donaldson, G. (2010) Teaching Scotland’s future

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/337626/0110852.pdf

Last accessed online 22/11/15

Elliott, J. (1987) ‘Classroom research: Science or Common Sense?’ in R. McALeese and D. Hamilton (eds) Understanding Classroom life (pp12-15). York: NFER

Foreman-Peck, L. & Winch, C (2010) Using educational research to inform practice – A Practical Guide to Practitioner Research in Universities and Colleges. Routledge

“Researching maybe more important than research” @realdcameron

The pedagoo #enquirymeet yesterday at Grangemouth High School was a new take on teachmeet format with a single focus on sharing practitioner enquiry. The range of presentations through early years, primary, secondary and some cross sector was fantastic with teachers and educators sharing their experiences and findings of enquiry. In his ‘final thoughts’ David Cameron (@realdcameron) had a bullet point “Research maybe more important than researching”, this connected with a paper I had been reading “Bridging the Gap between Researchers and Practitioners” Montgomery & Smith (2015), as I want to explore how research is accessed, used and the relevance of research in schools.

Teaching Scotland’s Future has a paragraph that discusses (p75), “a research-informed approach to continuous learning” in this Cochran-Smith (2009) is cited and her notion of teachers developing an ‘enquiry as stance’ is described as “they need to develop expertise in using research, inquiry and reflection as part of their daily skill set”. This is reinforced later in Teaching Scotland’s Future on p102, as “teachers will be more research aware and engage directly in self-evaluation”. In the essay by Montgomery & Smith (2015), they discuss the use of research to “assist teachers in providing evidence-based justifications for the curriculum materials they choose and the pedagogical decisions they make” and to “defend their professional choices”. These statements link the accountability that teachers have with the aspiration of ‘enquiry as stance’ and help to move teachers beyond "the kids loved it!" to more research informed practice. It also supports the suggestion discussed by Bevan (2004) that although teachers are both interested in improving students learning and are continually experimenting with ideas and approaches, using a more research focussed approach would encourage a more in-depth study of practice and support teachers to develop a criticality of “research-based initiative” which are ‘required’ to be implemented.

There was a major debate at the initial meeting to discuss the idea of a teachmeet with a focus on using research to inform practice. I was and still am of the opinion that the word ’research’ seems difficult, unattainable, and remote from teachers’ practice and indeed prevents teachers engaging in this way of working, as they can lack confidence and as Healy (2005) discusses many teachers have difficulty thinking of themselves as researchers. However by using a ‘softer’ idea of enquiry, this helps to break some myths and makes research more accessible for teachers, hence #enquirymeet.

There is a disconnect in the way teachers and researchers view themselves and each other and the relationship between the two ‘groups’ has not always been an easy one. Montgomery & Smith discuss these differing expectations as “researchers often wonder why so few research findings seem to make their way into classroom practice” and from the teaches point of view “teachers express frustration with how "out of touch" academic articles seem to be with the day-to-day realities”.

This argument of differing views is further discussed in terms of how research is written and where it is published. Classroom teachers can find access to research difficult. In Scotland, the GTC are supporting registered teachers to access academic literature through the Education Source – EBSCO, which has over 17,000 journal articles and also a small selection of ebooks to help teachers to engage with research. However, time is always a factor and teachers are “interested in concrete ways to improve their practice (Drill et al., 2012)”. Researchers “hope their work will have a large-scale impact on the profession” but for researchers, publication often serves a dual purpose. Firstly, to share their findings, thus adding to wider communities knowledge of the subject area and secondly, “a condition of continued employment”, therefore the intended audience may not be teachers which furthers the divide between researchers and teachers.

Most published research is written to a “standard convention” and follows a common structure. This “standard convention” can also create a barrier for teachers’ engagement with research as the abstract, literature review, methodology, discussion, and finally conclusion sections are lengthy and take precious time to wade through and digest. The use of "jargon," or "academese," can be off-putting and may seem to be “purposefully designed to deliberately exclude people”. The discussion and conclusion sections are usually of most use to teachers but can be written in an academically responsible but appear somewhat ‘wishy washy’ from the teachers perspective. However, this is right and proper, as Montgomery & Smith state “researchers try to be careful not to make assertions for which they do not feel they have adequate evidence, and limit the conclusions they draw from their research to statements that can be directly supported by the data they have analysed” but can lead to frustration for teachers who are hoping for something more ‘concrete’.

A further barrier for teachers for articles written in an academically conventional framework is the “extensive use of citations and complex statistical analyses”, this can be off putting for teachers as it can be “intrusive to the flow of the argument, and disruptive to their ability to understand the content” or viewed from an academic point of view as “gaps in their professional literacy” of teachers. There can also be an issue in the conclusions drawn from research and it can lack "street credibility" as it appears remote from the teachers’ personal experience.

The best way forward I would suggest would be, as is already appearing across Scotland, partnership models, where universities and either local authorities or schools, are forming relationships. These partnerships support “university researchers have access to students they would not otherwise be able to study” and “teachers can get the answers they need to improve their practice without taking on the research obligation alone” and this would appear to be the answer. However, a word of caution, in any partnership the relationship is key. The partnership must “find common ground” so there is no conflict of ‘whose agenda’ is being addressed. The outcomes of the research and who ‘owns’ the research must be agreed to minimise confusion and conflict as Montgomery & Smith state “[are] mostly due to the fact that both parties view the purposes and value of research from such different perspectives, which are firmly grounded in their unique roles and responsibilities”.

In essence, I agree with @realdcameron’s final thought of “Researching maybe more important than research” but I feel we, as a profession, need to become more proactive in seeking out literature to support our pedagogy but also understand the limitations of time and resource. Practitioner enquiry may be a first step into carrying out some ‘research’ into our own practice but I believe that if we can implement the partnership model as a way of working that meet the needs of teachers and researchers then we can have the best of both worlds.

References

Bevan, R. M. (2004). Filtering, fragmenting, and fiddling? Teachers' life cycles, and phases in their engagement with research. Teacher Development, 8 (2-3), 325-339. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13664530400200224.

Donaldson, G. (2010) Teaching Scotland’s Future

Retreived from http://www.gov.scot/resource/doc/337626/0110852.pdf

Drill, K., Miller, S., & Behrstock-Sherratt, E. (2012). Teachers' perspectives on educational research. Report from American Institutes for Research. Retrieved fromhttp://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED530742.pdf

Healey, M. (2005). Linking research and teaching exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning. In Barnett, R. (Ed.), Reshaping the University: New Relationships between Research, Scholarship and Teaching, (pp. 67-78). Berkshire, England: McGraw Hill / Open University Press. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124.

Montgomery,C. Smith, L.C.(2015) ‘Bridging the Gap between Researchers and Practitioners’ Die Unterrichtspraxis / Teaching German, Spring2015, Vol. 48 Issue 1, p100, 14p

What is knowledge?

I have been thinking about knowledge lately. This came into focus as terminology such as ‘knowledge into action’, ‘knowledge exchange’ and ‘21^st century knowledge’ are beginning to proliferate the discourse in education without the examination that we have a common understanding of the meanings of these terms.

The Oxford dictionaries (here) gives definitions of knowledge,

• as a noun - “facts, information and skills acquired through experience or education”, “the sum of what is known” or “information held on a computer system 
• as a philosophical stance - “true, justified belief; certain understanding, as opposed to opinion”.  “awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation” 
•  in archaic term -  “sexual intercourse”.

Following on from this, I have chosen two papers to support my understanding of the meaning of knowledge from the Education Source – EBSCO, which is available to all registered teachers in Scotland through MyGTCS.

In the first paper by Merrill-Glover, the author discusses different types of knowledge and how knowledge has changed over time. She states that knowledge was “inextricably linked to historical and cultural legacies” (p24) and this knowledge linked to history was termed “official knowledge” (p24) by Bernstein. She comments on the philosophical concept of knowledge having both “external reality” and as being “part of human thought” (Burr, 2013:12) and the notion that “knowledge is both malleable and multi-layered”(p24).

She goes on to discuss the ‘knowledge economy’ and how this, as Burton Jones (199:22) asserts is, “beginning to challenge money and all other forms of capital” (p25). Merrill-Glover asserts that a rethink around the concept of knowledge was brought about by the “democratisation of knowledge” combined with “know how” knowledge held within “transferable skills”. In the ‘knowledge society’ the status of ‘official knowledge’ is under threat as ‘transferable skills’ are coming to the fore. These ‘transferable skills’, highly prized by employers, are beginning to replace pure knowledge (subject based) as we move into what Merrill-Glover called a ‘pedagogic schizoid position’ “where individuals and institutions are required to manage the competing demands of traditional practices and modern day expectations” (p31)

In the second paper authored by Kereluik et al, according to Gardner (2008) and Pink (2005) “the educational demands of this new century require new ways of thinking and learning” (p127). The reason stated for these new ways of thinking and learning are given as students “due to their immersion in technology” i.e. being digital natives, are fundamentally different learners. This rethink of knowledge and how we support students to develop knowledge is linked to “technological modernisation and globalisation” (p129). Learning in the 21^st century seems to be almost exclusively linked to learning with technology but this is not without its misconceptions such as the belief that using technologies require a rethinking of pedagogy, just because you are using technology and a that technologies are limited to a single mode of use. I like the phraseology, used by a number of authors cited in the paper, which is that “technologies provide a ‘zone of possibility’”(p128), this supports my view that technology is a fantastic tool to support learning and provides teachers with new ways to engage learners.

In identifying knowledge types, the authors determined three broad categories and tried to “capture the essential elements” through an analysis of various frameworks. Their findings are summarised in as;

21^st Century Learning

                Foundational Knowledge (to Know)

o   Digital/ICT Literacy

o   Core Content Knowledge

o   Cross-disciplinary Knowledge

Meta Knowledge (to Act)

o   Creativity and Innovation

o   Problem solving and Critical Thinking

o   Communication and Collaboration

Humanistic Knowledge (to Value)

o   Life and Job skills

o   Ethical/emotional awareness

o   Cultural Competence

The authors states that “the need for students to develop deep disciplinary knowledge has always been important” and goes on to say “what has changed is access to disciplinary knowledge and authentic disciplinary inquiry made viable through technology and subsequently experts and resources” (p133) and another important factor is “knowing how and when” to use technology. Even with changing pedagogy and resources in the 21^st century “our core role (to know, to act, and to value) have not changed”.

Through examination of these two papers I do believe I have a greater understanding of the different forms of knowledge, but still feel that the education community creates and morphs words to make something ordinary sound extraordinary and in doing do loses some of the audience as they feel they cannot contribute and as they lack understanding. As Young (2008) cited by Merrill-Glover, argues, and I agree, “the question about what knowledge is remain largely unanswered”.

References

Merrill-Glover, K (2015) “Working towards powerful knowledge: Curriculum pedagogy and assessment in work based learning” Widening Perspectives and Lifelong learning Volume 17, number 1

Kereluik, K. Mishra, P, Fahnoe, C. & Terry, L. (2013)”What knowledge is of most worth: teacher knowledge for 21^st Century Learning” Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, Volume 29, Number 4

Some thought inspired by John Tomsett

This much I know about - Love Over Fear: Creating a culture for truly great teaching

John Tomsett (2015)

Having had John Tomsett’s book on my Amazon Wish list, I eventually downloaded the Kindle version, which to be honest is not my favourite way to read an education text as I prefer to be able to write on books, as I argue/agree with the author, although my own kids tell me off for this!! This book is a wonderful read, both from an educational perspective and also a human perspective, John is very honest in his reflections and engaging in his writing.

The clinching line for me is “fundamentally students need to feel loved” (p64). Isn’t that so true? and not just for our student! If you examine your core values somewhere lurking there is a love for children and an honest ambition to try to help them be the best they can be, this is all bound up in the complex things called ‘relationships’. In an accountability age,  instead of measuring students’ progress and attainment,  we need to focus on the ‘human activity’ of showing love for our students and their lives, as John says “the relationship between teachers and student is fundamental to whether a student learns” (p13).

We need to ensure that the ethos of our schools supports teachers to help our students to become successful individuals. Having worked in the same school with three different headteachers I know that the ethos and culture is very strongly influenced by leadership. Unfortunately, in some schools the culture is not positive, usually driven by an managerial accountability agenda that is not compatible with quality experience for students and teachers. John puts it thus, “until educators accept the fact that fear and quality work are incompatible, there can be no real improvement in the quality of the educational system” (p90), insightful and honest but who is listening?

The value leadership teams place on professional learning is fundamental to the culture of professional trust and “we need to foster a growth culture which is founded upon the belief that all of us can improve” (p26). Once the premise of improvement is agreed then each establishment should “define what great teaching is in their context and target all their CPD to this end” (p155). This is so important that we learn to be confident in our own context and respond to the needs of the students and not cherry pick or ‘grab and go’ with ‘what works’ but find out what do we need to change before we decide how to make that change and sustain it. For teachers, the buzz around research and using research should “address questions to which teachers really need an answer” (p178), again how sensible that we look at our context first and not always look outward for solutions. We are professionals and need to be confident that we are doing the ‘right thing’ for our students and most importantly, teachers need to stop asking for permission to make a change.

I wish more headteachers would follow in John’s confident footsteps and take responsibility for their own context and not become enactors of policy but instead be creators of happy, confident, successful students and teachers. I love the quote from Mike Hughes’s that John uses to shield him from educational fads,

“the most effective leaders seem to have erected a sheet of Polaroid across the school gates: all the confusing, paradoxical and frustrating initiatives hitting the school, as they pass through the Polaroid, emerge as parallel lines, harmonious with our plans and processes”

I really enjoyed this book and found it to be refreshing and heart-warming and I would recommend it to you.

References
John Tomsett  (2015) This much I know about  - Love Over Fear : Creating a culture for truly great teaching, Crown House publishing limited, UK

Mike Hughes, Tweaks to transform. Improving Teaching: A practical Handbook for School Leaders (London:continuum-3PL, 2002)

How can GTC Scotland support my engagement with research?

GTCS acknowledges that finding resources to support practitioner enquiry can be difficult if you do not have access to a University library.  To support teachers, GTCS have purchased resources which can be accessed by any teacher registered with the GTC Scotland.

The EBSCO resources are:

Education Source – EBSCO

Education Source – EBSCO provides access to over 1,700 education journals.

Some journals provide full text access (you can download the full article as a PDF or view online). However, some journals provide restricted or 'embargo' access to the most recent issues. You will find that these journals will only let you see the abstracts of the articles published in the last 12 months. There are some journals that only offer 'abstract only'.

The Leadership and Management Learning Centre

The LMLC provides resources specifically related to issues of leadership and management. This includes journal articles, eBooks and video resource content.

Ebooks

We have purchased a range of eBooks which have been categorised under the following broad research themes, they relate to key aspects of the Standards.

Education HUB

EducationHUB is an interactive online platform that provides an opportunity for education practitioners to share, discuss and review unpublished practitioner produced research and enquiry.

EducationHUB provides a framework and guidance for any GTCS registered teacher to publish their own research work and participate in professional dialogue with their peers across Scotland. Whilst this is not a 'peer reviewed' published journal, clear criteria is provided which should help individuals consider the rigour and value of the practitioner research.

You can contribute to the EducationHUB project in two ways:

·         By publishing your own (unpublished) work to EducationHUB (research posters or summaries, practitioner enquiry articles, dissertations, theses, etc.)

·         Reading, reviewing and discussing articles

Navigating the GTCS website to access the on-line support:

Load the GTCS website

Click the Research Tab

Click Online Access to Education Journals

Log in my GTCS

REMEMBER: Your username is your six-digit GTCS registration number (without the forward slash). The Date of Birth format is DD/MM/YYYY.

Click into Research

Scroll down to:

‒    Education Source

Visit Education Source – EBSCO for articles and journals.

‒    Leadership and management learning centre (LMLC)

Browse by theme.

‒       eBooks

                List of ebooks or browse by theme.

 Next week starting the 26^th October, the GTCS Research Engagement Group will host a slow chat (Monday – Wednesday) to discuss how teachers are using Education Source – EBSCO, LMLC, ebooks and the Education HUB to support their professional learning.

Join the conversation by following the hashtag #GTCSpl or better still use one of the resources and share your thoughts and learning.