Abstract
This essay responds to a selection of ideas and theoretical frameworks Sharada Gade uses to conduct her study. The ideas raised by Sharada are placed in the context of the changes and experiences taking place in today’s public school system. Her ideas also provide new insights into the construct of relational agency in accordance with expansive learning activity from a teacher as researcher perspective. The purpose of this response is to shed light on the collaboration that needs to exist between teachers and researchers as curriculum is designed and implemented.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1990). Research on teaching and teacher research: The issues that divide. Educational Researcher, 19(2), 2–11.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1999). The teacher research movement: A decade later. Educational Researcher, 28(7), 15–25.
Corcoran, T. B., Fuhrman, S. H., & Belcher, C. L. (2001). The district role in instructional improvement. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 78–84.
Corey, S. M. (1949). Action research, fundamental research and educational practitioners. Teachers’ College Record, 50, 509–514.
Danielson, C. (2013). The framework for teaching evaluation instrument, 2013 edition: The newest rubric enhancing the links to the Common Core State Standards, with clarity of language for ease of use and scoring.
Edwards, A. (2009). From the systemic to the relational: Relational agency and activity theory. In Learning and expanding with activity theory (pp. 197–211).
Engeström, Y. (2009a). Expansive learning: Toward an activity-theoretical reconceptualization. In Contemporary theories of learning: Learning theorists… in their own words. London: Routledge
Engeström, Y. (2009b). The future of activity theory: A rough draft. In Learning and expanding with activity theory (pp. 303–328).
Futernick, K. (2007). A possible dream: Retaining California teachers so all students learn. Sacramento: California State University.
Gray, C. (2013). Bridging the teacher/researcher divide: Master’s-level work in initial teacher education. European Journal of Teacher Education, 36(1), 24–38.
Hammersley, M. (1993). On the teacher as researcher. Educational Action Research, 1(3), 425–445.
Hollingsworth, S., Dybdahl, M., & Minarik, L. T. (1993). By chart and chance and passion: The importance of relational knowing in learning to teach. Curriculum Inquiry, 23, 5–35.
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The sage handbook of qualitative research, 3, 559–603.
Muirhead, B. (2002). Teacher-as-researcher. USDLA Journal, 16(9). http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/SEP02_Issue/article07.html.
Rodriguez, A. J. (2008). When does the researcher (should) also become a resource for the bricoleur teacher? A review of Ajay Sharma’s Portrait of a science teacher as a bricoleur: A case study from India. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(4), 867–873.
Tobin, K. (2014). Using collaborative inquiry to better understand teaching and learning. In Activist science and technology education (pp. 127–147). Netherlands: Springer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Lead editor: K. Tobin
This essay addresses issues raised in Sharada Gade’s article entitled: “Unpacking teacher-researcher collaboration with three theoretical frameworks—a case of expansive learning activity?” Cultural Studies of Science Education. doi: 10.1007/s11422-014-9619-7.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wright, S. Relational agency from a teacher as researcher perspective. Cult Stud of Sci Educ 10, 629–636 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9664-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9664-x