Advertisement

Teacher Research: A Knowledge-Producing Profession?

  • Nicole MocklerEmail author
  • Susan Groundwater-Smith
Chapter

Abstract

Teacher research has a long and proud history, stretching back to at least the 1970s, of supporting and valuing teachers as creators as well as consumers of knowledge about educational practice. In this chapter, we explore the shape and rationale of these historical ideals and the ‘architectures of practice’ that frame them, juxtaposed with the more instrumentalist notions of teacher research expressed in recent years by, among others, proponents of ‘evidence-based practice’. We argue for an opening of the discussion around evidence in education and what constitutes good evidence of practice, and a reclaiming of the notion of ‘evidence-based practice’ as a generative rather than reductive interpretation of educational practice, consistent with rather than antagonistic to the notion of praxis as morally informed action .

Keywords

Educational Research Good Evidence Professional Learning Participatory Action Research Teacher Professional Development 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Altrichter, H., & Posch, P. (2009). Action research, professional development and systemic reform. The SAGE Handbook of Educational Action Research, 213–225.Google Scholar
  2. Atkinson, E. (2000). In defence of ideas, or why ‘what works’ is not enough. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 21(3), 307–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Australian Council for Educational Research. (2008). The digest. Retrieved April 30, 2015 from https://www.trb.tas.gov.au/SharedDocuments/Usingdatatoinformteaching.pdf
  4. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2012). Australian teacher performance and development framework. Melbourne: AITSL.Google Scholar
  5. Biesta, G. (2007). Why ‘what works’ won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biesta, G. (2014). The beautiful risk of education. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Cameron, W. (1963). Informal Sociology: A casual introduction to sociological thinking. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  8. Carr, W. (2006). Philosophy, methodology and action research. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 40(4), 421–435.Google Scholar
  9. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305.Google Scholar
  11. Cronbach, L. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30(2), 116–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1992). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–305.Google Scholar
  13. Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (2009). Inquiry as stance: Practitioner research for the next generation. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  14. Davies, P. (1999). What is evidence-based education? British Journal of Educational Studies, 47(2), 108–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elliott, J. (2001). Making evidence-based practice educational. British Educational Research Journal, 27(5), 555–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elliott, J. (2004). Using research to improve practice: The notion of evidence-based practice. In C. Day & J. Sachs (Eds.), International handbook on the continuing professional development of teachers (pp. 264–290). Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fenton, B., & Murphy, M. (2015). New leaders for new schools. Retrieved 30 April, 2015, from http://www.ascd.org/ascd-express/vol5/508-fenton.aspx
  18. Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Goldacre, B. (2013). Building evidence into education. London: British Department for Education.Google Scholar
  20. Goldenberg, M.J. (2009). Iconoclast or creed? Objectivism, pragmatism, and the hierarchy of evidence. Perspectives in Biology & Medicine, 52, 168–187.Google Scholar
  21. Groopman, J. (2007). How doctors think. New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  22. Groundwater Smith, S., & Irwin, J. (2011). Action research in education and social work. In L. Markauskaite, P. Freebody, & J. Irwin (Eds.), Methodological choice and design (pp. 57–70). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Groundwater-Smith, S., & Mockler, N. (2002). The knowledge building school: From the outside in, from the inside out. Change: Transformations Education, 5(2), 15–24.Google Scholar
  24. Groundwater-Smith, S., & Mockler, N. (2007). Ethics in practitioner research: An issue of quality. Research Papers in Education, 22(2), 199–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Groundwater-Smith, S., & Mockler, N. (2009). Teacher professional learning in an age of compliance: Mind the gap. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Grundy, S. (1994). Action research at the school level: Possibilities and problems. Educational Action Research, 2(1), 23–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Grundy, S. (1995). Action research as professional development. Murdoch, WA: Innovative Links Project.Google Scholar
  28. Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (2008). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions and emerging confluences. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues (3rd ed., pp. 191–215). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  29. Hammersley, M. (1997). Educational research and teaching: A response to David Hargreaves’ TTA lecture. British Educational Research Journal, 23, 141–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hargreaves, D. (1999a). The knowledge-creating school. British Journal of Educational Studies, 47(2), 122–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hargreaves, D. (1999b). Revitalising educational research: Lessons from the past and proposals for the future. Cambridge Journal of Education, 29(2), 239–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hargreaves, D. (1996). Teaching as a research based profession: Possibilities and prospects (Teacher Training Agency Lecture, 1996). In M. Hammersley (Ed.), Educational research and evidence-based practice. London\Sage: Milton Keynes\Open University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Haynes, L., Service, O., Goldacre, B., & Torgerson, D. (2012). Test, learn, adapt: developing public policy with randomised controlled trials. Cabinet office-behavioural insights team. London: Cabinet Office-Behavioural Insights Team.Google Scholar
  34. Kemmis, S. (2009). Action research as a practice-based practice. Educational Action Research, 17(3), 463–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kemmis, S., & Grootenboer, P. (2008). Situating praxis in practice: Practice architectures and the cultural, social and material conditions for practice. In S. Kemmis & T. Smith (Eds.), Enabling praxis: Challenges for education (pp. 37–62). Rotterdam: Sense.Google Scholar
  36. Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  37. Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The action research planner: Doing critical participatory action research. Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lytle, S., & Cochran-Smith, M. (1992). Teacher research as a way of knowing. Harvard Educational Review, 62(4), 447–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. McLeod, S. (2015). Data-driven teachers. Saint Paul, MN: Saint Paul Public Schools.Google Scholar
  40. Mockler, N. (2005). Trans/forming teachers: New professional learning and transformative teacher professionalism. Journal of In-service Education, 31(4), 733–746.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mockler, N. (2011). Being me. In J. Higgs (Ed.), Creative spaces for qualitative researching (pp. 159–168). Rotterdam: Sense Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mockler, N. (2015). From surveillance to formation: Teacher ‘performance and development’ in Australian schools. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(9).Google Scholar
  43. Robinson, J., & Norris, N. (2001). Generalisation: The linchpin of evidence-based practice? Educational Action Research, 9(2), 303–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rothman, D.J. (1997). Beginnings count. The technological imperative in American health care. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Sales, C., & Schlaff, A. (2010). Reforming medical education: A review and synthesis of five critiques of medical practice. Social Science and Medicine, 70(11), 1665–1668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schatzki, T. (2010). The site of the social: A philosophical account of the constitution of social life and change. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton, J., & Kleiner, A. (2000). Schools that learn. London: Nicholas Brealey.Google Scholar
  48. Slavin, R. (1987). Ability grouping in elementary schools: Do we really know nothing until we know everything? Review of Educational Research, 57(3), 347–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Stenhouse, L. (1978). Applying research to education. University of East Anglia. Norwich. Retrieved from https://www.uea.ac.uk/documents/4059364/4994243/Stenhouse-1978-Applying+Research+to+education.pdf/24ec7b40-ac56-46d2-8f8f-2bb7b4c53ac4
  50. Stenhouse, L. (1979). The problems of standards in illuminative research. Paper presented at the Annual General Meeting of the Scottish Educational Research Association, University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
  51. Stenhouse, L. (1980). The study of samples and the study of cases. British Educational Research Journal, 6(1), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stenhouse, L. (1981). What counts as research? British Journal of Educational Studies, 29(2), 103–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stenhouse, L. (1985). The psycho-statistical paradigm and its limitations 1. In J. Rudduck & D. Hopkins (Eds.), Research as a basis for teaching: Readings from the work of Lawrence Stenhouse (pp. 20–24). London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  54. Stewart, W. (2015). Leave research to the academics, John Hattie tells teachers. Retrieved April 23, 2015 from https://www.tes.co.uk/news/school-news/breaking-news/leave-research-academics-john-hattie-tells-teachers?hootPostID=4e213f43b9d4c69fbbf623d03146632f
  55. Taubman, P. (2009). Teaching by numbers: Deconstructing the discourse of standards and accountability in education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  56. Thompson, G., & Cook, I. (2014). Manipulating the data: Teaching and NAPLAN in the control society. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 35(1), 129–142. doi: 10.1080/01596306.2012.739472 Google Scholar
  57. Thompson, G., & Cook, I. (2015, in press). The logic of data-sense: Thinking through learning personalisation. Policy Futures in Education.Google Scholar
  58. Wiliam, D. (2014). Randomised control trials in education. Research in Education, 6(1), 3–4.Google Scholar
  59. Wolfe (2002). Direct-to-consumer-marketing - education or emotion promotion? New England Journal of Medicine, 346, 524–526.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Education and Social WorkThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations