GLE 598 Enhancing Knowledge Production in Education Discussion – Description
Procedures
EXPLORE
In the explorations you will encounter materials that complement the primary readings or cast them in a different light. The resources may include articles, videos, websites, etc. Your job is to spend time reviewing each one to learn more. Feel free to spend more time exploring the websites or related videos that are of more interest to you and which have more applicability to your context.
After exploring the resources, you will write a reflection synthesizing your impression of the topic. Your reflection must include concrete evidence to demonstrate your engagement with the resources. So as you explore the resources, take note of evidence that may be relevant to your written reflection.
REFLECT
In a response, synthesize your impressions of the resources you explored. Address all of the following prompts to guide your writing. The goal is to demonstrate thoughtful, well-reasoned engagement with the resources and to consider their potential for the field of education and to your specific context.
How might a clear, high-level understanding of the “communities of practice” or “plural worlds” of educational research result in a more rigorous and relevant production of knowledge? What are some structures that perpetuate siloed knowledge?
How might Dewey and Thorndike respond to Sir Ken Robinson and (optional) Pasi Sahlberg?
Respond
Post your Exploration to the Discussion board and respond to one or two of your colleagues’ Exploration posts (all Explorations will be publicly viewable after you post your Exploration).
here is my peer’s post.
It is important to recognize the powers that influence and be able to discern the value of those influences. Lagemann (1989) would tell her students that Dewey “lost” and Thorndike “won” (1989, p. 184). However, throughout her work, Lagemann (1989) claimed this is not actually the case and that a critical review of events allows those with a high-level understanding to “begin to isolate the social and political factors that have defined educational research and, more broadly, the knowledge that has informed (or has not, but might have, informed) educational policy and practice” (p. 213-214). New administration in Dewey and Thorndike’s day swung the focus from practice to policy, and by understanding the influences that pull or push any of the plural worlds in and out of focus, we can better understand that the world that “wins” is not necessarily superior over the ideas or practices of those who “lost” (Lagemann, 1989, p. 184).
It is also important to recognize the potential of influences of ignored resources that could be used towards positive change in educational research. Those with a clear, high-level understanding of community of practice will recognize that the understanding of all epistemologies expands and enhances educational research. If epistemologies are only understood by those within them, there is no cross-collaboration, limited growth, and “single-mindedness” (Pallas, 2001, p.7). Instead, Pallas (2001) argues that instead of “compartmentalizing and segregating disparate epistemologies” universities should be “adopting a critical, reflexive stance toward doctoral research preparation, and interrogating the rationales for current practices” ((Pallas, 2001, p.11). Through the search for understanding and the bridging of epistemologies, the hope is that researchers will gain deeper understanding and stronger, more well-considered views of research overall. As a literature teacher, I strongly believe that the layering of lenses enhances understanding. If one were to only look at Animal Farm through a simple interpretation, it is a story about some very angry animals who drive away humans and make a mess of the farm. However, adding in lenses that unearth the author’s purpose, symbolism, and historical influence, the story reveals greater depth about the human experience and political influence as well as a commentary on communism and the Russian Revolution. The combination of lens and different epistemological stances create richer understanding and stronger collaborative discussions.
However, the goal of collaboration and deeper understanding is not easily achieved as there have been many barriers to the spread or collaboration of knowledge over the years. Lagemann (1997) noted that after 1910, non-educationalists were pushed out of educational research, and because of this, “the emergence of educational research as a distinct scholarly specialty isolated educationists from other scholars” (p.7). One could even find this siloing of knowledge in the epistemological realm. Pallas (2001) described the exclusion of new members who were unsure about the nuances of different epistemologies and so were excluded by the more knowledgeable. Because of this, “novices would not feel safe in voicing their developing under- standings of epistemology, and would be likely to withdraw from participation, that is, if they weren’t dismissed first” (Pallas, 2001, p. 10). However, even as internal and external forces hinder progress, ideas still rise, or rise again in new forms.
The goals of the past, return in voices of the present. From this presentation, Robinson seemed to be promoting concepts and ideas that aligned with Dewey’s view of education. Dewey would have agreed with Robinson’s proposal that education should shift into focus on broader themes in education such as the “economic,” “cultural,” “social,” and “personal” (Top Hat, 2019). Dewey wanted to break down the current levels and structure and improve education “by allowing children to utilize in school what they had learned in other institutions, especially the family; and by enabling the school to enliven its activities through close contact with the business, academic, cultural, and natural worlds” (Lagemann, 1989, p.200). In contrast, Thorndike’s views of education aligned more with the traditional structure of education that Robinson was disputing. Thorndike’s focus was much more on the measured results and “not concerned as Dewey had been with the significance of education as a means to social renewal and social change…” (Lagemann, 1989, p. 212).
As Robinson recognized changes in the current values and struggles, he questioned the traditional system and resurrected and revised a structure that had “lost” that now may provide a better alternative for the next generation, thus demonstrating this high-level understanding of the plural worlds (Lagemann, 1989, p. 184).
The post GLE 598 Enhancing Knowledge Production in Education Discussion first appeared on .
