Newsgroups: bit.listserv.qualrs-l
Date:         Mon, 9 Nov 1992 08:19:00 CST
              <QUALRS-L@UGA.BITNET>
From:         Gary Shank <P30GDS1@NIU.BITNET>
Subject:      erl-l discussion

sorry to have been quiet for so long.  here's a piece for the erl-l
ed research line that might be of interest.   gary shank

Dear ERL-L subscriber,

I've asked Gary Shank to contribute some provocative comments from
the perspective of a post-modernist semiotician.  As we move toward
an electronic journal, let's explore the potential of "editorial"
comments that engender quibbles, quarrels, challenges, support, or
whatever.
                               -Jean Pierce


(Note from Gary: Copy the following if you see fit, but please
include a disclaimer which states that this piece is Copyright 1992
by Gary Shank.)

Educational Research: All Played Out?

Gary Shank, Northern Illinois University
P30GDS1@NIU    Bitnet
P30GDS1@MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU  Internet


Educational Research is in trouble not because it is not being done
well, but because it has played out all of the insights that its
methods will allow it.  In other words, educational research is like
a mine that once contained some ore, but has now been mined out.
Before the qualitative people start chuckling as they wait for a
defense of their methods, let me say that qualitative methods are as
equally played out as the more traditional experimental methods.

Two points:  How can I support these claims and what should we do
about it if I am right? Let's field each in turn.

Is educational research played out?  I think so.  The evidence is
as follows:  1) Research designs in education have been, and
continue to be, less and less ecologically valid.  This was okay
so long as big and interesting questions were being asked.  We
could then deform the big ideas into practice, and see what happened
as a result.  Think of teaching machines as an old but good example
of this point.  We have not looked at big ideas per se for some
time now.  We import them whole from other fields.  Cognitive
science is a recent exampole of an imported big idea.
2) Educational research is more and more classroom-oriented.
This is a lot less okay than it looks on the surface.  It is also
why most qualitative research is not very good -- it is largely
if not exclusively focussed on what hapens in either the classroom,
in the school environs, or to students qua students.  What is wrong
with being classroom-oriented exclusively?  Well, being oriented
exclusively in any fashion is not good.  Also, focusing on the
classroom centers us on schooling, and not on the larger domain of
education.  Finally, taking a classroom orientation tends to make
the field reactive instead of proactive.  When was the last time
anyone turned to educational researchers to show new ways of doing
anything or looking at anything outside of school?  We spend all
our time applying theories from other branches of the social
sciences to schooling, or evaluating schooling practices;
3) We think some shift in methods will save the field.  Doing
fieldwork won't save educational research.  Doing multivariate
analyses won't save it either.  Methods follow the asking of
powerful and interesting questions.  You can't save the dog by
having its tail wag you to some higher ground.

What do we do now?  Several things:  1) Declare a moratorium
on championing new methods until we have done some serious
considerations of the foundations of our field.  Pick up any
philosophy of science journal, and you will see that science
as we know it is coming to an end.  Should we wait for other
inquirers to solve all the problems and lag behind, or should
we lead the way for a change?  I know how I feel;
2) What foundations should we look at?  For starters, we need
to consider whether epistemology, or the pursuit of knowledge,
is actually the most fundamental basis for our field.  I think
that the pursuit of meaning will be the challenge of the 21st
century, and we can contribute to that effort as educational
researchers--in fact, we need to lead the way; 3) We need to
act more like educatred beings, and less like trained beings.
We are trained to use statistical and ethnographic techniques,
but educated people bring the wide panoply of human experiences
and skills and insights to bear on whatever we consider.  I think
that an educational researchers ought to be a renaissance person,
since educating is the broadest spectrum of human experience.

Can we talk (to coin a phrase)?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU