Teacher as Researcher: An Essential Component of Teacher Preparation

Abstract

This article provides a brief synthesis of research findings from studies of teacher education programs that include attention to teacher research. It then details findings from a study of beginning teachers who learned about and conducted teacher research in their preservice M.A.T. program. Surveys and follow-up interviews show that these beginning teachers (2-6 years in the field) utilize a variety of research strategies, and the data from their classroom inquiry informs and sustains their work. Teacher research is more than just a requirement of their teacher preparation program; it is an essential habit of their classroom practice. Teacher quality is a hot topic for politicians, parents, students, educators, and community members. The relationship between teacher quality and teacher preparation is under scrutiny. What do teachers need to know? What is the best way to support this knowledge development? How do we ensure that teachers are prepared to educate 21 st century learners? In the midst of conversations about multiple routes into teaching, school-based residency programs, and greater attention to clinical practice, one curriculum trend is receiving attention: teachers as researchers. The assumption is that ―teachers need to gather, interpret, and use data about students‘ learning and other aspects of teaching, learning, and schooling to continually rethink and improve their teaching practice.‖ This focus on teacher research is not new to teacher education. A number of education researchers have written about the need for teacher research as part of beginning teacher preparation programs (Graham & Hudson-Ross, 1999; Kosnick, 2000; Monroe, Gali, Swope, & Perreira, 2007; Moore, 1999b; Ostorga & Lopez, 2009). This research recognizes that teacher researchers are uniquely positioned to provide an insider‘s view that ―makes visible the way that students and teachers together construct knowledge and curriculum‖ (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993, p. 43). John Dewey (1929) noted the value of teacher research, ―It seems to me that the contributions that might come from classroom teachers are a comparatively neglected field; or to change the metaphor, an almost unworked mine....‖ (p. 17). Teacher research supports ―a different theory of knowledge for teaching—one in which teachers are among those who are knowers‖ (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993, p. 61). Several features define or explain teacher research: (a) teacher researchers have an insider, or emic perspective; (b) they mix theory and practice (praxis) while teaching and researching within their classroom worlds; (c) teacher research is pragmatic and goal-oriented—there are practical classroom problems that need to be solved; and (d) teacher research involves disciplined inquiry (Shulman, 1997) which means that studies are intentional and systematically conducted (Baumann & Duffy, 2001, p. 611). My synthesis of studies that examine teacher preparation programs that include attention to teacher research finds that graduates of these programs: • Acquired a variety of knowledge about teaching and curriculum (Baumann & Duffy, 1 Hill Campbell: Teacher as Researcher: An Essential Component of Teacher Preparat Published by PDXScholar, 2011 24 NORTHWEST PASSAGE, 9(2) 2001; Kosnick, 2000; McEwan, Field, Kawamoto & Among, 1997; Moore, 1999a; Rock & Levin, 2002). • Explored their sense of self as teacher (Rock & Levin, 2002). • Gained awareness of their students, including knowledge of their students‘ perspectives and learning needs (Duffield & Townsend, 1999; Kosnick, 2000; Moore, 1999a; Rock & Levin, 2002). • Clarified their personal theories of teaching (Baumann & Duffy, 2001; Monroe, Gali, Swope & Perreira, 2007; Moore, 1999a; Ostorga & Lopez, 2009; Rock & Levin, 2002). • Gained awareness of and appreciation for the processes of inquiry, reflection, action, and change as roles of a professional teacher (Kosnick, 2000; McEwan et. al, 1997; Monroe, Gali, Swope & Perreira, 2007; Ostorga & Lopez, 2009; Moore, 1999a; Rock & Levin, 2002). Despite these findings, teacher research has not been a standard curriculum component of most teacher preparation programs. But with the increased emphasis on teacher preparation, there is growing interest in teachers conducting their own classroom research. ―Teachers as Researchers‖ was noted as a new direction for teacher preparation in Educational Leadership (Cochran-Smith & Power, 2010, p. 11). Several examples were noted, including the University of New Hampshire‘s preparation program, ―in which teacher candidates complete a yearlong internship in a school, generating questions, gathering student learning data, and modifying curriculum and instruction on the basis of this data‖ (p. 11). For the past ten years, my work as a teacher educator has focused on preparing beginning teachers to be researchers in their own classrooms. Preservice teacher candidates in our Middle School/ High School M.A.T. program are introduced to teacher research through a number of activities that span several courses. Specifically, M.A.T. candidates explore literacy through the lens of teacher research by taking field notes at their internship sites, spending a day shadowing a student, and then selecting one student to focus on for a literacy case study. Case studies are presented to preservice colleagues at a roundtable session in late fall. Candidates also read examples of teacher research in the Language Arts methods course. During the fall of their yearlong internship, candidates develop data collection skills. Candidates build on this effort in the spring by collecting data on one class they are teaching as part of their continued internship. Candidates collect data about student learning based on classroom observations, their own reflections on lesson plans and classroom practice, and student work, including formative and summative assessments. Attention is paid to noting patterns they observe and using these patterns to inform their planning and to develop assessments to check students‘ understanding. Candidates then write up their findings, including the data, their analysis, and their findings regarding student learning as well as a reflection on what candidates learned about their own teaching. A second cycle of data collection, analysis, and a write up of findings follows. In addition to their own research, candidates see teacher research modeled by professors, and graduates of the program present the research they are doing as beginning teachers. As noted above, although there are studies of teacher research as part of teacher preparation, they are limited. And there are even fewer studies that follow graduates into the field to see if they continue to conduct teacher research in support of their classroom practice. Kosnick (2000) found that teachers who were introduced to teacher research as part of their preservice teacher education continue to be teacher researchers in their first year of teaching. Gilbert and Smith (2003) studied a graduate teacher-induction program, which involved novice and practicing teachers in teacher research. They found that three years out of the program, four 2 Northwest Journal of Teacher Education, Vol. 9, Iss. 2 [2011], Art. 2 https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/nwjte/vol9/iss2/2 DOI: 10.15760/nwjte.2012.9.2.2 FALL 2011 25 former novices, out of 15, were doing teacher research as a response to classroom dilemmas. These studies of teacher researchers beyond their preparation program are promising but further studies are needed. A Follow-up Study of Beginning Teacher Researchers and Teacher Research This study was designed to explore the question: What is the impact of learning about teacher research as part of their preservice program on middle school/high school language arts teachers in their beginning years of teaching? The design for this research was qualitative, although there were Likert scale questions in the survey (described below). Qualitative methods were appropriate for the study given its focus on exploring participants‘ perspectives on their own understanding and use of qualitative research strategies as teacher researchers. The qualitative approach was also appropriate given that the majority of the literature on teacher research utilizes qualitative research methods. A qualitative approach also emphasized my researcher‘s role as an ―active learner who can tell the story from the participant‘s point of view rather than an ̳expert‘ who passes judgment on participants‖ (Creswell, 1998, p. 18). The data collection methods for this study were the following: a survey (with Likert scale and open-ended questions), interviews, and examples of participants‘ teacher research (artifacts). Tracking down graduates to conduct this follow-up study proved challenging. But I was able to locate 47 graduates with 2-6 years of teaching experience and send them a teacher research survey. From this group, 29 returned the survey. I then selected 8 survey participants who had indicated their willingness to do follow-up interviews. I looked for gender balance and interviewees who worked in a variety of school districts: suburban, urban, rural, and one small private school. I also wanted a mix of middle school and high school interviewees. Data was analyzed based on interpretative and collaborative approaches. Likert scale questions were tallied, and open-ended questions were read, analyzed, and coded. These codes were then checked during interviews with participants and examples of their teacher research artifacts were examined to describe and explain how teachers used teacher research data to construct knowledge that informed their practice. I took notes during the interviews and I also transcribed the audio from interviews. Data were also examined to determine attitudes and understanding regarding teacher research and research strategies. These data collection and analysis methods provided a detailed, complex, holistic pictu