_files/spacer.gif) |
|
Home > Resources
> School
Design > Data
Collection & Analysis _files/horace_sub_nomenu.gif)
The Cycle of Inquiry and Action: Essential Learning
Communities
Sidebars:
The
Cycle of Inquiry
Key
to Teacher Inquiry: Framing the Question, Planning the
Research
What
Counts as Data?
Three
Ways of Looking at a Colleague: Protocols for Peer
Observation
Readings
and Resourcs
In a true learning community, inquiry becomes everybody's
work. Teaching, learning, community involvement, leadership,
organizational management and change, professional growth–all take
place in a continual dynamic of asking good questions and finding
evidence that can guide a school's actions.
The kids who skip school, the kids who cut class, and the kids
kicked out of class all end up, at some point, in Greg Peters's
office at Oceana High School. "I could spend all my time just
checking up on kids," says Peters, a math teacher and the attendance
officer at this 800-student school in Pacifica, California, a
diverse, working-class community about half an hour south of San
Francisco.
But prompted by a growing interest in equity at this Essential
school, Peters started to wonder whether patterns would emerge if he
kept track of who came through his office, and why.
This past fall, he began to log certain data daily on a simple
Excel program he devised: the students' grade levels, ages, genders,
ethnicities, and grade point averages; the classes and teachers they
were missing; what time of day they showed up. He developed a simple
reflection form, and asked kids to write about why they had skipped,
cut, or acted up. He interviewed a focus group of students who had
been kicked out of class at varying rates. And he kept a journal of
his own, recording hunches and observations as they occurred to
him.
In a monthly regional study group coached by Anna Richert, a
Mills College education professor who serves on the Coalition's
national Executive Board, Peters sought out feedback, support, and
critique from other teachers doing research in their own settings.
And though still far from a conclusion, he says, he has taken a few
small steps to test out the inklings and possibilities his early
data suggests.
"Our repeat truants are often Latino, I realized," he says, "but
the initial warning letters we send out to the families when a
student skips school were in English only. Right away we translated
them into Spanish, and into Tagalog as well."
As attendance officer he offered extra support and coaching to
teachers who were sending students to his office at a higher rate
than most. "I started seeing fewer kids almost immediately," he
says.
Peters also shared the entire process of his "action research"
with the low-achieving students enrolled in the "Essential class" he
teaches, which aims to build their inquiry skills and accustom them
to demonstrating mastery through exhibitions and portfolios.
"The kids come up with their own questions to research about the
school," he says, "and then gather data, analyze the evidence, and
present a summary of their results." Some class members chose to
look into how well the school's required portfolio process was
working to increase student achievement; others investigated the
success of Oceana's advisory system.
Hundreds who gathered at the Bay Area Coalition's regional
student conference last month got a chance to see these Oceana
students present their results, which were "far less than polished
but as authentic as it gets," Peters says. "They really knew their
stuff–the questions, the process, the struggles."
And their findings usefully highlighted some issues at the
school. "With both portfolios and advisories, kids noticed a gap in
what's happening," Peters says; though some teachers did a fine job
in these areas, others gave them only shaky support. Oceana would
not see strong results from students, his class concluded, unless
its staff could unite behind its vision.
A Cycle: Inquiry and Action
The work this teacher and his students are doing creates a "cycle
of inquiry" that has immense importance in the work of changing
schools, Essential school educators and many outside researchers
agree.
The cycle starts when someone poses a question about the work in
relation to the school's vision of teaching and learning, then
identifies possible sources of information that might help answer
it. The next step involves gathering the relevant data and breaking
it into parts that make possible comparison, reflection, and
analysis. Finally, that analysis yields new action, which in turn
suggests new inquiry into the results; and the cycle begins
again.
When teachers take the initiative in this way, looking closely at
evidence from their own practice and making changes based on what
they find, the whole idea of educational research undergoes a
striking change in perspective.
Instead of receiving the wisdom of outside "experts," teachers
draw on their own experience to construct new knowledge on the job.
They might call on the research of others to enlarge and enrich
their inquiry, but the messy work of discovery stays squarely in
their hands.
And just as students learn better when they act as workers in the
classroom and connect new concepts to their own experience, so
teachers also find their understanding and effectiveness increasing
when they carry out what is known as "action research" in their
field.
Introduced in the 1950s at Teachers College of Columbia
University, and developed in the 1960s by John Elliot's Action
Research Network in Cambridge, England, such practitioner research
was once common, before social-science research gained dominance in
university education departments.
It is now regaining its place, as more educators start to believe
that change will succeed only if it comes from within the school
community, arising from the knowledge that its members construct
together.
The Power of Group Inquiry
When groups of teachers collaborate in the work of inquiry, it
holds especial power, many believe.
"Inquiry is everywhere!" says Kim Carter, a media specialist at
Souhegan High School in Amherst, New Hampshire who praises the
"powerful synergy" she has experienced in working with colleagues to
improve teaching practice.
"For me, the keys are learning to identify the questions, dig
into their underlying assumptions, and investigate a wide range of
quantitative and qualitative data that can deepen our
understanding," she says.
Many teachers do this as a matter of course, she observes, "but
rather unconsciously, and alone." The rich dialogue of a working
group, she says, helps surface the different assumptions and
interpretations its members make as they explore data–and supports
them as they take what they learn back into the classroom to help
students.
All this takes time and practice, and to support such work, the
DeWitt-Wallace Readers' Digest Fund this year funded the Coalition
of Essential Schools to join with the Southern Maine Partnership and
the CES Northwest Center in a pilot project dubbed "Instructional
Improvement Through Inquiry and Collaboration" (IITIC, pronounced
eye-tick).
With IITIC funding, groups in several Essential Schools in
Washington and Maine are using the cycle of inquiry to investigate
their teaching practices, understand the weaknesses in these
practices, take the risks necessary for meaningful change, document
the effects of these changes on student achievement–and ultimately,
share what they learn with other teachers and schools.
Asking Good Questions
At Noble High School in Berwick, Maine, for example, a
ninth-grade teaching team is looking into the relationship between
students' engagement and their achievement. In the process, they
have learned much about framing a question that can be answered
through research.
"At first, we asked ourselves how we could get students more
involved with their learning," says science teacher Liza Finkel.
"But that question is too broad to collect data on." Instead her
team decided to research its conviction that when curriculum
involved students in choices, made connections to their lives, and
crossed disciplinary lines, the quality of work would go up.
Throughout the first semester, Finkel steadily increased the
choices her students made about their classroom work. "In our
project based on a nearby stream each one chose a question to
investigate," she says. "When we studied plate tectonics, they chose
which aspect of the theory each wanted to research and present to
the class. When we studied space exploration, the class decided
together what we'd need to know in order to establish a colony on
Mars."
Meanwhile, their teacher had research of her own to do. As well
as recording her observations about class involvement, Finkel
closely charted her assessments of student work, including whether
they turned it in on time and complete. What she found created a new
question: as the students had more choices, their work came in more
promptly but suffered in quality.
"I'm wondering now what other factors might affect that–the
content of the unit, the time of year, my rising standards as the
semester progresses?" Finkel says. "My students always reflect on
their work in a portfolio at the end of a unit. With our next
project, I'm going to ask them to do that throughout, and see what
differences come out."
As she continues her inquiry, Finkel notices that she herself is
growing better at one of her chief goals for students, "how to ask
good questions and answer them with data." And sharing the research
process has electrified her teaching team. "We've always talked
together about particular students or the nitty-gritty of
curriculum," she says. "But this pushed us to talk about what goals
we're most concerned about, and how we can reach them better. We're
having the best conversations ever about the way we work with
students."
Collaboration Is Critical
Collaborative inquiry can come in many forms, from teaching teams
like Finkel's to curriculum study groups, parent-teacher-student
task forces, and the "critical friends groups" for which the
Annenberg Institute's National School Reform Faculty as well as many
Coalition Centers provide training.
In such groups, teachers commonly focus their work using two main
techniques: examining student work together, and observing each
other in the classroom. New to many teachers, each of these
practices benefits from using a careful "protocol" that eases the
anxieties of revealing the heart of one's practice to colleagues.
Inquiry groups may choose from a growing array of such protocols for
looking at student work (see Horace, Volume 13 Number 2, November
1996). And Simon Hole, an elementary Essential school teacher from
Rhode Island, has worked out a useful set of similar guidelines for
peer observations. (See sidebar, page 6.)
An emphasis on exploring a particular question about teaching and
learning marks all these techniques for close observation and
discussion. If what teachers find out then yields new practices in
the classroom, "they've closed the loop between research and
action," says Kathy Simon, CES's director of research and
professional development.
Worried about student apathy, a critical friends group at Nathan
Hale High School in Seattle (an IITIC site) decided to investigate
whether student-centered discussion increases student engagement and
academic achievement.
Coached by their colleague Elaine Wetterauer, the group members
first spent time wrestling with how even to observe and assess such
a slippery quality as student engagement. Should they chart the
number of times students speak in a discussion? And how would they
document higher student achievement as a result of such discussion?
What exactly qualified as "student-centered discussion"? Was it hard
work? How could they tell?
The teachers began their work by observing Socratic seminars,
says Rolynn Anderson, who co-directs the CES Northwest Center and
coaches several of its IITIC groups. Next, some learned to
facilitate such seminars in their own classes; and they have now
asked Anderson to help them assemble a repertoire of ways to conduct
student-centered discussions. Already, Anderson notes, many group
members are trying out new strategies in their classrooms.
School-to-School Inquiry
Working partnerships with other schools can also deepen and
strengthen the inquiry process. A group of five Massachusetts
Essential middle schools has been participating in a sustained
cross-school inquiry sponsored by the Center for Collaborative
Education, Boston's regional CES Center. Supported by a three-day
summer institute and two days of follow-up meeting in the fall and
spring, teams of teachers function as critical friends to a partner
school.
In early March, for example, a half dozen teachers from O'Maley
Middle School in Gloucester spent two days in nearby Salem, visiting
classes and conferring with teachers from Collins Middle School. The
schools both serve roughly 1,200 students, and their challenges have
enough in common to provide plenty of material for inquiry.
"We've been working on raising awareness of the diversity of our
students, making sure all voices are heard and respected," Collins
curriculum coordinator Linda Darisse told the visiting team at the
start of the visit. "We'd like you to be looking for evidence of how
we're doing." As the observers scattered –some to bilingual classes,
some to self-contained special education classes, some to the
guidance office, some to a meeting on educating kids about sexual
harassment–they kept her question in mind. When the two teams
debriefed at the end of the second day, the session would bring the
visitors' fresh eyes to the daily details of school life.
The Indiana Essential Schools Network works with Critical Inquiry
Groups in ten schools, all asking how to "develop a systemic culture
of inquiry that supports standards-based but not standardized
learning for all students."
Each group collects data at the school level, documenting the
beliefs, assumptions, and practices that have to do with standards
and student learning. (For example, teachers are asked, "How do you
determine what you teach? How do you know students are learning what
you want them to know?" Students are asked "How do you know if you
are learning? How do you determine the quality of your own
work?")
Then the inquiry groups gather for coaching on key techniques
such as performance assessment. In school "process-folios," they
collect samples of students' and teachers' work and reflections, and
they spend time examining that evidence as well as observing
classes.
"We hope the data will soon help us understand the impact of
collaboration and reflection on student learning and teacher
practice," says Randall Wisehart, who with Melody Shank coordinates
the Indiana CES Network. "And for the long range, we hope it will
help us understand the impact on student learning when teachers
align their authentic asssessment practices with the proficiencies
measured by state standardized tests."
Especially, the Indiana schools are looking for evidence that
students can demonstrate understanding in state proficiency areas
even if they do not score well on standardized tests. Some will be
comparing particular students' test scores with their more
"authentic" work that aligns with the same proficiencies.
Ultimately, the effort could help influence the state's policy
debate on school accountability and standardized testing.
Who Is a Researcher?
When the habit of asking questions together begins to pervade a
community, it changes everyone's role into that of a learner and a
researcher. Students, teachers, parents, and administrators all
become responsible for checking out whether the evidence supports
what the school says its vision is.
In a culture of inquiry, "inquiry is what people do," points out
researcher John Watkins, who has coached school inquiry and action
groups in Essential schools. "Every-thing that goes on is framed as
inquiry–leadership, classroom learning, professional development,
parent involvement, teaching, crisis management, exhibitions,
student conferences, the whole array."
At McCluer High School in St. Louis, Missouri, a dozen students
on a task force advised by assistant principal Jane Crawford took on
the question of whether the system that tracked students into
regular and honors classes was giving all students a fair
chance.
Almost 60 percent of McCluer's 1,700 students are
African-American. But Jenniqual Roberson, who at 16 chairs that
student task force, says, "I am the only black female and we have
only 3 black males in my honors English class." She has done well in
advanced classes, she says, but one year her score on the required
English placement test declined and she was transferred to a
lower-level class. "The year before I scored 10 out of 12 and got
in; but the next year I only got a 6." (Crawford defends the
school-wide writing assessment, which is "scored holistically by
trained scorers and monitored carefully for reliability," she says.
"The essay prompts are examined for validity by a university
representative who helps out with our assessment.")
Even if they can do the work, black students are often reluctant
to enter an advanced class where they feel outnumbered, the task
force's students (who are mostly African-American) hypothesized. To
check out their impression, they surveyed students and teachers, and
began to break down several years' class enrollment figures by race
and gender.
Supported by a daily 20-minute advisory period and by the St.
Louis regional CES Center's "CES Kids" institutes, these students
are confronting the difficulty of changing the system from within.
"Our survey results seem like kids want to keep things the way they
are," says Roberson. "But we think they need the chance to try out
advanced classes for a few weeks at the beginning of the year and
then decide." Dilemmas like this often prompt new questions–like
"Why do kids want to keep things the same?"–that in turn fuel deeper
inquiry.
The Larger System Adjusts
No matter what their age, learners in a culture of inquiry make
uncomfortable demands on the larger system when they call attention
to such issues, which often lie deep in its norms, structures, and
processes. Those tensions are healthy, says Watkins, but adds, "This
is a scary process."
"When critical inquiry begins to overcome the subtle and
pervasive ideological constraints to change," he observes, "a true
disequilibrium sets in, which drives ongoing learning, renewal, and
change."
A teaching team might well find out it needs more time to plan,
for example, once it realizes what its inquiry is uncovering. It
might raise questions about the school schedule that disrupt the
ways things have always been. Students pushing for more access to
honors courses may find that powerful community interests block
their way, concerned about preserving the privileges of a system
that has kept their children at the top of the heap.
Districts, states, and higher educational systems will also feel
their balance shaken as a culture of inquiry develops, Watkins
notes.
Instead of relying on old hierarchies and routines, they will
have to stay ready to create and dismantle flexible new structures
as schools need them. Instead of solving problems by bringing in
"experts" with prescriptions, they will have to make available
information and resources as schools work through possible solutions
on their own. Instead of imposing high-stakes accountability
systems, they will need to support experimentation and risktaking,
then provide a model for asking the hard questions that guide all
work.
"Leaders strategically can push people to act without complete
understanding," he says. "They build understanding through their
coordinated and thoughtful action."
As teachers begin seriously to collaborate on this kind of work
in Essential schools around the country, they will increasingly test
the policy environment's willingness to support local initiatives
that would significantly change school practices and structures. In
the process, they gain strength to transform the educational system
in ways new regulations never could.
"Time and again I've seen teachers realize that data can actually
help them determine if they are making a difference and what they
might adjust if not," says Indiana's Randall Wisehart. "When they
discover that looking at data doesn't have to mean being bludgeoned
by numbers on a secret test to show their ineffectiveness, they
suddenly experience a wonderful new power."
_files/inquiry.gif)
More
Info about IITIC
TOP
Key to Teacher Inquiry: Framing the Question, Planning the
Research
Teacher inquiry groups that take a hypothesis-testing
approach to action research often have difficulty framing a
good research question. John Newlin, who coaches the IITIC
groups connected with Maine's regional CES Center, the
Southern Maine Partnership, worked with Kate Graham and Kathy
Simon in CES's national office to come up with this framework
to organize such work:
- What would you like students to do differently; what are
the results or outcomes you want?
- What might you try to do differently in your teaching
practice (including changes in any aspects of curriculum,
instruction, assessment, classroom expectations, etc.)?
- What indicators might you look for to see if what you're
doing differently is helping create the desired results?
Several additional steps help clarify the process of posing
and testing a hypothesis. After they identify a particular
goal for students, for example, teachers might identify
current obstacles to reaching it, and then ask questions about
how to address those obstacles. By continually narrowing the
question, they will emerge with something about which they can
better collect evidence. For example, a teacher's thinking
might go through the following steps:
What I Would Like to Have Happen: I would like
students to be able to write a cohesive biographical
sketch.
An Obstacle to Reaching this Goal: Some students
don't seem to know how to structure or correct their
writing.
A Big Question I Have About This: What teaching
strategies will help my students recognize the gaps and
mistakes in their writing?
A Narrower Question I Have About This: How can I
help my students write better transitions?
A Teaching Strategy I Want to Try Out: I will have
my students do peer editing with a guide sheet that helps them
locate transitions and missing transitions.
Sources of Data: Early and final drafts; peer
editors' comments.
In developing questions, Newlin notes, many teachers find
it helpful to fill in the blanks of this question: "What is
the impact of _________ on _________?" The first blank should
describe the "practice" that might make a difference (the
cause); the second blank names the desired effect.
Determining what to put in the second blank can get
complicated, Newlin cautions. "Ultimately, the purpose of the
project is to improve student achievement, so teachers could
write ‘student achievement, '" he says. "That's fine, as long
as they also spell out the specific indicators of student
achievement on which they will collect information–for
example, performance on quizzes, or the quality of oral
discourse as scored on a rubric." As an alternative, one of
these more specific items could go in the second blank. The
second blank may also contain brief descriptions of student
behaviors the teacher assumes will precede or correlate with
student achievement, such as enthusiasm, time on task, eye
contact, seeking extra help, or other examples of
engagement.
Many teacher researchers prefer not to force a strict
linear cause-and-effect relationship, but rather to
systematically observe what goes on in the classroom among and
between teachers and students–including the experiences and
attitudes they all bring with them into the classroom.
Thoughtful reflection on what those observations might mean is
at the heart of all action research, whatever its
approach.
No perfect formula exists for framing action research
questions. But after recording an idea, teachers often need to
revise certain kinds of questions in the same way that they do
when devising "essential questions" in the classroom. For
example, these questions don't work well:
- Those that can be answered yes or no
- Those that begin with "why"
- Those that could be too easily misinterpreted
- Those that are too narrow or too broad
- Those for which they already know the answer
In order to answer a good action research question,
teachers must often change their practice in ways that closely
relate to the question, at the same time gathering information
that expands their understanding of it. What they find out may
lead to an even deeper question, and so the cycle
continues. |
TOP
What Counts as Data
When teachers set out to observe the "data" in their own
practice, they can call on a wide range of evidence, both
quantitative and qualitative. (See Horace, Volume 12,
Number 3, January 1996 for a more complete discussion of
"common" and "uncommon" measures.) Among the
possibilities:
- Student work (as exemplars and points along a continuum
of standards) in written, videotaped, and portfolio forms
- Curriculum and assessment designs and materials
(evidence of teacher planning and development)
- Analyses of survey responses from teachers, students,
parents
- Written reflections from teachers, students, parents
- Oral interviews and records of focus groups
- Student progress beyond school
- Notes and feedback from peer observations
- Shadowing of students
- "Portraits" describing events in the life of the school
(the way it resolves a dilemma, for example); stories and
reflections by students and teachers
- Quantitative data (disaggregated by race and ethnicity,
gender, and income status) including course grades,
standardized test scores, dropout and suspension rates,
attendance, grade retention, special education enrollment,
enrollment in high-level classes
|
Three Ways of Looking at a Colleague: Protocols for Peer
Observation
Simon Hole, a long-time Essential School teacher who
teaches fourth grade in Narragansett, R.I., has developed
guidelines for six ways for teachers to conduct peer
observations in the classroom. Three of them follow in
slightly condensed form:
Protocol # 1: Observer as Video Camera
This protocol aims to develop observational reliability
between the observer and the observed. No two people
ob-serving the same event will see the same thing, it assumes,
since the perceptions and prior experiences of each act as a
filter. The protocol allows the observed and the observer to
discover what the other "sees" during the observation, and to
help each learn to see as much as possible.
Pre-Observation Conference: The person to be
observed outlines what will be occurring during the
observation.
Observation: To the greatest extent possible the
observer maintains a "video camera" stance, scripting and
making note of as many events as possible. Take care not to
attempt to interpret or question during the observation.
Debriefing: In the first part of the debriefing, the
observer reconstructs the observation from her notes. The
observed listens carefully, taking note of any details that
escaped her own notice and jotting down anything remembered
that the observer does not mention. In the second phase of the
debriefing the observed speaks, naming those details of which
she was not aware and adding her own.
Note: Both parties should refrain from
interpretation and value judgments. "The student was bored" is
interpretation; "the student doodled, yawned, and gazed out
the window" is observation. "That was a great lesson" is a
value judgment.
Protocol # 2: Focus Point
This protocol aims to help deepen the observee's
understanding of his practice. The observer notes those events
that relate to a particular aspect of the observee's practice
and then actively listens as the observee attempts to make
sense of those events.
Pre-Observation Conference: In addition to outlining
what will be occurring during the observation, the person to
be observed asks the observer to focus on a particular aspect
of his practice. Example: "Would you look at how I respond to
student questions."
Observation: The observer focuses on the specific
aspect of practice raised during the pre-observation
conference. Field notes include descriptions of "focus" events
and related questions that the observer may wish to raise
during the debriefing. (The observer may also note events and
questions outside the focus of the observation, but these may
or may not be discussed during the debriefing.)
Debriefing: The observer begins by restating the
focus and asking the observee to share her thoughts. Example:
"How do you feel about the lesson? What did you notice about
how you responded to student questions?" As the observee
talks, the observer may 1) supply specific events that either
corroborate or contrast with the observee's statements, 2)
summarize what the observee is saying, 3) ask clarifying
questions, or 4) raise questions related to the focus that she
noted during the observation.
Note: Events and questions not directly related to
the focus of the observation should only be raised after
asking for the permission of the observee. Unless specifically
invited to do so, the observer should refrain from stating her
ideas and perspective on the issues.
Protocol # 3: Interesting Moments
This protocol assumes that the observer and the observed
will work together to create some new knowledge; they are in
it together. The observation is a shared experience, and so is
the debriefing. After listening to such a debriefing, one
outsider noted its seamless quality: "The two of you were
discovering something about the events you had seen."
Pre-Observation Conference: Because this form of
observation is more open-ended, it is not strictly necessary
to have a pre-conference, although it may help to orient the
observer as to what will be happening.
Observation: The observer maintains an open field of
vision, noting anything that strikes her as particularly
interesting or that may lead to "deep" questions.
Debriefing: Either participant begins by raising a
point of interest, stating what occurred as clearly and fully
as possible. Both participants talk about the incident,
attempting to sort out "what was going on there." As the ideas
build, both are responsible for keeping the conversation on
track while maintaining the flexibility necessary to create
new understandings. The "consultancy" protocol could be used.
(See Horace 13:2, November 1996)
Note: This protocol requires a high level of trust
between the two participants. They must trust that the
debriefing is not about evaluation, that each will listen and
respond thoughtfully to the other, and that whatever knowledge
they create will be shared knowledge.
These protocols were developed with additions and
adaptations from Carrie Brennan (Catalina Foothills High
School, Tucson, Arizona), John D'Anieri (Freeport High School,
Freeport, Maine), and John Newlin (Southern Maine
Partnership). Three additional protocols–"Teaming, "
"Self-Observation, " and "Silent Debriefing"–can be obtained
from Simon Hole at ropajavi@aol.com.
Inquiry Cultures and the Larger System
Cultures of inquiry make very different demands upon the
larger system and on outsiders than do less dynamic
organizational types, points out John Watkins, whose Amherst,
Massachusetts firm Inquiry and Learning for Change (JWatkins@javanet.com)
coaches and analyzes school change. For example, he observed
in a recent paper:
A culture of inquiry is an "open system, "
continually examining its own purposes as well as the ways
it reaches those purposes. New and even conflicting ideas can
come into the system at any time to influence what happens.
The school's vision guides its work, but in a dynamic tension
with its actions, each tested against the other in an ongoing
inquiry into the current state of affairs. To encourage this,
the larger system must not impose too rigid rules or high
stakes.
Cultures of inquiry create multiple, flexible structures
as they need them–for example, multi-age groups, multiple
forms of assessments, or various ways for school and families
to interact–and they continually test those structures against
the vision. Rather than asking how to make a current structure
more efficient or how to put a new one into practice, inquiry
cultures ask what problems the old structures solved, what
values they reflected, whose interests they served, what
structures might be more consistent with the values and
beliefs of the school's vision, and what people need to know
to enact those. An inflexible, prescriptive bureaucratic
system does not work well with this; instead, the larger
system also must be able to purposefully reconfigure itself as
necessary.
Cultures of inquiry depend on adults and students
collaborating in teams and networks, and they set up
critically reflective processes and norms that guide them.
These structures–grade-level or cross-grade teams, critical
friends groups, school-university teams, leadership
teams–include professional interactions among teachers, but
also involve other people important to the work, inside or
outside the school and community. To support this
characteristic, the larger system, too, must replace its
hierarchy with multiple networks of this sort.
Cultures of inquiry have sophisticated structures,
settings, processes, and norms that support
problem-setting, problem-exploring, problem-solving, and
inquiry. They have little patience for categorical,
prescriptive approaches; for traditional ways of choosing
among innovations to implement; or for "experts." From the
larger system they seek critical friendships with "outsiders"
who are themselves part of learning systems, and who
increasingly act also as insiders.
Cultures of inquiry create a risk-taking, experimental
environment that encourages members to develop, reflect
on, and modify structures and processes. The larger system
must not penalize such risk-taking by creating a high-stakes
environment or imposing highly structured or constrained
settings for change. Instead, it should support, encourage,
and reward open-ended, creative work.
Cultures of inquiry are highly strategic and
purposeful about seeking and using outside information,
resources, expertise, and collaborations. Ideas, information,
and people constantly move across their boundaries with the
"outside." The larger system must provide access to
information and support, networks for sharing and building
knowledge, and non-hierarchical, ongoing partnerships,
interactions, and critical friendships.
Leadership in a culture of inquiry is shared and
inclusive, a source of and model for asking the hard
questions that guide all work. The larger system must thus see
all aspects of the system as settings for leadership
development and communities of inquirers–non-bureaucratic and
non-hierarchical, it should support, facilitate, and provide
resources for local decision-making and
leadership. |
TOP
Readings & Resources
Allen, David, ed. Assessing Student Learning. New
York: Teachers College Press, 1998.
Cochran-Smith, Marilyn and Susan L. Lytle.
Inside/Outside: Teacher Research and Knowledge. New
York: Teachers College Press, 1992.
Duckworth, Eleanor, "Teaching As Research" chapter in
The Having of Wonderful Ideas. New York: Teachers
College Press, 1987.
Evans, Claryce, "Support for Teachers Studying Their Own
Work." Educational Leadership, March 1991.
Evans, Claryce, M. Stubbs, E. Duckworth, and C. Davis,
"Teacher-Initiated Research: Professional Development for
Teachers and a Method for Designing Research Based on
Practice." Cambridge, Mass: TERC.
Glickman, Carl D. Renewing America's Schools, A Guide
for School-Based Action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1998.
Grady, Michael. Qualitative and Action Research: A
Practitioner Handbook. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa
International (800/766-1156), 1998.
King, Jean A., and M. Peg Lonnquist, "A Review of Writing
on Action Research, " Minneapolis, MN: Center on Organization
and Restructuring of Schools, College of Education, University
of Minnesota, 1994.
Lieberman, Ann. "Practices That Support Teacher
Development." Phi Delta Kappan (April 1995).
Lytle, Susan L., Jolley Christman, et al. Learning in
the Afternoon: When Teacher Inquiry Meets School Reform.
Philadelphia: Research for Action (215-823-2500), 1994.
Macpherson, Pat, Jody Cohen, et al. Homegrown Research:
A Guide for School Communities. Philadelphia Education
Fund (215-6665-1400), 1997.
Noffke, Susan and Robert B. Steven-son, eds. Educational
Action Research: Becoming Practically Critical. New York:
Teachers College Press, 1995.
Padak, Nancy and Gary Padak. "Guidelines for Planning
Action Research Projects." Research to Practice
(October 1994).
Senge, Peter, et al. The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook.
New York: Doubleday, 1994. |
TOP
Price: $5
Code: H15:4
To
order a hard copy of this resource you will need the title, price,
and code to fill out your order
form.
This resource last updated: May 14, 2002
Database Information:
|
Source: Horace. Vol. 15, #4.
April 1999.
Publication Year: 1999
Publisher:
CES National
Type: Horace Feature, Horace
Sidebar
School Level: All
Issue:
15.4
Focus Area: School Design
STRAND:
School Design: data collection & analysis
Data Collection and
Analysis: Cycle of Inquiry
| |
|
_files/nav_logo.gif){kind=logo}
_files/login_blue.gif){kind=small}
_files/nav_left.gif){kind=small}
_files/nav_about.gif){kind=small}
_files/nav_net_tab.gif){kind=small}
_files/nav_fallforum.gif){kind=small}
_files/nav_ssp_tab.gif){kind=small}
_files/nav_resources_HOT.gif){kind=small}
_files/nav_homebase.gif){kind=small}
_files/nav_right_plus50.gif){kind=small}
_files/main_top_plus50.gif){kind=small}
_files/resources_toolbox.gif)
_files/CESlogo_house.gif)
_files/main_bottom_plus50.gif){kind=small}
_files/writeus.gif){kind=small}
_files/main_bottomright.gif){kind=small}
_files/sub_inthissection.gif){kind=small}
_files/side_photo6.gif)
_files/side_search.gif){kind=small}
_files/ChangeLabDVDBlogSideNav.jpg)
_files/essential_news.gif){kind=small}