May 26…On the Nature of a Discipline or Field of Study…Steward of What?

Have you ever thought about the potential for unintended consequences in acquiring disciplinary expertise?  While one might assume that you see the rewards as worth the risks, this might not be the case, as some of you might be in the program more for the post-credential opportunities than for a genuine desire to become an “expert.” How does all of this relate to your situation and also to the current state of Doctoral Education in Education?           

May 26…On Labaree’s Scholar-Practitioner Tension

Note something from this article with which you disagree (note: I assume that reading this paper was a different experience for those with P-12 experience and those without.  That said, he made a sufficient number of bold claims so I’m sure everyone can disagree with something he said). Why do you disagree with it?  Did Labaree give words to any tensions that you feel as you head down the road of the educational researcher?  If so, explain.

May 31…Becker (Ch. 1)

Do you see any overlaps between Becker’s talk about writing and what we’ve discussed so far in this class? 

June 2…Scientifically-based Educational Research

How did Pring’s Ch. 1-3 and the Eisenhart and Towne article leave you feeling about the possibility of educational research to be scientific? What obstacles do you see to realizing the vision of a scientifically-based ed. research and are they insurmountable?

June 7…Qual. v. Quant.?

Comment on Pring’s take on the quant./qual. tension. Do his ideas conflict with most of what you’ve heard about the two approaches to research? Does he say anything surprising? Disturbing?

June 14…Ed. Research and the -isms

At the end of Chapter 6, Pring warns us to “beware of the -isms…”. That said, try to make sense of where you see Pring fitting in, “-ism-wise.” Feel free to draw on Paul and 702 here (or not).