Perceptions of research and its link to teaching.

Abstract

This article investigates graduate education majors' perceptions of research and its relation to teaching. I show that most students view research as consumers. Missing from this view is an inquiry-based stance in which they position themselves as producers of knowledge about their students and classrooms. Implications for instruction and professional development are: a) teachers must be exposed to literature positioning them in the role of researchers and b) research assignments must not be restricted to literature review research.

Introduction

There are growing calls for K-12 teachers to engage in research and reflect on teaching. For instance, one of the five core propositions of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) requires that "teachers think systematically about their practice and learn from experience" (NBPTS, 2005, p. 16). The Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC) echoes a similar call when it declares that "'the teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of his/her choices and actions on others and who actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally" (INTASC, 1992, p. 31). University researchers studying areas such as professional development, action research and teacher expertise have stressed the importance for teachers to conduct classroom research (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993; Good & Brophy, 1997; Levine & Trachtman, 1997; Borich, 2003; Hogan & Rabinowitz, 2003). According to NBPTS (2005, p. 16), the call for research reflects the recognition that teachers "work in a field marked by many unsolved puzzles and an expanding research base", rendering it indispensable for teachers "to be lifelong students of their craft." Despite these calls for teachers to engage in research, there is surprisingly little research that examines teacher perceptions of research and the relationship of research to their teaching. We know very little about how teachers define 'research' and how they understand the overall relationship between research and teaching. In fact, evidence suggests that most teachers do not see the link between research and their own teaching (Hargreaves, 1984).

This article investigates the perceptions of research by 70 graduate education students, addressing the patterns they perceive research and its relation to teaching. I find that most of them construe research as library-based research and as a tool to discover new teaching techniques and strategies. What is missing is an understanding of how research can inform the instructional decisions teachers make and how effective teaching requires the ongoing research of students and student reactions (Good & Brophy, 1997; Borich, 2003).

Methodology

This project invited 75 teachers to define research and its relation to teaching. Data was collected over a 2-year period and participants were asked to respond to two open-ended questions (What is research? How is research related to teaching and education?) that were presented to them at the start of five sections of a required introductory education research course. Participants were told that their responses would not be graded, but only analyzed for research and course improvement purposes. Of the 75 teachers asked, 70 (16 males and 54 females) submitted their responses. The 70 participants including 52 in-service and 18 pre-service teachers were enrolled in the Master of Science in Education program, required of candidates seeking their professional certification in New York State. Their teaching areas ranged from English (16), social studies (24), math (6) and science (8) to special (12), foreign language (3) and physical education (1). Prior to this course, they had received their bachelor's degrees and initial teaching certification from New York State. Apart from their education courses, their academic backgrounds varied in which subject areas they specialized in and where they were in their graduate studies. Of the 70 students, 18 did not have teaching jobs apart from student teaching experiences. 52 students had been teaching for between 1 and 5 years. Among the inservice teachers, mean duration of teaching experience was around 26 months. The data reported here were subjected to two rounds of analysis in accordance with the procedures of qualitative data analysis (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003). The first round of analysis was conducted as soon as the responses were collected. This round comprised of three steps. First, a preliminary reading of the responses was performed, which generated an initial list of coding categories, including, for instance, "research as checking sources" and "research as offering new ideas for teaching". Second, I coded the responses using the categories, revising the initial categories and adding new categories such as "research as instructional content" as the coding proceeded. Then I read the responses a third time and reexamined initial coding. Once this initial round of analysis was completed, I conducted the second round of analysis. In the second round, I re-read the responses, re-checked the coding previously assigned and identified the larger themes that resulted from initial coding such as "research as search" and "research as a process". The findings reported here are based on four readings and two rounds of analyses. In addition, I conducted focus group interviews with the 28 students that took the face-to-face course. One-to-one phone interviews were conducted with 18 of 42 students who took the online sections of the same course. The interviews were conducted to identify the sources of their perceptions and to clarify the written responses.

Results

The participants' responses to the two questions are quantitatively different. The responses to "What is research?" are less elaborate than their responses to "How is research related to teaching and education?" This difference probably reflects the participants' concern with teaching. In what follows, I report the findings on the two questions separately, starting with the first question. What is research? The responses to this question are assigned to three categories: a) defining research as "search"; b) defining research as a process; and c) defining research in terms of instruments. Consider the responses that equate research with "search".

(1) Examples of responses defining research as "search"

a. 'Research' means going to a library and searching databases for articles, books, and information on a given subject.

b. Research is trying to find out information about a certain topic using many different resources.

c. Looking up information on a certain topic.

d. Research is looking for specific background information in order to help answer a question or set of questions.

Some responses in this category directly associate research with library-based research, as in (1a). Other responses are less direct. Nevertheless, this group of responses shares the assumption that the information being researched is available and research amounts to "search", evidenced by such expressions as "searching" (1a), "find out" (1b), "looking up" (1c) and "looking for" (1d). This view conjures up the image of a researcher as "a hunter-gatherer" of information. Responses of this type, which come from students with a variety of backgrounds, experiences and specializations, account for 63%. The second group of responses defines research as a multi-step process involving topic identification, hypothesis formation, analyses and explanations, even though not every response explicitly identifies each of these steps.

(2) Examples of responses defining research as a process

a. Research is choosing a topic, finding out as much as you can about it, and analyzing it and explaining it in your own words.

b. Research involves "developing hypotheses, discovering & searching for information, learning new material and info".

What distinguishes these responses from (1) is that they do not associate research just with "search". Research involves "choosing a topic" (2a), "developing hypotheses" (2b), "analyzing" and "explaining" (2a), and "discovering" (2b). When I probed students for what they meant by "discovering" or "finding about" information, some participants continued to equate these actions with "'searching" in the sense of (1). Others display an awareness of their own role in data collection and discovery. 18% of the responses fall into this category. The third group of responses defines research in terms of the data collection instruments.

(3) Examples of responses defining research in terms of instruments

a. I view research as the ability to examine and analyze data through direct observation and review of data.

b. Research is investigation into a topic using many methods, such as conversation, observation, interviews, statistical information, etc.

These responses differ from (1) in that research is not just limited to data collection via search of databases or other resources. Research, as defined in (3), involves collecting data via means such as observation and interview. These responses also differ from (2) in that they reflect an awareness of the different ways in which research data may be collected, which include, but are not limited to information gathered through library-based search. When I examined the responses of these participants to the second question and probed some of them regarding what teachers should observe or whom they should interview, the participants mentioned their own classrooms as potential sites for observation and their colleagues and occasionally their own students as interview subjects. This type of responses accounts for 15% of the total responses. Apart from these three types of responses, there are 4% of responses that do not fall into any of the three categories, all of which come from one or at most two participants.

To summarize, these responses, though varying in how they define research, reflect a limited view of what research is. Most participants view research as "search". Only a small percentage of the participants identify their own teaching and students as potential sites for investigation. We will see that this view is consistent with the pattern emerging from the responses to the second question. How is research related to teaching and education? The respondents address this question in a variety of ways: some address the question directly, while others interpret the question as asking why research is important to teachers. I classify the responses into three categories: a) research as an information-gathering tool; b) research as instructional content; and c) research as a tool of self-discovery. One group of responses relates research to teaching by stating that research constitutes an information-gathering tool, allowing teachers discover new ideas and strategies from published sources.

(4) Examples of responses highlighting research as an information-gathering tool

a. I use research to find out more information on what I am teaching (ex. ideas, activities, articles). I think there are a lot of ideas (new & usable) you just have to look for them. Sometimes we don't need to reinvent the wheel--just find the information that will help us as teachers we always want to know more.

b. I do think that research is related to teaching because teachers are always in need of new information. Something as simple as looking for a new and fun way to teach a boring or difficult topic involves research.

c. I think research is related to teaching for a few different reasons. The first reason is for particular students in a teacher's class. If a student has a special need or a disabling condition, it is helpful for teachers to read research that has already been conducted to find out as much as they can about it.

d. Research is a very important aspect of teaching in my opinion. In order to be the best teacher possible, you must investigate and keep current on the most recent findings. New discoveries are always being made, one example of this would be brain research. We are finding out new things rapidly and we should use them to better our teaching. The research on multiple intelligences has helped me to reach a larger percentage of my students. Without reading research on this topic I wouldn't have incorporated it into my classroom resulting in fewer students learning the materials.

Research, as these responses reveal, refers to research as "search" in (1). This is evident from some of the responses that directly name the research useful to teachers such as studies on disabilities (4c), multiple intelligences (4d) and brain research (4d). Other responses, though not directly naming the research, implies this view. As the response in (4a) states, "we don't need to reinvent the wheel--just find the information that will help us as teachers ..." Not surprisingly, the largest percentage of responses, 67%, is of this type. Apart from the view of research as an information-gathering tool, some responses address the question in terms of what students must learn and what teachers must do to develop this learning. For these responses, research is part of the instructional content.

(5) Examples of responses that highlight research as instructional content

a. Research is important to teachers because we are expected to give students experiences using the library and computers to research topics in their subject areas. If teachers are going to ask students to do work on research projects, then teachers should have knowledge and experience with research, also.

b. I feel students being able to research on their own, to know how to research, is integral to education. Students should be taught in a way that they learn how to find information on their own--making them autonomous learners.

These responses imply the same rationale as that offered for the need for teachers to master other instructional content; namely, if you want to teach math, you must know math. When these participants were questioned about what kind of research they should teach their students, they discussed it frequently in the sense of research as "search". This view is reflected in (5a), which links research with giving students experiences "using the library and computers". 14% of the responses are of this type. The third group of responses sees research as an important tool of self-discovery for teachers. They recognize that research is something that teachers should conduct to learn about their own teaching.

(6) Examples of responses highlighting research as a tool of self-discovery

a. Another reason research is important to teachers for evaluating and developing our teaching skills. We must continually look at what is working and what is not in regards to our teaching. We need to discuss, observe, and share with other teachers in order to determine what methods and techniques are effective and which are not.

b. If the teacher is interested, they may also be able to conduct their own research in their classroom ...

The responses in both (4) and (6) see research as a tool for teachers. But they differ in their views of what can be researched. The responses in (4) view research as investigating others' studies. Though the respondents in (6) hold the view of research as "search", they show an awareness of the importance of researching their own teaching, which cannot result only from searching published studies. Such research can lead to self-discovery, that is, learning about one's own teaching and its impacts on students. Of the responses, 19% is of this category. To summarize, most responses define research as "search" or as library-based literature review research. It makes sense from this view that the respondents view the research-teaching relation as one in which research serves as a tool for teachers to discover new strategies or "best practice" techniques researched by others. The responses to both questions converge in showing that most respondents position themselves as consumers of knowledge produced by others (See Everton et. al. (2000) for similar results). It is important to point out that the views of research expressed by the participants are not incorrect. Research does involve "search". It does involve analyzing published or unpublished studies. Such research can provide new insights for teaching. Learning to use the library and computer to search for information is something that teachers must know and teach to their students.

While these views are not wrong, they are incomplete, reflecting a limited conception of what research is, who should conduct research and how research interacts with teaching. Missing from most responses is the recognition that each classroom presents new and different challenges and constitutes the potential site for inquiry. Missing from most responses is the awareness that effective instruction cannot take place without researching one's own classroom and that researching one's own teaching is not a matter of interest for teachers, as stated in (6b). Missing from these responses is an understanding of how knowledge of students collected via teacher research can influence instructional decisions and that supposedly "research proven" strategies cannot be applied without researching their effects on students. McCracken (2004, p. 114) states: "They [teachers] need to know the value of teacher inquiry. They need to learn to how to learn about students, and how to 'kidwatch'" In short, what is missing is an inquiry-based stance in which teachers position themselves as learners and producers of knowledge about their own students and teaching. Through the interviews, I asked the participants where they thought their views of research originated. Their responses made repeated references to three things. First, they pointed to the types of course-related research assignments such as annotated bibliographies, literature reviews, or term papers. These assignments often required them to check published sources and synthesize the information read. They were rarely asked to collect data directly through observation or interview or other data collection tools. Second, they mentioned the types of the readings they had been exposed to as students. Most of these readings provided research-proven "best practice" techniques. Seldom were they introduced to research conducted by K-12 teachers. The third source of perception came from the professional development workshops they received. These workshops often brought outside exports to share supposedly research-proven strategies and frequently positioned outsiders as experts, creating the impression that research was something that somebody else conducted and that teachers' responsibility, in so far as research was concerned, was to consume such research.

Implications

This research was designed to study graduate students' perceptions of research prior to my education research course and to use this information to guide the course design. It was not intended to identify students' limitations for the sake of highlighting their shortcomings. In such research, it is inevitable that researchers come upon limitations in students' perceptions. But these limitations are not the faults of students. After all, most participants had not taken an education research course prior to their participation in this study. Moreover, as we see from the findings, their limited views were externally reinforced through instructional and professional development activities. Thus, an understanding of students' perceptions and the limitations in their perceptions has important implications, two of which are discussed here. First, in order for K-12 teachers to see themselves as producers of knowledge, they must be exposed to literature that position them in the role of researchers, not just practitioners of others' research. They should be introduced to teacher researchers as role models and to research conducted by their peers. Moreover, professional development conducted with teachers must be careful not to reinforce their role only as recipients or consumers of knowledge. Effective professional development must include teacher empowerment and teachers as agents of change as its core principle (Timperley & Phillips, 2003). Second, research assignments in teacher education or other subject areas must not be restricted to literature review research. Education majors must learn to collect data about their students and classrooms through observation and interview and to analyze such data for instructional purposes. As this research shows, many perceptions that the participants have of research are externally reinforced through course work, readings or workshops. If these perceptions are to change, we must broaden the range of research experiences they receive. This research is limited in its sampling of students, relying on a convenience sample of graduate students from a specific geographic area. Therefore, it is not clear that these findings can generalize to other student populations. Nevertheless, it is my hope that this research will spur further investigations of students' perceptions of research and its relation to teaching. Unless we understand these perceptions and their origins, we cannot address them effectively through instruction and professional development.

References

Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Borich, G. D. (2003). Observation skills for effective Teaching. Upper Sandle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.

Everton, T., Galton, M., & Pell, T. (2000). Teachers' perspectives on educational research: Knowledge and context. Journal of Education for Teaching, 26, 167-182.

Good, T., & Brophy, J. (1997). Looking in Classrooms. New York: Harper & Row.

Hargreaves, A. (1984). Experience counts, theory doesn't: How teachers talk about their work. Sociology of Education, 57, 244-254.

Hogan, T., & and Rabinowitz, M. (2003). Representation in teaching: Inferences from research of expert and novice teachers. Educational Psychologist, 38, 235-247.

Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC). (1992). Model standards for beginning teacher licensing, assessment and development: A resource for state dialog. [Online], Available: http://www.ccsso.org/projects/interstate new teacher assessment and_support_consortium/Projects/Standards_Development/#core.

Levine, M., & Trachtman, R. (1997). Making professional development schools work: Politics, practice, and policy. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

McCracken, N. M. (2004). Surviving shock and awe: NCLB vs. college of education. English Education, 36, 104-118.

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS). (2005). What teachers should know and be able to do. [Online], Available: http://www.nbpts.org/about/coreprops.cfm.

Timperley, H. S., & Phillips, G. (2003). Changing and sustaining teachers' expectations through professional development in literacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 627-641.

Long Peng, State University of New York at Oswego 

Peng, Ph.D., is Assistant Professor of Education Research, TESOL and Linguistics.