Been blogging less frequently lately, mostly because the tenure application deadline looms LARGE.  But, I got a bit riled up after reading an article that Kevin Jarrett pointed out via Twitter.

Blogging under the auspices of The Wall Street Journal (a highly respectable publication), John J. Edwards III wrote about a forthcoming book by two sociologists at the University of Texas-Arlington.  He surely learned of this book through a press release issued by the Office of Media Relations at UT-A.  I think it’s great that the folks in that office are promoting this book.  In fact, the public relations guru that works in my unit at VCU will be publishing an article about me and my blogging/professional networking in the next issue of our alumni magazine.

I do, however, have a couple of problems with this press release and the associated blog post by Mr. Edwards.  First, Edwards notes only that the book is “forthcoming.”  The press release says that “[t]he book is being published…with the release date to be announced.”  So, not only is the book not available to the public yet, but there isn’t even a date for release yet.  I don’t have a ton of experience with book publishers, but I have plenty of data from experiences with colleagues.  And I’m guessing that without even a date for release, we won’t see this book for a while.

That’s highly problematic.  When I read articles about educational research in the popular media, I’m instantly skeptical.  Not skeptical as in doubtful; but skeptical as in “I’m going to have to see the actual text of the report/article/book myself” so that I can make my own meaning of it.  Here, all I’ve got to go on is one blogger’s account of the book.  Furthermore, there’s no indication that Edwards read the book himself.  He quotes directly from the press release.  YET, amazingly (maybe not considering the usual credibility of the WSJ), there are dozens and dozens (I couldn’t count) of comments to the post.  I understand that Edwards used the press release to ask a couple of otherwise banal questions to his readers, but wouldn’t we all be better served if we had access to the book itself?  Wouldn’t the discussion within the comments be a more interesting and more informed discussion?

My department is launching a new Ed.D. program in educational leadership this coming fall semester.  In planning the program, we’ve had some really good and really important discussions about the sorts of skills and dispositions school leaders need to have.  I’ve been most interested in our conversations around “inquiry.”  There, we’ve concluded that school leaders need to be informed and critical consumers of research.  In fact, we’re working on a case/module where the doc. students will be asked to consider, for example, new math software.  There will be various activities built into that case/module, and among them will be an exploration of the research base on math software.  In an era where schools are mandated to implement only research-based programs, it’s crucial for educational leaders and policymakers to not just accept what others say about the research base for a given program.  They need to know how to find and critique the research base themselves.  This becomes particularly important in the digital age, where access to information is not bounded by space or time and where anyone with an Internet connection can provide information.

I recognize that the media relations folks at UT-A were doing their jobs by creating advance buzz for a book to be published by two of their faculty members.  And, I realize that there’s nothing inherently wrong with using a press release as a departure point for a blog post.  But, I just think a disservice has been done to the educational community here.

My second problem has to do with the book itself and the way it’s portrayed in the news release and the blog post.  The language used suggests that these researchers have devised some kind of novel argument.  Consider: “The authors explore topics like time-use in schools; the confinement and physical disciplining of young bodies as they carry backpacks and sit at cramped desks; the stress on fine motor skills; the performance principle and grading; the performance principle and testing; the disunity of mind and body; vocationalism; a fetish of facts and factoids; rote learning and regurgitation; worksheet-driven learning; classroom authoritarianism and competitive school sports.”  Isn’t the verb “to explore” usually associated with charting new terrain?  Perhaps this stuff is new to the researchers, but haven’t they ever read anything by the likes of Alfie Kohn?  Even Gary Stager?  According to the UT-A website, Dr. Agger is a professor of sociology and the humanities housed in the Department of Sociology.  Same with his co-worker and wife, Dr. Shelton.  They are sociologists and apparently not especially sociologists of education.  So, maybe they are not as versed in the literature on progressive education.  Maybe they do reference that literature.

And, is their argument/contention based on new data they’ve collected and analyzed?  Or, are they synthesizing others’ research?  Or, are they simply theorizing?

But, see I can’t know any of this for sure.  And, apparently I won’t know for sure for a while because it’s not clear when the book will be available.  That’s what’s so infuriating here.  Rather than creating advanced buzz, the fine folks at the Office of Media Relations have just thoroughly annoyed me.  They’ve treated you and me as uncritical consumers of information.

Tags: , , ,



5 Comments to “On being an informed consumer of educational research in the digital age”

  1. Karen Richardson | August 5th, 2008 at 9:00 am

    Your comment, “And, is their argument/contention based on new data they’ve collected and analyzed? Or, are they synthesizing others’ research? Or, are they simply theorizing?” is spot on…I read the press release and we struck by the seeming lack of research at all! They point out that they are parents and the comments to the blog were mostly parents as well so what we’ve got is a lot of anecdotal stuff but I wonder what the research evidence might be.

    In addition, there seem to be two different points here: kids are anti-intellectual and school is boring. I wonder if they make any connection between making school more fulfilling and making kids more intellectual? Are schools the only ones at fault for raising these “passive consumers”? When I read that, I wondered if they had looked at any of the Pew Internet data that shows that kids are actually creating and interacting online, not just consuming.

    All in all, you got it right: this is very frustrating!

  2. Ed | August 5th, 2008 at 9:26 am

    Jon, we might just wonder about the wisdom f spending precious summer moments reading a blog about suburbanites with not enough time, and then further taking time to spread the non-column, and further to complain about it!

    (When, of course, if not strolling campus or the beach, you could be getting back to me on the two-page pdf review!)

    Actually, what I wanted to comment on here was the idea that “school leaders need to be informed and critical consumers of research.” Not disagreeing with the principle, but the reality of the way schools are organized is that there will be precious little time indeed “to not just accept what others say about the research base for a given program. …to find and critique the research base themselves.”

    What we need is for school leaders to begin to recognize that their economic model doesn’t allow for this type of well-considered study, the way, say Boeing might, and begin making the switches to models that do.
    ed

  3. Ed | August 5th, 2008 at 9:35 am

    That would be, the 2 page pdf on Failing Schools, Agile Education, and Learning & Civil Rights, of course! :-)

  4. Jon Becker | August 5th, 2008 at 5:16 pm

    @Ed - I’ve perused the document. What sorts of goals do you have for it? Lots of strange bedfellows in one two page document? You don’t often see references to the Thernstroms, for example, on the same document that references Rothstein, for example.

  5. Ed | August 5th, 2008 at 5:50 pm

    Hey, Jon, Thanks!

    Goals: I’d like for it to be a quick starting point for discussions of the real, addressable problems of failing, inner city, minority schools. These sorts of two page summaries are popular among the software development crowd, and I thought I’d see if we can’t jumpstart a wider discussion of the problems by introducing a breadth of resources in one sweep. Wouldn’t mind if it came to be used in some ed schools.

    The strange bedfellows character: partly my trying to include different sides. Yet these are strange days. The very idea of Al Sharpton breaking the union/civil-rights/DNC monolith is amazing enough. And today, I listened to the most stunning interview with the President of the DC Teachers Union.* Times are changing–but they can still go backward.

    The balance among the topics doesn’t seem entirely right yet - too many video links from the same source; too few references from the Rothstein crowd maybe.

    And theres no good reference document as to how de-unionizing could lead to more research-based, user-developed, curriculum & learningware.

    What do you think?

    * Not the Only Kid on the Block-Education Podcast with John Merrow #112: George Parker, president of Washington DC’s Teachers Union, shares some astonishing confessions about the lack of accountability in the union and how it’s affecting competition between public and charter schools.

Leave a Comment