Haven’t been writing/posting here much.  Had to prioritize putting together my tenure portfolio.  Having rid my shoulders of that weight (literally and figuratively), I look forward to writing more here.  For now, I thought I’d let you know what I wrote about my blog in my tenure narrative.  First, I began my section on “scholarship” with the following quote from Dewey’s Logic: The Theory of Inquiry:

In scientific inquiry, every conclusion reached, whether of fact or conception, is held subject to determination by its fate in further inquires…The conditional status of scientific conclusions (conditional in the sense of subjection to revision in further inquiry) is sometimes used by critics to disparage scientific “truths” in comparison with those which are alleged to be eternal and immutable. In fact, it is a necessary condition of continuous advance in apprehension and in understanding.

Then, in making the claim that a blog can be a form of scholarship, I wrote:

Since January 2008, I have explored a new mode of publishing. As a blogger at Educational Insanity (http://edinsanity.com), I have come to firmly believe that I am engaging in a relevant and important form of scholarship. Consistent with Dewey’s theory of inquiry and my beliefs about scholarship, I use my blog as a space to make knowledge claims; assertions that are conditional on their fate by further inquiries. Those inquiries come from peers, most of whom are educators in one form or another. In other words, blogging affords a pure form of peer review. The “blogosphere,” and especially the “edublogosphere,” is wonderfully rigorous and relentless in its review process; knowledge claims without sufficient warrants are regularly challenged. Blogging, for me, is very much a scholarly endeavor and satisfies me as a public intellectual.

Tags: blogging, Dewey, scholarship, tenure

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: blogging, digital, educational research, information

A couple of weeks ago, Cathy Nelson tagged me for this. I was honored and eager to do this; I think this is a great opportunity for both self-reflection and to put my cards on the table for my readers to get to know me a bit more.

I’m going to take a slightly different approach than Cathy. Specifically, I’m going to “borrow” from Peter King, one of my favorite sportswriters. In his weekly Monday Morning Quarterback column on CNN/SI, King always includes a segment called “10 Things I Think I Think.” So, without further ado, here are 10 things I think I think about education:

1.  I think the thinkers/writers who’ve most influenced my thinking are Kieran Egan, Roger Schank and, well, I’d have to say John Dewey. I challenge you to read the following narratives by those three men, synthesize them in your head and tell me what you come up with (and, yes, I know that Egan is critical of Dewey, but that’s fine by me): Egan article; Schank & Jona white paper; Dewey book chapter

2.  I think the best book on education I’ve read to this point continues to be Schoolteacher by Dan Lortie. Over three decades later, Lortie’s work stands out as THE definitive exploration (methodologically and substantively) of the “ethos of teaching.” If you haven’t read this book, please add it to your summer reading list.

3.  I think we too often use the terms “education” and “schooling” interchangeably. They are too very different things. I think of schooling as a subset of the larger idea of education. This is not at all a novel idea, but I do think we need to continually remind ourselves of it.

4.  I think if you read or hear someone saying that there is a “program” or “initiative” or “reform” that significantly improves student achievement for a large group of students (lets say, for arguments sake, greater than 384), especially in a short period of time, they are lying (or, at least, terribly misleading you). There are lots of ideas/programs/curricula/etc. out there designed by really smart, well-intentioned people. But, I promise you, none of them will dramatically and suddenly alter the achievement growth trajectory for any large group of students. None.

5.  I think, having just written that, the bodies of research that are most compelling with respect to improving student outcomes (notice I didn’t write “achievement”) are about small class sizes, quality early childhood education, and year-round learning. In other words, if you told any educator that next year they were going to have a much smaller class, with kids who had high quality early childhood educational experiences, and who have had learning opportunities during the summer months, they’d be thrilled. If we’re going to continue the institution of public schooling, we ought to think about improving early childhood educational opportunities for all kids, moving away from the agrarian-based educational schedule, and reducing class sizes (I might even be so bold as to suggest we break down classroom walls altogether; how open education of me). Notice I’ve written nothing here about technology?…that body of research is neither robust nor consistent enough yet. )-:

6.  I think emphasizing evidence-based practice in education is a good idea. I think embracing a very narrow view of what counts as a warranted knowledge claim (i.e. what counts as evidence) is absurd.

7.  I think whereas there has necessarily been great attention given to issues of between-schools segregation by race in the U.S., there is a huge, insidious problem of within-schools segregation in far too many schools in the U.S. For those of you that work in or know of schools with a reasonable semblance of racial diversity (yes, both of you), take a look at your school population and then the populations of the kids in: special education, gifted and talented programs, advanced placement courses, the APs office for disciplinary referrals, etc. Do those populations have the same racial compositions? I thought not.

8.  I think we need more principals like Chris Lehmann and Tim Lauer. I kept that list short, for lots of reasons.

9.  I think “Leadership Without Followers” by Chris Dede continues to be relevant and the framework for all that I believe about educational leadership.

10.  I think all kids can learn…I’m just not sure they can do it well enough within the confines of 99.99% of the schools in the United States.

There, I said it…or at least wrote it.

Unlike some, I kinda like this meme concept; I think it’s a decent way to encourage folks to write on a particular topic. So, in that light, I’m tagging the following bloggers:

• Justin Bathon
• Paul Bogush
• Ric Murry
• Kate Olson
• John Hendron

Have at it, folks.

Tags: blogging, education, meme, reflection

On occasion, I find myself itching to compose a post for this blog relating to some aspect of my work. Often, I end up stopping myself because…well…umm…because I’m scared. You see, I’m an untenured professor in a world (academia) that largely doesn’t get this whole blogging thing. It is (I’m afraid to say) still a fairly traditional space where hierarchies and bureaucracies abound. The politics of higher education are not a whole lot different than the politics of P-12 education. So, I’m extremely cautious so as to not speak badly of anyone or to write anything that might get back to anyone important.

So, I was particularly interested in Vicki “CoolCatTeacher” Davis‘ comment on Gary Stager’s blog. She wrote, “Classroom teachers in the public school system who blog are on a ’short leash’ if any and do not truly experience freedom of speech, as you could well imagine.”

Then, Will Richardson posted today about a similar topic. According to Will, “…the New York City Department of Education has laid down the law about employees referencing their blogs in their e-mail signatures…the city is providing disclaimer language for anyone in the department who blogs and who comments on other’s blog.”

As you might imagine, this is all very troubling to me. I have academic freedom and so do K-12 educators. There are laws about that. I even JUST presented a paper about free speech rights of K-12 educators. Here’s the legal standard in a nutshell: First, is our expression (blogging is certainly a form of expression) a matter of public concern? In almost all cases, the answer to this is yes (if not, there are no First Amendment protections for purely private speech). In the Gary Stager case, writing about Reading First would be a matter of public concern. The second step in the analysis is the “disruption” test. Does the individual’s interest in expressing him/herself outweigh the disruption caused to the school environment? In other words, did the expression interfere with teaching, destroy morale, create lots of negative chatter, etc? Negative publicity has been deemed to be NOT disruption in at least one instance.

So, I think I need to reflect a bit and find my voice again. And, I hope the teachers Vicki commented about can find theirs as well. They and I have rights.

Tags: academic freedom, blogging, freedom of speech, school law

You’re breaking up with me?  I thought we had something…

So many comments/pingbacks/etc.  Be careful what you wish for?

A few thoughts, comments, replies, etc to Scott et al…

First, I just want to be VERY clear that I NEVER used the word “elite” or any form of that word in any of my posts.  Never.  In fact, I very specifically and carefully wrote that there was “an awesome cocktail party conversation…”  Meaning, there was great stuff being said.  Also, I basically retracted the cocktail party metaphor in my subsequent post.  I think it’s really dangerous to inject one’s interpretative, normative language into someone else’s reflections.  Remember, all, these were reflections…I continually started with “I feel…”  Those are the key words in any form of reflective practice.  I should know; two of my dearest colleagues wrote the book.

Second, Scott, I’m having trouble reconciling Facts 1 and 2 with the rest of the brutal facts.  If I build it and nobody is going to come and nobody cares about me anyway, then why does it matter that there are things I can do to build traffic and that there are people who can help.  With what would they be helping me?  And, patient for what?  Nobody cares and nobody’s going to come anyway, at least according to facts 1 and 2.  And, you were one of the first to write about comment intensity.  So, help me with the logic here.

Third, many of the comments suggest something to the effect of “don’t blog for the stats.”  Again, I never said that I was blogging FOR the stats.  Furthermore, how do I reconcile comments/replies that suggest that I shouldn’t worry about stats, I should use blogging as a form of reflection and focus on the kids.  Well, I am absolutely committed to the blogsophere as an author and as a particpant because I want to effect change; I want to improve the lives of school-aged children and those who work with them directly or indirectly.  But, if I’m authoring a blog as a reflective exercise and nobody’s listening, how am I achieving my goals?  So, I’m not blogging FOR the stats; I’m simply looking at the stats to gauge my progress.  That’s also a key component of reflective practice; staring the data in the face and using them for growth.

Fourth, I’m stuck on (at least) one issue.  Kate Olson (Hi Kate, and welcome to my Bloglines account!) wrote: “When you directly quote another blog and share your response and opinion, it’s just plain NICE to encourage everyone to visit the blog you are referring to. So, because I’m naturally a little, let’s say - contentious - I’m going to ask that you please share your thoughts on the original topic with Jon, this post wouldn’t be here without him.”   Vicki Davis responded with, “The conversation doesn’t BELONG to anyone! It just doesn’t - we can talk any place, anywhere that we want!”  I agree that conversations don’t belong to anyone, but isn’t Kate’s way one very small step towards putting some very light boundaries around a conversation?  IDK…this one’s tough.

Finally, THANKS.  Thanks to all who’ve commented, replied, taken the conversation away (c’mon, that was a joke people!).  Scott, I couldn’t agree more about being gracious.  A wise professor once told me that if I do nothing else in life, I should pay my bills, pay my taxes and write my thank you letters.  So, thanks all for aiding my reflective exercise.

Now go away!  (again, a joke people…)

Yours in the blogoshpere,

JB

Tags: blogging