[NIFL-AALPD:1812] research and pd

From: Eileen Eckert (eileeneckert@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Dec 15 2004 - 14:17:27 EST


Return-Path: <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id iBFJHRU03520; Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:17:27 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 14:17:27 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <BAY22-F30AC8D2C92244800A98166CFAD0@phx.gbl>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: "Eileen Eckert" <eileeneckert@hotmail.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-aalpd@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-AALPD:1812] research and pd
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Status: O
Content-Length: 2299
Lines: 37

I hope this will be a quick note on some of the discussion about evidence 
for the effectiveness of professional development.

Catherine talked about the nature of methods in the natural sciences vs. 
social sciences (or research involving conscious, changing human beings). I 
don't think that discussion in terms of a split between the natural and 
social sciences is the most productive or effective. Even in the natural 
sciences, where experimental research has reigned supreme, there is growing 
awareness of the nature of complex systems and the need to go beyond, or 
move away from, or extend the boundaries of accepted research methods, to 
recognize the interactivity of systems and their parts. You can see this, 
for example, in the global warming debate. The strict experimentalists (I 
think I just made up that word) would say that we don't have enough data, or 
controlled experiments, to establish a causal link between human activity, 
greenhouse gas production, and global warming (and therefore we shouldn't 
take action, just do more research). The more complex-systems-oriented would 
say something like, "Given the number of variables, their interactions, and 
our inability to hold all other things constant while we study one variable, 
we are not going to establish a causal relationship using controlled 
experiments. We're in a complex system; we need research that describes the 
relationships and interactions of the parts--in other words, how the whole 
system works--and we need to take action now."

In my opinion, we should not cast our debate in terms of natural vs. social 
or human sciences, we should cast it in terms of the experimental dinosaurs 
vs. the evolving complex systems thinkers. In terms of this discussion, we 
shouldn't stop doing pd until we've established a causal link between pd and 
student outcomes through controlled experiments, although controlled 
experiments may contribute to our understanding, the dinosaur part is in 
thinking the are the only acceptable method. We should be looking at how, 
what kinds, and to what extent pd affects teaching and student learning, and 
we should use what we learn to improve pd and to improve the research. It's 
a complex system too. OK, I wanted this to be quick, so I'll stop there.

Eileen



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Dec 23 2004 - 09:46:01 EST