What? So What? Now What?

What?

We went through the 4 types of educational research. They were as follows:

Descriptive: It describes a situation. They allow us to draw conclusions about the way things are at the current moment. (You cannot change circumstance and environment).

Correlative: It looks at the relationships, or possible relationships, that exist between things. It specifically highlights the extent to which two things tend to be together or change together. Key works are “…emplies”. (You cannot change circumstance and environment).

Experimental: It is meant to be a study where the experimenter has a hand in the results of the study, manipulating at least one of the variables to see what happens, measuring the effects of those changes. This is the ONLY research method in which you can change the environment.

Action: Research conducted by either teacher or other faculty to address issues in their own schools.

So What?

For whatever reason I am struggling with these principles. Not in theory but in practicality. The first two are so subjective that you would think most people would dismiss the information gathered as impractical since it can only be applied to a very small subject matter. Experimental research, where are at least you control circumstances, requires that the outcome of your research be duplicated without ‘help’ from the researcher in the future. If what is studied and gathered in the controlled environment cannot happen naturally outside of the control space, then what is the point in being able to rely on experimental data? And then we have action research. Unlike the others, at least this is pertinent. But then I struggle with what happens to a classroom if they are a study group. Yet, this makes more sense to do research that the individual can use and benefit from and share with peers who teach in a similar environment.

As based on our scenarios, it seems that most research is presented as a scare tactic (as in the day care-aggression line of thought). I am sure there are children who do react violently after day care, but you then can argue nature vs. nurture or perhaps age cognition and genetics. It seems so open-ended. I have a hard time seeing how most of these methods can be used without bias. Scenario 4 seems the most likely and genuine IF the presenter stated that she recommended the use based on her experience alone and not on any other qualitative measures.

Now What?

This also causes confusion for me. Because of my fears when it comes to bias, I am hesitant to make any assumptions. I need to learn more about their practical application. Obviously they are used. Why? How? How can you go through the process, make assumptions, find connections and present a conclusion and feel confident that the answer reached has grounding in fact? This is what I want to learn. I am curious as to what studies I have ‘bought into’ without recognizing what methods and tactics were implicitly employed for the best possible reaction.

As a teacher and observer, I need to be aware of patterns. I would like to study action research and how best to implement such for learning and development without sacrificing the students of the class. I assume that we all need to learn and grow from ourselves and our co-workers. We are stronger when we can develop beyond our current state of being, and this is a continual maturity. To remain stagnant is to be a mediocre teacher.