ED 200A Introduction to Educational Inquiry Tu Th 4-5:45 Stevenson

Kip Téllez ktellez@ucsc.edu http://education.ucsc.edu/faculty/ktellez Office: 459-2208 Home: 335-2797 Mobile: 345-7081

The truth is what our peers let us get away with saying.

- Richard Rorty

 

Randomized trials are the only sure method for determining the effectiveness of education programs and practices.

- Grover (Russ) Whitehurst, Director, Institute for Education Sciences

Course Participants

Course Overview

This course addresses the foundational knowledge needed to understand and conduct educational inquiry and research.  The topics of study include epistemology in the human sciences, the philosophical foundations of modern research strategies, and the general classes of research investigations in education.  Course activities and expectations include readings, in-class discussions, and oral and written exercises designed to identify and explore research issues related to teaching and learning.  Students will prepare a comprehensive literature review on a topic of their choice, engage in peer review, as well as prepare a proposal for a comprehensive research study. 

Course Objectives

An understanding of:

• The nature of knowledge as it applies to contemporary research in education
• The history of research in the social sciences
• The nature of data and other representational resources in educational research
• The ethical responsibilities of the educational researcher
• The research/practice gap in educational reform 
• How to read, understand and critically evaluate written research documents
• How to extract information from research literature as a literature review
• How to write a research plan designed to address a research problem
• The essential features of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods educational research

Course Requirements

1. Readings/Discussions Log
   Please keep a log of reactions/questions/summaries of the readings.  This log will also be used in class for reactions to questions/issues posed by both instructor and students. 

2. Research Review Presentation
   Please find and review three existing research papers directly related to your own research interest(s).  Specific format will be provided. 

3. Research Proposal
   Please prepare a comprehensive proposal for conducting your own research, complete with literature review and research plan, as well as mock findings/analysis. 

Books (Available at Baytree):

Creswell, J.W.  (2003).  Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Pring, R.  (2000).  Philosophy of educational research.  London: Continuum. 

Dewey, J.  (1938.)  Logic: The theory of inquiry.  Published as Volume 12 of The Later Works (1925-1953) series edited by Jo Ann Boydston.  Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press. 

Course schedule (Subject to change)

Session	Topics/Activities	Reading(s)
9/25	Introduction to course, participants/ Strategies for locating research
9/30	Consideration to data types, philosophical strategies, and overarching purpose of educational research/ Library visit (Using reference resources to locate educational research.  This date is tentative.	Creswell, Ch. 1 Téllez, “Mentor…” article.
10/2	Purpose of previous literature/ Writing Strategies/ Sharing studies	Creswell. Ch.  2,3
10/7	Designing research/ Sharing studies	Creswell. Ch. 4,5,6
10/9	The role of theory in ed research/ Sharing studies	Creswell. Ch. 7
10/14	Definitions in research/ Quantitative methods Sharing studies	Creswell. Ch. 8,9
10/16	Qualitative and mixed procedures	Creswell. Ch. 10,11
10/21	Overview of philosophy in educational research/ The nature of human knowledge (including a discussion of the empiricism-rationalism continuum)	Pring, Ch. 1
10/23	Educational research, practice and policy: Friends and enemies.	Pring, Ch. 2
10/28	Philosophical problems posed by various types of educational research Metaphysics and scientific inquiry	Pring, Ch. 3
10/30	Key issues of ontology and language in using and understanding educational research.	Pring, Ch. 4
11/4	Modern interpretations of knowledge and inquiry Reconsidering the assumptions of modern science.	Pring, Ch. 5
11/6	Action and practitioner research	Pring, Ch. 6
11/11	The ethnical responsibilities of the educational researcher	Pring, Ch. 7 and 8
11/13	Logic as immutable-The pragmatist question/ Deductive-inductive reasoning and applications to modern inquiry.	Dewey, Ch. 20,21,22
11/18	Scientific method and subject matter	Dewey, Ch. 23
11/20	Role of social sciences in society/ The promise of social sciences for “progress”	Dewey, Ch. 24,25
11/25	Hermeneutics in education research.	Rorty, R.  “Inquiry as recontextualization…”
12/2	Something to hide? Social sciences vs. natural science knowledge and inquiry	Rouse, J.  “Interpretation in natural…”
12/4	Presentations
12/11	Presentations

Readings:

We’ll discuss these additional readings as time permits.  However, please include your reactions to each in your log. 

Aristotle’s theory of knowledge: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-logic/ (selections)

Berliner, D. (2002). Educational research: the hardest science of all. Educational Researcher 31(8) 18-20.

Coulter, D., & Wiens, J.R.  (2002).  Educational judgment: Linking the actor and the spectator.  Educational Researcher, 31(4), 15-24

Feuer, J. F., Towne, L., & Shavelson, R. (2002). Scientific culture and educational research. Educational Researcher 31(8) 4-14.

Gouinlock, J.  (1990).  What is the legacy of instrumentalism?  Rorty’s interpretation of Dewey.  Journal of the History of Philosopy, 28(2), 251-269. 

Kinchloe, J.  (1995).  Meet me behind the curtain: The struggle for a critical postmodern action research.  In P. McLaren and J.M. Giarelli (Eds.), Critical theory and educational research (pp. 71-90).  Albany, NY: SUNY.

Pring, R.  (2001).  The virtues and vices of an educational researcher.  Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35(3), no pagination. 

Robinson, V.M.J.  (1998).  Methodology and the research-practice gap.  Educational Researcher, 27(1), 17-26. 

*Rorty, R.  (1991). Inquiry as recontextualization: An antidualist account of interpretation.  In D.R. Hiley, J.F. Bohman & R. Shusterman (Eds.), The interpretive turn: Philosophy, science, and culture (pp. 59-80).  Ithaca, NY: Cornell. 

*Rouse, J.  (1991).  Interpretation in natural and human science.  In D.R. Hiley, J.F. Bohman & R. Shusterman (Eds.), The interpretive turn: Philosophy, science, and culture (pp. 42-58).  Ithaca, NY: Cornell.

Smeyers, P.  (2001).  Qualitative versus quantitative research design: A plea for paradigmatic tolerance in educational research.  Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35(3), no pagination. 

Social Epistemology http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology-social/  (selections)

Standish, P.  (2001).  Data return: The sense of the given in educational research.  Journal of Philosophy of Education, 35(3), no pagination. 

Tellez, K.  (1995).  The legend of the qualitative/quantitative dualism.  Unpublished manuscript. 

* These two papers will serve as primary discussion readings for two class meetings late in the quarter. 

Other information

Students with disabilities are encouraged to speak with Dr. Téllez regarding modifications to the course structure. In addition, please contact the UCSC Disabilities Resources Center at 831-459-2089 for general assistance.

Like all endeavors in the university, this course holds to the UCSC guidelines for academic integrity (http://oasas.ucsc.edu/avcue/integrity/).