Now What? (Education and Technology in a Post COVID World)

“Scientific study reflects the culture from which it arises, and entails values, often unspoken.”

Kathryn H. Au and Taffy E. Raphael

Au and Raphael are both senior advisors with schoolRISE, an organization that focuses of equity and research in literacy in Ann Arbor, Michigan. In 2021, they explained their mindset that “scientific study reflects the culture from which it arises, and entails values, often unspoken” (p. S65).

In other words, we are what we study. This thought forces me to wonder about the type of research educators conduct and write about. Do we research to find innovative ways to help our students learn? Or do we design research studies to merely check the boxes for our obligations at institutes of higher learning? Do we merely like the prestige of a byline and a journal publication to add to our vitae?

I have struggled with these questions for years. However, a recent article assigned in our coursework provided a glimmer of hope about the thinking behind educational research.

The introductory chapter to Sawyer’s anthology The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (2006) describes the history of the ever-changing educational landscape and the studies that have shaped its best practices. ‘The times they are a’ changin’’…constantly. For example, we now know that ‘instructionism” is far less effective than a more collaborative, social learning approach in classrooms.

But with changing times comes research findings that are slow to catch up to what is actually happening in the world…and in our classrooms

As mentioned in a previous post, Roblyer (2005) discussed ill-conceived research designs that have little impact on new best practices in the classroom. I have also mentioned Gutièrrez and Penuel (2014) calling for more observational approaches to research that are actually relevant to teachers toiling away in the classroom trenches (a visual paraphrase by yours truly, but you get the general idea).

All of this ties in with a new-to-me research concept that I find tremendously exciting: the learning ecology framework. In this framework, a researcher examines many factors that may impact a person’s learning throughout their learning lifecycle. Not to mix metaphors, but if we were to examine a person’s ecological landscape in terms of a theatrical play, we would study the story’s setting, the stage backdrops, the other characters, the temperature of the theater, the reaction of the crowd, and the content of the play itself–all of these and more serving as factors that might impact the main character’s performance.

In his study, Barron (2006) examines how self-motivation expands learning in and out of the classroom, in both formal and informal learning situations. In other words, how learning plays out in the holistic world of the subject, beyond the research lab and the classroom setting. Barron’s research is qualitative, based on interviews over a ‘ecological’ time span of years in his subject’s lives and development. In fact, he states unequivocally, “By focusing on schools and labs as primary research sites, we miss opportunities to investigate learning when it flows from the initiatives of the learner and his or her companions across time and settings” (Barron, 2006, p. 193).

To tie things in to my earlier questions: what could be a better reason for research than a long term investment into the daily lives of people impacted by educational practices?

This concept of following a student’s learning lifecycle opens up new and imaginative doors of research possibilities in my mind. By adapting to the ecological life cycles of modern-day students and how they learn, perhaps it will no longer take decades for real change to catch up to the latest research in best practices. The researchers will have been there in the trenches all along.

Aukerman and Schuldt’s 2021 article in Reading Research Quarterly (What Matters Most? Toward a Robust and Socially Just Science of Reading) calls for “a bolder and broader vision” when it comes to reading instruction and, arguably, other concepts related to education and educational research (S86). Part of that new vision is examining the “full life span” of reading and comprehension, rather than just the early years of school and childhood development (Aukerman & Schuldt, 2021, p. S86).

Furthermore, Au and Raphael (2021) believe that research into literacy (and by extension, education) should consist of five key values that include “collective responsibility, equity through higher order thinking, rigorous systems, accountability with transparency, and stability and sustainability” (p. S65). The keyword here? Sustainability. Long-term sustainability and investment.

So, what is the tie that binds all of this week’s research together? A call for research design that examines students where they are at, along with the factors affecting them…diving in to their ‘ecological habitat and life cycles’….a more holistic approach to examining educational best practices.

Yes, this will take longer, and yes, this will cost more. But it is my hunch that the data uncovered and the information gleaned will be invaluable to what works in education moving forward. And isn’t that really the point?

^{This week’s post relates to reading assigned as a part of my graduate assistantship with Central Michigan University’s Literacy Center. My supervisor wanted me to get a ‘crash course’ in the science of reading—along with all of the current debates attached with it—before we begin new research. It is fascinating to me that our EDU coursework, my GA research reading, the communication theory courses I’m teaching at a local community college, and my extensive background in media content creation and public relations are all connecting with some of the same basic principles, ideas, and questions about best practices when it comes to education and how people consume media content along with other technology forms.}

References:

Au, & Raphael, T. E. (2021). What Matters. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(1), S65–S67. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.4

Aukerman, & Chambers Schuldt, L. (2021). What Matters Most? Toward a Robust and Socially Just Science of Reading. Reading Research Quarterly, 56(1), S85–S103. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.406

Barron, B. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecologies perspective. Human Development, 49, 193-224.

Gutierrez, K. D., & Penuel, W. R. (2014). Relevance to practice as a criterion for rigor, Educational Researcher, 43(1), 19-23.

Roblyer, M. D. (2005). Educational technology research that makes a difference: Series introduction. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(2), 192-201.

Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Chapter 1 introduction: The new science of learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.). The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences(p. 1-16). New York: Cambridge University Press.