| Nama Pengarang | : | Colleen A. Capper, Gary L. Anderson, Kathryn Herr, Roschelle, Jeremy, Pea, Roy |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-11 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | The purpose of this paper is to consider the possibilities for research with lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender school administrators and for the broader study of queerness in schools as organizations. Scholars need to consider both modernist and postmodernist practicalities related to (a) significance, (b) research focus, (c) methods, and (d) theoretical perspectives. I also explore how sexualities shape and are shaped by organizational life. Researchers should explore the (hetero)sexual culture and structure of schools, and the (homo)sexual ruptures and resistances to heterosexuality. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-17 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | The pressure towards more school-based teacher education programs, visible in many countries, creates a need to rethink the relationship between theory and practice. The traditional application-of-theory model appears to be rather ineffective and is currently being replaced by other, more reflective approaches. However, until now the variety of different notions and assumptions underlying these new approaches have not provided a sound basis for further development. Two related theoretical bases are presented for a new paradigm in teacher education. The first uses the concepts of episteme and phronesis to introduce a new way of framing relevant knowledge. The second is a more holistic way of describing the relationship between teacher cognition and teacher behavior, leading to a model of three levels in learning about teaching, the Gestalt level, the scheme level and the theory level, which are illustrated by interview data. Building on these two theoretical frameworks, a so-called ``realistic approach`` to teacher education is introduced. The teacher educator`s role within this approach is analyzed as well as organizational consequences. First evaluative results are presented. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Bebeau, Muriel J. , James R. Rest, Darcia Narvaez, Jos P.A. Kessels, Fred A.J. Korthagen |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 18-26 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Changing concerns and ideological shifts in American society produce different emphases in moral education. We argue that different approaches address different dimensions of development. If viewed as complementary rather than contradictory, we may be able to move beyond ideological and philosophical disputes to solid theory-building based on empirical findings. In proposing an action program for moral education that incorporates research, we draw upon lessons learned from the Head Start movement of the 1960s. In defining researchable variables, we recommend the Four Component Model (sensitivity, judgment, motivation, character) instead of the usual tripartite model (thinking, feeling, acting). |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 4-13 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Teacher research has been concerned with the generation of knowldge and voice for more than 70 years; teachers are invited to join the academic dialogue by becoming researchers themselves. Yet the promised fusion of communities seems as distant as ever. I want to suggest that for these two solitudes to be brought together, the emphasis needs to change from the generation of knowledge to dialogue about what counts as knowledge. Using the work of the Russian literary theorist Mikhail Bakhtin (1895-1975), I argue for dialogic research. In making my case, I present a research problem that was investigated by a group of school administrators and teachers, sketch the previous response of the research community to that issue, take a brief detour through Bakhtin`s literary theory, and then show how each of the conceptual resources that the supplies-polyphony, chronotope and carnival-affected the research project and the ensuing dialogue about knowledge and its relationship to practice. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 25-28 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 36-38 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 14-24 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | Current empirical research in science and technology studies provides new and different views of science and scientists that contrast markedly with the mythical views that underlie many curricularefforts geared toward incresing scientific literacy. If descriptions of science and scientists that emerge from science and technology studies are legitimate, considerable implications arise for educational aims guiding science instruction, learning experiences directed toward those educational aims, and resources that support those learning experiences and educational aims. In this paper, we (a) briefly review some of the diverse scholarship within science and technology studies, and (b) discuss associated curricular implications in terms of educational aims, learning experiences, and resources. These implications are directed toward a vision of scientific literacy as preparation for competent participationin scientific laboratories, activist movements, the judicial system, or other locations/communities where science is created and used. This vision implies a reformulation of what can be considered ``authentic`` science (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989) and provides a natural continuity from participating in science in schools to participating in science in professional practice or activist movements. We argue for science education as a starting point for trajectories of legitimate peripheral participation (Lave & Wenger, 1991) in science-related discourses and practices. |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 28-30 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | Nell K. Duke, Sarah W. Beck, Ginette Delandshere, Anthony R. Petrosky, Michelle K. McGinn, Roth, Wolff-Michael , Slavin, Robert E., Susan M. Brookhart, David Coulter |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 31-36 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | - |
| Nama Pengarang | : | - |
| Nama Majalah/Jurnal | : | Educational Researcher |
| Volume / Nomor Edisi | : | - |
| Nomor Halaman | : | 26-37 |
| Abstraksi Narasi | : | This article presents the results of a research project on the phenomenon of out-of-field teaching in American high schools-teachers teaching subjects for which they have little education or training. Over the past couple of years, the problem of out-of-field teaching has become a prominent topic in the realm of educational policy and reform, and the results of this research have been widely reported and commented on both by education policymakers and the national media. But unfortunately, out-of-fieldteaching is aproblem that remains largely misunderstood. My research utilizes nationally representative data from the Schools and staffing Survey, conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics. The purpose of this article is to summarize what my research has revealed about out-of-field teaching: how much of it goes on; to what extent it varies across different subjects, across different kinds of schools, and across different kinds of classrooms; and finally, the reasons for its prevalence in American schools. The data show that even using a minimal standards for qualified teachers-those holding a college minor in the fields in which they teach-the numbers of out-of-field teachers are striking. For example, a third of all secondary school teachers of mathematics have neither a major nor a minor in mathematics. My analyses have also shown that out-of-field teaching greatly varies across schools, teachers, and classrooms. The crucial question, however and the source of great misunderstanding is why so many teachers are teaching subjects for which they have little background. I examine three widely believed explanations of out-of-field teaching-that out-of field teaching is a result of either inadequate training on the part of teachers, inflexible teacher unions, or shortages of qualified teachers. My analysis shows that each of these views is seriously flawed. The article closes by offering an alternative explanation for out-of-field teaching-one focused on the organizational structure of schools and the occupational conditions and characteristics of teaching. |
Unduh Dokumen Berkas PDF Utama