Coming from an education background and being a certified teacher, I think I can see myself choosing a research question that has to do with teaching. Interestingly enough, I was reading an article today about how provincial test scores show children are regressing in their math skills and hate math more than ever before. That got me thinking back to when I was in school. I learned math through repetitive drills and rote practice. Today, this has been replaced with the problem-based “strategies” and estimation techniques. On the surface the solution may be simple – teachers could return to the original teaching methods that some would say is “what worked for them.” What about the students who are thriving in the problem-based strategy learning environment?
Also, regarding the part about hating math, I would have liked to have seen the list of survey questions. Maybe it’s not that kids hate math (as a whole) but just certain kinds of math. And if so, which ones? The article does not specify this. Here’s where the “so what” question that was introduced in class and in our reading comes in to play. Well, maybe that would be the first step in understanding what teachers ought to be doing (the same or differently) when teaching the various math subjects. Another question is do we assume that all these students who did poorly on the annual EQAO test automatically hate math? Thoughts?
Although I am not a trained social researcher, having gone through teacher’s college where we were taught to be self-reflective in our teaching techniques and strategies, I can relate to Knight’s idea that “researchers should start writing from the moment that they see a glimmer of an inquiry because it helps them to think and to capture their thinking.” (Knight, 1) Relating this to the teaching profession, after a lesson, teachers are supposed to write down their thoughts and ideas about how the teaching and learning went, i.e. did I incorporate all the learning styles in my teaching, were learning objectives achieved, and if not, why not? And so teachers also maintain a kind of “research journal” as presented by Luker. I agree with Luker when she states, “writing engages a very different part of the brain than reading and talking do.” (Luker, 21) Personally, I find I am more of an active learner because I am not only reading and simply absorbing the material, but rather, actually extending and adding my own “two cents” to the “so what” part of the social research question (as I appear to have done when evaluating the article above). I feel like I’ve learned so much already - makes me feel proud to be taking INF 1240!
Michelle, your post highlighted how numbers can be manipulated and presented to say so many different things! I encounter this all the time: sensationalistic headlines with little factual support. Your questions are exactly what I would ask: which students hate math? which areas of math do they hate? do their scores indicate they hate math? As an aside, I hate EQAO tests, and I don't believe they accurately reflect students' knowledge or schools' ability to teach.
ReplyDeleteOften, after presenting a headline such as "students hate math", the article will go on to cite some statistics, but I find that the main questions still remain, which to me suggests that either the study was not done well, or the article generalizes in an inaccurate way.
I apologize for venting, but this issue really really bothers me because it creates a certain perception among the general public that's actually not supported by facts. And then politicians come in and say they will fix the problem that's not actually a problem, but saying that they'll fix it will get them elected... etc, etc. I guess we can't control how others interpret our findings, but hopefully, when (if) we do research, we can be very explicit and narrow in our own interpretation of what we noticed. Saying what it *doesn't* mean seems to me as important as saying what it *does*.