ERIC ED433997: Teacher Inquiry. Center for the Development of Teaching Paper Series.

26 Pages·0.41 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 433 997
SE 062 348
AUTHOR
Hammer, David
TITLE
Teacher Inquiry. Center for the Development of Teaching
Paper Series.
INSTITUTION
Education Development Center, Newton, MA. Center for the
Development of Teaching.
SPONS AGENCY
DeWitt Wallace/Reader's Digest Fund, Pleasantville, NY.
PUB DATE
1999-01-00
NOTE
25p.
AVAILABLE FROM
Education Development Center, 55 Chapel Street, Newton, MA
02138.
PUB TYPE
Opinion Papers (120)
Reports
Research (143)
EDRS PRICE
MF01/PC01 Plus Postage.
DESCRIPTORS
Educational Assessment; Educational Change; Evaluation;
*Inquiry; *Knowledge Base for Teaching; Physics; *Science
Education; Secondary Education; Student Needs; Teacher
Education; Teacher Student Relationship; *Teaching Methods;
*Teaching Skills
ABSTRACT
The progressive agenda of science education reform,
particularly the goal of promoting student inquiry, places substantial
intellectual demands on teachers. If this reform is to succeed, the education
community must do more to appreciate and address its demands. This paper
presents three examples of high school physics teachers' conversations about
"snippets" of each others' work with students. The purposes are:
(1) to
highlight the central role and intellectual demands of teacher inquiry, in
particular teachers' diagnoses of students' strengths and needs;
(2) to
suggest that teachers often experience and express their diagnoses in terms
of instructional strategies; and (3) to suggest that the value of educational
research for instruction be understood primarily with respect to what it may
contribute to teacher inquiry. (Contains 15 references.)
(Author/ASK)
********************************************************************************
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
********************************************************************************
CENTER FOR THE
PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS
DEVELOPMENT OF TEACHING
BEEN GRANTED BY
PAPER
SERIES
TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Educational Research and Improvement
DUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
CENTER (ERIC)
This document has been reproduced as
ceived from the person or organization
originating it.
Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction quality.
Points of view or opinions stated in this
document do not necessarily represent
official OERI position or policy.
I
CENTER FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF TEACHING
PAPER
SERIES
Teacher
Inquiry
David Hammer
January 1999
EDC
3
The Center for the Development of Teaching (CDT) is a research and development
center within the Center for Learning, Teaching, and Technology (LTT) at
Education Development Center, Inc. (EDC). The goal of the Center for the
Development of Teaching is to learn, with teachers, how teachers' practice can be
transformed so that it supports students' construction of knowledge. The Center is
now focusing on mathematics and science teaching, but will expand to include
the teaching of history and/or language as well. The Center carries out a coordi-
nated program of research and action projects that address the issues involved in
teacher change at three interacting levels: (1) teachers' beliefs and knowledge
about their subjects and about learning and teaching; (2) teachers' classroom prac-
tice; and (3) the complex social system that extends from the school and school
district to the society at large.
This CDT Paper Series is intended as a vehicle for discussion of research on teach-
ing and teacher development as they relate to education reform. Publications in
this series will contribute to the community's understanding of the practice and
profession of teaching, as well as to the process of change. It is our editorial policy
to have papers reviewed by a panel of four readersthree named by the author
and one chosen by CDT.
Core support for the Center for the Development of Teaching, and for CDT's
Paper Series, has been provided by the DeWitt Wallace-Reader's Digest Fund,
whose mission is to foster fundamental improvement in the quality of educational
and career development opportunities for all school-age youth, and to increase
access to these improved services for young people in low-income communities.
Support for the editing and production of individual papers is provided by the
grant that supported the work described in the paper.
If you would like to be in direct contact with the author of this paper, please write
to:
David Hammer
University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742
[email protected]
Teacher Inquiry
David Hammer
University of Maryland
The progressive agenda of science education reform, particularly the
goal of promoting student inquiry, places substantial intellectual
If this reform is to succeed, the education com-
demands on teachers.
munity must do more to appreciate and address its demands. This
paper presents three examples of high school physics teachers' conversa-
tions about "snippets" of each others' work with students. The purposes
are (1) to highlight the central role and intellectual demands of teacher
inquiry, in particular teachers' diagnoses of students' strengths and
needs; (2) to suggest that teachers often experience and express their
diagnoses in terms of instructional strategies; and (3) to suggest that the
value of education research for instruction should be understood pri-
marily with respect to what it may contribute to teacher inquiry.
Inquiry" in the classroom generally refers to student inquiry. One
does not often associate inquiry with the teacher's role, other than
with respect to the questions that come up within the discipline, sci-
ence questions for a science teacher, to which the teacher does not
have an immediate answer. My first objective in this paper is to pro-
mote a view of inquiry as central to the teacher's role, particularly
inquiry into student understanding, participation, and learning.
Although it is becoming more common to think of teaching as inquiry,
the emphasis in education reform remains on methods, materials, and
Meanwhile, the progressive agenda of promoting student
standards.
inquiry, along with the need to coordinate that agenda with the tradi-
tional goal of "covering the content," places substantial intellectual
If these demands are not considered and
demands on teachers.
In other
addressed, the progressive agenda is unlikely to succeed.
words, pursuing science education reform through the development of
new curricula, new materials, or new standards is not sufficient. To
promote student inquiry, we must do much more to understand and
support teacher inquiry.
Hammer, D. (1999). Teacher Inquiry. Newton, MA: Center for the Development of Teaching,
Education Development Center, Inc. Also in J. Minstrell and E. van Zee (Eds.), Teaching and
Learning in an Inquiry-Based Science Classroom. American Association for the Advancement of
Science.
5
DAVID HAMMER
Teachers spend a significant portion of the day
this group was comprised of me and the follow-
taking in and interpreting information about
ing teachers:
their students. Much of this data gathering is
Elisabeth (Lis) Angus, Winchester High
deliberate and explicit, as teachers take atten-
School
dance, collect homework assignments and labo-
Hilda Bachrach, Dana Hall School,
ratory reports, and give quizzes and exams.
Wellesley, Mass.
Other information arrives on its own, in a
Edmund (Ed) Hazzard, Bromfield School,
nearly continuous stream, in the questions stu-
Harvard, Mass.
dents ask and comments they make, as well as in
their facial expressions, body language, and
Bruce Novak, Watertown High School
tone of voice.
John Samp, Cambridge Rindge and Latin
High School
What teachers perceive in their students and
how they interpret those perceptions (whether
Robert Stern, Brookline High School2
the students are alert, confused, interested, frus-
Our conversations, recorded on videotape for
trated, etc.) can dramatically influence how
transcription and analysis, concerned "snip-
they choose to proceed (e.g., by posing a chal-
pets" from the teachers' classes, small samplings
lenging question, providing information, con-
of the information they took in about their
tinuing to new material, or digressing to pursue
students in the form of transcripts, video or
a student's idea). Most of this interpretation
audiotape recordings, or samples of students'
happensmust happenwithout explicit, ar-
written work. Reading, watching, or listening
ticulate deliberation. In this respect teachers are
to these snippets, we talked about what there
like other reflective practitioners, from chess
was to see in the students' participation, explor-
players to doctors, whose reasoning is and must
ing a range of possible interpretations. With
be largely tacit.'
their focus on the "data" of everyday teaching,
For chess players and doctors, however, there is
the snippets and the conversations about them
a general awareness that this perception and
provided a window into the intellectual work of
judgment is taking place, that it is intellectually
everyday teacher inquiry.
demanding, and that its betterment is central to
The body of this paper is organized around three
professional education. It is both possible and
of the snippets from three consecutive meetings
expected for chess players and doctors to make
in the fall of 1996, contributed respectively by
at least some of their reasoning explicit, as a
I have chosen these
Robert, Hilda, and Bruce.
matter of professional practice and develop-
examples to reflect a range of physics topics and
ment, and they do so in the context of specific
forms of snippet and, in general, because they
games and cases. For teachers, in contrast, it is
are representative of the substance and tenor of
rare to have the opportunity, let alone the
our work. Each example will begin with the
expectation, to present information from their
teacher's snippet, then present excerpts of our
classes to others, to make explicit their interpre-
conversation, and then end with an analysis of
tations, or to consider alternatives.
what the snippet and conversation may reveal
about teacher inquiry. I will use these analyses,
in turn, to advance the following three objec-
Conversations Among Teachers
tives of this paper:
This paper describes work from a project de-
1. Teacher perception and judgment. The first
signed to engage teachers in precisely this sort
objective, as I noted above, is to promote
of conversation, centered on their ongoing ex-
greater appreciation for the role and de-
periences in the classroom. From March 1995
mands of teacher inquiry into students' un-
through June 1998 a group of physics teachers
derstanding, participation, and learning.
and I met roughly every other week of the
2. A language of action. The second objective is
school year for two hours, to talk about students
to offer an insight that has emerged from our
and teaching. During the 1996-97 school year,
work regarding the language teachers use to
2
TEACHER INQUIRY
express what they discover through that
There's the gravity that pulls him
S4:
(Student draws a vertical
down.
inquiry. In our conversations we noted that
arrow down.)
teachers often experienced and communi-
cated their interpretations in a language of
What's the common English word
T:
actioni.e., as ideas for what to do in the
for force of gravity?
given circumstancerather than in an ex-
Students (collectively): Weight.
plicit language of diagnosis. For example, a
Add the letter W to your diagram.
T (to S4):
teacher may express an interpretation ("The
Now what?
students have forgotten what they learned
Then there's the air resistance. (He
about inertia") by suggesting an action ("I
S4 :
draws a vertical arrow up, but not
would review the concept of inertia").
connected to the weight arrow.
3. A role for education research. The third objec-
Long silence.)
tive is to propose a view of the role of educa-
You have to put the arrows together.
tion research in instructional practice. Spe-
S5:
cifically, I will suggest that its primary role is
Why?
T:
to contribute to teacher inquiry, i.e., to teach-
Because they're both pulling on the
S5:
ers' perceptions of their students and judg-
person.
ments for how to proceed, rather than to
Yeah, that's right. (He draws both
S4:
prescribe effective methods. The conversa-
arrows connected to the same
tion between teachers and researchers should
point.)
therefore be understood to take place mainly
How are the two arrows related?
at the level of their respective interpretations
T:
Are they the same? Is one bigger?
of students' understanding and participation.
This conversation, however, may be difficult
Well, the weight is bigger because
S4:
to recognize and to facilitate, owing largely to
it's pulling down.
differences in the language by which research-
Does everyone agree? (Calls on a
T:
ers and teachers experience and communi-
student.)
cate their interpretations.
No, it can't be right because the
S6:
speed is increasing. The force of
gravity is getting bigger.
Interpreting a Class Discussion About
What's the common word for force
T:
Free Fall: Teacher Inquiry into Student
of [due to] gravity?
Understanding and Participation
Weight.
S6:
The first snippet we discussed in our meeting on
So what are you saying? The person
T:
November 18, 1996, was a transcript Robert had
gets heavier as he falls?
prepared of a discussion in his college prep-level
(smiling) No, but something is
S6:
class about the forces on a skydiver.3 Robert's
wrong. He keeps going faster as he
goal for this activity was "to reinforce the idea of
falls, doesn't he?
the net force as the driving engine for accelera-
Sure he does, but it's the gravity
S4:
tion." The following is roughly half the tran-
that pulls him down.
script:4
But doesn't the air resistance get
S7:
What forces act on the skydiver
T:
bigger?
when he first jumps out?
You have some good ideas, but there
T:
He accelerates down; he goes faster.
is confusion here. The difficulty, as
I see it, is that you're confusing the
But the air slows him down so he
S2:
motion with the forces. Remember
can't fall faster.
that you started the year with learn-
But he doesn't slow down, so some-
S3:
ing how to describe motion [kine-
thing must be getting bigger.
matics]. All the graphs and equa-
tions you did. Now you're looking
Someone come up to the board and
T:
at forces [dynamics]. It's the forces
draw the forces acting on him.
3
7
DAVID HAMMER
and I looked around, I thought that
which make things move, and we've
got to separate these two effects.
might be a good way to tie up some
of the ideas, let the students talk.
Let's concentrate on just the forces;
then we'll connect them to the
Instead of doing [lots of] problems
today, we'll spend a while, what-
motion.
ever we need, just talking about
Excerpts from our conversation
[one] problem. And it just was so
enlightening to me to see that, just
Bruce started our conversation with the sugges-
what you're saying, [they came up
tion that S6's comments revealed a common
with the] idea, there needs to be
misconception. Robert's response showed that
That's the key
another "force."
he too considered S6's contribution significant,
item: There needs to be something
but for different reasons:s
else to make it accelerate. It doesn't
have to be an increase in the force,
[S6 showed] a misconception, that
Bruce:
but it needs to be something.
we've talked about before. That the
speed is proportional to the force
Turning back to the misconception he saw in
(reading S6's comment from the snip-
S6's comment, Bruce commented on Robert's
pet): "That can't be right because
response at the end of the excerpt above:
the speed is increasing. The force of
gravity is getting bigger."
You may reinforce [the misconcep-
Bruce:
tion] with what you say:
"It's the
[S6] is usually very, very slow in
Robert:
forces which make things move."
reaching any sort of [original idea],
Which makes it sound like you need
so for her to say what she did . . She
.
the force to have the motion. Which
said it so immediately, she knew the
is something a lot of us say, [al-
speed was changing, but in all of the
though] we don't mean it that way.
year it's the first time I've ever seen
her, you know, come up with some-
This reminded Robert of a related difficulty:
thing herself.
[There] must some-
students' reluctance to accept a velocity as an
thing else, another force, another
initial condition of an object, a problem he
factor. It was nice to see her do that.
agreed his language may aggravate:
She couldn't quite get it, and I'm not
sure whether that's [important].
Typically the thing that comes up,
Robert:
I
thought it was a turning point in the
now that you mention it is, even
whole discussion.
when you have problems with
things moving at a constant veloc-
After a brief exchange to help others locate S6's
ity, there are always a handful of
comments in the transcript, I turned the con-
kids, you know, they want to get
versation back to what Robert had been saying:
that acceleration in the beginning,
[thinking] "You gotta get it going,"
And that was a turning point, and
David:
and I say, "OK, now it's going" .
the student who said that was some-
. .
Well, maybe I contribute to that.
body who
Bruce recalled a suggestion John had made the
Who normally doesn't see things
Robert:
previous year of a strategy for responding to this
She's very me-
very intuitively.
Start with the room lights off and
difficulty:
thodical, she's very good at memo-
but, for original
rizing stuff .
then turn them on after setting a ball in motion.
. .
ideas, no. This is the first time that
The idea is to help students distinguish between
I saw that with her. Which was that
the concepts of velocity and force by focusing
you can see that somewhere what
their attention on the ball's initial motioni.e.,
we had is not enough. There needs
when the lights come on, the ball is moving
to be something else. But you didn't
and away from any prior, initiating force.
know what it was.
Hilda reminded us that the students were talk-
Shortly afterward, Robert elaborated on what he
ing about a skydiver who had no initial down-
had intended in this conversation and what he
In this case, she noted, the
ward velocity.
saw happening at this juncture:
students' reasoning may have been appropriate
I've never done this one before .
Robert:
. .
I'm using a new textbook this year
4
TEACHER INQUIRY
because "there had to be a force, otherwise [the
Teacher perceptions of students' understanding
skydiver] wouldn't come down." Robert main-
and participation
tained, nevertheless, that the students were not
The snippet continued further, as did our con-
distinguishing force as causing velocity from
versation; we spent roughly half an hour talking
force as causing acceleration.
about it, the amount of time we typically allo-
cate. Our conversation was also typical in the
After a brief digression on the sensitivity of
range of perceptions it reflected, by the snippet's
students' understanding to particular wording,
author and by the rest of the group. Among
I asked Robert to say more about the snippet. He
their interpretations of the students' under-
reflected on his impressions of the discussion,
standing and participation, Robert and the other
reiterating his pleasure and surprise at how it
teachers noted the following:
went, and recounted more of what happened
after the segment he had transcribed:
A misconception, on the part of S6, that the
speed is proportional to the force.
I thought it was a great class. The
Bruce
Robert:
class ended, the kids didn't want to
mentioned this in our conversation, but Robert
I had no idea it would turn
go! .
had evidently seen something similar in S6's
. .
I started out with,
out this way.
contribution, since, a moment later in the snip-
here's this problem, let's look at the
pet, Robert told the students, "The difficulty, as
different forces, maybe get to the
I see it, is that you're confusing the motion with
idea of seeing that the net force
the forces."
would keep changing.
An original contribution by a student, S6,
Were you drawing on the board at
Lis:
who was more inclined to memorization.
all?
Robert recognized the same misconception Bruce
Very little, I did very little.
Robert.
did, but he perceived S6's idea in several other
The kids did [draw on the board].
Hilda:
ways as well. He saw S6 as participating in a way
that was new for her, a perception not available
The kids did most of it. At the very
Robert:
end, when this one student wanted
to the rest of us from the snippet itself, since it
to know howwe finally got the
depended on Robert's experience from the start
idea that the net force is chang-
of the year.
inghe wanted to know, how does
the net force change?
I asked,
A valid insight in S6's idea that, as Robert put
"What do you think would hap-
it, "there needs to be something else," and a
pen?" and [he drew] a set of axes
productive turning point in the class discus-
with force and time. And he stood
In addition to seeing S6's reasoning as
sion.
there a while, and eventually he
reflecting a misconception, that is, a concep-
drew a straight line decreasing to
tion inconsistent with the Newtonian under-
zero. Which was, I thought, a very
standing Robert wanted students to develop,
good first step, because the kids
Robert saw it as containing an insight that could
have never done this before.
help her and the class progress toward that
The student was correct that the net force on the
understanding.
skydiver would decrease to zero. As the skydiver's
Possible (and inadvertent) reinforcement of
velocity increases the force of the air resistance
a misconception by the teacher's comment,
increases as well, until the force of air resistance
"It's the forces which make things move."
(upward) equals that of the earth's gravity (down-
This was not directly a perception of the stu-
ward). The straight line was not correct. The net
dents' understanding, although indirectly it
force would approach zero asymptotically, not
as a linear function. Robert was impressed by
attends to how they might reasonably interpret
the student's having made the first realization;
a statement by the teacher.
he was not worried that the explanation wasn't
Students' difficulty with the idea of an initial
fully correct at this point, when the students
velocity. Bruce and Robert talked about the
were first considering the question.
students' confusion over the concepts of mo-
5
9
DAVID HAMMER
tion and force, both with respect to this particu-
resents only a fraction of what transpired in a
lar situation and as a more general misconcep-
single period of a single school day. Here, then,
tion. Here, Robert connected their reasoning to
is an illustration of this paper's opening premise:
Teachers take in and process an enormous
a related pattern he had seen in students' rea-
amount of information about their students'
soning, i.e., their difficulty thinking of an object
as having an initial velocity.
understanding and participation. Most of this
inquiry is and must be tacit, because there is
Students' interest and engagement. Robert
more information than explicit thought could
was enthusiastic about the outcome of the dis-
accommodate. It would be impossible for any
cussion, both for the students' engagement
teacher to articulate all of his or her perceptions
("The class ended; the kids didn't want to go!")
and intentions.
and for the substantive progress they initiated
Although it seems to be both possible and
("The kids did most of it").
productive for teachers to articulate some of
To be clear, the point here is not these particular
their perceptions and intentions, nevertheless,
perceptions, and I am not claiming they are
at least in the United States, it is rare for this to
I expect other teachers would offer
"correct."
occur. Teachers seldom have the opportunity
different interpretations, as happens routinely
or occasion to show others their "data," to
in our conversations. My point is that these
present their interpretations, and to have those
perceptions represent multiple dimensions of
interpretations challenged with alternatives.
teacher awareness concerning the students' con-
Because of this, teachers are mostly left to them-
ceptions of forces and motion, their modes of
selves, individually, to develop the intellectual
reasoning and participation, and the level of
resources they need to meet the intellectual
their interest and engagement. This awareness
demands of interpreting their students' under-
encompasses both individual students and the
standing and participation, diagnosing their
class as a whole, in general, over the school year,
students' strengths and needs, and making judg-
and in particular moments.
ments for how to proceed.
In fact, this list of teacher perceptions is incom-
We do not pretend that our conversations cap-
plete, as it reflects only those that Robert and
ture more than a fraction of teacher thinking.
the rest of the group made explicit.
It is clear
But by capturing that fraction, these conversa-
that much goes unsaid in our conversations
tions allowed the teachers to exchange and
about the snippets.
For instance, Robert saw
compare not only methods and materials, but
something in the students' reasoning that led
perceptions of students in particular moments
him to press them with respect to vocabulary:
of instruction. Our conversations, grounded in
"What's the common English word for 'force of
specific instances from the teachers' classes,
gravity'?" It is a reasonable guess that he saw the
provided not only ideas for instructional strat-
students' distinguishing as two ideas (the weight
egies but also new diagnostic possibilities, an
of an object and the force of gravity on that object
exchange of resources to support the intellec-
by the earth) what a physicist considers one
tual work of teaching.
idea. By insisting on their use of the "common
In this respect, in their ongoing inquiry into
English word," he was insisting that they apply
their everyday understanding of weightin
students' understanding and participation teach-
particular, that the weight of an object is inde-
ers have much in common with education re-
pendent of its motionto their reasoning about
searchers, specifically those who conduct re-
"force of gravity." From Robert's comments on
search on learning. They study essentially the
other occasions, it is also likely that he per-
same phenomena, i.e., student learning, although
ceived and hoped to address a general pattern of
in different ways, and it is reasonable to expect
students' treating physics as disconnected from
that teachers and researchers could support one
their everyday experience.
another in their efforts. The central purpose of
this project was to explore how this collabora-
Moreover, it is sobering to consider, this is only
tion might occur, particularly how perspectives
an excerpt of Robert's snippet, which itself rep-
from education research might contribute to
6