| Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools. |
DOI: 10.3102/0013189X031007026 The Uses of Practitioner Research and Status Issues in Educational Research: Reply to Gary AndersonDepartment of Educational Policy Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1000 Bascom Mall, 221 Education Building, Madison, Wisconsin 53706; mhmetz{at}facstaff.wisc.edu. She is a sociologist whose research interests include school organization, teachers work lives, and qualitative research.
University of California, Riverside, School of Education, 2128 Sproul Hall, Riverside, CA 92521; reba.page{at}ucr.edu. Her research interests include curriculum studies, interpretive research methodologies, and sociocultural foundations of education. In calling for practitioner research, Anderson highlights a number of important issues but, as Metz and Page demonstrate in their response, the questions he raises have few straightforward or unequivocal answers. Metz and Page agree that because efforts to study and improve educational practice too often impose abstract findings on schools and teachers, much may be gained from the development of a literature based in practice. They argue, however, that everything included under the umbrella of practitioner research should not be called research. They predict that calling for teachers to engage in activities labeled as research on a broad scale may produce as many unanticipated problems as it does benefits.
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
||||||||||||






