Educational Researcher recent issues

Reflections on a Century of College Admissions Tests

Atkinson, R. C., Geiser, S. — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:43 PST

The College Boards started as achievement tests designed to measure students’ mastery of college preparatory subjects. Admissions testing has significantly changed since then with the introduction of the Scholastic Aptitude Test, Lindquist’s creation of the ACT, renewed interest in subject-specific assessments, and current efforts to adapt K–12 standards-based tests for use in college admissions. We have come full circle to a renewed appreciation for the value of achievement tests. Curriculum-based achievement tests are more valid indicators of college readiness than other tests and have important incentive or signaling effects for K–12 schools as well: They help reinforce a rigorous academic curriculum and create better alignment of teaching, learning, and assessment along the pathway from high school to college.

Comments on Atkinson and Geiser: Considerations for College Admissions Testing

Linn, R. L. — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:43 PST

Atkinson and Geiser (2009) make a strong argument for moving to a new form of college admissions testing using curriculum-based achievement tests. In making their case, however, they exaggerate the weaknesses of current tests such as the ACT and SAT by minimizing these tests’ predictive utility and claiming a stronger relationship to socioeconomic status measures than is justified. Although some of the features that they would like admissions tests to have, such as providing a strong signal to students, are indeed desirable, the tight alignment of admissions tests to college preparatory courses in high school is unlikely to be achieved on a national level without a national curriculum.

Rethinking Texts: Narrative and the Construction of Qualitative Research

Holley, K. A., Colyar, J. — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:43 PST

This article outlines how a theory of narrative can be used to deconstruct qualitative research texts. Although research texts are a distinct genre in comparison with works of fiction, the basic components of literary activity are similar. Researchers structure and emphasize data and participants in various ways to tell a logical story. Narrative analysis offers a specific framework and terminology that researchers can use to construct texts. Ultimately, such tools can prepare qualitative researchers to make intentional choices in regard to writing. The authors define the narratological concepts of character, plot, story, and focalization. They discuss how these concepts can be used to teach qualitative research methods.

(E)pistemological Awareness, Instantiation of Methods, and Uninformed Methodological Ambiguity in Qualitative Research Projects

Koro-Ljungberg, M., Yendol-Hoppey, D., Smith, J. J., Hayes, S. B. — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:43 PST

This article explores epistemological awareness and instantiation of methods, as well as uninformed ambiguity, in qualitative methodological decision making and research reporting. The authors argue that efforts should be made to make the research process, epistemologies, values, methodological decision points, and argumentative logic open, accessible, and visible for audiences. To these ends, they discuss two ways of conceptualizing the role of epistemological awareness and instantiation of methods, including (a) a series of decision junctures and (b) a spatial conceptualization of epistemological decision making. Through an analysis of researchers’ decision junctures drawn from studies published in high-impact education journals in 2006, the authors illustrate current methodological awareness and instantiation of methods in the field of education research.

The Intellectual Foundations of Education: Core Journals and Their Impacts on Scholarship and Practice

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:43 PST

Academic journals are the primary mode of communication among researchers, and they play a central role in the creation, diffusion, and use of knowledge. This article updates previous attempts to identify a core set of journals that most education scholars would acknowledge as consequential sources. On the basis of nominations from a panel of experts, 11 primary journals were identified; 3 of these—American Educational Research Journal, Educational Researcher, and Review of Educational Research—were nominated by at least one third of the respondents. The impact of these journals is assessed using a number of alternative metrics. In addition, differences in impact on policy and practice versus scholarship are considered.

From the Desk of the President: The Intellectual Community of AERA

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:43 PST

NSF Supports Expanded AERA Grants Program

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:43 PST

Luis C. Moll Gives Sixth Annual Brown Lecture in Education Research to Packed Audience

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:44 PST

JCSEE Holds Annual Meeting at AERA Headquarters: Latest Edition of The Program Evaluation Standards Approved for Publication

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:44 PST

Revision of Testing Standards Moves Forward

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:44 PST

Candidates for AERA Office: 2010 Election

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:44 PST

AERA Announces Professional Development and Training Courses for 2010 Annual Meeting: Courses Start April 29

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:44 PST

2010 AERA Annual Meeting and Exhibition: Friday, April 30-Tuesday, May 4, Denver, Colorado

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:44 PST

Important Information on Accessibility of Session Presentations and Communication: 2010 AERA Annual Meeting

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:44 PST

Reviewers for Volume 38

Tue, 22 Dec 2009 07:28:44 PST

The Construction Zone: Literary Elements in Narrative Research

Coulter, C. A., Smith, M. L. — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:43 PST

Narrative research has become part of the landscape of education inquiry, yet its theory and practice are still debated and evolving. This article addresses the construction of narratives using literary elements common to nonfiction and fiction writings. The authors discuss these elements and use four narratives to illustrate them. They address how literary elements intersect with more familiar practices of generating and analyzing evidence to reveal themes, and they relate these intersections with wider issues about what can be known from research and how it can be learned.

Comments on Coulter and Smith: Narrative Researchers as Witnesses of Injustice and Agents of Social Change?

Barone, T. — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

In commenting on Coulter and Smith (2009), the author explores issues related to the place of the political in education research and in literature, but especially in forms of narrative research that possess both scientific and literary dimensions. More specifically, the author examines four sets of issues related to the researching and writing of forms of narrative composition that exhibit an overtly progressivist orientation. These issues involve (a) the fundamental purposes for which the research is undertaken, (b) the role of opposing tropisms operating through textual design elements that tend to promote or discourage multiple perspectives, (c) ethical issues related to assumed privileges of authorship by the researcher, and (d) the political prerogatives and responsibilities of readers of literary forms of narrative research in education.

Comments on Coulter and Smith: Relational Ontological Commitments in Narrative Research

Clandinin, D. J., Murphy, M. S. — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

In this comment article on Coulter and Smith (2009), the authors raise concerns that focusing exclusively on issues of representation may lead readers to misunderstandings about narrative research. The authors argue that narrative ways of thinking about the phenomena under study are interwoven with narrative research methodologies. Drawing on Dewey’s theory of experience, they discuss three features of an ontology of experience. They highlight distinctions between narrative research and other forms of qualitative inquiry, attend closely to the transition from field texts to research texts, and address the interconnections between ontological and ethical commitments. In their view, research texts need to speak to the everyday experiences of researchers and participants to arrive at an understanding of those experiences as "storied" phenomena within social, cultural, institutional, and linguistic narratives.

Comments on Coulter and Smith: The Issue of Authorial Surplus in Narrative Research

Smith, M. W. — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

Advocates of narrative research often contend that it is superior to nonnarrative research, both qualitative and quantitative, because they believe it is better able to represent multiple perspectives and foster multiple interpretations. The author of this comment article on Coulter and Smith (2009) draws on literary theory and an analysis of the cultural expectations of narratives to argue that, although narratives have the capacity to represent multiple perspectives, many do not. As a consequence, he urges narrative researchers to work to reveal the constructedness of their stories so that readers have the information they need to question the researchers’ perspectives and construct their own.

Response to Comments: Finding the Narrative in Narrative Research

Coulter, C. A. — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

The author responds to comments by Barone (2009), Clandinin and Murphy (2009), and M. W. Smith (2009) on "The Construction Zone: Literary Elements in Narrative Research" (Coulter & M. L. Smith, 2009). She clarifies issues regarding point of view, authorial surplus, narrative coherence, and the relational qualities of narrative research. She maintains that the relational, the ethical, and the aesthetic are not mutually exclusive. Literary elements can function to support collaborative processes while attending to the aesthetic qualities that invite the reader into the storied account.

Teacher Verbal Ability and School Outcomes: Where Is the Evidence?

Aloe, A. M., Becker, B. J. — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

Many have claimed that teachers’ verbal ability is among the most important predictors of school outcomes. Teachers’ verbal ability has been thought to predict student achievement ever since the relationship was found in the classic Equality of Educational Opportunity (EEO) study by Coleman et al. By way of meta-analysis the authors examine the evidence on teachers’ verbal ability as a predictor of school outcomes. They find that the evidence is not as extensive as might be inferred from prior reports. Results of 19 studies indicate that teachers’ verbal ability is at best very weakly related to school outcomes, and the main evidence for this weak relationship arises from the EEO study. Other studies find that verbal ability is unrelated to school outcomes.

Annual Report

Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

Errata

Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

World Education Research Association Holds First Meetings in Vienna

Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

Call for Editor Proposals: Handbook of Research on Teaching, Fifth Edition: Deadline: March 1, 2010

Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

OIA Fall Policy Meeting Addresses Critical Research Issues

Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

AERA Grants Program Holds Annual Grantee Conference

Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

AERA Grants Program: Training Opportunities

Wed, 09 Dec 2009 18:04:44 PST

Learning From Our Differences: A Dialogue Across Perspectives on Quality in Education Research

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

The dialogue re-presented in this article is intended to foster mutual engagement—and opportunity for learning—across different perspectives on research within the education research community. Participants in the dialogue each addressed the following questions: (1) What are the touchstones by which you judge quality or rigor in education research (for a single study, a set of studies, or a "field" or community of researchers in dialogue)? What is your chief concern or fear that the touchstones guard against? (2) Where do you see challenges to your perspective in the perspectives of other members of the panel? How might your perspective evolve to respond to those challenges? Given all of this, what are the implications for the preparation of education researchers? Opening and closing comments set the dialogue in historical context, highlight issues raised, and suggest next steps for collaborative learning from the diversity of perspectives in our field.

Sharpening Our Focus in Measuring Classroom Instruction

Douglas, K. — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

This commentary highlights convergent themes from four articles in the March 2009 issue of Educational Researcher on measuring classroom instruction. Classroom instruction is a complex enterprise that occurs at the intersection of teachers, students, and texts within the surrounding classroom, school, and community environments. Progress in studying the complexity of classroom instruction on a large scale relies on our ability to pose research questions at the appropriate levels of analysis and to attempt to answer the questions using rigorous methods. These articles contribute to this task by sharing theoretical and practical viewpoints based on systematic programs of mixed methods research. The value of this body of research is reinforced through evidence of its impact on teaching practices and student learning.

The Cultural Practice of Reading and the Standardized Assessment of Reading Instruction: When Incommensurate Worlds Collide

Smagorinsky, P. — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

This article critiques the articles by Connor et al., Croninger and Valli, Pianta and Hamre, and Rowan and Correnti, which appeared in the March 2009 issue of Educational Researcher, by taking a cultural-historical perspective on reading and reading instruction. In this paradigm a number of those authors’ assumptions are seen as questionable, including the beliefs about reading that it is a self-evident construct, that it is a discrete act, and that it is an acultural act. The author of this critique presents evidence that challenges each of these assumptions and argues that by accepting them, the authors of the critiqued articles institute an order that values the system above relational aspects of schooling and teachers’ informed decision making.

EduPolitical Research: Reading Between the Lines

Willis, A. I. — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

This article presents a counternarrative informed by personal, critical, and qualitative perspectives, written in response to articles on effective classroom literacy instruction for improved academic performance published in March 2009 in Educational Researcher. Classroom literacy instruction is a complex undertaking that must include an understanding of local communities, schools, and classroom contexts, especially in culturally and linguistically diverse and low-income schools. Edupolitical research refers to the intersection of education research and federal intervention that informs education policy. A way out of the quicksand of unresolved debates over epistemology, pedagogy, and methodological and analytical approaches to effective classroom literacy instruction, teacher–student interactions, and student performance is a collaborative effort to create dense theories of instruction informed by a broad body of knowledge.

Back to the Future: Contrasting Scientific Styles in Understanding Reading

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

In this rejoinder to Willis, Smagorinsky, and Douglas (this issue of Educational Researcher), the authors discuss how many of the points raised by Willis and Smagorinsky regarding their original article, which appeared in the March 2009 issue of Educational Researcher, are concerned less with the methods themselves than with different styles of science. The authors of this rejoinder examine their differing styles of science, using Stanovich’s 2003 framework, and call for consilience and the understanding that multiple perspectives and methods are needed to solve the important and perplexing problems that students and teachers will face in the 21st century.

Mixing It Up About Methods

Croninger, R. G., Valli, L. — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

The authors respond to the commentaries (this issue of Educational Researcher) on a series of articles (in the March 2009 issue of Educational Researcher) that discuss the challenges associated with measuring reading instruction. The authors argue that the teaching of reading is a complex, multifaceted phenomenon best studied through a variety of overlapping and complementary methods, quantitative and qualitative. They describe how they put this belief into practice in their longitudinal study of reading and mathematics instruction, and they use other articles derived from that study to demonstrate how a mixed methods research design can enhance our understanding of instructional practices and aspects of the social and cultural contexts that influence those practices. They argue against a return to the paradigm wars that plagued education research during the 1980s.

A Lot of Students and Their Teachers Need Support: Using a Common Framework to Observe Teacher Practices Might Help

Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K. — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

The authors take the opportunity to respond to the commentaries (this issue of Educational Researcher) that were written regarding their article (in the March 2009 issue of Educational Researcher) summarizing the conceptual and empirical basis for using standardized approaches to observing teachers’ practices in classrooms and the potential that such approaches have for addressing some concerns about youngsters’ early literacy development. In this response, their intent is to clarify what appear to be points of misunderstanding and to add some details that could be helpful in interpreting their earlier article. They do not use citations for their assertions; the points made in this response requiring such documentation are made in the original article and are cited there, Interested readers can pursue those references.

Measuring Reading Instruction With Teacher Logs

Rowan, B., Correnti, R. — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

The authors argue that the criticisms of their earlier article on teacher logs (Educational Researcher, March 2009) by Smagorinsky and Willis (this issue of Educational Researcher) do not address, much less undermine, the evidence they presented as part of their validation argument about the teacher logs. Moreover, they argue that their method for studying classrooms is not nearly as incommensurate with Smagorinsky’s and Willis’s methods as those authors’ arguments seem to imply. The authors of this rejoinder see the main differences between themselves and their critics as being around the notion of "consequential" validity, an issue they discuss at the end of this article.

From the Desk of the President: Expanding Our Research Horizons

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

AERA Undergraduate Student Education Research Training Workshop: 2010 AERA Annual Meeting, Denver, Call for Applications, Deadline: December 15, 2009

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

Connecting Education Research to Policy: Summer Institute Convened by AERA and Foundation for Child Development

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

2010 Reports From AERA and Division Nominating Committees

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

Calls for Postdoctoral and Minority Dissertation Fellowships

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

Aera Grants Program: Training Opportunities

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

Council Minutes, June 26-27, 2009

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

Classifieds

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 13:29:03 PDT

Repositioning Politics in Education's Circle of Knowledge

McDonnell, L. M. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

The model implicit in most research on the politics of education assumes that political factors such as interest group support and opposition shape policy. However, because this perspective yields incomplete information about the educational enterprise, researchers should not just ask what kinds of policies politics creates but also reverse the causal arrow to examine what kinds of politics result from different policies. In addressing this question, the concept of policy feedback focuses analytical attention on the institutional structures and rules policies establish, the elite and public interpretations of those policies, the interests that are mobilized, and how these factors interact to shape future policies.

Positivist Dogmas, Rhetoric, and the Education Science Question

Howe, K. R. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Explicit versions of positivism were cast off some time ago in philosophy, but a tacit form continues to thrive in education research, exemplified by the "new scientific orthodoxy" codified in the National Research Council’s Scientific Research in Education (2002) and reinforced in the American Educational Research Association’s Standards for Reporting on Empirical Social Science Research in AERA Publications (2006). The author rehearses previous critiques of positivist "dogmas" in education research and applies them to the new orthodoxy. Then, borrowing from the emergent field of the "rhetoric of science," he explores how pursuit of the education science question has nourished a positivist conception of education research. He concludes by suggesting that the education science question should be reframed and briefly suggests how.

Comments on Howe: Getting Over the Methodology Wars

Bredo, E. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Howe’s (2009) critique of positivistic tendencies in the education research community is valuable and pertinent. His analysis is nonetheless one-sided, finding fault with one side of current divisions alone. In an effort to retain the good points of his analysis, the author first summarizes Howe’s argument, interpreting it as a critique of hasty and dogmatic reductionism. He then considers parallel problems arising from hasty and dogmatic holism that Howe does not address. Following this discussion, a third, temporal approach is suggested in which analytic and synthetic perspectives are used to suggest and modify one another in a cycle, rather than being taken as fixed stances. Adopting this approach could help reduce the dogmatism evident in the methodology wars, although struggles for advantage would clearly remain.

Comments on Howe: Toward a More Inclusive "Scientific Research in Education"

Johnson, R. B. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

In response to Howe (2009), the author argues that educational research needs multiple thoughtful perspectives. The author’s standpoint is that of a mixed methods research methodologist. Mixed methods research provides an antidualistic and syncretic philosophy and set of approaches or possibilities for merging insights from diverse perspectives; its working goal is to provide pragmatic, ethical solutions to local and societal problems. To achieve this goal, researchers should cease writing articles that construct straw figures (based on old literature), knock them down, and claim Truth. The author of the present article provides a new set of guidelines for an education science that includes a respectful and important place for all. The author also provides a working value theory that resolves some objectivist and subjectivist differences.

Comments on Howe: The Never-Ending Education Science Debate: I'm Ready to Move On

Tillman, L. C. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

The usefulness of positivist traditions in education research has been debated for some time, and there continue to be various epistemological and methodological camps regarding the question of what constitutes "good" or "real" research. The importance of educating all children necessitates that we think about what are the most effective and most appropriate methods for investigating specific problems, including methods that are outside positivist traditions. The author of this response to Howe (2009) addresses Howe’s critique of the education science question, points out what is missing in Howe’s critique, and considers the implications for conducting research that is critical to the education of all children, particularly those who traditionally have been underrepresented and under-served in the U.S. public education system.

Response to Comments: Straw Makeovers, Dogmatic Holism, and Interesting Conversation

Howe, K. R. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Assessment for Accountability in Education: Past, Present, and Challenges Ahead

Cizek, G. J. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Accountability Testing: Getting Situated

Afflerbach, P. P. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Response to "Accountability Testing: Getting Situated," by Peter P. Afflerbach

Cizek, G. J. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Response to "The Past of Test-Based Educational Accountability," by Gregory J. Cizek

Afflerbach, P. P. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

From the Desk of the Executive Director: AERA, ER, and New Pathways for Scholarly Communication

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Call for Chapter Proposals for Handbook of Research on Educational Leadership for Diversity and Equity

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

AERA Announces New Editors for Educational Researcher

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Luis Moll to Present 2009 Brown Lecture in Education Research

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Call for Nominations for 2010 Brown Lecture

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Call for AERJ-TLHD and RRE Editors

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

President-Elect Kris D. Gutierrez Invites Nominations for Committees: Committee Appointment Process About to Commence

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Standards for Reporting on Humanities-Oriented Research in AERA Publications: American Educational Research Association

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Council Minutes, April 13, 2009

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Summary of AERA Journal Operations, 2008

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT

Classifieds

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:33:57 PDT