This item is only available as the following downloads:
1 HIGH SCHOOL WORLD HISTORY TEACHERS EXPERIENCES: LEARNING TO USE AUTHENTIC INTELLECTUAL WORK IN SCHOOLS OF COLOR By CHRISTOPHER ANDREW BRKICH A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011
2 2011 Christopher Andrew Brkich
3 To Katie, for her love and support throughout this endeavor
4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS After four long years, my doctoral journey is finally at an end. This dissertation study represents the climax of many sixteenhour workdays and many more sleepless nights, and I am proud to be standing tall still. In spite of my Herculean efforts, however, I could not ha ve completed this task without the guidance and support of numerous people. Therefore, I am taking this opportunity to express my sincerest thanks for those on whose shoulders I have stood to reach these heights. I need first to extend my thanks to the chair of my dissertation committee, Professor Elizabeth Yeager Washington, without whose assistance my return to the University of Floridas School of Teaching and Learning in 2007 would have been considerably more difficult. From the time I arrived at her doors tep in 2005 to pursue my masters degree in social studies e ducation, she has been a bulwark of professional, academic, and personal support, and has opened numerous doors in paving the way to my success. For this, I am eternally grateful. I also must extend my gratitude to the members of my doctoral committee for their tireless efforts. Professor Mirka Koro Ljungberg, my minor advisor, enabled me to indulge my guilty pleasure of philosophy throughout my studies. Professor Dorene Ross maintained my focus on the importance of both social justice and powerful classroom instruction. Professor Sevan Terzian pushed me consistently to improve the quality of my writing and to consider the broader civic and democratic dimensions of all aspects of my work. Combined with the efforts of Professor Washington, all have helped me become a better scholar and a better pedagogue. While at the University of Florida, a number of sympathetic colleagues provided me companionship as well as intellectual guidance, and I count my self fortunate to have
5 had the pleasure of their acquaintance. Among those still faithfully pursuing their own doctoral journeys, I include Timothy Barko, Katherine Barko Alva, Stephen Masyada, Jessica Clawson, and Emma Humphries. Among those who have gone before me and yet have maintained their support, I number Robert Dahlgren, Michele Phillips, Brian Lanahan, and Cheryl Ellerbrock. I am most appreciative of the participation Jake Jones, Mike Minsk, and Sam Smalls provided throughout the course of this st udy. As classroom teachers working in a high school of color and poverty with students of color and poverty, their willingness to open up their classrooms and to share their experiences with me helped me to not only come to a greater understanding of what teaching is like in their contexts, but also to sharpen my understanding of my own similar teaching experiences. I must also acknowledge my familys continual encouragement of my academic pursuits. For my father John, I am thankful for the gifts of irrever ence and big picture thinking. For my mother Laura, I am thankful for the gifts of her limitless cajoling and attention to detail. For my sister Angela, her husband Andrew, and their son Patrick, I am thankful for the gift of a welcoming outlet for my indi vidual absurdities. For my inlaws John and Carol, I am thankful for the gifts of a home away from home, of parents away from parents, and above all of their daughter. Finally and above all else, I want to express my sincerest gratitude to my wife, Katie. From our first date in January 2008 onward, she has been my shining light and an unshakable bedrock of unconditional love and support. She champions my successes, laments with me in my failures, and tolerates me when I am at my most
6 annoying. I count mysel f among the few and most fortunate who not only have found in their spouses a soul mate, but a best friend and a companion in all things.
7 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... 4 ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 11 C HAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 13 Statement of the Problem ....................................................................................... 14 Purpose of the Study .............................................................................................. 17 Why Schools of Color? ........................................................................................... 19 Research Question ................................................................................................. 21 Summary ................................................................................................................ 21 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ............................................................................ 23 The Culture Wars and the Social Studies ............................................................... 25 A Brief Background Introduction ....................................................................... 25 The Blending of Perennialism and Efficiency ................................................... 26 A Nation at Risk and the revival of educational perennialism .................... 26 Accountability testing and the cult of efficiency .......................................... 29 Current Iterations of the Culture Wars .............................................................. 30 War on the law ........................................................................................... 30 War on the ac ademy .................................................................................. 32 War in the classroom ................................................................................. 34 Conclusions on the Culture Wars ..................................................................... 37 The Deleterious Effects of Educational Accountability ............................................ 37 Historical Underperformance on Standardized Tests ....................................... 38 The color effect .......................................................................................... 40 The poverty effect ...................................................................................... 43 Ac countability and Curricular Narrowing .......................................................... 45 Notions of Powerful Learning .................................................................................. 48 General Implications and Examples ................................................................. 49 Some Examples in the Social Studies .............................................................. 51 Authentic Intellectual Work ..................................................................................... 53 Initial Development of the Framework .............................................................. 54 Subsequent Evolution of the Framework .......................................................... 56 Construction of knowledge ......................................................................... 58 Disciplined inquiry ...................................................................................... 58 Value beyond school .................................................................................. 59 The AIW Framework and Student Achievement ............................................... 59 The AIW Framework and Problem Based Learning ......................................... 63 Synopsis ........................................................................................................... 66
8 Summary ................................................................................................................ 67 3 PHILOSOPHICAL FRAMEWORKS AND RESEARCH METHODS ........................ 69 Hermeneutic Phenomenology ................................................................................. 69 Ontological Existentialism ................................................................................. 70 Existence ................................................................................................... 70 Temporality ................................................................................................ 72 Historical Development of Phenomenology ...................................................... 74 Roots of phenomenology ........................................................................... 74 The hermeneutic phenomenologists response.......................................... 75 Study Design in Hermeneutic Phenomenological Research ................................... 77 Research Question ........................................................................................... 7 8 Coresearcher and Site Selection ...................................................................... 79 Selection criteria ........................................................................................ 79 Sample size ............................................................................................... 81 Site description .......................................................................................... 82 Coresearcher descriptions ......................................................................... 83 Participant compensation ........................................................................... 85 Hermeneutic Phenomenological Data Collection ............................................. 85 Parenthesizing ........................................................................................... 86 Interviews and critical friends reading group .............................................. 88 Hermeneutic Phenomenological Data Analysis ................................................ 91 Data immersion .......................................................................................... 92 Isolation of thematic statements through horizontalisation ......................... 93 Composing linguistic transformations through textural description ............ 9 5 Determining incidental and essential themes through eidetic variation ...... 95 Composing the Interpretive Experiential Descriptions ...................................... 9 6 Attending to the speaking of language and varying the examples ............. 98 Writing and rewriting .................................................................................. 99 Qualitative Research Validity ............................................................................ 99 Validity in phenomenological research ..................................................... 100 Peer review .............................................................................................. 102 Subjectivity Statement .......................................................................................... 102 4 RESULTS ............................................................................................................. 104 Individual Textural Descriptions ............................................................................ 105 Textural Description of Jakes Experience ...................................................... 105 Textural Description of Mikes Experience ...................................................... 109 Textural Description of Sams Experience ...................................................... 112 Individual Structural Descriptions .......................................................................... 115 Structural Description of Jakes Experience ................................................... 115 Structural Description of Mikes Experience ................................................... 117 Structural Description of Sams Experience ................................................... 119 Combined Textural Description ............................................................................. 1 21 Frustration ...................................................................................................... 1 22
9 Responsibility ................................................................................................. 123 Disdain for Theory .......................................................................................... 125 Collegiality ...................................................................................................... 127 Combined Structural Description and the Essence of the Experience .................. 128 Balancing Process Learning and World History Content ................................ 128 Crystallization of Professional Identity ............................................................ 129 Positioning toward Educational Theory .......................................................... 1 30 Essence of the Experience ............................................................................. 1 3 1 Summary .............................................................................................................. 1 31 5 DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................... 1 3 3 Essential Elements ............................................................................................... 1 3 3 Implications for Future Research .......................................................................... 137 The Theory Practice Divide ............................................................................ 138 Subject and School Based Instructional Differences ..................................... 139 Connections to Quantitative Performance Studies ......................................... 1 4 1 Implications for Teacher Education ....................................................................... 1 4 3 Inserv ice Teacher Education .......................................................................... 1 4 3 Preservice Teacher Education ....................................................................... 1 4 5 Significance of the Study ...................................................................................... 148 Limitations ............................................................................................................. 148 6 EPILOGUE ........................................................................................................... 1 5 1 APPENDIX A IRB PROTOCOL ................................................................................................... 1 5 4 B RECRUITMENT LETTER, REVISED ................................................................... 1 5 7 C INFORMED CONSENT LETTER, REVISED ........................................................ 158 D INTERVIEW PROTOCOL A, REVISED ................................................................ 1 60 E INTERVIEW PROTOCOL B, REVISED ................................................................ 1 6 1 F INTERVIEW PROTOCOL C, REVISED ................................................................ 1 6 2 G FUNDAMENTAL MEANING PHRASES ............................................................... 1 6 3 H FINAL HORIZONAL LIST ..................................................................................... 1 6 4 I SAMPLE TEXTURAL DESCRIPTION .................................................................. 165 J FINAL LIST OF ESSENTIAL INTERPRETED STRUCTURES ............................. 1 7 2 K SAMPLE STRUCTURAL DESCRIPTION ............................................................. 1 72
10 REFERENCE LIST ...................................................................................................... 1 7 6 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .......................................................................................... 1 9 3
11 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy HIGH SCHOOL WORLD HISTORY TEACHERS EXPERIENCES: LEARNING TO USE AUTHENTIC INTEL LECTUAL WORK IN SCHOOLS OF COLO R By Christopher Andrew Brkich August 2011 Chair: Elizabeth Yeager Washington Major: Curriculum and Instruction This study investigates the experiences of high school world history teachers learning to use authentic intellectual work (AIW) in schools of color. As a means of powerfully engaging students by having them construct knowledge through processes of disciplined inquiry for value beyond school, AIW can pro vide students of color and of poverty a highquality preparation for their adult lives. A growing body of quantitative research additionally demonstrates that all students who are exposed to and produce AIW but especially students of color in urban areas, make considerable learning gains on standardized measures of achievement. It therefore has the potential to help close troubling and persisting educational achievement gaps. In spite of AIWs potential to improve students of color opportunities, teachers in schools of color and poverty rarely pursue it T o understand why this work explores the experiences of three teachers as they learned about AIW and endeavored to implement it in their classrooms. Over the course of three interviews, they spoke individ ually of their hopes, concerns, and frustrations relating to AIW and their learning experiences. T o examine the crux of their experiences, I employed a hermeneutic phenomenological
12 methodology which allowed for an interpretive portrayal of their experiences in a fashion consistent with existential temporality. This work suggests that high school world history teachers experiences of learning to use AIW in schools of color are ones of striving to meet professional responsibilities by aiming to balance process learning with content learning and in which their identities a s educators are firmed up. Depending on their experiences with AIW in the present as experiencing and with educational theory in the present as remembering, they entrench their positions regarding educational theory and researchdriven instructional praxes in the present as anticipating. This determines partly the extent to which they will continue to use AIW as a n instructional framework. T he insights this work ultimately affords can provide social studies teacher educators with guidance on how to better a pproach both preservice and inservice teacher education as it relates to the promotion of AIW as an instructional approach.
13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION While in my last year of teaching high school before returning to pursue my doctoral studies, I had a number of experiences which contributed to the development of my primary research interests at the University of Florida. To paint a picture of the school at which I taught, it was a boarding school, and the student population varied considerably. Some students a ttended because the school had a strong record of college placements; some were sent by wealthy parents who wanted to sail the world unencumbered by children; some were sent by parents who could not control their children, or were mandated by the courts to attend rather than go to juvenile detention. Additionally, the students varied ethnically, socioeconomically, and nationally. The college bound tended to be white middleclass English speaking nativeborn Americans; those sent by sailing parents were by and large a mixed Caribbean lot, speaking of house servants, tremendous wealth, and bitterness about being away from their wealth; and the socalled problem students either sent by their parents or mandated by the courts were mostly socioeconomically disadv antaged students of color, with the predominant ethnic group being African American. I had been physically assaulted in my classroom when breaking up a fistfight between two of my students. I had a switchblade pulled on me in the schools cafeteria. I had irate parents of wealthy college bound students demand I sabotage their childrens romantic relationships with some of the schools more troubled students. All in all, it was not the typical high school teaching experience. Though I had earned a masters degree in social studies education and had taught previously back home in Montreal, I struggled in this environment to provide my
14 students with meaningful learning experiences which would serve them once they left school. Frustrated, I contacted one of my graduate instructors for advice. After hearing me grouse about my own shortcomings in being able to successfully reach my students, she asked me simply, Are your lessons and assessments authentic? Recognizing different words have different meanings in di fferent contexts, I answered her question with a question: What do you mean by authentic? At this point, she emailed me a handful of practitioner oriented readings on authentic instruction and assessment, and I thanked her for her time. My own experiences from this point onward in the school year, as I looked to teach within this framework for authentic intellectual work, made me wonder how other teachers experienced teaching within this framework, and how these experiences would influence whether they continued to teach within it or discarded it wholesale. Statement of the Problem In this current age of heightened educational conservatism and accountability, social studies classroom teachers dedicated to the promotion of deep and meaningful student lear ning are finding themselves in a series of conundra. First, social educators are finding themselves subjected increasingly to conservative political pressures. Conservative educational critics such as ED Hirsch (1987) Allan Bloom (1988) Diane Ravitch (20 03) and several individuals at the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation (Leming, Ellington, & Porter Magee, 2003) have argued that students need to acquire a discrete body of chronological and true historical information in order to be cultured. Coupled with pow erful state mandates, such as the Florida House of Representatives relatively recent Act relating to education (HB 7087E3, 2006) which orders,
15 American history shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed, shall be viewed as knowable, teachable, and t estable, and shall be defined as the creation of a new nation based largely on the universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence ( HB 7087E3, pp. 44; lines 11591163) social studies teachers are being pressured ever more to abandon instruc tion which is interpretive, argumentative, socially critical, and essential to the development of the democratic character. Furthermore, social studies teachers face charges of liberal indoctrination from conservative students, parents, politicians, and pundits when they deviate from sonamed objective or fact based instruction and affect more interpretive and critical approaches in their classrooms (Dahlgren, 2009; Dahlgren & Masyada, 2009; Horowitz, 2007b; Passe & Evans, 1996) Additionally, teachers themselves may express resistance to exposing their students to multiple and socially critical interpretations on moral grounds (James, 2008) These factors conspire to prevent social educators from fulfilling their mission to design learning experiences such that schoolchildren can demonstrate an understanding that different people may describe the same event or situation in diverse ways, c iting reasons for the differences in views (NCSS, 1994, p. 34) Second, classroom teachers have been subjected to an increasing process of deskilling. From the Minimum Competency Testing movement of the 1970s (Linn, 2000) and A Nation at Risk in the early 1980s (Gardner, 1983) through the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001) to the present, classroom teachers have found themselves pressured generally to tailor instruction to ensure student success on accountability measures. This has resulted in an inordinate amount of test preparation (Black, 2000; Buly & Valencia, 2002; Hamilton, 2003; Hargreaves, Earl, & Schmidt, 2002) and those whose subjects are not tested found themselves marginalized within the schools
16 (Barton & Levstik, 2004; BoyleBaise, Hsu, Johnson, Serriere, & Stewart, 2008; Karen, 2005) This situation gives rise to the proliferation of reductively behaviorally based curricula, prespecified teaching competencies and procedures and student responses, all of which result in the proleterianization of [teachers] work (Apple, 2004, pp. 183, 190; see also Au, 2009; Imig & Imig, 2008; Ozga, 1995) A public distrust of teachers contributed in part to the focus on standardized testing as a means to account for these issues (Nickell, 1999; C. Ta ylor, 1994; Terwilliger, 1997) However, this manner of teacher deskilling and the related focus on test based curricula of content coverage problematically raise barriers to the promotion of higher order thinking (D. G. Olsen, 1995; Onosko, 1991) Even er stwhile conservative educational critic Diane Ravitch (2010) recently criticized teacher deskilling and the focus on testing as resulting in the intellectual decline of the United States. Finally, as a group, social studies teachers consider providing thei r students quality citizenship education an important part of their practice. The NCSS mission statement (1994) holds that the primary purpose of social studies is to help young people develop the ability to make informed and reasoned decisions for the p ublic good as citizens of a culturally diverse, democratic society in an interdependent world (p. vii) Educational conservatism and systems of accountability position social studies teachers such that teaching only one model of citizenship the personally responsible citizen (Westheimer & Kahne, 2004, pp. 240, 241) becomes possible. However, as there exist multiple models of good citizenship (Anderson, Avery, Pederson, Smith, & Sullivan, 1997; Brophy, 1990; Westheimer & Kahne, 2004) including those which encourage both wider civic participation and the challenging of social injustices, social studies
17 teachers committed to the promotion of democratic citizenship can find themselves thwarted from the outset. Given the importance society accords the tea ching of higher order thinking skills and the preparation of schoolchildren for their lives as adult citizens, and the prominence citizenship has had in the history of American education ( particularly Dewey, 1915, 1916) the current age of heightened educational conservatism and accountability presents numerous challenges to both social studies teachers and social studies teacher educators. Purpose of the Study Finding solutions to these conundra which resonate with classroom teachers is of particular impor tance. Several authors have identified the issue of teacher involvement as especially important in ensuring the adoption and success of particular educational reforms (Datnow, 2000; Gitlin & Margonis, 1995; van den Berg & Ros, 1999) Without the support of school faculty, educational reforms are more likely to fail in their implementation. Amanda Datnows and Marisa Castellanos (2000) examination of declining support for the Success For All within California Schools is a telling example of how enforcing ed ucational reform on unsupportive teachers results in half hearted application. Advocates for the adoption of a more authentic approach to teaching the social studies, and to teaching generally speaking, argue that this approach has a number of advantages a nd can address many of the problems associated with the accountability movement in the schools. This approach is defined as using the construction of knowledge through a process of disciplined inquiry which has value beyond the purposes of certifying school competencies (Newmann, King, & Carmichael, 2007)
18 Fred Newmann, Ron Brandt and Grant Wiggins (1998) argue that through an authentic approach to education, schools will satisfy the needs of accountability systems by providing instruction which addresses high educational standards anchored in real world student academic performances. Others argue that teaching students according to the principles of authentic intellectual work (AIW; discussed best in Newmann, et al., 2007) work considerably to close existing achievement gaps (Black & Wiliam, 2003; Hamilton, 2003; Newmann, Marks, & Gamoran, 1996; Scheurman & Newmann, 1998) Fred Newmann, Bruce King, and Dana Carmichael (2007) state particularly that the gap in achievement gains from 8th to 12th grade between high and low SES students decreased substantially in schools with high levels of authentic instruction, but the achievement gap between SES groups increased in schools with low levels of authentic instruction. ( p. 24) As such, failing to implement educatio nal reform based on the principles of AIW may cause achievement gaps to worsen. Given the unlikelihood that the accountability measures attached to education will be scuttled in the near future, and given that a traditional pedagogy of transmission in the social studies appears to be failing the stated purposes of a social studies education (NCSS, 1994) bringing authentic intellectual work into the nations social studies classrooms appears imperative. That said, there exists a dearth in the social studies education scholarly corpus regarding how teachers experience teaching with AIW. Some work has identified the relationship between teacher empowerment and student academic performance (Marks & Louis, 19 97) Some research has been done examining what AIW looks like on a schoolwide basis (Darling Hammond, Ancess, & Falk, 1995) Some researchers have explored the benefits of AIW on student performance in a number of field studies (King, Schroeder, & Chawszc zewski, 2001; Newmann, Bryk, & Nagoka, 2001; Newmann,
19 Lopez, & Bryk, 1998; Newmann, et al., 1996) However, taking into consideration how social studies teachers themselves experience teaching with authentic intellectual work is an essential step in determ ining whether attempts at promoting this manner of teaching will actually take hold within the classrooms. This study seeks to remediate this scholarly lacuna and to shed light on the feasibility of encouraging more social studies teaching based on the AIW principles based on teachers experiences with the framework within their situated contexts. Why Schools of Color? The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001) had as one of its central purposes the reduction of achievement gaps between white students and st udents of color. However, recent figures published by the Florida Department of Education (2009) demonstrate that there still exists a considerable achievement gap between white students and students of color. Scholars have pointed to the long history of s tudents of color underperformance on standardized measures of achievement, from the institution of the Army Alpha and Beta tests in the early twentieth century straight through to accountability testing under NCLB in the twenty first (Battle & Coates, 2004; Fass, 1980; Garca & Pearson, 1994; Gipps, 1999; Linn, 2000; Myers, Kim, & Mandala, 2004; Ravitch, 2000; Louis M. Terman, 2001; Tyack, 1974) Additionally, students of color suffer disproportionately from the deleterious effects of the current educational accountability movement and the standardized testing associated therewith. These include placement remedial learning tracks (Darling Hammond, 2000; Schiller & Muller, 2003) higher school dropout rates (Darling Hammond, et al., 1995; Dworkin, 2005; Haney, 2000; Karen, 2005; Rumberger & Thomas, 2000) and lower levels of educational attainment overall (Bastedo & Gumport, 2003; Darling Hammond, 2000;
20 Schiller & Muller, 2000) Furthermore, given that schools of color by definition contain higher proportions of students of color, it is in these particular settings that teaching the social studies with AIW can do the most good. Therefore, having an understanding of how teachers working in schools of color make sense of and experience teaching with authentic in tellectual work will bring clarity to the question of whether AIW is something to which these teachers would avail themselves. Regarding students of color experience with secondary social studies instruction in schools of color, scholars have recognized the social studies power in raising awareness of and posing challenges to the systemic discrimination inherent to a traditional social studies education. Luis Urietta (2004) refers to this traditional curriculum as whitestream, through which active att empts are made to amputate, reduce, or kill the primary language and culture of students of color (p. 439) consistent with Joel Springs characterization of the public schools as one of the dominant cultures major weapons in the deculturalisation of people of color. These longstanding traditional social studies curricula have contributed to an engrossed sense of self worth for students of the dominant culture, believing their successes to be based strictly on their own merit (McKnight & Chandler, 2009) The purposeful absence from the social studies curriculum of frank discussions on the roles ethnicity and racism play in American society (Branch, 2004) contribute to the deepening of conditions under which white students feel race does not matter, w hereas students of color remain convinced that it does (Howard, 2004) Schools of color thus serve as ideal sites to challenge the dominant cultures social hegemony, in terms of historical narratives (e.g.,
21 Banks & Nguyen, 2008; Epstein & Shiller, 2010) civic learning opportunities (Kahne & Middaugh, 2010) and interethnic group relations (Banks, et al., 2010) Research Question RQ1: How do high school world history teachers experience learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color? Summary Social studies education continues to be a highly contested field, and will become even more so in the state of Florida when the accountability measures associated with the Justice Sandra Day OConnor Civics Education Act ( HB 105ER, 2010) come into effect. SG Grant (2010) speaks of the standardization of K 12 social studies education as a natural outgrowth of the accountability movement. With respect to research on social studies education, this standardization is highly problematic. Not all student s can learn social studies content and processes the same way, nor can all teachers teach the same content and processes in an identical fashion. However, just because accountability measures themselves are problematic and for a number of reasons at that does not mean they will simply vanish. As such, working within this difficult paradigm, social studies teachers, teacher educators, and researchers need to investigate ways in which the learning experiences of the primary educational stakeholders the students and the teachers who deliver these experiences can be improved upon. It is my hope that my research will contribute in some small part to this body of research. I hold as an assumption that both teachers and students who operate within a framewo rk for authentic intellectual work in high school world history classes will not only have better lived experiences within their classrooms, but will also learn the
22 material required of them more thoroughly. While some have previously examined students learning gains in such an environment (Avery, 1999; King, et al., 2001; Newmann, et al., 2001; Newmann, Lopez, et al., 1998; Newmann, et al., 1996) there exists a sizeable vacuum in the literature as it relates to their classroom teachers experiences. Cons equentially, it is my wish that while undergoing this dissertation process I may not only fill this void in the scholarship but additionally provide more social studies teachers with the impetus to adopt the AIW framework regularly in their classroom deali ngs.
23 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Although the federal government overlooked social studies educators in its landmark accountability legislation, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001) social studies educators still find themselves subjected to increased scrutiny, from conservative politicians and academics. Situated within what Zimmerman (2002) has called the culture wars within the public schools (p. 2) social studies teachers are being pressured more than ever by these educational conservatives to deliver a curriculum which shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed, [and] shall be viewed as knowable, teachable, and testable (HB 7087E3, 2006, pp. 44; lines 11591163) This approach to social studies education is problematic, for mult iple reasons. Primarily, however, is that it runs directly counter to the mission statement of the National Council of the Social Studies (N CSS 1994) This mission statement posits that teachers need to design learning experiences such that schoolchildren can demonstrate an understanding that different people may describe the same event or situation in diverse ways, citing reasons for differences in views (p. 34) Additionally, they need to create conditions allowing students to demonstrate that histori cal knowledge and the concept of time are socially influenced constructions that lead historians to be selective in the questions they seek to answer and the evidence they use (p. 34) As such, there exists an educational conundrum. These conflicting curr icular demands place social studies educators in a precarious position, raising a number of questions. Do they teach strictly the content material which is simultaneously politically sanctioned and tested? Or, do they include materials not included in the explicit curriculum, risking the ire of parents,
24 administrations, and local school officials? Do they use traditional modes of instruction, including lecture and standardized multiple tests, to prepare their students for success on accountability mandates? Or, do they use processes which prepare their students for life beyond school, while gambling their students success on these mandates? The classroom teachers situated and lived experiences contribute in large part to how they negotiate the content and process decisions they have to make on a daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly basis. In this chapter, I will first present a brief background on the culture wars, their roots in the late 20th century blending of curricular perennialism and the cult of effic iency (Callahan, 1962) of the accountability movement, and the manner in which they are playing out presently. Second, I will look to problematise the connections between educational accountability and the deleterious effects it has had on students of col or and of poverty by presenting a review of the literature on standardized measures of achievement and equity concerns. Third, I will consider notions of powerful learning (Darling Hammond, 2008) and why, if we truly want to prepare students to engage the world in which they will live intelligently, we need to move away from test centered instruction. Finally, I will review the foundations of Newmanns, Kings, and Carmichaels (2007) framework for authentic intellectual work as a vehicle to move away from test centered instruction and to mitigate the negative educational consequences of accountability on students of color and of poverty, all while meeting current policy concerns by improving students performance on accountability measures.
25 The Culture Wa rs and the Social Studies A Brief Background Introduction The edifice of American education is inherently infused with the countrys politics, and shifts in educational currents often reflect broader shifts in national political trends. Acknowledging addit ionally that personal politics are often driven by the way people view the world and by the values they hold be they fiscal, social, moral, or religious logic follows that these factors will contribute to the opinions they hold on both the curricular c ontent and pedagogical approaches Americas public schools use when teaching the youth of the next generation. Furthermore, multiple competing visions of the schools ultimate purpose provide definition to the battlefield public education has become. Refer red to throughout scholarly literature and mass media alike, these conflicts play out in the nations schools as opposing factions seek to use the institution of education to advance their vision of the United States of America. Furthermore, given their hi ghly contested political nature, the social studies have taken a focal position in this battle. As early as 1970, James Barth and Samuel Shermis partly attributed this to the only loosely defined nature of the discipline, but also identified three differen t views on the purposes of social studies education as contributing thereto. Social studies education as citizenship transmission, which carries with it the connotation that there is a kind of content which is known in advance and should be taught (p. 74 4) tends to reflect a perennialist educational philosophy trending toward conservatism. Social studies education as reflective inquiry, a position which identifies citizenship as a process and mandates students acquire practice in making decisions whic h reflect significant social problems and which presently affect them or are likely to affect them
26 (pp. 748749) tends to reflect a progressive educational philosophy trending toward progressivism. Finally, social studies education as social science, whi ch values the acquisition of knowledge simply for knowledges sake, purporting that academically rigorous studies in and of themselves will lead to citizens understanding the complex and brave new world (p. 748) tends to reflect an essentialist educati onal philosophy trending toward social pragmatism. These competing positions on citizenship education, long recognized as a fundamental process of public schooling (Anderson, et al., 1997) remain in conflict. Dissenting views on the purposes of education writ large, and the purposes of social studies education more specifically, continue to be contested in the culture wars. The Blending of Perennialism and Efficiency A Nation at Risk and the revival of educational perennialism Following Ronald Reagans asc endancy to the Presidency, Terrell Bell was appointed Secretary of Education. As the Secretary working for a conservative administration, he searched for an agenda that he could pursue that would maintain high visibility for his department and educational concerns without much financial cost (Urban & Wagoner, 2009, p. 401) He championed the return of prayer to the public schools, school choice, and a revitalization of moral education in response to perceived social decline. All of these items were immens ely popular with President Reagan and the neoconservative base which elected him. However, Bells major triumph was the commissioning of the National Commission on Excellence in Education (NCEE) in 1981 to study the cause of a perceived decline in educational standards and achievement, and resultantly a decline in Americas international standing. By 1983, on behalf of the NCEE, David Gardner authored and published A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for
27 Educational Reform, the seminal document of the excellence movement which is presently driving American educational policy. Gardner (1983) opens the document, stating, our Nation is at risk. Our once unchallenged preeminence in commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation is being overtaken by competitors throughout the world... [and] the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that threatens the very future of our Nation and a people.... If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to imp ose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war. As it stands, we have allowed this to happen to ourselves. (p. 5) Citing a steady decline of test scores since the launch of Sputnik I hi gh rates of functional illiteracy, the drastic increase in remedial mathematics at the college level and in the armed services, and an increasingly diluted high school curriculum saddled with an overabundance of nonacademic choices (pp. 89, 18) the repor t places the blame at the feet of teachers who focused too much on the method rather than on the substance of their disciplines. The solution therefore lay in a return to content. To counter the perceived deleterious effects which progressive approaches to education had had on American intellectualism, educational reformers in the early 1980s began advocating in favor of a perennial curriculum centered around a core corpus of knowledge all students should acquire. For example, ED Hirsch (1987) called for th e development of cultural literacy, arguing that literacy is more than a skill and that to understand what somebody is saying, we must understand more than the surface meanings of words; we have to understand the context as well (p. 3) While acknowledging the importance of developing in students the skills requisite to critical thinking, he argued that without teaching students the background knowledge related to
28 items such as the Antarctic Ocean, Arctic Ocean, Atlantic Ocean, Baltic Sea, Black Sea, Caribbean Sea, Gulf of Mexico, North Sea, Pacific Ocean, Red Sea (p. 29) and so on would leave them ill equipped to discourse socially with their peers in an intelligent fashion. Curricular resources such as Hirschs (1992) What Your 4th Grader Needs to K now as well as a series of national content and process standards (e.g., National Council for the Social Studies, 1994; National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1989; Rutherford & Ahlgren, 1990) provided the classroom materials and guidance necessary f or teachers to advance the perennialist agenda. Only through a perennial curriculum, argued some scholars, would American schoolchildren be able to stem the tide of their nations intellectual decline (Bloom, 1988; Laqueur, 1980; Ravitch, 1985) When viewe d through the lens of Barths and Shermis (1970) models of citizenship education, this revival of educational perennialism meant essentially a return to systems of education which sought to perpetuate traditional narratives of American exceptionalism thro ugh citizenship transmission. This curricular shift aimed to eliminate interpretive shades of grey from the social studies curriculum by holding that a single body of social studies knowledge existed, could be known in advance and should be taught (p. 74 4) effectively determining that there were right and wrong answers to social studies questions. Furthermore, because advocates of this perennial approach premised the existence of right and wrong answers to these questions, they laid exclusive cla im to objectivity and denied their actions and educational choices were politically motivated. They additionally accused those who advance alternative historical interpretations or of calls for paying more proportional attention to the historical contribut ions of minorities of being politically correct. Says Graff (1993) of this paradox,
29 The rule seems to be that any politics is suspect except the kind that helped us get where we are, which by definition does not count as politics. Here is the double standard that governs recent attacks on political correctness [in the curriculum]: Our subjects earned their way into the curriculum on their own merits, but theirs are getting in only through political pressure, on a free handout or dole. (p. 156) Thus, it appears that the perennial curriculum advanced following A Nation at Risk not only supports the status quo of traditional social narratives and values, but agitates against change and reform through acts of political marginalization. Accountabilit y testing and the cult of efficiency As the natural outgrowth of a resurgence in curricular perennialism, competency testing gained prominence as politicians and the public alike began to demand measures of student success. Furthermore, they demanded that publicly funded schools and their teachers be held accountable for students performance. The spirit of administrative progressivism as embodied in the cult of efficiency (Callahan, 1962) drove the rise of testing during the Clinton administration (Myers, et al., 2004) and contributed considerably to the importance granted to the testing associated with the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001) For, if the perennialists curriculum was static and constituted of right and wrong answers to social studies questions, it followed necessarily that it should be knowable, teachable, and testable (HB 7087E3, 2006, lines 11591163) Additionally, accountability mandates associated with this testing would force a standardized curriculum on all students from the top down, ensuring that students came away from their classes with what perennialists considered the proper interpretations of social studies content. Furthered by a general distrust of public school social studies teachers to provide their students with t he correct interpretations of social studies content and of their
30 ability to objectively evaluate their students performance (Nickell, 1999) the testing essentialists associated with the perennial curriculum gathered support, because they felt this te sting would ensure the teaching of a rigorous academic curriculum grounded in traditional conservative values (Leming, et al., 2003; Ravitch, 2003) Additionally, textbook companies and testing companies, in association with university scholars, developed curricular materials which would render the instructional process more streamlined with statelevel standards and thus more efficient, satisfying politicians and private citizens alike who begrudged public schools supporters their school taxes. Ultimately this represents a return to what Callahan (1962) described as the cult of efficiency, as policymakers, administrators, and teachers alike become more concerned with test scores than their students learning. Current Iterations of the Culture Wars War on the law Because politics and values lie at the heart of the culture wars, they are far from resolved and continue to rage across the United States. On the one extreme lay efforts by several historically conservative states to require schools to promote pol itically and socially conservative interpretations of social studies content. In Florida, the State House of Representatives issued legislation ordering that American history shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed, shall be viewed as knowable, teac hable, and testable, and shall be defined as the creation of a new nation based largely on the universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence. (HB 7087E3, 2006, lines 11591163) While the language may appear benign on the surface, the requi rement to view American history as factual as opposed to constructed by historians necessarily promotes a singular correct version of American history. Furthermore, that it is defined
31 exclusively as the creation of a nation based on the principles in the Declaration rather than on slave labor, for example provides short thrift to different interpretations of American history which are supportable by historical evidence. When coupled additionally with the legislations emphasis on the importance of fre e enterprise to the United States (HB 7087E3, lines 1201 1202) the educational legislation represents a fiscally, politically, and socially conservative mandate for social studies education. Likewise, the Texas State Board of Education, which wields consi derable influence over the content of social studies textbooks used nationally, took a highly conservative turn in 2010 with the publication of its revised social studies standards (19 TAC 113, 2010) Like Florida, Texas approach to the social studies pro moted a fiscally, politically, and socially conservative mandate for its schools. Among the changes to the TEKS which have come under heavy fire for the outright conservative politicization of education are the dismissal of the separation of Church and State by the heavy emphasis placed on the JudeoChristian tradition (particularly biblical law) in the foundation of the nation, the absence of discussions on the Black Codes, sharecropping, or the Ku Klux Klan during Reconstruction, and a dismissal of Texas born Lyndon Baines Johnsons Great Society legislation. Academic historians have grossly condemned the revisions, claiming that the Texas Board has constructed a bizarre amalgam of traditionally ahistorical social studies combining the usual inclusive, diversity driven checklists with a string of politically and religiously motivated historical distortions.... Texass [ sic ] standards are a disservice both to its own teachers and students and to the larger national history of which it remains a part. (Stern & Stern, 2011, p. 143)
32 While the social studies TEKS represent what even some perennialists dismiss as nonsense, they come as the result of attempts to promote a singular correct and unassailable version of the social studies. War on the academy Colleg es and universities, long recognized as bastions of free critical thinking, are currently targets of conservative attack for their often progressive messages. Critics of higher education have charged that colleges and universities actively work to suppress politically conservative views, values, and interpretations by aggressively silencing students who espouse them (Kors & Silverglate, 1999; Rauch, 1994) These charges have led to the highly damaging ad hominem attacks contained in David Horowitzs recent works. In The Professors (2007b) Horowitz purposefully identifies by name 101 tenured university professors across the United States who hold critical views of Americas support of Israel, of its pursuit of war in Afghanistan and Iraq, of the suspension o f civil liberties under George W. Bush, of capitalism, and of traditional historical narratives of American exceptionalism. Calling attention to what he views as insidious transgressions against the fabric of the United States, Horowitz (2007b) claims the shift from purely academic pursuits to the pursuit of social change has been the work of an academic generation that came of age as anti war radicals in the Vietnam era. Many of these activists stayed in school to avoid the military draft and earned PhDs, taking their political activism with them when they became tenuredtrack professors in the 1970s.... They rejected the concept of the university as a temple of the intellect, in which the term academic described a curriculum insulated from the political passions of the times. Instead, these radicals were intent on making the university relevant to current events, and to their own partisan agendas. (pp. xxxviii xxxiv)
33 Coupled with his socalled Academic Bill of Rights (2007a) Horowitz is engaged in a cr usade to remove partisan politics from the classroom (2004) However, as David Tyack (1974) similarly charged of the administrative progressives in the early twentieth century, this call to remove colleges and universities from politics is but a thinly v eiled attempt to preserve conservative value systems. As Graff (1993) argues, this represents a gross double standard. Applied to the social studies more specifically, conservative perennialists at the Thomas B. Fordham Institute claim that in the field o f social studies itself, the lunatics had taken over the asylum, with leaders who held plenty of grand degrees and impressive titles but who possessed no respect for Western civilization [and] who were included to view Americas evolution as a problem for humanity rather than mankinds last, best hope (Finn, 2003, p. i) Inherent to the language used are the assumptions that social studies education leaders ought to have respect for Western civilization and ought to view America as mankinds last, best hope, and because they do not, are morally reprehensible. Social studies educators have not allowed these attacks to go unanswered. Firing salvos of their own, leaders in social studies education have argued that calls for objectivity and neutrality in fact represent calls for the use of materials and curricula which support a conservative status quo. E. Wayne Ross (2000) contends that anyone who has paid attention to recent debates on school reform efforts (particularly social studies curriculum reform) knows that schooling is a decidedly political enterprise. The question in teaching (as well as in teacher education and school reform) is not whether to advocate but the nature and extent of ones advocacy. (p. 44) Elsewhere, Ross and Perry Maker (2005) argue that the Contrarians within the Fordham Institute and their conservative allies who yearn for a return to the good old
34 days in which historians taught naught but the facts and teacher educators taught their candidates to teach in this fashion, the research indicates that the good old days are but a myth (p. 147) Instead, they hold that these Contrarians are actually working a gainst the democratic principles they claim to support because they advocate their interpretations of history and the social studies with fundamentalism. Similarly, Ron Evans (2004a, 2004b, 2010) has examined the history of social studies education, and responds that the social studies field has always been hotly contested because control thereof determines in part the shape American society will take. He looks dimly upon the powerful alignment of conservative foundations, subject matter associations, and state and federal governments behind a disciplinebased social studies (2004b, p. 177) as closing off democratic dialogue over the kind of society in which we want to live (2010, p. 32) Allowing uncontested facts drive a singular interpretation of Am erican history and of other social studies fields would thus present a tremendous threat to the nations democratic character. As such, academics have a responsibility to challenge perennialist interpretations of social studies content in the name of genui ne concern for citizenship education (Hinchey, 2010) War in the classroom In addition to being fought in the nations legislatures and in the nations colleges and universities, the culture wars are likewise being fought on the front lines of education in Americas public schools. Classroom teachers who promote progressive interpretations of social studies content or who use methods other than banking pedagogies (Freire, 2000) which support cultural transmission and replication find themselves accused of attempting to politically indoctrinate or brainwash minors. And some even risk losing their jobs.
35 Prentice Chandler (2006) recounts his experiences teaching American history at a rural school in Alabama and how he sought to have the alternative historic al interpretations of Howard Zinns (2005) A Peoples History of the United States and its companion volume, Voices of a Peoples History of the United States (Zinn & Arnove, 2004) a compendium of primary sources giving voice to the historical Other pr esented in contrast to the sanctioned textbooks. However, one of his students parents who were political conservatives reacted furiously and onesidedly. Chandler recounts: Because they found the material so objectionable, I offered to provide their child with alternative material. The parents rejected that proposal. I offered to allow them to choose their childs supplemental material. They refused. I even offered not to give their child any additional material, but they would not agree. They did not want anyone in the class reading Howard Zinns book. Over the next week, they pressured the superintendent into removing these books [for which Chandler received both grants and county level permission for their use] from this advanced, collegeprep track cour se because of what they considered inappropriate content. (p. 354) Subsequently, these parents lobbied for his termination, and when unsuccessful, said they simply wanted him to teach with more balance, by which they meant that they wanted me to teach both sides of the historical picture in other words, not spotlight voices of resistance (p. 356) Problematically, however, was that Chandler was in fact attempting to present a more balanced approach to American history by contrasting officially sanctioned textbook narratives focusing on white middleclass Protestant v alues of American exceptionalism and progress with narratives highlighting the peoples whom these same white middleclass Protestant Americans marginalized in their pursuit of exceptionalism and progress. Balance in his detractors minds meant a return to the comfortable Eurocentric, maledominated, capitalistic celebrating, anti immigrant story that functions to homogenize alternative voices and actions of
36 resistance and dissent (McKnight & Chandler, 2009, p. 69) which, not surprisingly, has no sembl ance of balance at all. Likewise, Bob Dahlgrens (2009) analysis of community resistance to the use of Michael Moores Fahrenheit 9/11 in social studies classrooms demonstrates that social studies teachers as soldiers on the front lines of the culture wars now face the most precarious moment in terms of job security since the height of the McCarthyite movement of the 1950s (p. 25) Because of the films anti Bush slant, conservative Republican proBush media outlets assailed it even before it was released and shortly after its release on DVD, stories began to surface in the blogosphere about incidents in which high school teachers and community college professors had been disciplined for having the temerity to show the film to their students (p. 30) Op ponents charged that it was highly inappropriate to show the film to impressionable youths of legal voting age, and that even classrooms at the college level needed to remain bastions of nonpartisanship. However, as Dahlgren points out, these claims of the necessity of nonpartisanship in fact represent attempts to marginalize those with nonconservative values. Additionally, the charge that showing the film to impressionable youths of legal voting age represents an unacceptable act of brainwashing is proble matic on two grounds. First, the position assumes that traditional curricular materials presenting traditional interpretations of social studies content does not also influence these students views. Second, the position patronizingly subcategorizes eighteenyear olds who by right of the Constitution have the same rights and responsibilities as all other citizens as more susceptible to political influence and thus need to be protected from improper (read: progressive) ways of thinking.
37 Conclusions on the Culture Wars The culture wars have had a tremendous impact on social studies education in the United States. Because the social studies are politically infused and valueladen by their very nature, control over social studies education is politically motivat ed because it results in the political shaping of the nation. From A Nation at Risk (Gardner, 1983) and the revival of educational perennialism to the meteoric rise of educational efficiency through the accountability movement, proponents of traditional interpretations of social studies content are claiming increasingly and exclusively the mantles of objectivity and neutrality. However, these claims are but smokescreens to the promotion of and perpetuation of conservative social, moral, political, and relig ious values. The culture wars continue to rage on in our nations legislatures, in our nations colleges and universities, and on the front lines in the classrooms of our public schools. Advocates of presenting challenges to traditional interpretations of social studies content often do so at risk to their jobs, as they are convinced that doing so presents their students with important and necessary challenges in spite of the intellectually stifling climate of standardized accountability testing (Cornbleth, 2010; Grant & Salinas, 2008; Marri, 2009) The Deleterious Effects of Educational Accountability One of the major stated purposes of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2001) was to work toward the closing of persisting educational achievement gaps between students of color and their white peers and between students of poverty and students of means. By holding all students to high standards of achievement and assessing their progress toward attainment of those high standards through standardized measures o f achievement, NCLB was supposed to act as a great educational equalizer. However,
38 opinions on its application doubt whether the legislation has had the desired effects, and a number of NCLB critics charge it has actually cemented the achievement gaps it w as designed to address. Historical Underperformance on Standardized Tests Educational accountability measures in the United States largely rest upon the statistical assumption of normality. This assumption argues that the variable measured is distributed according to the Gaussian function throughout the population, visibly modeled by the bell curve (Shavelson, 1996) As applied to the field of education, this would hold that the accountability measures to which students are subjected would measure that whic h, and only that which, they are intended a students level of academic achievement. However, from the appearance of standardized testing in the United States onward, schoolmen and policymakers alike have violated the assumption of statistical normality to satisfy the sociological assumptions classifying white Englishspeaking nativeborn Protestant middleclass Americans as normal. Fass (1980) in her analysis of the intelligence quotient as a cultural and historical framework, argues that the IQ seemed to provide a form of social order and meritocratic evaluation at the same time as it helped to organize an increasingly complex educational process during the social tumult of the early twentieth century (p. 431) Initially implemented by the United Stat es Army to track draftees into either the enlisted ranks or the officer corps during the Great War, the statistical science behind the Army Alpha and Army Beta tests ( Yoakum & Yerkes, 1920) was rapidly modified to meet and satisfy extant prejudice. Fass (1 980) notes that given the cultural concerns of the time and the context of the growing use of statistical techniques like normal distributions, correlations, mean and factor analysis, led predictably to racial
39 comparisons (p. 439) Most problematic, howe ver, was that when test results were persistently inconsistent with testers sociological assumptions, rather than revise their assumptions as would be consistent with the scientific method testers discounted these results as outliers and modified thei r instruments to appropriately account for them. Tyack (1974) points to the case of African Americans from the northeast, who tended to outperform southern whites in large numbers on the Army Alpha tests. When the results of the draftees tests were publis hed as a whole, this fact was conveniently overlooked. Instead, the results were presented in such a fashion so as to give scientific validation to gardenvariety social prejudice (Tyack, 1974, p. 205) This should not come as much of a surprise. Lewis T erman, who developed the Stanford Binet IQ test, wrote it in such a fashion that the questions reflected traditional American values and knowledge, normed on white Englishspeaking nativeborn Protestant middleclass Americans (Garca & Pearson, 1994; Tyac k, 1974) Terman (Louis Madison Terman, 2010) explicitly acknowledged this norming bias, stating that students ethnolinguistic and cultural backgrounds may affect the results of the test to some extent (p. 246) However, this norming bias naturally predisposed those students who fell outside the constructed sociological norm of the population that is, students of color, students of poverty, and speakers of languages other than English to underperform when compared to their white Englishspeaking nati ve born Protestant middle class American age peers (Gipps, 1992, 1999) For the reason of their inherent norming bias, there existed a series of achievement gaps from the beginning of standardized testing in the United States.
40 While the nature of standardi zed testing has changed since the early twentieth century, the norming bias inherent to these tests remains static. Furthermore, this bias is evinced by the persistence of the same achievement gaps No Child Left Behind (NCLB, 2001) has declared anathema. F or example, data from Floridas 2009 state accountability measure demonstrate persisting mean gaps in tenth grade reading between whites and their African Americans white peers (35% from 20072009) and their Latino/a peers (21% from 20072009), between spe akers of English and speakers of languages other than English (42% from 20072009), and between students of means and students of poverty as measured by eligibility for free and reduced lunch (16% from 20072009) (Florida Department of Education, 2009) As such, the accountability movement in education has failed to address the extant gaps between white English speaking nativeborn Protestant middleclass Americans and their diverse age peers. Furthermore, the standardized measures of achievement attached t o the accountability movement, by virtue of their being normed on the knowledge and values of white English speaking nativeborn protestant middleclass Americans, in fact contribute to the perpetuation of these achievement gaps. The color effect The debat e over issues of ethnic equity in schooling are far from new. Linda Darling Hammond (2000) that education has continued to be substantially separate and unequal for Americas students of color, African Americans in particular. With the added issue of accou ntability through testing thrown into the mix, Philip Daniel (2004) states that the Brown decision is being rolled back, as National support of education has come in the form of spending that favors accountability and achievement over racial equity... [le aving schools] to carry on the same discrimination as in the past (p. 255)
41 Furthermore, their opinions as opponents to NCLB and the measures of accountability as states apply them are not the only ones. Drawing data from the National Educational Longitudinal Study of 19881992, Juan Battle and Deborah Coates (2004) note that prior to the implementation of NCLB, African American students did not do nearly as well their white peers on standardized math and reading tests. Additionally, evidence suggest these results are partly the product of experiences of racism in the schools. Throwing back to the Minimum Competency Testing (MCT) movement of the 1970s, Robert Linn (2000) notes that on initial implementation, three fourths of the White students passed [the test] on the first attempt compared to slightly less than one fourth of African American students (p. 6) and that the achievement gap on NAEP scores persisted through the 1990s. Referencing the 1996, 1998, and 1999 Minnesota comprehensive statewide testing data of eighth graders, Samuel Myers, Hyeoneui Kim and Cheryl Mandala (2004) note that a persistent race effect exists in the achievement gap between African American students and their white peers that cannot be explained away by other student background characteristics. Joan Herman (1997) theorized that this may have been the result of their lack of access to the same educational opportunities as those of the dominant culture; as their education suffered, so did their test scores. This is supported by both Darling Hammond (2000), who states that the quality of instruction received by African American students, on average, was much lower than that received by White students (p. 271) and Adam Gamoran (2001), who states that Differential quality of schooling is another explanation that has been offered for black white differences in educational outcomes (p. 137) This
42 results problematically in standardized measures of achievement not measuring students of color achievement, but rather the quality of sc hooling afforded to them. While some may theories that students of color may underperform on standardized test measures because they feel less competent when they believe that their ability and intelligence are being judged (Roderick & Engel, 2001, p. 20 0) the end result is the same: standardized measures of achievement do not adequately measures students of color achievement, but rather the quality of schooling afforded to them and their ability to select exam responses. Furthermore, the achievement gaps between persons of color and their white peers is real: From 20072009, African Americans underperformed their white peers in all areas tested (Florida Department of Education, 2009) Historically, most students of color, including African Americans, L atino/a Americans, and First Nations, do not perform as well as their white Englishspeaking peers on standardized tests (Garca & Pearson, 1994; Myers, et al., 2004; Warren & Jenkins, 2005; Willingham, Pollack, & Lewis, 2002) Given that the standardized tests have a tendency to be normed on white middleand upper class English speaking Protestant norms (Garca & Pearson, 1994; Tyack, 1974) students of color underperformance on these measures is both predictable and highly objectionable. Caroline Gipps (1999) maintains that this is the result of the tests authors biases, noting that they will reflect the values, culture, and experiences of the dominant culture males who write them. As such, they are naturally predisposed against giving students of colo r a fair chance at success. The biases present in standardized test measures, and the ethnic and cultural differences between the tests authors and those who submit to them, contribute in a large part to the achievement gap between students of color and
43 t heir white peers. NCLBs aim to close the ethnic achievement gap based on standardized test measures appears to have been both ill researched and ill advised. The poverty effect Much as the debate on ethnic equity in schooling and performance on standardiz ed testing continues, so does the debate on socioeconomic equity. Battle and Coates (2004) state that socioeconomic status (SES) appears to be the best predictor of educational outcomes for students, particularly for children experiencing poverty (p. 394) When coupled with the accountability provisions in NCLB and their applications at the state level, students of poverty find themselves seriously disadvantaged compared to their peers of means. Students of poverty, much like students of color, tend to do poorly on standardized measures of achievement, which raises issues about their validity (Buly & Valencia, 2002; Darling Hammond, 2000; Hamilton, 2003; Heck & Crislip, 2001) Drawing from National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) data, Jaekyung Lee and Kenneth Wong (2004) note that a persisting socioeconomic achievement gap of approximately thirty points existed from 1990 to 2000, raising questions whether standardiz ed measures of achievement in fact measure students socioeconomic status as opposed to their academic achievement. Alan Schoenfeld (2002) also argues that mathematics scores on the SAT also correlate astoundingly well with parental income (p. 15) Recent data published on Floridas standardized assessment tests additionally document a persistent performance gap between those from highSES and low SES backgrounds, as measured by eligibility for free or reducedprice lunches (Florida Department of Education, 2009) Given that NCLB specifically recognizes students of poverty need of a quality education (Karen, 2005) and given that a wide body of
44 research has demonstrated that students of poverty have persistently performed worse on measures of standardized assessment than students of means, it is incomprehensible as to why they continue to be assessed in this way. Individual student poverty is not the only issue in terms of achievement on standardized assessment measures. Concentrations of poverty in school s also have a detrimental affect on the quality of student education, which in turn affects their performance again on standardized tests. Jeanne Powers (2004) notes that students in schools of poverty tend to be taught by higher percentages of noncredent ialed, less experienced, and less educated teachers that is, those with no higher than a bachelors degree (p. 774) Battle and Coates (2004) likewise note that the higher the percentage of students eligible for free lunch, the more students suffered on standardized measures of achievement. Finally, another study notes that as a measure of a schools socioeconomic status, the available of print materials in the classroom contributes greatly to students reading scores on standardized measures of achievem ent (Duke, 2000) As they are held accountable for their performance on standardized measures of achievement, the effects are particularly pernicious. While governments may attempt to shift the blame from schooling to the families for the socioeconomic achievement gap, citing variables beyond their control (Benveniste, 2002; Duke, 2000) critics note that holding students of poverty accountable for these variables which are equally beyond their control is grossly unjust (Linn, 2000) Because states have don e little to equalize funding and access to educational resources across schools of poverty and schools of
45 means (Darling Hammond, 2000) when children of poverty attend schools of poverty, a learning gap follows and continues to persist (Gamoran, 2001) Ac countability and Curricular Narrowing The manners in which the accountability measures of No Child Left Behind are applied is also a source of considerable debate. While most schoolchildren are ultimately held accountable for their academic performance on state level standardized measures of achievement, NCLB does not specifically prescribe consequences for students, the actual unit of measurement (Dworkin, 2005) The laws critics have charged that the highstakes measures have had strongly negative effect s on both the schools and the students learning opportunities, which are felt most strongly by those who tend to do poorly on standardized tests students of color and students of poverty. Curricular narrowing by and far represents the grossest unintended consequence associated with the educational accountability movement. Proponents charge that by raising standards, accountability measures cause the achievement gaps to close as teachers motivate lower achieving students of color and of poverty to succeed at greater rates than their white peers and peers of means (Lee & Wong, 2004; Roderick & Engel, 2001) Opponents charge contrarily that the learning students are doing, which is being measured by these tests of achievement, has little real value. Marcia R iddle Buly and Sheila Valencia (2002) note that accountability measures cause a narrowing of the curriculum with a strict focus on basic skills test preparation. Furthermore, Darling Hammond (2000) states that students of color and students of poverty, bec ause they are specifically targeted by NCLB, are disproportionately more likely than others to receive instruction focused solely on passing multiplechoice tests and given tasks that are profoundly disconnected from the skills they need to learn (p. 277) Because there
46 is such great importance placed on demonstrating high pass rates on highstakes tests, educational stakeholders are more likely to pay attention to students test scores and to adopt practices intended to maximize pass rates as opposed to maximizing student learning. This ultimately results in an excessive narrowing of teachers focus (Black, 2000; Hamilton, 2003) These findings are substantiated by other scholars. David Karen (2005) raises the question of issues not dealt with on statewide assessments, asking are they simply ignored? (p. 167) Social studies teachers, and until recently science teachers as well, would agree this was the case. Taylor and associates (2003) sampled a thousand Colorado teachers on their perceptions of the ef fects state standards and the Colorado Student Assessment Program (CSAP) had on their classroom praxes. Though the teachers reported that state standards, rather than the CSAP, influenced their content decisions, the alignment between the standards and the CSAP make this distinction ambiguous at best. Furthermore, as a result of the CSAP, a number of teachers reported the drastic decline of the sciences and the social studies from the school curriculum, as well as the loss of a number of instructional formats, such as field trips, projects, and lab work. Over 60% of teachers in schools rated Unsatisfactory as a result of their CSAP performance spent two weeks or more our of the year on test preparation, and over 50% of teachers in these same schools report ed spending four or more weeks on test preparation (p. 36) Combined, these denote a clear narrowing of the curriculum as a result of the Colorado Student Assessment Program. Likewise, Teppers (2002) study of teachers in Chicago and on the influence the I owa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) had on their instructional practices identified a marked increase in
47 time spent on tested subject. This resulting in a decrease in time spent on the sciences and the social studies, as this additional time must come at the expense of other activities (p. 80) Tepper notes that the proportion of classroom teachers spending at least twenty hours per week on test preparation activities jumped from a third in 1994 when the ITBS was introduced to 50% in 1999 (p. 92) These two c onditions both denote a definite curricular narrowing toward success on the ITBS. This trend toward curricular narrowing was not restricted to the areas of reading, writing, and mathematics, but also found its way into the social studies in states where th e social studies are tested. Segalls (2006) analysis of teachers perceptions of the Michigan Educational Assessment Program (MEAP) bear this out. The teachers he interviewed felt a need to emphasize or deemphasize particular topics within existing cour ses (p. 115) based on their likelihood of appearing on the MEAP and viewed the MEAP as a test that dictates curriculum decisions rather than simply assessing what is taught (p. 116) Though the teachers interviewed acknowledged that using tests as the basis for teaching is unacceptable (p. 121) the standards with which the MEAP is aligned invariably cause curricular narrowing. van Hovers (2006) analysis of Virginias Standards of Learning (SOLs) of beginning secondary history teachers also sustains t he conclusions regarding the content taught in the classrooms and the states accountability measures. While the study presents the glimmer of hope that teaching history in a state with an accountability scheme can be done powerfully and without focusing on test preparation, it still acknowledges that the SOL tests exert a strong influence on certain aspects of their assessment planning (p. 213) In particular, the teachers interviewed noted that their unit tests take the same format as the endof year
48 SO L, and their regular use of this format results from the pressures associated with the SOL. Studies support the hypothesis of a negative narrowing of the curriculum, noting that standardized assessment tests and the accountability measures attached to them lead teachers to abandon teaching practices that inclusively address the varying needs of all their students in favor of rote test preparation (Hargreaves, et al., 2002, pp. 8485) Though many would agree that teaching content specifically sampled by the test or coaching students in specific responses to test items is unacceptable practice (Linn, 2000) providing students with explicit instructions in test taking strategies on practice tests does just this. Additionally, students who perform the most p oorly on standardized high stakes tests, largely being students of color and of poverty, see their education narrowed to the point by which tremendous portions of the school year are dedicated to preparing students to pass exit examinations (Warren & Jenki ns, 2005) As such, the quality of education they receive is not equal to the quality of education their white and socioeconomically advantaged peers receive, perpetuating the achievement gap in schools. Notions of Powerful Learning In spite of the pressur es associated with educational accountability, numerous educational researchers actively work toward ensuring classroom teachers do not adopt test centered curricula in favor of powerful approaches to student learning. By providing students both academic r igor and the process learning skills Dewey (1897, 1906, 1910, 1915, 1916, 1938) argued were necessary for functioning citizens to intelligently and rationally address the problems of the day, advocates of powerful learning argue that students will not only be able to demonstrate high levels of proficiency on standardized
49 accountability measures but will also not be robbed of their ability to function socially once they leave school. Furthermore, they argue that by ensuring teachers pursue these notions of p owerful learning in their classrooms, they would be mitigating considerably the social inequities associated with the accountability movement. General Implications and Examples Linda Darling Hammond (2008) writes, Since A Nation at Risk (1983) was published a quarter century ago, mountains of reports have been written about the need for more powerful learning focused on the demands of life and work in the twenty first century (p. 1) Problematic to the way in which educational accountability has shaped cu rricula for all students, but particularly to students of color and of poverty, she likewise argues that these new demands cannot be met through passive, roteoriented learning focused on basic skills and memorization of disconnected facts (p. 2) She th us calls policymakers attention to three principles of learning for effective teaching: (1) students come to the classroom with funds of knowledge that teachers must incorporate into their lessons; (2) students need to organize and use their knowledge conceptually in order for their learning to be useful beyond school; and (3) students learn better if they learn metacognitively (pp. 34) In order to achieve this goal of effective teaching, Darling Hammond (1997) argues teachers and administrators need to focus students learning around active engagement with the central problems of the disciplines they encounter in their classrooms. Active and indepth learning engages students in doing the work of writers, scie ntists, mathematicians, musicians, sculptors, and critics in contexts as realistic as possible, using the criteria of performance in the disciplines as standards towards which students and teachers strive (p. 108, emphasis in original) Furthermore, by us ing
50 content and performance standards as guideposts, not straightjackets which mobilize system resources rather than... punish students and schools (p. 213) classroom teachers will be empowered to make professionally sound curricular decisions to the benefit of their students. Linda Darling Hammond, Jacqueline Ancess, and Beverly Falk (1995) showcase multiple examples of what they consider to be powerful learning. At Central Park East Secondary School (CPESS), for example, students meet requirements for graduation through the development of portfolios. Founded in 1985, the authors argue that the CPESS graduation portfolio establishes high standards without standardization, and it creates a dynamic vehicle for ongoing curriculum development, professional discourse, and meaningful dialogue among parents, students, and school staff, all while allowing for a much deeper and more effective accountability for student growth, learning, and preparation to succeed after high school than most schools provide ( p. 22) Through this approach, 90% of the schools population of which 85% were students of color and 60% were students of poverty when they conducted the study graduate within five years (p. 23) Furthermore, by focusing on learning which promotes cri tical and deep thinking, as opposed to performance on the Regents exams, students are better prepared for their adult lives once they leave school. Adapting this principle more broadly, Darling Hammond (2010) examines the case of Finland, which she descr ibes as having developed an exceptional system of education over the past forty years. Describing the nations educational progress, she states, Finland has shifted from a highly centralized system emphasizing external testing to a more localized system i n which highly trained teachers design curriculum
51 around very lean national standards (p. 167) Assessments are school based, focus on higher order thinking skills, and schools demonstrate both equity in funding as well as equity in opportunities to learn Furthermore, while the nation maintains a college matriculation exam, which is not required to graduate from high school and only constitutes part of the college admissions decision, these exams are given in the candidates mother tongue (Finnish, Swedi sh, or Saami) plus at least three subjects of the candidates choosing... [and] include extensive written work, as well as oral and listening components (p. 169) The absence of gatekeeper testing in the high schools thus allows teachers to pursue locally responsive and powerful approaches to instruction, better preparing students for their adult lives. Some Examples in the Social Studies Applied to the social studies, Elizabeth Yeager (2005) outlines a number of key characteristics of wise practice for powerful learning in spite of accountability testing. She notes teachers need to have not only a strong grasp of content knowledge, but the ability to present it in manners which interest students; that they are enthusiastic about their content and interact with their students; that they promote critical thinking and problem solving skills in their classrooms; that they differentiate instruction; and that they do not remain chained to their textbooks, but supplement their materials whenever possible. Andrea Librescos (2005) case study of Paula Marron, whom she describes as an excellent veteran fourthgrade teacher by any standard of evaluation (p. 33) points to a number of these important factors. Marron requires her students to perform complex exercises i n analytics, wrestling with crucial vocabulary words through the use of dictionaries, texts, and conversations with adults (p. 38) She likewise has her
52 students conduct computer research and history mysteries, collecting abundant sources external to the texts, all while working toward the elaborated composition of an essay answering essential and thematic questions. Her students do the actual work of historians and citizens, and she works meticulously to check for student understanding and to ascert ain what students do not know (p. 44) Though the existence of statelevel assessments in the social studies have contributed to the shape her praxis has taken, it has not defined it, and as a result her students are better prepared both for the test as w ell as for their lives beyond school. Jill Gradwells (2006) case study of Sarah Cooper, a novice eighth grade social studies teacher in New York State, also demonstrates a number of connections to the characteristics of wise practice for powerful learning Sarah, Gradwell writes, does not slavishly follow the state curriculum guide, [nor] does she sacrifice depth for breadth by marching her students through the content (p. 165) She incorporates a number of graphic organizers and primary source materials external to the textbook into her instruction. Furthermore, she varies her instructional methods throughout her lessons, including exercises on reading primary periodpiece poetry, small group analysis of social studies content, and wholeclass film viewings. Ultimately, her instructional approach results in exceptionally satisfying levels of student performance on the states Regents exam a 98% pass rate in spite of her gross dissatisfaction with the nature of the document based question format as being too limiting (pp. 169170) Bruce Larsons (2005) case study of Joe Gotchy, a veteran social studies teacher in Auburn, Washington who pioneered a program of interdisciplinary instruction at his school in his social studies classrooms, shows the value of inquiry based approaches to
53 learning. Called Raiderlinks, this program has at its heart the teaching of skills and content knowledge while focusing the academic and personal needs of students on preparing to live, study, and work after high school ( p. 155) through the use of technology. Larson describes Gotchy as possessing enthusiasm for teaching history and culture, and additionally notes that he does not merely encourage students to learn content; he challenges them to gain a sense off exciteme nt and appreciation for the world and its events (p. 157) Finally, his assessments require students to demonstrate their mastery of the content, rather than their mere recollection thereof. His attempts to teach students to learn how to use information provide an environment for preparing young people for the role of participatory citizen (p. 163) making critical thinking central to his instruction. Authentic Intellectual Work The framework for authentic intellectual work (AIW), developed over the past twenty plus years by Fred Newmann and his associates (Archbald & Newmann, 1988; King, Newmann, & Carmichael, 2009; Newmann, 2000; Newmann, et al., 2001; Newmann, et al., 2007; Newmann, King, & Rigdon, 1997; Newmann, Lopez, et al., 1998; Newmann, et al., 1996; Newmann & Wehlage, 1993; Scheurman & Newmann, 1998) falls into the broader category of powerful learning (Darling Hammond, 2008) Furthermore, it represents the best possible solution for what Aristotle (2004) refers to as the Golden Mean when this principle is applied to education. Not only does it allow for the promotion of rigorous academic content learning, which allows all students better chances at success on standardized accountability measures, it likewise prepares them for their lives as adults by focusing on disciplinary expertise and on value beyond school. In this final section, I will review the theory behind the AIW framework, charting
54 its development from the late 1980s through to the present, and consider the budding research base w hich demonstrates the connections between AIW and increased performance on standardized measures of achievement by students of color and students with disabilities. Initial Development of the Framework As presently constituted, the theory behind the framew ork for authentic intellectual work finds its roots in the work of Doug Archbald and Fred Newmann (1988) The abstract reads thusly: This book was designed as an assessment of standardized testing and its alternatives at the secondary school level. More specifically, a framework for thinking systematically and creatively about assessment, a review of the uses and limitations of standardized tests of general achievement, and descriptions of several methods that may offer more helpful approaches to assessment are provided. (p. 1) Generated as a response to the increased focus on standardized testing which resulted from A Nation at Risk (Gardner, 1983) Archbald and Newmann (1988) charge that such traditional measures of student success communicate very little about the quality or substance of students specific accomplishments (p. 10) Furthermore, these measures likewise serve to undermine the legitimacy not only of the numeri cal indicators, but of the educational enterprise itself (Archbald & Newmann, 1988, p. 11) As an alternative to these standardized measures, which they charge weaken the educational edifice as a whole, Archbald and Newmann propose three criteria of authenticity: disciplined inquiry, integration of knowledge, and value beyond evaluation. In its initial formulation, Archbald and Newmann (1988) describe the process of disciplined inquiry as having three parts. First, it depends on prior substantive and proc edural knowledge considered essential to understanding problems within a field (p.
55 11) Second, it tries to develop indepth understanding of a problem rather than passing familiarity with or exposure to pieces of knowledge (p. 11) Finally, it requires those to move beyond knowledge that has been produced by others (p. 11) While recognizing that students will be unable to perform at levels of mastery similar to field experts with years of experience and postsecondary education, the authors hold that students are capable of performing authentically if the tasks required of them approximate these standards in principle. Regarding integration of knowledge, Archbald and Newmann (1988) state that in order to understand scientific theories, literary and ar tistic masterpieces, architectural and mechanical designs, musical compositions, or philosophical arguments, we must ultimately consider them as wholes, not as collections of knowledge fragments (pp. 1112) Too often, standardized measures of achievement require students only to parrot the definitions of terms, to recall the precise dates of substantive events (e.g., World War II began on 1 September 1939), or to provide quick answers to questions similar to those posed in a television quiz show, where answers bear little relation to one another (p. 12) Fred Newmann (1965) argues that such approaches can do little than cause mental fragmentation and psychological damage in students. While Archbald and Newmann (1988) do not discount the importance of knowledge fragments, it is only through their relational presentation that students can come to demonstrate their mastery of this content. It is through this relational presentation that students can be challenged to understand integrated forms of knowledge. .. [as well as] be involved in the production, not simply the reproduction, of new knowledge (Archbald & Newmann, 1988, p. 12)
56 Finally, concerning value beyond evaluation, Archbald and Newmann (1988) note that demonstrations of disciplined inquiry are most meaningful when achievement has sthetic or utilitarian value apart from determining the competence of the learner (p. 12) They note that authentic demonstrations of content mastery have three co mmon features which are uncommon to the typical school experience. First is the production of discourse, things, [and] performances (p. 12) which contrasts starkly with the identification of discourses, things, and performances already produced by other s. Second is the flexible use of time, the limits of which are determined by the work being performed rather than by the requirements of institutional management (p. 13) Last is collaboration, which differs tremendously from traditional measures which focus... primarily on what the student can accomplish while working alone (p. 13) These three initial criteria served as the foundation for the AIW framework. Aimed to stand in contraposition to the testing associated with the mandates of A Nation at Ris k (Gardner, 1983) the work of Archbald and Newmann (1988) laid the groundwork for a paradigmatic shift in the manner in which secondary school teachers taught their students, from the planning phase through delivery to assessment. Subsequent Evolution of the Framework Since its appearance in the late 1980s, the AIW framework has undergone some changes. That said, the frameworks underlying principles remain relatively unchanged. Fred Newmann and Gary Wehlage (1993) mildly redefine the criteria established by Archbald and Newmann (1988) stating: To define authentic achievement more precisely, we rely on three criteria that are consistent with major proposals in the restructuring movement: (1) students construct meaning and produce knowledge, (2) students us e disciplined inquiry to construct meaning, and (3) students aim their work toward the production of discourse, products, and performances that have
57 value or meaning beyond success in school. (Newmann & Wehlage, 1993, para. 2) While the constructivist nature of the initial AIW framework was muted initially beneath the wider concerns of integrating knowledge into extant structures, this is perhaps suggestive of the period in which Archbald and Newmann (1988) developed the framework. Educational perennialism was experiencing an upswing in popularity during the 1980s, and overtly constructivist approaches to education might have sounded too similar to the educational progressivism of the 1930s and 40s, as well as the educational essentialism inherent to the new social studies structures of the disciplines approach. However, during the standards movement of the early 1990s, in which institutions such as the NCSS (1994) explicitly acknowledged the inherently constructed nature of history, the open constructivism of Newmann and Wehlage (1993) appears appropriately contemporaneous. Additionally, while Archbald and Newmann (1988) define the third criterion for AIW as being value beyond evaluation, Newmann and Wehlage (1993) change the language mildly, calling it val ue beyond school. This accounts for a mild distinction, as value beyond evaluation may be taken as value beyond immediate evaluation. Contrarily, value beyond school as a criterion eliminates this potential confusion. By the late 1990s, the language around the criteria for authentic intellectual work had solidified. Geoffrey Scheurman and Fred Newmann (1998) write, Significant intellectual accomplishments such as [the process of Supreme Court rulings] provide three criteria that can serve as guidepos ts for intellectual activity: construction of knowledge, disciplined inquiry, and value beyond school (Criteria for Authentic Intellectual Work, para. 4) Likewise, Fred Newmann (2000) identifies construction of
58 knowledge, disciplined inquiry, and value beyond school as the criteria for authentic intellectual work. Ultimately, these three criteria have persisted in the remaining major works on authentic intellectual work, providing a stable definition: Authentic intellectual work [is the] construction of knowledge, through the use of disciplined inquiry, to produce discourse, products, or performances that have value beyond school (Newmann, et al., 2007, p. 3) Construction of knowledge As presented in the quintessential AIW framework document (Newmann, et al., 2007) the criterion of constructing knowledge holds that to reach an adequate solution to new problems, the competent adult learner has to construct knowledge because these problems cannot be solved by routine use of information or skills previously learned (pp. 3 4) Within the context of powerful learning, this first criterion hold students to high academic standards by requiring students to think critically instead of regurgitating prefabricated responses. Students exposed to this construction of knowledge are thus better prepared for addressing the problems of the day as well as for developing themselves intellectually within the school. Disciplined inquiry Newmann, King, and Carmichael (2007) argue that simply constructing knowledge is not enough to designate student work as authentic. This construction must be done through a process of disciplined inquiry, requiring that students draw on and build on an established knowledge base, gain a deep understanding of this knowledge, and communicate it in elaborate forms. Relating to established corpora of knowledge, they state that students must acquire a knowledge base of facts, vocabularies, concepts, theories, algorithms, and other conventions necessary to conduct rigorous inquiry (p.
59 4) However, the process does not cease there. Students must also demonstrate a complex understanding of that knowledge that helps them gain deeper understanding of specific problems, which they accomplish by looking for imagining, proposing, and testing relations hips between key disciplinary facts and concepts, and then be able to communicate these ideas effectively across multiple formats (p. 4) Thus, through processes of disciplined inquiry, students acquire not only the discrete pieces of knowledge necessary f or success on standardized accountability measures, but also a deeper understanding of the content material with which they have worked and the skills necessary to make sense of present day issues and concerns. Value beyond school Finally, Newmann, King, a nd Carmichael (2007) claim that in order for student learning to be meaningful, it must have utilitarian, sthetic, or personal value (p. 5) Taking pains to distinguish this from hands on or relevant learning, they argue that the work they do needs to have significance beyond the purpose of certifying academic competencies in school. As intellectual challenges raised in the world beyond the classroom are often more meaningful to students than those contrived only for the purpose of teaching students in school (p. 5) teachers who seek to focus their content area learning around issues relevant to that content but external to those presented in traditionally sanctioned curricular materials will not only work to better engage their students with the m aterial, but will also provide them practical experience in problem solving and in making sense of the world in which they live. The AIW Framework and Student Achievement Newmann, King and Carmichael (2007) have grounded the AIW framework in numerous research studies analyzing the benefits afforded to students exposed to
6 0 instruction based on the framework. The studies, which were conducted between 1990 and 2003, are based on data collected from diverse students in Grades 312 in a wide variety of subjects, including the social studies, mathematics, sciences, and language arts. Additionally, these studies addressed the issue of equity by estimating, and usually statistically controlling for, the influence of students backgrounds (socioeconomic status, race, gender) and prior school achievement on the connection between classroom promotion of authentic intellectual work and student performance (Newmann, et al., 2007, p. 14) In the Center on Organization and Restructuring Schools (CORS) Field Study (Newmann, et al., 1996) the researchers focused their data collection around three issues. These were the quality of and variability in observed authentic pedagogy and student performance, the link between pedagogy and performance, and the equitable distribution of authentic pedagogy and authentic student performance (p. 292) They concentrated their collection in social studies and mathematics classes in twenty four schools, three at each level of elementary, middle, and high. Their collected corpus consisted o f some 500 lesson observations, 230 assessment tasks, and over 2100 samples of student work. While the authors noted wide variability in the authenticity of lessons, assessment tasks, and student work samples, using a hierarchical linear regression model t hey identified a significant (p < 0.001) coefficient of 0.37 between authentic pedagogy and student performance, representing an advantage of thirty percentile points for students having received highrating instruction based on the AIW framework (p. 299) Additionally, the gap between white and African American students
61 diminished in environments with highrating instruction based on the AIW framework (p. 306) In the Chicago Annenberg Research Field Study (Newmann, Lopez, et al., 1998) the researchers focused their data collection on students in grades three, six, and eight, aiming to establish a baseline of practices in Chicago schools for comparison in subsequent research that will track school improvement (p. 4) They concentrated their collection in mathematics and language arts classes at twelve elementary schools which were performing at a somewhat lower level than the rest of the [Annenberg] system on the ITBS (p. 21) These schools were also classified not being integrated, which the researchers define as being at least 30% white (p. 21) Thus, the schools sampled were schools of color. The researchers collected corpus consisted of some 350 assignments from some 75 teachers, and some 3300 samples of student work. Using a four category Rasch a nalysis, the researchers identified a statistically significant performance advantage range of 3156 percentile points for those exposed to instruction extensively based on the AIW framework, with the average gap being 46 percentile points (pp. 38 39) Whi le their analysis concluded that little authentic intellectual work was being done in the schools, in the classes in which teachers were strongly delivering the AIW framework students performance demonstrated a tremendous advantage. The Research Institute on Secondary Education Reform for Youth with Disabilities (RISER) Study (King, et al., 2001) though focused on a specific population of students, continues to bear out the results of the studies previously discussed in this section. The study posed two m ajor questions: In secondary schools with inclusionary practices, to
62 what extent are teacher designed assessments authentic? and How do students with and without disabilities do on these assessments? (p. 1) For this study, the researchers focused thei r collection in thirty two high school classes from four schools which were evenly spread out in urban, suburban, and rural areas. The RISER study did not constrain itself to a single academic subject area, but drew from language arts, social studies, mathematics, and science classes. Though students with disabilities produced work that was slightly less authentic than their peers without disabilities, the research evinced three important trends. First, students with disabilities who were given tasks which rated high in their authenticity performed considerably better... than students who were given below average tasks (p. 9) Second, students with disabilities who were given tasks which rated high in their authenticity additionally performed better than t heir peers without disabilities who were given tasks which rated low in their authenticity. Finally, when analyzing a subset of data comprised of matched pairs, sixty two percent of the students with disabilities produced work that was the same, or higher than in authenticity than their nondisabled peer [ sic ] (p. 12) These findings, coupled with the 5158% performance advantage experienced by those exposed to tasks which rated high in their authenticity, demonstrate the benefits students with disabilities enjoy within a framework for authentic intellectual work. Finally, the Chicago Annenberg ITBS Gains Study (Newmann, et al., 2001) provides additional confirmation to the other empirical studies on which the AIW framework (Newmann, et al., 2007) is grounded. While the gains demonstrated in the previous studies (King, et al., 2001; Newmann, Lopez, et al., 1998; Newmann, et al., 1996) are based on an authenticity scoring guide ( Newmann, King, & Carmichael, 2009
63 for the most recent iteration) the ITBS Gains Study provides a direct link between instruction grounded in the AIW framework and students performance on statelevel standardized accountability measures. The question guiding this study was What happens to students scores on standardized t ests of basic skills when urban teachers in disadvantaged schools assign work that demands complex thinking and elaborated communication about issues important in students lives? (p. 10) From 1997 1999, the researchers collected over 2000 assignments fr om over 275 teachers, with a total of 1785 participating students in writing and 1794 participating students in mathematics. Furthermore, 53% of participating students were African American, 39% were Latino/a, and 89.4% of the total participating students were classified as students of low income (pp. 1617) The research found a consistent positive relationship between student exposure to highquality intellectual assignments and students learning gains on the ITBS (p. 23) Students in classes with highquality intellectual assignments made 20% gains over the national average, and 4245% gains over students in classes with low quality intellectual assignments (p. 23) Additionally, highquality authentic assessments provided students with poor prior ITBS performance a valueadded benefit of 2829% of one years worth of learning gains in reading and mathematics (p. 27) The AIW Framework and Problem Based Learning Within the social studies especially, a few researchers have conducted a handful of studie s focusing on the relationship between authentic intellectual work and the use of educational technology in promoting problem based approaches to learning (Brush & Saye, 2004; Saye & Brush, 1999, 2007) Acknowledging that authentic intellectual work is of ten more interesting and meaningful to students than repeated drills aimed at disconnected knowledge and skills (Newmann, et al., 2007, p. 12) this work addresses
64 students levels of engagement with problem based instruction through technology (Saye & Br ush, 1999) the effects scaffolding may have on mitigating teachers resistance to its implementation in their classrooms (Brush & Saye, 2004) and on the affordances technology offers to promoting such problem based learning in the social studies classroo m (Saye & Brush, 2007) John Sayes and Thomas Brushs initial study (1999) explores high school students responses to a technology supported, problem based US history unit and considers whether the use of technology would help overcome learner obstacles associated with problem based instruction, including a lack of deep engagement with the content area material, a failure to consider the worth of differing perspectives on multiperspectival issues, and both missing content area knowledge and metacognitiv e reflection (p. 472) Their study asserts that students exposed to technologically assisted problem based historical instruction, which in its design aligns in part with the AIW criterion of disciplined inquiry, demonstrated higher levels of engagement, i ncluding enthusiasm, dialogue, and persistence in unit activities (p. 489) However, while they claim a socioconstructivist perspective, the researchers problematically blend the ethnographic methods of Judith Goetz and Margaret LeCompte (1984) with statistical design experiment theory (Brown, 1992) This introduces a strong element of methodological instantiation into their study alongside a lack of epistemological consistency (Koro Ljungberg, Yendol Hoppey, Smith, & Hayes, 2009) Furthermore, while Saye and Brush (1999) acknowledge others ought not generalize their findings, questions arise regarding the methodological rigor of their study. One the statistical side, their sample is far too small to infer robust results; on the qualitative side, both the
65 lack of deep description and the subjection of qualitative data to the status of mere databased speculations (p. 496) are not only objectionable but beg the question of why they were even included in the study. Thomas Brushs and John Sayes subsequent work on teachers resistance to authentic intellectual work (2004) while arising from their previous, more methodologically conflicted work, sheds a number of these difficulties by focusing exclusively on the qualitatively ethnographic side of data collec tion and analysis (Goetz & LeCompte, 1984) Casing an individual teachers use of a scaffolded multimedia learning environment over a threeyear period, the authors looked to answer three questions: (1) whether working with a multimediasupported problem b ased unit would engender in their participant a reconsideration of her pedagogical praxes; (2) whether scaffolding and what kinds of scaffolding would encourage problem based instruction; and (3) what limits might exist to overcoming teachers resistance to such problem based approaches (Brush & Saye, 2004, pp. 349350) Ultimately, they determined that their research participant, while reticent initially to problem based instructional approaches, did reconsider her praxes in part as they related to teaching for deep thinking. However, she continued to maintain what the authors refer to as absolutist epistemological assumptions (p. 353) ultimately resulting in her adding a factual recall assessment worth 40% of the instructional units examined. Ultimately, this indicates that teachers worldviews particularly if they conceive of the world in a logically positivistic fashion (e.g., Ayer, 1952; Popper, 2010) may work to inhibit the adoption of authentic intellectual work in their classrooms.
66 Finally, John Sayes and Thomas Brushs summative survey of their research on technologically assisted problem based historical inquiry (2007) presents their conclusions on the affordances technology can offer in promoting authentic intellectual work. In i t, they conclude that the incorporation of technology into the social studies classroom can: (1) encourage challenges to ones epistemological worldviews; (2) support the development of foundational content area knowledge as well as strategic and metacogni tive thinking; (3) help students develop perspective recognition skills and empathetic caring; and (4) engender awareness of and working within ethical dilemmas (p. 205) Even though they recognize students may have difficulty in holding complex, competing perspectives and numerous conceptual connections in their heads so that they are available for constructing the sort of complex models needed for rigorous problem solving (Saye & Brush, 2007, p. 216) they note that these difficulties should not discour age the use of technologically assisted problem based units of instruction. The mission they identify encouraging critical thinking on important social issues demands teachers work through these difficulties. And while some of the previous epistemolog ical difficulties relating to their research design resurface ( Saye & Brush, 1999) their message is still pertinent. Synopsis While the breadth of research demonstrating students learning gains on standardized tests when exposed to instruction grounded i n the AIW framework is limited, the Social Studies Inquiry Research Collaborative (SSIRC, 2010) is currently working to collect quantitative data in a number of states with highstakes accountability measures in the social studies for further substantive analysis. However, very little legitimately rigorous qualitative research exists on the benefits of student learning within
67 the AIW framework (e.g., Darling Hammond, et al., 1995) Most problematic to this study is that, while Brush and Saye (2004) qualitat ively examined the effects of exposure to the AIW framework on an individual teachers classroom praxes, their research does little to explore it as a lived experience (van Manen, 1990) Though research on student gains is promising, if classroom teachers have miserable lived experiences working within this framework, we cannot hope to enjoy their support and adoption of the AIW framework. Summary Over the past thirty years, the culture wars have continued to rage on in our public schools and in our institutions of higher education as competing factions have sought to assert their influence in order to control not only the manner of education schoolchildren and college students receive, but also the way in which the nation develops culturally, socially, economically, religiously, and morally. Conflicting notions on what the schools should teach and how they should teach it have produced the current era of educational accountability in which we find ourselves, as well as the passionate responses thereto. In an d of itself, these cultural divergences might appear benign to some. However, they are having a number of problematic effects on our nations systems of education. The standardized measures of achievement accountability proponents support have had a long history of marginalizing students of color and students of poverty. Furthermore, though the No Child Left Behind Act was initially conceived of a means to address the achievement gaps between students of color and their white peers as well as between studen ts of poverty and students of means, the application of the accountability measures associated therewith have only served to entrench them. Students of color and of poverty, instead of seeing their education enriched by
68 progressive legislation, find their curricula narrowed to the point of banality as concerns over test scores and pass rates rather than student learning dominate their environments. However, notions of powerful learning that can bring equity back to our nations schools and help close these persisting and nefarious achievement gaps exist. Accounting for both students performance on standardized accountability measures particularly students of color and students of poverty, who continue to underperform compared to their white and financiall y secure peers all while better preparing students for their lives as critically thinking and effective adult citizens is not impossible. The framework for authentic intellectual work is one such powerful example. By promoting the construction of knowledge through a process of disciplined inquiry for value beyond the purposes of mere school certification, classroom teachers can enrich their students lives and provide them a deeper understanding of the world in which they live. Furthermore, the budding body of research connecting AIW to scores on standardized measures of achievement demonstrates that pursuit of authentic intellectual work in the classroom can satisfy multiple competing educational concerns.
69 CHAPTER 3 PHILOSOPHICAL FRAMEW ORKS AND RESEARCH METHODS In this third chapter, I present the philosophical frameworks guiding this study as well as the research methods I used to collect and analyze my data. I begin with an introduction to hermeneutic phenomenology, in which I detail its connections to the ontological framework of existentialism and to the epistemological framework of interpretivism. Next, I provide a detailed breakdown of my coresearcher selection process, including a discussion of my selection criteria and demographic portraits of eac h of my participants. I then give a presentation of my data collection and analysis procedures, and conclude with a discussion of my studys trustworthiness. Hermeneutic Phenomenology When conducting hermeneutic phenomenological research, the primary researchers personal experiences with the phenomenon under investigation typically serve as the motivating forces for inquiry. The goal is to gain a greater interpretive understanding of the textures and structures of these experiences. Furthermore, while the primary researchers experiences constitute an important part of the data corpus ( for example, Estola & Elbaz Luwisch, 2003) it is not through an autoreflective analysis that the researcher gains a greater phenomenal comprehension. Instead, as van Manen (1990) notes, it is through the examination of the experiences of others with the same phenomenon that the primary researcher achieves greater insight: Why do we need to collect the data of other peoples experiences? We gather other peoples experiences because they allow us to become more experienced ourselves (van Manen, 1990, p. 62) What follows in this section is a discussion of the philosophical frameworks which guide hermeneutic phenomenology.
70 Ontological Existentialism Ontological existentialism is a theory of reality which holds concrete human existence as its core. It negates the preexistence of human essence otherwise conceptualized as the soul and instead presumes that human essence is the result of human action and choice rather than its result. Sartre (2007) states that, within an existentialist ontology, man is not only that which he conceives himself to be, but that which he wills himself to be, and since he conceives of himself only after he exists... man is nothing other than what he makes of himself (p 22) For this reason, people are who they are because they chose to be so, and therefore bear full responsibility for their personhood. In what follows, I will detail the connections between ontological existentialism and hermeneutic phenomenology by dra wing heavily on the philosophers concerned therewith. This shall proceed in two parts, beginning first with an examination of existence and concluding with an examination of temporality. Existence Phenomenology is grounded in the ontological assumption that the world consists of phenomena and the manner in which these phenomena are experienced. Coined as a term by Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel and adopted by Edmund Husserl in the early twentieth century, phenomenology thus designates a science, a complex of scientific disciplines and designates at the same time and above all a method and an attitude of thought: the specifically philosophical attitude of thought, the specifically philosophical method (Husserl, 1999, p. 19) Furthermore, this philosophical method gives priority to the question of Being. Hermeneutic phenomenologists in particular concern themselves with the Being of Dasein, an entity for whom its own Being and its own potentialities for -
71 Being are issues of paramount importance (Heidegger, 2008, pp. 32, 183187) While not negating the transcendence of the worldhoodof the world as such ( Aristotle, 2002 discusses the postulate of the Unmoved Prime Mover; and Heidegger, 2008, pp. 91148 discusses existential transcendentalism) this focus on B eing nevertheless holds that reality constitutes solely that which any and all existent Daseienden experience. Furthermore, because hermeneutic phenomenologists concern themselves with the Being of Dasein, they acknowledge the primacy of existence, define themselves according to the manner in which they perceive their experiences, accept responsibility for their personhood, and consequently can will themselves to action. Existence within an existential framework can be summarized by three major ideas. First existence precedes essence (Sartre, 2007) Second, the world consists of the totality of perceptible things and the things of all things... [understood] as the universal style of all possible perceptions (Merleau Ponty, 1964, p. 16) Finally, Dasein is an entity which, in its very Being, comports itself understandingly towards that Being (Heidegger, 2008, p. 78) Ontological existentialism thus presents a challenge to traditional positivist conceptions of reality, which advocate the existence of a universal and objective Truth outside and separate from the knower. Because the Being of Dasein is in each case mine (Heidegger, 2008, p. 68; see also pp. 149153 on the "I hood" of Dasein) in any and all cases reality is subjective by the grammatical vi rtue of Dasein acting as the knower. For the hermeneutic phenomenologist, this implies that researchers need be concerned with their coresearchers experiential perceptions and interpretations, and ultimately with taking social action to help their coresearchers improve upon their personhood (Holstein & Gubrium, 2005)
72 Temporality The ontological existentialism inherent to phenomenological human science inquiry differs in its approach to temporality. It presents a challenge to the temporal classifications o f past, present, and future, held as universal and objectively True outside and separate from the knower. Derived from the distentio animi of Augustines Confessions (1998) in which he affirms that time is something experienced, perceived, and measured in the mind (pp. 239244) there exists only the present in an ontologically existential framework. However, this concept of the present is what Ricur (1984) refers to as the dialectic of the threefold present (p. 9) that is, the past as being the present as remembering, the present as being the present as attending, and the future as being the present as expecting. It is precisely this threefold present, argue Gallagher and Zahavi (2007) which allows us as Daseienden to make temporal sense of our exper iences. It is because of the threefold present that a perception cannot merely be a perception of what is now; rather, any perception of the present slice of an object includes a retention of the just past slice and a protention of what is about to occur (Gallagher & Zahavi, 2007, pp. 7778) Without this dialectic, temporal sensemaking would be impossible. Applied to hermeneutic phenomenological research, the threefold present dictates necessarily the researchers inquiries: How do the coresearchers pres ently interpret their past experiences through the process of reflection? How do they presently interpret their current experiences? How do they presently interpret their future experiences through the process of anticipation? Additionally, because our phenomenal experiences are temporally grounded in the dialectic of the threefold present, while our temporal mode of experiencing may change from an increasingly less distant present as expecting, to a present as attending, to an
73 increasingly more distant present as remembering the truth of our experiencing this phenomenon does not change. Consider, as an intellectual example, skydivers who experiences a parachute malfunction upon canopy deployment. While watching the canopy deploy in a state of present as expecting, as they see their potentiality for Being in a parachute malfunction, they may experience a slowing of time more likely than not coupled with thoughts of Please, dont let this happen. Once experiencing the parachute malfunction in a state o f present as attending, as they proceed through the emergency procedures for which they are well trained, they may experience time in a more normal fashion, counting out their movements in measured cadence. Finally, after successfully cutting away from their malfunctioning parachutes and safely deploying their reserves, they may reflect on the entire experience in a state of present as remembering and think Did that ever happen quickly! Though each stage of the skydivers experiences with their parachute malfunctions approximately two to three seconds would objectively measure the same on a chronometer, each stage of their experiences present as expecting, present as attending, and present as remembering had for them a different and yet equally t rue length. It is because of the experienced nature of time that Heidegger (2008) states, a pathway which is long Objectively can be much shorter than one which is Objectively shorter still but which is perhaps hard going and comes before us as inter minably long. Yet only in thus coming before us is the current world authentically ready to hand. (pp. 140 141) For this reason, the world must be experienced if it is to have any meaning, any reality, or any truth to any given Daseienden. Consequently, hermeneutic phenomenologists must concern themselves with their coresearchers experiences and attend to the interpreted temporality of these experiences as indicative of their reality.
74 Historical Development of Phenomenology Phenomenology as a research pr ocess aligns itself epistemologically with a number of counter positivist traditions. In what follows, I will briefly survey the origins of phenomenological human science research, and chart particularly the development of hermeneutic phenomenology as a response to what existentialist philosopher Heidegger (1982, 2005, 2008) viewed as the residual influences of logical positivism in early transcendental phenomenology. Roots of phenomenology Husserl (1970) claims scientific positivism resulted in a crisis for humanity, rendering the experiential world devoid of meaning (pp. 67) Instead, by embracing experience as being inherently subjective and the world as being inherently intersubjective (Husserl, 1977; 1983, pp. 5156) he sought to restore the range of ethic and sthetic meanings associated with human experience which the positive sciences theretofore had stripped away. All knowledge rests upon inward evidence (Husserl, 2008, p. 19) Likewise, all thinking is intentional; consciousness is always conscio usness of something and that an object is always an object for someone (Crotty, 1998, p. 79) Therefore, it necessarily follows that any knowledge all Daseienden have is the result of their having experienced a phenomenon and having interpreted it. It i s for this reason that phenomenologists refer to study participants as coresearchers all are actively involved in the twin processes of meaning making and interpreting their own experiences. To label them as participants rather than coresearchers would be to apply an outmoded standard of positivism to phenomenological research.
75 Given the ontologically transcendent nature of the worldhoodof the world as such, Husserl envisioned the phenomenological approach to human science inquiry as being able to t ranscend the inherently subjective nature of a given human experience to the (eidos), or universal phenomenal essence, of this experience. This is achieved through an intuitive process which holds good for all realities without exception (Husserl, 1983, pp. 89) or as Moustakas (1994) explains, Thus, the maxim of phenomenology, To the things themselves (p. 26) This process is called (epoch) (Husserl, 1999) and is sometimes referred to as parenthesizing (Husserl, 1983, pp. 5960) or bracketing (Crotty, 1998; Moustakas, 1994) In this process, phenomenologists exhibit a manner of Cartesian self doubt and challenge their own assumptions, beliefs, and the things they hold close. As a result, they are able to shut [themselves] off from a ny judgment about spatiotemporal factual being (Husserl, 1983, p. 61) and arrive at a grammatically objective phenomenal understanding, both rich and thick in description, which still retains its subjective truth (Husserl, 1999, p. 36) Even though it makes a clear break from the reductionist approach of logical positivism, Husserls transcendental phenomenology still maintains, as Crotty (1998) suggests, a hint of objectivity about it, or alternatively what Hinchey (2009) calls a positivist hangover (p. 96) It is in opposition to this logical positivism which existentialist philosopher Heidegger framed hermeneutic phenomenology. The hermeneutic phenomenologists response While Heidegger agreed that the purpose of a phenomenological examination was t o provide rich and thick descriptions of a respondents experiences, Heidegger could not accept the reductions, the sharp distinctions between subject and object, and between essence and existence, on which Husserls project depended (Carman, 2008,
76 pp. x vii xviii) Instead, Heidegger held that by the grammatically interpretive nature of accessing any universal phenomenal essence, no phenomenologist could hope to divorce oneself completely from the assumptions, beliefs, and the things one held close. No ma tter how detailed a researchers bracketing process, this divorce can never be complete. Heidegger (2008) states: Our investigation itself will show that the meaning of phenomenological description as a method lies in interpretation. The [logos, trans. logic or dialogue] of the phenomenology of Dasein has the character of a [hermeneuein, trans. hermeneutic or interpretation], through which the authentic meaning of Being, and also those basic structures of Being which Dasein itself possesses, are made known to Daseins understanding of Being. The phenomenology of Dasein is a hermeneutic in the primordial signification of this word, where it designates this business of interpreting. (p. 62) As such, hermeneutic phenomenologists int erpret their own experiences and the experiences of others to come to the subjective truth which Husserl (1999) acknowledged, without purporting any claims to objectivity. This is not to say that the process of parenthesizing is valueless within the hermeneutic approach. Heidegger (2008) notes that The achieving of phenomenological access to the entities which we encounter, consists rather in thrusting aside our interpretative tendencies, which keep thrusting themselves upon us and running along with us, and which conceal not only the phenomenon of such concern, but even more those entities which themselves as encountered of their own accord in our concern with them. (p. 96) By rid[ding] ourselves of our tendency to immediately interpret (Crotty, 1998, p. 96) based on the influence of culture, hermeneutic phenomenologists will be able to achieve more nuanced, and importantly more personal, interpretations of their and others experiences.
77 Furthermore, given that for Heideggers primary focus is on the Bei ng of Dasein, which is in each case mine (2008, p. 68) for each and every Daseienden, hermeneutic phenomenology is less concerned with the discovery of the universal phenomenal essence of a human experience for its own sake, and is more concerned with t he human dimensions and implications of this experience. In other words, the purpose of Heideggerian phenomenology is the intentional act of attaching ourselves to the world, to become more fully part of it, or better, to become the world... research is a caring act: we want to know that which is most essential to being (van Manen, 1990, p. 5) Given that the world of Dasein is a withworld (Heidegger, 2008, p. 155) Being alongsidethe world with Others has as its essential nature care and concernfor Others. Thus, Heideggers hermeneutic phenomenology, while aiming to engender a greater and deeper understanding of the nature of human experience, does not end there. Rather, it continues ahead of Husserlian transcendental phenomenology in search of ways in which researchers can work to help their coresearchers improve upon their human existence. It is for this reason that Holstein and Gubrium (2005) categories hermeneutic phenomenology as an interpretive practice intended for social action, and for which the term coresearcher takes on the added dimension of disrupting the traditional researcher researched relationship, in which both researcher and coresearcher alike interpret lived experience and serve as authorities of knowledge. Study Design in Hermene utic Phenomenological Research Hermeneutic phenomenology, though recognizing the inherently subjective nature of knowledge as well as the highly personcentered and interpreted nature of transcendental reality, is guided by a highly structured series of pr ocedures for coresearcher selection, data collection, and analysis. What follows in this section is an
78 integrated and detailed discussion of these procedures, how they compare and contrast to the procedures of transcendental phenomenology, how these proced ures provide epistemological consistency thus avoiding what KoroLjungberg and associates (2009) refer to as a lack of (e)pistemological awareness and how I designed my dissertation study to align with these procedures. Research Question When conduct ing phenomenological human science inquiry, researchers need to begin with questions rooted in autobiographical significance (Moustakas, 1994; van Manen, 1990) The phenomenal experiences the researcher has had, and the desire to come to a deeper understanding of these phenomenal experiences, determines which questions the researcher will ask, as these are of greatest interest to the researcher. During my time as a classroom teacher before returning to the University of Florida to pursue my PhD, I taught hi gh school world history in a school of color. Though I received my preservice teacher education through traditional means at a Research One university, earning a m asters d egree in social studies e ducation, I had a number of difficulties in the earlier par t of the year in getting my students of color to connect with my lessons. As a result, I contacted a friend whom I had met during my preservice teacher education and had herself worked as a social studies teacher in schools of color. When I recounted to her my difficulties, she asked me, Is your instruction authentic? I intimated that while I thought so, I knew very little about what she meant by authentic. In response to my uncertainty, she kindly referred me to some relatively easy to read and easy to understand practitioner oriented readings on authentic instruction (Newmann & Wehlage, 1993; Scheurman & Newmann, 1998) Reading these on my
79 own and attempting to learn how to use authentic intellectual work as a high school world history teacher in a school of color, I found myself comparing the kinds of lessons I had taught previously to my understanding of these practitioner oriented readings, working to develop authentic lessons for the topics I was teaching at the time, and thinking ahead to the ways I could implement authentic intellectual work for future units. My successes and failures alike, as well as my desire to provide the best quality instruction for my students as possible, drove me eventually to return to the University of Florida to deepen my theoretical understanding of the framework for authentic intellectual work, and to pose the following research question: How do high school world history teachers like myself experience learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color? Co researcher and Site Selection Selection criteria Having begun with questions of autobiographical significance, the hermeneutic phenomenologist, having experienced the phenomenon under investigation, aims to gain a greater understanding of this phenomenal experience through the experiential recountings of others (van Manen, 1990) It is these others experiences which provide the researcher with a broader, fuller, and more complete understanding, in the Aristotelian sense, of the universal phenomenal essence of the experience being investigated. For this reason, selecting coresearchers in a hermeneutically phenomenological study must be absolutely purposeful and criterionbased. These criteria are informed naturally by the research question. For example, if r esearchers were interested in gaining a greater understanding of their experiences as primary school science
80 teachers working in a rural school of poverty, they would need to select coresearchers who are either having currently or would have had previously similar experiences. Furthermore, by maintaining as homogeneous a sample as possible through greater levels of question specificity say, restricting the inquiry to the teaching of Grade Five Earth and Space Sciences will provide the researcher with ex periential descriptions much closer to ones own. In this manner, they satisfy the egocentric requirements of the phenomenological endeavor. While this may provide the appearance of common sense, to do otherwise would demonstrate a lack of (e)pistemological awareness (Koro Ljungberg, et al., 2009) If researchers are interested in exploring others experiences with a given phenomenon they themselves have not experienced, they need to employ a different methodological perspective (e.g., phenomenography; see Marton & Booth, 1997) In the case of my research design, in order to achieve the depth of experience necessary to produce rich and personally meaningful findings, I needed to ensure that my study coresearchers experienced the same phenomenon as I: learning to use authentic intellectual work. To provide greater specificity to my study, I began homogenizing my coresearcher pool by restricting the research question to focus on the experiences of high school world history teachers working in schools of color. As the social studies in the high schools consist of a wide field of subject areas, including psychology, sociology, geography, government and law studies, and many varieties of history, restricting the subject area focus to one of the social studies disci plines with which I had teaching experience helped considerably to meet this end. Furthermore, as I had taught world history in a school of color, I restricted my pool of possible school
81 sites to high schools of color, which I define as schools the student populations of which are more than 50% of color. Finally, as my interest was on the experiences of teachers learning to use authentic intellectual work, I restricted my coresearcher selection to teachers who expressed interest in learning about authentic intellectual work, who were willing to participate in collegial discussions thereon, and who were willing tentatively to develop and deliver a lesson based on the frameworks principles to their students. Sample size In determining the sample size of a phenomenological study, the researcher needs to balance the twin concerns of sufficiency and manageability. The more coresearchers a phenomenologist has participate in a study, the more experiential recountings will be available to the researcher through coll ection. This will allow for the construction of a more complete understanding which approximates increasingly the universal phenomenal experience (Aristotle, 2002; Heidegger, 2008) conceptualized as the totality of lived phenomenal experiences of interest (Merleau Ponty, 1964) However, given the volume of data collected in a phenomenological study (see below for a detailed discussion of collection procedures), as the researcher collects more coresearchers experiential recountings, the difficulty in analy zing these accounts for the purpose of assigning them meaning increases. Addressing this issue, Polkinghorne (1989) recommends limiting the sample of study coresearchers to a number between five and twenty five, thus effectively allowing the researcher to construct a sufficiently deep understanding of the universal phenomenal essence, all while working with a manageable data corpus. Additionally, a number of methodological and phenomenological scholars have attested that the primary investigator herself constitutes an important coresearcher in a
82 phenomenological study (Creswell, 2007; Gallagher & Zahavi, 2007; Grbich, 2007; Moustakas, 1994; van Manen, 1990) By including oneself in the sample, a researcher can conduct phenomenological research which demonstrates rigor, (e)pistemological and methodological consistency, novelty, and utility with as few as four additional coresearchers. F or the purposes of this research, I had planned initially to work with a total of six coresearchers, as this number placed my coresearcher sample within the limits Polkinghorne (1989) recommends. However, due to logistical difficulties in securing county l evel permission for a second research site, and with the explicit permission of my committee as established during my proposal defense, I limited my coresearcher sample size to three. Site description As coresearcher selection in hermeneutic phenomenologi cal studies needs be purposeful, and because my study focuses on the experiences of high school world history teachers working in schools of color, I elected to recruit coresearchers from a high school of color and of poverty, with whose principal I had pr eviously established a working, cordial relationship, and who agreed to allow me to conduct research in his school on another occasion (Brkich & Washington, 2011) This school was Thomas Jefferson High School (TJHS), a pseudonym. Thomas Jefferson High Scho ol is located in a college town in the Southeastern United States, the population of which is in excess of 100,000 yearlong residents. In the 20082009 school year, its student population was 74% of color, with African American students making up the largest proportion of the entire student population (60%). Additionally, 42% of all students at TJHS were eligible for free and reduced lunch during
83 the 20082009 school year. Furthermore, because less than half of the schools lowest quartile did not make annu al yearly progress in reading, the school declined two full letter grades, from a B to a D, in its annual rankings based on the states accountability scheme. Comparing TJHS to the towns predominantly white (64%) high school reveals some stark differe nces. The proportion of the predominantly white high schools African American student population in the same year was comparably small (19%), as was the percentage of students eligible for free and reduced lunch (19%), and the school had maintained a grade of either A or B over the past ten years according to the states accountability scheme. Coresearcher descriptions Below, I provide individualized portraits of each of my coresearchers at TJHS to provide some additional context, which may have contr ibuted to their experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work. Jake Jones. Jake is a white male in his late fifties. He is a lifelong resident of the town in which TJHS is situated. He attended junior college in the late sixties and early seventies, and worked for a number of years before returning to school to earn a b achelors d egree in history. Subsequently, he earned a m asters d egree in social studies e ducation at an accredited Research One university and entered the teaching profession. Initially, he worked for three years at one of TJHS feeder schools, Booker T. Washington Middle School, the student population of which was 73% of color. After these initial years of teaching, he transferred within county to Thomas Jefferson High School, and has taught there ever since. At the time I conducted this research, Jake was entering his fourteenth year of teaching. He teaches both American and w orld h istory to students of color in TJHS Major Program. He describes himself as
84 academically oriented, but has expressed pessimism regarding the teaching profession as a whole in light of sc hool county state and national level accountability movements. Mike Minsk Mike is a white male in his early sixties, and moved to the city in which TJHS is situated late in the latter years of his life. He pursued advanced graduate studies and earned a d octorate of p hilosophy in cultural anthropology before he was aggressively recruited to teach high school social studies in a southeastern coastal town. Following three years of teaching honors level World History to students of color, he applied for and was accepted to teach w orld h istory to TJHS International Baccalaureate and Pre IB students, as well as the schools honors level Major Program classes. In recent years, he has seen his assignment expand to include Advanced Placement Major Program st udents, and the honors level Major Program classes have disappeared altogether from the schools curriculum. At the time I conducted this research, Mike was also entering his fourteenth year of teaching w orld h istory, having spent the last eleven years of his career working with a mixture of predominantly white IB and Pre IB students and predominantly African American Honors and AP Major Program students. He describes himself as someone who is concerned with the big picture, and is disappointed with the m anner in which accountability movements have circumscribed his ability to teach this big picture. Sam Smalls Sam is a white male in his late twenties. He earned a b achelors d egree in g eography and immediately enrolled in graduate school to pursue a m aste rs d egree in s ocial studies e ducation at a Research One university. Following completion of his teacher education, he began working at TJHS. He initially started teaching
85 American History to Major Program students, and later had his assignment changed to teach Advanced Placement Human Geography, Advanced Placement World History, and regular World History to Major Program students. At the time I conducted this research, Sam was entering his fourth year of teaching at TJHS. He describes himself as someone who is passionate for his craft, and regularly seeks out ways to improve his store of teaching knowledge. Participant compensation As part of my dissertation could be construed as professional development, I secured for my coresearchers four professional dev elopment inservice credit hours. Classroom teachers in the state in which I conducted my study are required to accumulate a minimum of 120 professional development inservice credit hours over the course of five years, or take two college classes in their c ertification area within the same timeframe, in order to be eligible to renew their professional teaching certificates. I provided no other compensation for my coresearchers. Hermeneutic Phenomenological Data Collection Heideggers (2008) existential ontol ogy identifies the essential structures of Dasein as Being with and Daseinwith [ Mitsein und Mitdasein] and that the world of Dasein is a with world [ Mitwelt ] in which Being in [the world] is Being with Others (pp. 149, 155) Furthermore, his interpr etivist epistemology holds that all knowledge of the worldhoodof the world which any Dasein may hold and convey to any other Dasein must be generated in discursive fashion. Heidegger (2008) acknowledges that while the concept of the (logic) had many significations in the time of Plato and Aristotle, within an existential framework essentialising Being with as a feature of Dasein, it needs to be understood as (dialogic) (p. 55) Necessarily, this translates as either
86 dialogue or discourse Heidegger (2005) also notes that the speaking is one with the manner of perceiving.... Only on the basis of possible communication can one succeed at all to make a unitary fact of the matter accessible to several individuals in its unitary character (p 21) For these reasons, when conducting phenomenological research, one can only gain knowledge of the world, accessed strictly through the perceptions of any given Dasein, through a discourse which concerns itself with these perceptions. Most commonly us ed is the long interview, conducted in a climate in which the research participant will feel comfortable and will respond honestly and comprehensively (Moustakas, 1994, p. 114) as it most explicitly demonstrates the characteristics of discourse. However researchers can avail themselves to other manners of data which are epistemologically consistent, provided they demonstrate equally the characteristics of discourse. Vagle (2006) and van Manen (1990) both demonstrate how reflective journaling and the process of parenthesizing meet the characteristics of discoursing with oneself. As Heidegger (2008) held that Being with is an essential characteristic of Dasein even when factically no Other is present at hand or perceived (p. 156) reflective journals or other forms of self discourse such as autointerviewing, so long as they address the phenomenon of interest, hold epistemologically. Parenthesizing An important part of the collection process in phenomenological research is the process of (epoch). T his process is otherwise known as parenthesizing (Husserl, 1983) bracketing (Crotty, 1998; Moustakas, 1994) or bridling (Dahlberg & Dahlberg, 2003; Vagle, 2006) For the purposes of this study, the term parenthesizing will take prominence. In this phas e of collection, prior to collecting coresearcher da ta,
87 the primary researchers aim to challenges their own assumptions, beliefs, and the things they holds close regarding their own experiences with the phenomenon they are investigating. The researchers can meet this challenge by subjecting themselves to their own interview questions, by recording their own recountings, and then by reflecting on their meaning through linguistic interpretation. Once completed, they can put these reflections aside and begin i nterviewing their coresearchers. The philosophical foundations of hermeneutic phenomenology acknowledge the impossibility of severing oneself entirely from ones inquiry. However, by pushing aside the temptation to interpret others experiential recounting s through ones own lenses, particularly by positioning oneself as a coresearcher, the hermeneutic phenomenologist is more able to generate a nuanced and meaningful, rather than nave, interpreted narrative (Crotty, 1998; Heidegger, 2008; Ricoeur, 2009) A dditionally, by not employing a manner of constant comparative between ones own recountings and the recountings of study coresearchers ( Corbin & Strauss, 2008, pp. 7374, 77) and by examining the recountings of each study coresearcher isolatedly, the res earcher provides the opportunity to interpret the study coresearchers experiential accountings more closely to their respective perceptions of their own experiences. Regarding my work as part of this process of judgment suspension through parenthesizing (Crotty, 1998; Dahlberg & Dahlberg, 2003; Husserl, 1983; Moustakas, 1994; Vagle, 2006) I subjected myself to my own interview questions at each stage of collection prior to interviewing my coresearchers. This allowed me to generate a preunderstanding of m y own experiences, what both Heidegger (2008) and Ricur (2009) refer to as a nave interpretation. I transcribed these autointerviews verbatim.
88 Furthermore, by regarding these autointerviews as having equal weight to those of my coresearchers in that they held no special value above that which my coresearchers provided I allowed myself to be critically reflective (Cohen, Kahn, & Steeves, 2000) This constituted an important part of my attempts to minimize the impact of my own experiences on both my c oresearchers recountings and my interpretive analysis thereof. Furthermore, even though hermeneutic phenomenologists typically advocate researchers include their own preunderstandings as epistemologically consistent portions of the data corpus (Gallagher & Zahavi, 2007; van Manen, 1990) I excluded my own preunderstanding from the data story in order to ensure my coresearchers recountings retained appropriately the central position in my findings. However, I did return to my nave, interpretive preunderst andin g in this studys Epilogue ( Chapter 6), discussing how my understanding of my own experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color changed and matured as a result of my interactions with my coresearchers. Interviews and critical friends reading group The most commonly used form of discursive data in phenomenological research is the long interview (Moustakas, 1994) Given that the focus of hermeneutic phenomenology is to access the coresearchers interpretations and percept ions of their experiences with a given phenomenon of inquiry (Heidegger, 2008; MerleauPonty, 1964, 2002) the long interview provides most easily data which are epistemologically consistent with a framework of existential interpretivism. As such, long int erviews consisted the totality of analyzed data for my research. Over the course of this study, I conducted three informal and individual interviews with each of my coresearchers, in their respective classrooms, at the end of the school
89 day. I elected to hold the interviews in their classrooms largely because these environments were familiar to my coresearchers and would allow them to respond to my questions deeply and thoughtfully without feeling environmental discomfort (Moustakas, 1994) Each of these three interviews lasted approximately sixty minutes in length, generating a total of approximately twelve hours worth of digitally recorded coresearcher audio data, all of which I transcribed verbatim. I conducted the interviews in three stages, with each s tage consisting of one interview per coresearcher. Each of the three stages additionally corresponded to the three phases of my coresearchers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color, as based on Augustines distenti o animi (Augustine, 1998; Ricoeur, 1984) and which also corresponded roughly to the phases of my own experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work. During the first stage of interviews, I focused my questions on my coresearchers learning to date about authenticity in teaching and on the experiences they had had to date in their classrooms with authenticity. This stage corresponds to my own experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work, in which my friend initially asked me, Is y our instruction authentic?, designed to elicit my coresearchers initial interpretations o f authenticity in teaching ( Appendix D). Following this first stage of interviews, my study coresearchers and I examined in depth a current practitioner oriented reading on authentic intellectual work (King, et al., 2009) We each read the article individually and on our own time, after which we held a Critical Friends Group (Curry, 2008) meeting to discuss our ideas on the framework and its applicability to our praxes I helped direct our discussion using the Four As
90 discussion protocol (National School Reform Faculty, 2009) in which my coresearchers and I discussed at length the assumptions Newmann and associates held regarding AIW, the points at which we agreed with the authors, the points as which we argued with the authors, and importantly the aspirations we had for their respective classroom praxes. The reason I chose a National School Reform Faculty discussion protocol to guide our discussion is because the Four As protocol, like all National School Reform Faculty protocols, is designed to promote equitable participation all while challenging the participants to think deeply and richly on the subject at hand. Additionally, I chose the Four As because, as part of the study, we all would have to develop and deliver an instruction grounded in the framework for authentic intellectual work, and Four As directs teachers thinking forward toward their aspirations. Subsequent to this reading group discussio n, I encouraged each of my study coresearchers, within their Critical Friends Group, to rely on each other for support, advice, and constructive criticism with respect to the lessons they would generate and teach, and to encourage them to bring student wor k samples to subsequent interviews. Subsequent to each of my study coresearchers individual lesson deliveries, I began my second stage of interviews. During this second stage of interviewing, I focused my questions on my coresearchers present experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in their respective schools. The questions focused on the two parts of their present experiences, with the first part being their experiences in the first stage of professional development and the second part being their experiences teaching the lessons they had developed and how these experiences informed their learning to use authentic intellectual work. This stage corresponds roughly to my own experiences of
91 learning to use authentic intellectual work as a high school world history teacher, when my own experiences with the lessons I developed and delivered to my students would inform my own praxis ( Appendix E). After I completed the second stage of data collection, I scheduled the third round of individual interviews with my coresearchers. In this final stage of interviewing, I focused my questions on my coresearchers future expectations of using authentic intellectual work in their classrooms and on how their experiences of learning to use authentic intell ectual work as a result of my work would inform their future professional development as classroom teachers. The final round of interviews corresponds roughly to my own experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work, as I would look to future opportunities for implementing authentic intellectual work in my classroom ( Appendix F). Hermeneutic Phenomenological Data Analysis I analyzed the transcripts of all collected coresearcher and autointerviews by blending the analysis methods of van Manen (1 990) and Moustakas (1994) First, though van Manen (1990) lacks an explicit demonstration of the philosophical foundations of phenomenology, which Creswell (2007) considers an essential factor in establishing the trustworthiness of phenomenological researc h, Moustakas demonstrates a detailed and thorough examination of the works of Husserl, Heidegger, MerleauPonty, and Sartre. Second, though Moustakas presents a detailed method of analysis, his work is grounded most heavily in the transcendental phenomenol ogical tradition of Husserl (1983, 1999) which while demonstrating a strong subjectivist epistemological shift away from logical positivism, still suffers mildly from Hincheys (2009) positivist hangover (p. 96) Contrarily, van Manen aligns clearly wit hin the
92 interpretivist tradition, and as such aligns epistemologically with this study, though his work (1990) demonstrates less philosophical elegance. Furthermore, Creswell notes that even though the two methodologists use different terms in labeling their stages of analysis, the stages of Moustakas correspond directly to the stages in van Manen. In what follows, I will detail the several stages of hermeneutic phenomenological analysis through which I went, referencing both van Manen (1990) and Moustakas (1994) with the express disclaimer that this analysis was in every sense and above all else interpretivist in nature. Data immersion After hermeneutic phenomenologists parenthesize and collect their data, they must begin reducing their data corpum such that they become manageable for more detailed analysis. It is in this first stage of reduction that they identify what Cohen, Kahn, and Steeves (2000) refer to as the essential characteristics of each major segment of the data corpus (p. 76) Here, the hermeneutic phenomenologists take what van Manen (1990) describes as the wholistic [ sic ] or sententious approach in assigning meaning to an entire interview transcript by asking the question What sententious phrase may capture the fundamental meaning or main significance of the text as a whole? (pp. 9293) The researchers then interpret the interview transcript as a whole by formulating a fundamental meaning phrase which captures the content of the text. This necessary initial stage of herm eneutic analysis represents what both Heidegger (2008) and Ricur (2009) refer to as the composition of an initial, nave interpretation. Immediately after I completed each interview transcription, I immersed myself in my coresearchers words by performing three readings of the transcript. In the first reading, I skimmed through the transcript to gain initial and general impressions of my
93 coresearchers experiences. In the second reading, I read on a paragraphby paragraph basis to sharpen my impressions. A fter this second reading, I composed the fundamental meaning phrase capturing what I interpreted to be the fundamental meaning and main significance of the interview transcript. In my third and final reading, I skimmed through the transcript once more to s ee if the general impressions I held of my coresearchers experiences matched sufficiently with my composed fundamental meaning phrase. If they did, I kept the phrase; if they did not, I made the changes I felt were both necessary and appropriate ( Appendix G). Isolation of thematic statements through horizontalisation Once hermeneutic phenomenologists have immersed themselves in their interview transcripts and have composed a nave interpretation for each major segment of the data corpus, they must then wor k to reduce the whole of the corpus they will have amassed throughout the data collection processes. First, the researchers can simplify their coresearchers spoken language by removing turns such as you know, um, uh, and like from the transcripts (Cohen, et al., 2000) The researchers further simplify each transcript by removing digressions from the inquiry at hand, which Moustakas (1994) refers to as horizontalisation (pp. 9596) van Manen (1990) notes that the hermeneutic phenomenologist accompl ishes this by isolating study coresearchers thematic statements using a selective or highlighting approach by asking What statement(s) or phrase(s) seem particularly essential or revealing about the phenomenon or experience being described? while reading through the reworked transcripts (pp. 92 93) The researcher identifies these by either highlighting or underlining the coresearchers words.
94 Final to this step, the hermeneutic phenomenologist interprets each segment of coresearcher meaning by applying to each an interpretive label. Through this process, the researcher interprets the horizons of the study coresearchers experiences (Heidegger, 1982; Moustakas, 1994) Compiling these into a list and eliminating those horizons which repeat themselves acr oss the entire data corpus, the hermeneutic phenomenologist has at this point a working body of thematic statements, transformed into meaning units from which a linguistically interpreted and transformed narrative of the study coresearchers experiences wi th the phenomenon under investigation can be constructed. Similar to the previous stage of my analysis, I worked to isolate my study coresearchers thematic statements and to horizontalise my data corpus by performing three close readings of each interview transcript. In the first reading, I highlighted or underlined my coresearchers words which I deemed most essential (van Manen, 1990) In the second reading, I applied interpretive labels of my own to these essential segments of text, thus providing mysel f with the horizons of my coresearchers experiences (Heidegger, 1982; Moustakas, 1994) I kept a list of each horizon I deemed essential as I proceeded. Following this, I eliminated any horizons which repeated themselves within each transcript. In my final reading, I examined each transcript again to determine whether I had missed any statements or phrases I might interpret as essential. If I did, I highlighted or underlined them and immediately applied to them a horizonal label; if I did not, I left my horizonal list as it was. Once I completed these final readings for all of my transcripts, I constructed a final and summative horizonal list ( Appendix H).
95 Composing linguistic transformations through textural description Once hermeneutic phenomenologists have constructed a horizonal list of their study coresearchers phenomenal experiences, they must then work to transform their data corpum into working interpretive descriptions of these phenomenal horizons. Moustakas (1994) refers to this as textural descri ption writing, in which one facilitates clear seeing, makes possible identity, and encourages the looking again and again that leads to deeper layers of meaning (p. 96) This process is by nature both creative and interpretive (van Manen, 1990, p. 96) A s such, the analytical focus remains not on the textures of the coresearchers experiences themselves, but rather on the meanings these textures accord them, and how the hermeneutic phenomenologist interprets these meanings. In this third stage of my analy sis, I transformed my data corpus into working interpretive descriptions of the phenomenal horizons I developed in the previous stage. These textural descriptions held as their subject my interpretations of the meanings my coresearchers gave the prereflect ive feelings they held in conjuncture with their experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color. These textural descriptions likewise provided a deeper dimensional sense of my coresearchers experiences ( Appendix I). Determin ing incidental and essential themes through eidetic variation After composing their linguistic transformations through textural description, hermeneutic phenomenologists undergo a final stage of analysis. In this stage, they seek to determine which of the horizonal themes they assigned to their data corpum are incidental and which ones are essential to their coresearchers phenomenal experience. This does not constitute an additional and final phase of phenomenological reduction,
96 but rather serves as the st age of analysis in which researchers work to discover aspects or qualities that make a phenomenon what it is and without which the phenomenon could not be what it is (van Manen, 1990, p. 107) The researcher accomplishes this through a process called eidetic variation by imagining how one might experience the phenomenon under investigation with a given structural theme such as time, space, materiality, causality, and relationship to self and to others (Moustakas, 1994, p. 99) missing from the interpretation. The researcher asks, Is this phenomenon still the same if we imaginatively change or delete this theme from the phenomenon? Does the phenomenon without this theme lose its fundamental meaning? (van Manen, 1990, p. 107) The themes the researcher interprets from the study coresearchers experiential recountings as being fundamental to the phenomenon constitute its structures. From these structures the researcher is able to begin composing interpretive and structural descriptions of the individual coresearchers phenomenal experiences. In this ultimate stage of my analysis, I sought to determine which of the horizonal themes for which I composed textural descriptions were essential and which were incidental to the phenomenon of learning to teach us ing authentic intellectual work in schools of color. Through the process of eidetic variation, in which I imagined how my coresearchers might have experienced this phenomenon with a given theme absent, I established which horizonal themes constituted its essent ial interpreted structures ( Appendix J). Subsequent to this, I composed a structural description for each of my study coresearchers ( Appendix K). Composing the Interpretive Experiential Descriptions While some researchers identify multiple manners of presenting hermeneutic phenomenological findings, the weaknesses of these presentation styles in showcasing
97 the studys interpretive themes results in the favoring of one presentation method above all others. For example, Cohen, Kahn, and Steeves (2000) hold that the results of hermeneutic phenomenology can be presented by case study. However, they acknowledge the limitation of this approach: Most of the time a single case does not represent all the major categories and themes. Often, three or four case studies are necessary, or in some cases, a fictive narrative that combines the experiences of several informants will be used, and it will be made clear that the narrative is fiction. (p. 96) Though this case study method of presenting multiple cases may cover all of the interpretive themes, and the fictive narrative represents an approach consistent with an interpretivist epistemology, these approaches fall somewhat short. Because the focus of hermeneutic phenomenology remains on the interpretive analytic themes of coresearchers experiences, phenomenological researchers typically advocate combining the studys coresearchers textural and structural descriptions as a presentation method (Cohen, et al., 2000; Moustakas, 1994; Smith, Larkin, & Flowers, 2009; van Manen, 1990) The final presentation of the findings takes the form of the combined thematic textural structural description (Moustakas, 1994) sometimes referred to as either the anecdotal approach (van Manen, 1990) or the theme and quote [ sic ] method (Cohen, et al., 2000, p. 96) The value of the texturally structurally descriptive approach is that it allows hermeneutic phenomenologists to present each of the essential interpretive themes of their coresearchers experiences while providing illustrative and concrete examples from the data. Additionally, as more creative approaches to presentation such as readers theatre (Cohen, et al., 2000; Donmoyer & Donmoyer, 2007) are often better suited when live performances are the end product of the research process, the texturally structurally
98 descriptive approach is preferable when the end product of the research process is written, such as a dissertation or peer reviewed journal article. For these reasons, I elected to present my findings along the texturally structurally descriptive approach. Once I had identified the textures and structures of my study coresearchers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color and had composed individual textural and individual structural descriptions of their experiences, I composed combined textural and combined structural descriptions of their experiences. It is these descriptions which I present in the findings chapter of my dissertation. Attending to the speaking of language and varying the examples In presenting ones findings in a hermeneutic phenomenological study, the researcher undergoes several stages of writing. In the first stage, they attend to the speaking of language. van Manen (1990) notes that language is the only way by whic h we can bring pedagogic experience into a symbolic form that creates by its very discursive nature a conversational relation. Writing and reading are the ways in which we sustain a conversational relation. (p. 111) Because as Daseienden human beings are i nherently bound by language, hermeneutic phenomenologists must choose the words used in the interpretive process attentively. The decision to quote certain parts of their study coresearchers recountings as anecdotal evidence of the themes is central to this phase of writing. Each choice the researchers make here presents a potentially very different narrative discourse. For these reasons, I chose very carefully which of the parts from my study coresearchers recountings I would quote in my interpreted narr ative of their experiences. Furthermore, to ensure the quotations were the ones I felt best conveyed
99 the meaning I wished to convey, I varied the examples I used through a process of quotation substitution. Similar to the process of eidetic variation, whil e writing my interpretive narrative I address[ed] the phenomenological themes of a phenomenon so that the invariant aspect(s) of the phenomenon itself comes into view (van Manen, 1990, p. 122) The examples I felt convey my interpretive meaning the bes t remained; those that did not, I replaced with more suitable examples. Writing and rewriting Once hermeneutic phenomenologists have firmed up their decision regarding the examples they wish to use, they proceed to compose their textural structural descriptions. Even though the words are not the thing (van Manen, 1990, p. 130) it is only through words that researchers are able to convey the thing, that is, the universal essences of their coresearchers phenomenal experiences. Following the creation of a first draft, with added rethinking, reflecting [and] recognizing (van Manen, 1990, p. 1 31) hermeneutic phenomenologists are able to produce nuanced narratives of their coresearchers phenomenal experiences which convey the meanings they intend them to convey. In my findings chapters, I present the final interpretive narrative draft of the es sences of my study coresearchers phenomenal experiences. This representation best conveys the interpretive meanings I have assigned thereto, resulting from the application of the analytical method outlined in this chapter. Qualitative Research Validity Un like most quantitative studies, the strength of which is determined by the multiple types of validity applicable thereto ( Dooley, 2001, pp. 264269 discusses statistical validity types) scholars judge the quality and strength of qualitative studies
100 based on a different series of criteria. In immediate contrast to statistical validity, validity in qualitative research generally is not like objectivity and cannot be dismissed simply because it points to a question that has to be answered in one way or anot her: Are these findings sufficiently authentic (isomorphic to some reality, trustworthy, related to the way others construct their social worlds) that I may trust myself in acting on their implications? (Guba & Lincoln, 2005, p. 205) Operating within an ex istentialist interpretivist framework, Heidegger (2008) further problematised the notion of validity, holding he would scarcely venture to expect that validity as ideal Being is distinguished by special ontological clarity. Instead, he notes that val idity means at the same time the validity of the meaning of the judgment and, in Aristotelian fashion, that it retains a universal bindingness of character (p. 198) Thus, within an existentialist interpretivist framework, objectivity refers strictly to grammatical objectivity rather than the objectivity of logical positivism, and validity refers to the extent to which researchers interpretive narratives convey the meanings they intend for them to convey. Validity in phenomenological research In addition to these general criteria for validity in qualitative research, Creswell (2007) provides a detailed discussion of the standards of validation and evaluation as applied to phenomenological research. The evaluative questions he holds reviewers should pose of phenomenological research are: Does the author convey an understanding of the philosophical tenets of phenomenology? Does the author have a clear phenomenon to study that is articulated in a concise way? Does the author use procedures of data analysis in phenomenology, such as the procedures recommended by Moustakas (1994) ?
101 Does t he author convey the overall essence of the experience of the participants? Does this include a description of the experience and the context in which it occurred? Is the author reflexive throughout the study? (Creswell, 2007, pp. 215216) All of these evaluation criteria point to what KoroLjungberg and associates (2009) refer to as epistemological and methodological consistency. They hold that efforts should be made to make the research process, epistemologies, values, methodological decision points, and argumentative logic open, accessible, and visible for audiences (p. 687) This openness thus serves as a manner of paper trail when evaluating the worth of the research based on established standards, particularly useful when one seeks to publish ones f indings (American Educational Research Association, 2006) My work demonstrates its adherence to all of Creswells (2007) evaluative criteria. I have demonstrated both in this chapter and throughout my findings chapters a complex understanding of the ontol ogical and epistemological foundations of the hermeneutic phenomenological framework. My phenomenon, high school world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color, is both articulated concisely and ident ifies a clear, precise, and specific aspect of my coresearchers experiences as classroom teachers. I have used clearly defined methods of analysis by blending both Moustakas (1994) and van Manens (1990) analytical approaches to data, and account for my analysis throughout my interpretive findings. In these findings, I also convey the overall essence of my study coresearchers experiences, and pay particular attention to describing their experiences and the contexts in which they occurred. Finally, throug h the process of parenthesizing (described earlier), I remained reflexive throughout my research.
102 Peer review To increase the trustworthiness of my work I involved a colleague conversant in the philosophical and methodological foundations of hermeneutic p henomenology in a process of peer review (Frankel, 1999) While Creswell (2007) does not explicitly require peer review in ensuring a researcher conducts phenomenological research rigorously and validly, this process allowed me the opportunity to problemat ise and resolve any egregious shortcomings of my work based on Creswells criteria, as well as to ensure the work remained epistemologically consistent. Subjectivity Statement Because all brands of phenomenology begin with the primary researchers personal experiences with the phenomenon of inquiry, providing a subjectivity statement in addition to performing the process of parenthesizing presents an additional layer of transparency and openness in the research. As a former high school world history teacher who has worked in schools of color and who, while teaching, was learning to teach within and taught within Newmanns, Kings, and Carmichaels (2007) framework for authentic intellectual work, I have had a number of pedagogical experiences with my phenomenon of inquiry. While I hold that I cannot entirely parenthesize these experiences, nor should I want to within a hermeneutic frame (Heidegger, 2005, 2008) accounting for these experiences permitted me to resist the urge to provide an immediate and final interpretation of my coresearchers experiences. I am a socioeconomically advantaged White male who lived and taught high school economics and world history in a school of poverty prior to coming to the University of Florida for my graduate studies in educ ation. Following the completion of my m asters degree in social studies e ducation, I taught high school world history in a
103 school of color. Upon the completion of my third total year of teaching, I returned to the University of Florida to pursue my Doctorate of Philosophy in Social Studies Education. It was during my final year of teaching world history in the state of Florida that I learned of the AIW framework, and worked to incorporate it into my classroom. During my tenure as a doctoral student and candidate at the University of Florida, I have worked as a teacher educator to incorporate the AIW framework into my teacher candidates preservice education where I could. Given my ontological and epistemological positions as an existentialist interpretivist, I feel that the AIW framework, in its constructivist foundations, approximates most closely my own position. Furthermore, given my classroom teaching experiences, in which I felt my students of color and of poverty were ill prepared by traditional modes o f instruction for their lives as participatory citizens, I felt compelled to impart upon my teacher candidates at a minimum the alternative approach the AIW framework offers.
104 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS Hermeneutic phenomenology and its processes, described previously in Chapter 3, produce textural and structural descriptions of coresearchers experiences with the phenomenon under investigation. These descriptions, presented both on an individual coresearcher basis and in combined synthetic form, help provide a deeper understanding of their experiences. Consequentially, they provide researchers with a deeper understanding of their own experiences with the phenomenon they are investigating. In this fourth chapter, I present the findings of this research study, which focuses on high school world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color. The chapter is structured based on the analysis methods presented in Chapter 3. It begins with a presentation of the inter pretive textural descriptions of each of the three coresearchers experiences. These textural descriptions facilitate clear seeing, make possible identity, and encourage the looking again and again that leads to deeper layers of meaning (Moustakas, 1994, p. 96) Presenting each of Jakes, Mikes, and Sams textural descriptions allows for the savoring of the varied meanings associated with their experiences. Following the presentation of the individual interpretive textural descriptions, Chapter 4 proceeds with a presentation of the interpretive structural descriptions of each of the three coresearchers experiences. These structural descriptions, produced through a mixed process of eidetic variation and writing, allows for the interpretive arrangement of aspects or qualities that make a phenomenon what it is and without which the phenomenon could not be what it is (van Manen, 1990, p. 107) These
105 descriptions account for structural themes such as time, space, materiality, causality, and relationship to self and others (Moustakas, 1994, p. 99) Presenting each of Jakes, Mikes, and Sams structural descriptions allows for the appreciation of the differences in their experiences while still grasping the commonality of their experiencing the worldhoodof the world (Aristotle, 2002; Heidegger, 2008) Subsequent to these individual interpretive textural and structural descriptions, this chapter continues with a presentation of combined textural and structural descriptions of the three coresearchers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color. By combining the textures of Jakes, Mikes, and Sams experiences, I am able to present an interpretation of their experiential features while providing illustrative and concrete examples from the data. By combining the structures of their experiences, I am able to present an interpretation of that which their experiences held in common and how they progressed. Ultimately, this provides for an understanding of the essential nature of their experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color. Individual Textural Descriptions Below I present the individual textural descriptions of Jakes, Mikes, and Sams experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color. These descriptions provide for the feel of their respective experiences and the affective dimensions associated thereto. Textural Description of Jakes Experience Jakes experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color is one primarily of resistance and disdain strengthened throughout camaraderie and collegiality with his coresearchers. Jakes experience is similar to that of Walk Kowalski
106 from Gran Torino an embittered man facing what he views as a decline in his school, both frustrated and disgusted by his students lack of background knowledge and motivation, and both distrustful and disdainful of new approaches to pedagogical salvation. Because of the strength of his distrust and disdain for edu cational theory, following his initial interview and participation in the Critical Friends Reading Group, he expressed disinterest in developing any lessons grounded in the AIW framework, and refused to do so. Frustrated with his students, Jake says, all of my kids are capable of doing it [the work he assigns them]. Its just a question of whether they want to or not, or whether theyre willing to.... They all want to go to college, but they dont even want to do the basic work in high school. Arguing he is pretty academically oriented, he feels that kids at this age, that are in high school, they should be here because they want to graduate. As such, he places responsibility for his students success ultimately on his students shoulders, and views hi s own responsibility as expos[ing] them to this information [of w orld h istory content], because otherwise theyre never going to get it. Based on his reading and understanding of the AIW framework, he discusses the shortcomings he perceives in the fram ework of being able to cover a sufficient amount of content in a similar timeframe to traditional instruction, which aligns with the feelings of responsibility he has to provide his students with a content rich education. Jake explains using a lesson he believed would meet the label of authentic as presented in King, Newmann, and Carmichael (2009) : When teaching my students about the printing press, I could give them the assignment of copying the textbook by hand, and all of the illustrations, and all of th e maps, to see how long it would take. And then we could use a miniature classroom press with movable type to repeat the process, and
107 then compare that with making copies at the copying machine, when it spits out the copies, like zoop, zoop, zoop. But th at just takes too damned long. Notwithstanding the point that the lesson he conceives of being authentic misses the mark on the criteria of disciplined inquiry as well as on value beyond school, it is Jakes interpreted understanding of the AIW framework w hich frustrates his adoption of it in light of his sense of responsibility to teach. Because of the perspectives which Jake has taken, when exposed to the framework for authentic intellectual work, he expresses tremendous disdain for those who do not activ ely teach in a classroom like his and yet who either place constraints on his practice or make demands which he feels are divorced from his reality. Of the framework itself and its designation of authenticity, Jake is particularly vehement, saying Its jar gon, its nonsense, it doesnt mean anything. you know, how do you teach in an inauthentic way? ... And no offense to you, since youre in the College of Education, but thats what the business of the College of Education is. Its coming up with jargon, an d its coming up with the latest buzzword, and the latest hotshot technique. And most of its come up from people who arent in the classroom. This disdain also extends to those at the state level who impose accountability schemes on his classroom Jake ar gues that t he whole [accountability] movement is pretty bogus because policymakers want to grade the school, but now they want to link teachers salaries and evaluations to test scores and all this.... None of it makes any sense. but you got politicians making the rules, and you know, theyre clueless. Finally, he expressed a lot of concern regarding the level of development that the kids are on already and whether they are really able to do that level of work. Because of the existing gap between st udents of color and their white peers, the gap between students of poverty and their financially secure counterparts, Jake feels that his students many of whom dont watch the news are simply incapable of performing to the expectations
108 of the AIW fra mework. Because of these lowered expectations, Jake expresses disdain for those who would advance the AIW framework in his classroom. These feelings of frustration and disdain segue into feelings of depression and persecution. Jake experiences learning to use the AIW framework as an ad hominem attack on his practice, in which he retorts, Put those three guys in my classes and let em do it. Let em run that, and not just one lesson, but put them in a class like mine for nine weeks and let em run that plan. Then let em write the article. Working in a context in which other schools damned sure dont want the kids that we teach, Jake cant help but feel that somebody is out to get [him]. Pressures to adopt the flavor of the week, the flavor of the year what he perceives as the uselessness of College of Education theories and the blame he feels unjustly placed on him for his students lack of success, he characterizes as depressing. While Jake manages to find comfort in the camaraderie and solidar ity gained from his coresearchers during his learning experience, he also gains an affirmation of his praxis This comes particularly when he compares his teaching experiences to that of his colleagues. First, he thought Well, maybe Im not being effectiv e, and maybe other teachers are being more effective than I am at this kind of thing, but as a result of his experience comes to find that hes not totally out in left field here with these kids. The camaraderie and solidarity he gains in this experienc e are applied primarily to entrench his disdain for and frustration with the framework for authentic intellectual work, referring to it as pie in the sky. All told, Jakes experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color is one of feeling deprofessionalised and disrespected as a classroom teacher.
109 Though there are some positive affective dimensions to his experience, these positive dimensions serve only to heighten the negative dimensions and to entrench them. Furthermore, Jakes experience cannot rightly be characterized as one of learning to use authentic intellectual work, because he neither internalized the AIW framework nor attempted to use it in his classroom. His experience can more rightly be characterized as one of learning about using authentic intellectual work in a world history class within a school of color, in which he concluded AIW could not be done. Textural Description of Mikes Experience Mikes experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color is one of attempting to recapture lost feelings of professionalism and validation in the face of frustratingly increasing external constraints placed on his praxis and on his abilities to develop as a professional. His experience represents an interesting blend of positive emotions, such as excitement, enjoyment, and camaraderie, and negative emotions, including frustration, disappointment, and psychological exhaustion. This is reflective of much of the general experience of classroom teachers across the country since the accountability movement took hold. While he is fortunate not to have to cater his instruction to state accountability testing, nevertheless his curriculum has been impacted similarly, representing a struggle to balance process with content in the light of Advanced Placement testing. On managing this balance, Mike says, Now that weve gone to an AP format, its driven by getting through the content. And thats a problem... youre dealing with wanting to focus on developing sk ills [for the Major Program students], and having a very limited time to do that. Central to Mikes experience is the feeling responsible for ensuring his students receive the best possible education, in line with what he feels are the essential goals of
110 a proper social studies education. Mike notes that you need to have the exposure to that kind of stuff the individual dates, whatever , but that ultimately his prime goal as a social studies educator is to provide his students of color with the big picture stuff... because thats where they see applications to other societies, their own society, and so on. Part of his frustration relating to the conflicting goals of education connects particularly with his Major Program students backgrounds as pers ons of color and of poverty. As he recognizes these students have a shortfall of life experiences when compared to their predominantly white peers and that his Major Program students often struggle with just the basic ideas [of] republican government or democracy or whatever, he feels driven to provide them with the learning experiences he feels they lack, all while providing them the skills necessary to be successful. This contrasts with the external pressures he experiences, particularly coming from his school administrators, to really approach it completely as an AP class. The disconnect between the two leaves him feeling a bit frustrated, particularly because he feels holding his ninth grade preIB and tenth grade Major Program kids alike to a college standard is developmentally inappropriate and irresponsible. Mike defends his position, noting, I cant set as my primary focus the idea that they have to be prepared for this exam.... As a professional teacher, I think I owe it to them to say, All right, lets focus on things that youre going to carry with you, that are going to be meaningful to you . These external pressures particularly relating to ensuring his students pass the AP examination leaves him feeling increasingly deprofessional ised, less able to be as creative as a teacher as [he] used to be, and forced to approach his vocation in a way he feels is inappropriate.
111 In spite of his frustration, and of feeling deprofessionalised, Mikes experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color produces some strong positive feelings. Though somewhat distrustful of what he termed College of Education jargon, he still places a high amount of value and respect on the currency of the research, and that I was willi ng to problematise it alongside my other coresearchers. Mike feels excited that the framework left him feeling professionally empowered, and that the framework could serve as a tool [he] could use to better teach his Major Program students effectively. A dditionally, collaborating with his coresearchers allows him to feel less isolated and to experience the excitement and feelings of professionalism he had experienced at his previous teaching assignment Speaking of his previous experience, Mike states: It was a very exciting, dynamic time, and I felt like that was one of the most important times in my career as a teacher, was just having the opportunity to interact and engage with fellow teachers, with administrators, and thats what it was.... This was th e first time [I felt that] since being at TJHS in my eleven years here. Initially developing a lesson on poverty grounded in King, Newmann, and Carmichael (2009), and debating whether addressing poverty was a government responsibility in the present day United States, Mike reports being able to connect some of his Major Program students experiences to the social justice policies of Asoka in the ancient Mauryan Empire and to engage his students at previously unrealized levels. Ultimately, while Mike feels disappointed with his students work output in his Ancient Mauryan / Modern American poverty lesson, he still enjoys feeling allowed to really tap into [his] own creativity, that [he] felt like [he] was being treated as a professional, somebody that was capable of making these [curricular] decisions, and that they were decisions that were academically educationally sound decisions.
112 Furthermore, Mikes experience of teaching this lesson resulted in greater pedagogical reflexivity and considerations of how he could continue to build on the lesson [The lesson] did lead into a unit in which we went back and began to look at the origins of African civilization, and Im going to come back tot hat theme of poverty and the causes of it, and how it ties in with greater economic movements in world history and how it was necessary at all times to make instruction culturally relevant in order to build a meaningful dialogue and notions of concepts. Finally, the camaraderie of working closely with his peers on a topic of professional interest helps Mike feel as though he regained some of his lost professional status, and worked to break down in part his feelings of isolation. Textural Description of Sams Experience Sams experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color is one primarily of struggling to find practical ways to balance process learning and content acquisition with his major program kids. This experience blends both positive and negative dimensions. The positives include feelings of collegiality, happiness at overcoming teacher isolation, and appreciation of the practicality of authentic intellectual work. The negatives include feelings of frustration, a strong disdain for the College of Education and educational theory, and disappointment. However, Sams quest for the practical remains paramount: Im still thinking authentic education is higher order thinking, its the skills, its the questioning, its the brainpower that i s up here, but also has a practical application and draws upon previous skills and knowledge.... But still, as with almost all COE pedagogical stuff, its too broad and general. The responsibility Sam takes personally to ensure his students receive the best possible education is central to the manner in which he seeks to balance content and
113 process while learning to use authentic intellectual work. Examining the balance between rigor and relevance, he states, I think that rigor doesnt really change overal l, based on your geographical or cultural locus. But I think your relevance does, and I think I make my class authentic to my students by making it relevant to them, and not just, you know, Well, lets learn about history through hiphop music.... If you dont have them engaged, theres no hope. And you got to make it relevant for them. Sam cites particularly a lesson he taught on the notion of the pax romana and the rule of law by bringing in current American prison demographics as a vehicle to problemat ize systemic racism for his students of color and of poverty as a whole, some of whom who have incarcerated family members. When learning to use aut hentic intellectual work, this strong sense of responsibility leads him to have strong feelings of guilt: It made me feel like, Why hadnt I raised the bar earlier for my kids? You know what I mean? Why hadnt we scaffolded up to this point? Theres a lot more we could be doing... and what youre doing now is not enough. In Sams case, the connection between his feelings of responsibility seem closely tied to his perceptions of how he has managed to make his world history instruction both rigorous and relevant to his students of color and of poverty. Accompanying these feelings of responsibility and guilt are feelings of frustration, particularly directed at educational theorists and colleges of education. When presented with the term authentic, he initially retorts, I must not be part of the Ivory Tower anymore. Likewise, Sam contrasts the content of the King, Newmann, and Carmichael (2009) article with the way in which he and his coresearchers discuss it: We talked it out in laymans terms, in twenty first century teacher terms, not twenty first century pedagogical researcher terms, you know what I mean? College of Education, Taj Mahal terms. Commenting largely that the AIW framework appears to be pie in the sky, he
114 feels deterred from the theoretical framework when discussing the article with his coresearchers. In spite of these negative dimensions, S am reports feeling excited about the collegiality of the learning experience, particularly because the collaborative aspect of his learning experience is so rare: When do you ever get together with just the three people that teach w orld h istory at your school? Never. When do you just get together and talk about pedagogy with three of your peers? Theres none of that collaboration in this school, and I thought that was a very positive aspect. The practical elements of the discussion, such as How are we going to implement this? How are we going to get this to work? lead Sam to feel excited about the potential of the framework for his practice, even though he remains frustrated at the lack of practical examples which he could implement immediately in his clas sroom. Sam developed and taught two lessons grounded in the framework: one for his open enrollment Advanced Placement World History class, in which he taught the Roman crisis of the third century, and one for his open enrollment Advanced Placement World Ge ography class, in which he taught the concepts of place and placelessness. In the first lesson, he sought to make relevant the military, political, religious, and economic problems the Roman Empire faced in the latter half of the third century to the probl ems the United States faces currently in the same areas. In the first lesson, even though the lesson was planned to have high levels of relevance to the world beyond school, the content Sam taught was a little advanced for his students of color and of poverty: If they had a bright student in that [discussion] group, they nailed it... but the directions were tough. Even though there were snippets of the [current day problem] examples, some of those were hard for the kids to understand. Learning from this
115 e xperience, in that he would have liked to have started that scaffolding of content a little earlier, he spent more time scaffolding the concepts of place and placelessness in his w orld g eography class while preparing his students to redesign their school cafeteria to embody a local sense of place. While noting an improved level of engagement, Sam still experienced some frustration with a number of his stud ents performance. Though they were AP Honors level kids, some still had difficulty grasping the assignment concept he was advancing, even though Sam had talked about it five times all ready. All told, Sams experience is one of struggle to balance process learning with content acquisition in a practical fashion, tempered by feelings of frustration resulting from a perceived chasm between educational theory and educational practice. Individual Structural Descriptions Below I present the individual structural descript ions of Jakes, Mikes, and Sams experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work. These descriptions provide for a greater relational understanding of the factors which constitute their experiences, giving them their distinctive shapes. Structu ral Description of Jakes Experience While Jakes experience cannot be truly called one of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color, as he was disinclined to develop, teach, and reflect upon a lesson grounded in the AIW framework, his experience of learning about authentic intellectual work in his high school of color demonstrates considerable consistency through the several stages of Augustines distentio animi Furthermore, his initial preunderstanding of the framework for authenti c intellectual work, based on his pedagogical experiences leading up to the study, shapes considerably this learning experience.
116 While Jake accepts responsibility for his students learning, because he views himself as someone who is primarily academically oriented, though he feels disappointed with regards to his students work output he is psychologically isolated from any associated feelings of guilt. As such, ultimate responsibility for his students success needs to lie with someone else the students primarily, but also with the administrators and with the state, all of which worked actively to constrain his classroom praxis. Because of the perceived power imbalance between himself and those external to his classroom, and the pressures those outsiders exerted temporally and pedagogically Jake feels deprofessionalised and disrespected as a classroom teacher. Thus, when encountering the AIW framework initially, his preunderstanding of the theory contextualizes it with these feelings of deprofessional i z ation and disrespect. Even though the framework in essence seeks to reprofessionalise classroom teachers, because it is foreign to his experience, Jake is largely distrustful of it. Disdain for the entire enterprise of authentic intellectual work, charac terized as College of Education jargon, thus results in tremendous insulation and resistance to actual use and implementation of the framework in Jakes classroom. Over the course of the study, his rhetoric on Colleges of Education becomes increasingly vit riolic, indicative perhaps of an experienced ad hominem attack on his practice by the frameworks language. Given the vast distances he perceives between the subject area of world history content, the theory driving the AIW framework, and his students of color and of poverty academic abilities and motivations, he refuses to develop a lesson based
117 on the framework as part of the learning process. This represents the height of his disdain for the instructional theory. In spite of these oppositional structures, or perhaps working in conjunction with them, Jakes feelings of collegial validation and of happiness at overcoming his isolation at TJHS manifest within the context of his disdain for the theory as something foreign to his praxis, foreign to his realit y. Noting his coresearchers likewise feel temporally strained, disappointed with their students levels of work, frustrated by external accountability measures, and distrustful of theory, Jake is emboldened in his resistance to using authentic intellectual work. Jake is assuredly more knowledgeable about the framework, having read through the King, Newmann, and Carmichael (2009) reading, as well as having discussed it with his coresearchers. However, his initial preunderstanding of the framework as disrespectful to his status as a classroom teacher, and of College of Education theory as representing useless jargon, shape his experiential understanding thereof. Ultimately, this result in a firmed postexperiential preunderstanding of authentic intellectual wor k as yet another deprofessionalising external constraint on his classroom praxis. Structural Description of Mikes Experience Mikes experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in his school of color shows an increasing respect for the AIW fr amework as he progresses through the several stages of Augustines distentio animi Because he himself once past worked heavily with and in theory, this shapes considerably the rapid progression of his acceptance of the framework for authentic intellectual work as a useful approach to teaching world history to major program students of color.
118 Mike experiences some doubt regarding the AIW framework when initially introduced to it, expressing mild disdain and distrust for College of Education theory, interpreted as jargon. However, he himself is an academic and places value on current researchdriven classroom praxes. As such, he is open to the learning process and expresses willingness to try implementing the framework in his classroom. Additionally, because he sees himself as being ultimately and personally responsible for his students learning which he clarifies as not being measurable by standardized achievement tests he regularly struggles and seeks out ways to balance the process learning which he values most, and the content learning which he values least. Mike experiences increasing reprofessionalisation as the process of learning to use authentic intellectual work in his school of color wears on. During the collegial discussion on the King, Newmann, and Carmichael (2009) reading, Mike feels increased levels of camaraderie with his coresearchers, which help to break down isolating barriers. Furthermore, he also perceives through the present as remembering the professionally validating associat ions he held at a previous teaching assignment. The professional feel of the discursive experience makes Mike feel as though he is regaining lost collegiality and lost status as a valued and respected educator. While planning his lesson on the nature of po verty, developed in conjunction with the framework for authentic intellectual work, these feelings of reprofessionalisation persisted. In the present as anticipating, Mike looks forward hopefully for increased levels of student engagement and participation. When his students performed in the class discussions at elevated levels, Mike feels validated, as though he has met his responsibilities as a classroom teacher. When his students fail to produce the level of
119 written work he has expected of them, he is di sappointed and experiences frustration. However, because of his acceptance of the ultimate responsibility for his students learning, this causes him to be reflexive, self evaluative, and to simultaneously experience the three phases of the distentio animi He experiences the present as remembering as he reflects on the planning he put into his lesson; the present as experiencing as he feels the disappointment of his shortcomings; and the present as anticipating as he looks forward to lessons which would incorporate changes designed to elicit improved levels of written student work. The responsibility Mike feels in bringing what he views as quality instruction to his students ultimately leads to a recognition of the value of the framework for authentic intel lectual work. The experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work with his Major Program students of color and of poverty, and the added pedagogical reflexivity associated therewith, is one of seeking out and recovering lost feelings of professio nalism through professional validation, collegiality, and the acknowledgement of his status as an educator empowered to make sound decisions regarding his students education. Structural Description of Sams Experience Sams experience of learning to use a uthentic intellectual work in his school of color demonstrates progression through the several stages of Augustines distentio animi beginning with mild resistance to the framework in the present as anticipating and ending with conditional acceptance in t he present as remembering. Shaping largely his experience are Sams overall concerns for things of a practical nature and for his acceptance of personal responsibility above all for his students of color learning.
120 In his initial exposure to the AIW framew ork, Sam experiences a practical disconnect from the pedagogical theory, in which he questions whether it could be applied successfully to his major program students of color. Resulting from this disconnect are expressions of disdain for Colleges of Educat ion and their relative inability to produce useful, grounded, and immediately implementable educational solutions for students of color and of poverty. While this sense of disdain and disconnectedness diminishes in the present as experiencing, both in the collegial discussion with his coresearchers and during the two lessons he developed in connection with the framework one on the Roman crisis of the third century and the other on the concepts of place and placelessness his concern for practical application is still paramount. When he sees the frameworks potential for his major program students of color, he champions it; when its practical potential is obscured, he stands firmly in opposition to it. His concern for the practical ultimately aligns with his unwavering acceptance of personal responsibility for his students academic success. When it seems to Sam that the AIW framework holds the potential to allow him to meet his educational responsibility to his students, he looks hopefully at the framework in the present as anticipating as a vehicle to balance valuable process learning with necessary content learning. Relating particularly to his second lesson on place and placelessness, he expressed some excitement that his teaching might inspire some of his students to become architects. However, when it seems to Sam that the AIW framework risks sacrificing world history content for a dubious learning process, in which he feels it would prevent him from meeting his responsibility, he affects disdain for and distrust of
121 the framework. Regarding his lesson on the Roman crisis of the third century, the level of content background knowledge required to make sense of the material in an authentic fashion led him to believe the AIW framework was better suited for senior level economics and government classes. During his teaching experiences, in which he learns to apply authentic intellectual work practically in his classroom, he expresses much hopefulness in the present as anticipating. His feelings are mixed duri ng the present as experiencing, in which he expresses frustration with external constraints on his praxis and disappointment with the level of his students written work. However, in the present as remembering, within the context of personal responsibility and practicality, he acknowledges the frameworks worth and reflects on the ways in which he could better incorporate its use into his major program world history classes. Furthermore, he feels validated by his students successes, appreciates his coresea rchers collegiality and the camaraderie he feels with them, and looks forward to new experiences in a newly formed present as anticipating. In spite of feeling deprofessionalised by external factors, including statelevel accountability schemes, and of st ruggling to balance process learning with content learning, Sams experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in his school of color structurally demonstrates progress from resistance to cautious acceptance and reflexivity, all contained with in the contexts of practicality and of personally accepting responsibility for his students learning. Combined Textural Description As Chapter 3 explains thoroughly, the combined textural description presents the collected fundamental meaning units drawn from all of the studys coresearchers, representing their experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of
122 color as a synthetic whole. There are four primary textures to the experience: frustration, responsibility, disdain for theor y, and collegiality. Frustration Frustration represents one of the central textural features of the coresearchers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work at TJHS, their school of color. This frustration additionally manifests itself along numerous avenues. One such avenue is teachers frustration with their major program students, along which they complain about their students of color academic weaknesses. Some of this centers around their reading skills, which Jake teacher describes as bei ng generally pretty low Citing recent experiences in their classrooms, Mike say s that they look for [an exactly worded answer], and because that phrase isnt in there, most of them miss it. And thats frustrating, that even at what you would consider to be a fairly basic level of comprehension, theyre not getting it. Sam concurs, noting that [his] kids dont read any of this, and write word for word, without understanding Other frustrations cent e red around their lack of work ethic For example, Mike complains that y ou couldnt expect them to get homework done, because they just wouldnt do it Likewise, Sam laments the absence of work self discipline among [his] students and that t here s not a lot of motivation Finally, Jake notes that on e would be amazed at how many students wont even write down a correct answer, even when you go over it in class [and give them the opportunity to finish] Teachers also experience frustration with factors external to their classrooms, which negatively i mpact their praxes and represent obstacles to their using authentic intellectual work. Rating highly on the list of external frustrations are multiple accountability measures, including statelevel testing and links between Advanced
123 Placement testing and s chool grades Jake expresses particular frustration about school level pressures, stating that its frustrating, being told, The kids have to pass this or pass that, and teachers are being more and more criticized. And the retakes really mess with our s c hedules! Likewise, Mike complains that the AP format makes him feel as though he cant be as creative as a teacher as [he] used to be, and that the administrations focus on making all AP classes open enrollment for major program students was one to p repare [his students of color] for the test Finally, frustration also manifests itself as frustration with the self and of guilt. Authentic intellectual work opens a manner of Pandoras Box for the coresearchers. Sam states that his learning experience made [him] feel good, like, Oh, Im trying something new, yay! But it also made [him] feel like, Why hadnt I raised the bar earlier for my kids? Theres a l ot more we could be doing Additionally, difficulties of connecting with students represents a source of frustration with the self Mike notes the disconnect between adult and student ways of thinking, noting that w e have practice thinking like adults, understanding connections in the adult world, and its not always clear where these kids themselves are coming from... its challenging for me, and I feel frustrated Responsibility Responsibility for students world history learning, and acceptance thereof, also constitutes a major textural feature of the experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color. Teachers acceptance of responsibility for their students of color learning likewise manifests itself along a number of avenues. One such avenue is the acknowledgement that students need to encounter world histor y content Of his students abilities, Jake says that y ou really cant take anything for
124 granted with these kids, that theyre able to understand even basic things and concepts.... I need to cover the material. They need to be exposed to this stuff, other w ise theyll never get it Likewise, Sam says that for some of my lower students who are not going to go on to honors classes... if they leave my class with an understanding of what happened on each of the continents Im pretty happy Responsibility al so manifests itself with respect to ensuring students develop the necessary process skills to be successful as adults in society. Jake notes that w hen you get to more complex matters, theres levels of it, theres things that you can approach in a simple way . By modeling some higher level thinking, Jake feels he is able to accomplish this. Mike similarly notes that the whole intent of education is to produce functional adults that are capable of processing and synthesizing and analyzing, and youve got to prepare them to do that at some point Part of this relates to reducing prejudice and how teaching world history can help meet this end. On the one hand, Sam argues that i ts scary how much color and race is pervasive in our education system, and in the minds of our students, and in our own adults in education. So many of my students think that everyone who is Asian is Chi nese, and thats so wrong. Mike concurs, noting The fact that we can talk about different religious traditions, the problems that humans have faced regardless of the time period were talking about, these are things we share in common. Focusing on these issues will help develop a sense of understanding [that prevents students from] immediately making judgment statements and helps re duce stereotypes and prejudices inherent to the human condition. Addressing issues of higher order thinking through modeling, particularly with a goal of eliminating racism, thus features prominently in the coresearchers minds as one of their responsibili ties as world history teachers in high schools of color.
125 Finally, responsibility manifests itself as a dedication to ensure the teachers present their students with their best work. These notions of best work coincide with the teachers ideas of what const itute the goals of a good social studies education, and though they vary, they stand commonly opposed to standardized measures of achievement Mike expresses regret that weve sort of been pushed into this teaching AP at that level resulting from the pe rceived competitiveness of getting into colleges that you really need to have all thes e AP classes on your transcript, even though he feels that that kind of pressure on a ninth grade student really shouldnt be there. Jake expresses disgust with t he w hole [testing] movement which he views as pretty bogus , and complains about lost days of instruction, noting that this crap [of lost instructional days] comes up all the time (Jake). Additionally, the acceptance of responsibility to provide ones best teaching even comes at personal cost Sam notes that, in spite of the potential for disappointment, The old adage says, If youre going to have low expectations, then the kids are going to perform low. So, just bite the bullet and expect the best. Jak e notes that, even though it takes research and extra work as a teacher, You have to be on the top of your game. Youve got to have a good angle. You approach it in a way that they havent probably heard before Likewise, Mike notes that his teaching felt like that was a best effort on [his] part , and even though he was disappointed, he wouldnt be adverse to doing other things like that because it represented some of his best teaching. Disdain for Theory A third major texture of high school world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color is the heavy disdain they have for College of Education theories, which they consider to be disconnected from their praxes
126 and classroom realities. Invariably all study coresearchers referred to the AIW framework as piein the sky theory when applied to major program students of color. Jake notes that if you did it with IB [International Baccalaureate] kids, I think itd be wildly successful. But our studen ts are really not capable of doing that, of participating in someth ing at that high a level Sam concurs, noting that in the collaborative discussion, he and his coresearchers used that phrase about ten times, piein the sky ideals and thought it was interesting that we all had that view. I thought someone would be a dissenter... but no While Mike is more open to the theory, being both an academic and a former theorist himself, he still acknowledges the disconnect between the fram ework and his class room reality. Of this disconnect, Mike says, Ive really basically got three preps. And so Im balancing my time between those classes, and sometimes one class really demands more time, and not only in terms of maybe preparing a lecture, but just in terms of the grading that is getting done. I can see this kind of activity being very effective for a teacher who has at most two preps... but that theory isnt my reality. Another source of disdain for the framework is with the language used by the framework it self. Acknowledging that words have power, the label authentic immediately positions the studys coresearchers as necessarily falling short of doing their jobs properly Jake experiences this particularly as an ad hominem attack, stating vehemently, It s jargon, its just nonsense, it doesnt mean anything. How do you teach in an inauthentic way? Thats what the business of the College of Education is its coming up with the latest buzzword, and the latest hotshot technique Sam also notes that he mus t not be part of the Ivory Tower anymore, and that when the three coresearchers discussed the framework, they talked about it in laymans terms, in twenty first century teacher terms. Not pedagogical researching terms College of
127 Education, Taj Mahal Iv ory Tower terms Mike sums up the feeling succinctly, stating that Its easy to get locked away in the Ivory Tower Collegiality One final textural feature of world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color is the collegiality which they feel with their peers. Similar to the other experiential textures, these feelings of collegiality are experienced along a number of lines. First of these is the overcoming of feelings of isolation typically associated with secondary school teaching Jake notes that their department doesnt meet too much and that they all pretty much do our own thing , noting that because teaching is an isolating profession, the opportunity to communicate was nice... cause we dont communicate much. Mike echoed his sentiments, noting that other than my wife, I dont get to talk to other people about what Im doing. I dont get to see other teachers much. And its important for teachers to be a ble to share experiences Sam also avows appreciation for his colleagues and the opportunity to converse with them a hundred percent , and muses, When do you ever get together with just the three or four people that teach world history at your school? Never. Theres none of that collabor ation in this school , all while noting his thankfulness for the opportunity to collaborate with his coresearchers. Another aspect of their collegiality is the sense of camaraderie gained through the realization of shared experiences. Sam notes that i t wa s a truly sympathetic experience. I liked that aspect of our conversation that were all in this together, were all educators, and we all have pretty much the same experiences Likewise, Mike argues that i ts very easy to imagine that the problems that youre experiencing are somehow your problems, or that youre the only one that has this bag of strategies to
128 deal with kids For Jake, this sense of camaraderie and of shared experience was very important, in which he states, One thing I gained is that I realized that what Im doing is not completely different from what everybody else is doing. You kind of intuitively know that youre having the same issues with students as they are, but sometimes its good to hear it more directly. Im sure theres som e variation, and some things work better in some classes than in others, but its good to hear that youre not totally out in left field with these kids. Combined Structural Description and the Essence of the Experience As Chapter 3 mentions, the combined structural description, which seeks to portray the themes of time, space, materiality, causality, and relationship to self and to others (Moustakas, 1994, p. 99) displays the things which make up the study coresearchers experiences essentially. In the case of this studys coresearchers Jake, Mike, and Sam and their experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in their school of color, ni ne essential meaning units ( Appendix J) provide three refined essential interpretive structures. Fir st, high school world history teachers learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color strive to achieve what they consider a proper balance between process learning and social studies content learning. Second, through the learning proces s they crystallize their professional identities as high school social studies teachers. Finally, they resolve their positions with regards to educational theory and researchdriven praxes. Balancing Process Learning and World History Content High school w orld history teachers in schools of color constantly strive to find what they consider to be the proper balance between their students of color developing the necessary skillset for lives as adults and their exposure to and thinking on the stuff names, places, dates, and actions that makes up the history of the world. On the one
129 hand, they are pressured to satisfy accountability pressures, particularly relating to students reading abilities on statelevel testing and to their storing of world history knowledge for Advance Placement tests at the school level. On the other hand, they are pressured to equip their students for thoughtful and responsible citizenship once they leave school. Thus, high school world history teachers in schools of color can fi nd themselves drawn in seemingly competing directions. As they learn to use authentic intellectual work, the goals which they perceive the AIW framework as serving can contribute in part to the extent to which they incorporate it in their classrooms. Furth ermore, if they see these goals as oppositional as opposed to mutually supportive, when coupled with the demands placed on their time and the pressures exerted on them from without, they may postpone their endeavors for authentic intellectual work for exte nded periods of time or abandon them altogether, instead of viewing authentic intellectual work as a means of meeting both of these academic goals. Crystallization of Professional Identity While learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color, high school world history teachers crystallize their identities as professional educators. Based on the ways in which they experience professional identity development in the present as remembering, and based on the ways in which they experience demands placed on them in the present as experiencing, the process of learning to use authentic intellectual work can cause high school world history teachers to feel professionally respected and empowered to have a significant and meaningful impact in the lives of their students of color. However, it can also cause them to feel that the gap between the ways they ought to feel professionally and the ways they are professionally positioned in actuality is an insurmountable chasm. Connected to their conceptions of the goals of a social studies
130 education properly formulated, when feeling as though authentic intellectual work can serve as a means to achieve those goals for their students, positive professional identity validation results. Contrarily, if authentic int ellectual work is seen as something rendered beyond their reach by external constraints, they may suffer the results of an emotionally painful professional identity crisis. Positioning toward Educational Theory Experiences with educational theory and with Colleges of Education in the present as remembering influence high school world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in the present as experiencing. Perceptions of a wide disconnect between instructional learning theories and the classroom realities of teachers working in schools of color with students of color and of poverty can cause teachers to shield themselves from what they view as an external and judgmental imposition on their praxes. Likewise, feelings of bitt erness resulting from professional identity frustration can also cause world history teachers in schools of color to look upon the framework for authentic intellectual work with scorn. However, when they view educational theory and research as somewhat con nected to their classroom praxes in the present as remembering, more positive orientations toward the framework result in the present as experiencing, increasing openness to its use and increasing acceptance of the worth of the theory in the present as ant icipating. Additionally, positive feelings resulting from professional identity validation also contribute to a greater acceptance of the value of authentic intellectual work as a theory and to a more favorable positioning toward educational theory as a whole.
131 Essence of the Experience High school world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color are ones of striving to meet ones responsibilities as a professional educator by aiming to properly balance process learning with content learning and in which their professional identities as social studies teachers are crystallized, defined, and firmed up. Depending on their experiences with authentic intellectual work in the present as experiencing and with educational theory generally in the present as remembering, high school world history teachers in schools of color entrench their positions with regards to educational theory and researchdriven instructional praxes in the present as anticipating. Ultimately, this determines the extent to which they will continue to use authentic intellectual work as a guiding framework for instruction in their classrooms. Summary This interpretive presentation of Jakes, Mikes, and Sams experiences show that high school w orld history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work, while having differences with regards to how they encounter the worldhoodof the world some subtle, some less so have important commonalities. Learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school of color, with students of color persons whom the framework purposefully targets as benefitting from this manner of instruction is tinged with powerful negative affect. In spite of this negative affect, positive dimensions to their experiences likewise exist. In the end, the affective balance from their experiences can contribute to their adoption of the framework for authentic intellectual work, which has implications not only for teacher education but likewise for the pow er
132 and status relationships between classroom practitioners and college of education theorists.
133 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION This work examines high school world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color, an d was designed to bring my own experiences with authentic intellectual work while teaching social studies in schools of color and of poverty into relief (van Manen, 1990) By discoursing with Jake, Mike, and Sam at length on their experiences, I was able t o come to not only a greater understanding of my own experiences with AIW but also to a greater understanding of the ways in which high school world history teachers working in schools of color experience the worldhoodof the world (Heidegger, 2008) Given that Fred Newmann and his associates identify students of color and of poverty as particularly needing the kind of instruction for which they advocate in order to close persistent academic achievement gaps (King, et al., 2009; Newmann, et al., 2007) havi ng a greater understanding of how those who teach students of color and of poverty experience learning to use their instructional framework is particularly edifying. Essential Elements The essence of high school world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color includes three primary elements. As mentioned in Chapter 4, these elements are: 1) balancing process learning and world history content; 2) the crystallization of professional identity; and 3) posi tioning toward educational theory. The first essential element, balancing process learning and world history content, represents an ongoing struggle in which high school social studies teachers engage, particularly when the stresses of standardized measures of achievement are added (Brkich & Washington, 2011) Conflicting notions of what
134 constitutes the proper end of a social studies education be it the acquisition of discrete pieces of information (Bloom, 1988; Hirsch, 1987; Leming, et al., 2003; Schlesi nger, 1998) or the development of complex thinking and discussion skills necessary for civic engagement (Dewey, 1916; Evans, 2010; Hess, 2009, 2010; Ross & Marker, 2005; Saye & Brush, 2007) serve to polarize the social studies, giving the impression that these competing ends are mutually exclusive. Classroom teachers find themselves caught in the middle of these social studies wars and, depending on where their respective pedagogical alleg iances lie, seek to promote what they consider to be good teaching. Difficulties arise, however, when classroom teachers acknowledge that the satisfaction of but one of these ends is grossly insufficient to a complete social studies education. Just as one cannot make sauce alla bolognese without ground beef, tomato sauce, and sundry spices, one cannot make the same dish without knowledge of how to properly brown and drain the beef, in what quantities to combine the ingredients, and at what length and temper atures to cook it. The same holds for social studies educators and the curricula they advance in their classrooms. Once cannot provide a balanced and thought provoking world history education if important historical figures, events, and dates are ignored altogether. Likewise, one cannot provide a balanced and thought provoking world history education if the detailed analysis of primary sources, debates over historical causality, and discussions on the implications of the past for the present do not constitute part of classroom instruction. Consider, for example, the experience of Mary in Thomas Brushs and John Sayes study on teacher resistance to problem based instruction (2004) Though exposure to a unit adopting some of the principles of
135 the AIW framewor k resulted in her adopting more collaborative approaches, students roles therein were ill defined, and she still maintained her logical positivism through her addition of a factual recall based summative assessment weighted at 40%. As such, this placed both her and her students at a disadvantage, unable to engage in historical thinking [because they did not] perceive knowledge as uncertain and constructed by the knower (Saye & Brush, 2007, p. 200) Seeking to find the proper balance between the acquisition of world history content information and the thinking processes necessary to make greater contextual sense of them is something with which social studies teachers generally, but especially those in schools of color, struggle while learning to use authentic intellectual work. The second essential element, the crystallization of professional identity, represents a likely determining factor as to whether high school social studies teachers working in schools of color and of poverty will continue to work in those environments, leave these environments to teach white children or children of means, or leave the teaching profession altogether. As the accountability movement towers over the entire edifice of education, the social studies included, classroom teac hers identities and status as professionals are overshadowed by efforts to increase test scores. Reminiscent of early twentieth century charges that classroom teachers were grossly inefficient (Ayres, 1913; cf. Callahan, 1962) there continues to exist an air of teacher distrust when it comes to curricular decisions relating to content and assessment (Darling Hammond, 1994; Nickell, 1999) Coupled with the persisting manufactured crisis of American educational decline (Berliner & Biddle, 1995; Mathews, 2011) classroom teachers are finding themselves increasingly under attack, with those
136 external to their professions and to their classroom seeking to control their work (Apple, 2004; Datnow, 2000; Imig & Imig, 2008) The relationship between authentic intell ectual work and high school world history teachers identities as professionals thus represents a problematic facet of their experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work. On the one hand, the framework is sufficiently broad in its approach, s imultaneously allowing for and requiring classroom teachers to exercise their professional judgment, their content area expertise, and their pedagogical skill in bringing together all of the elements required for powerful and thought provoking learning experiences. The framework for authentic intellectual work represents at its core a recognition of classroom teachers as professionals, and affords them both the level of respect and the responsibility associated with that professional status. On the other hand, by the very language it uses, it risks demeaning the work of teachers in schools of color who do not meet its lofty and seenas unobtainable standards. In this light, the framework may represent but another assault on the teaching profession. The final essential element, teachers positioning toward educational theory, represents the ultimate element as to whether high school world history teachers working in schools of color will adopt the framework for authentic intellectual work long term, or will ab andon it, as a result of their learning experiences. The tensions between educational theory and classroom practice form a central feature of reform efforts, particularly when classroom teachers are not a part of the conversation (Russell, McPherson, & Mar tin, 2001; Schoonmaker, 2007) This results in educational theories becoming more and more disconnected from the classroom realities of teachers in
137 schools of color. Additionally, classroom teachers are rarely consulted for suggestions and instead find the mselves pressured to accept instructional approaches produced outside of their situated contexts (Datnow, 2000) In schools of color and of poverty populated by students who have historically underperformed on standardized accountability measures, these pr essures are exacerbated (Darling Hammond, 2000) The framework for authentic intellectual work, having been produced by educational theorists, thus finds itself in a difficult position when confronted initially by high school world history teachers working in schools of color. While more recent articles have been targeted directly to classroom practitioners (e. g., Newmann, et al., 2009) providing concrete examples for its implementation into a variety of social studies disciplines, some may find it still too theoretical for their uses. John Saye and Thomas Brush (1999) consider at length the experience of Mary, who expressed both trepidation and resistance to problem based instructional approaches, noting she had been trained in neither collaborative nor problem solving approaches to learning during her teacher candidacy. As evidenced by subsequent research (Brush & Saye, 2004) Mary continued to hold onto traditional, logically positivistic views of history, and her implementation of the problem based inst ructional approach may be characterized as halfhearted. Implications for Future Research This study, which focused on high school world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color, has implications for a number of additional areas of research. These divide along three primary lines. First, i t has implications regarding the existing theory practice divide in social studies education. Second, it has implications regarding instructional differences between the varied social
138 studies disciplines, between schools of color and primarily white school s, and between schools of means and schools of poverty. Finally, it has implications regarding the existing body of quantitative research concerning itself between the framework for authentic intellectual work and students performance on standardized meas ures of achievement. The Theory Practice Divide Given that the coresearchers who participated in this study all exuded varying levels of disdain and distrust for both the AIW framework and for Colleges of Education in general, the social studies education research community needs to pay greater attention to how high school social studies teachers may feel disconnected from the theory driving authentic intellectual work. This research may shed light on how teacher educators may work to minimize these feeling s of disconnectedness to encourage greater acceptance and use of authentic intellectual work in social studies classrooms. Recognizing that words themselves have power (Gee, 2005) considering the language used in the framework and how classroom practitioners react to this language may explain in part the reason they express resistance to adopting the framework for their classrooms. While the label of authentic may accurately represent Newmanns and his associates position that doing school serves litt le real purpose and additionally does a poor job of preparing students for the real world (Archbald & Newmann, 1988; King, et al., 2009; Newmann, 2000; Newmann, et al., 2007; Newmann & Wehlage, 1993) this studys coresearchers experienced this label in varying degrees as an assault on their worth as professional educators. Making sense of how classroom teachers interpret the label authentic and how they experience its valueladen meaning when comparing their praxes to those suggested in the AIW framework may
139 shed some light on how they should be presented with the material or whether even the language of the framework itself needs to be modified. Researchers might also want to expand their examinations of the obstacles to the implementation of authentic intellectual work in schools of color. While Onoskos work (1991, 1996) examines many of the obstacles to higher order thinking in social studies classrooms generally, and how teachers may promote higher order thinking in spite of them, there are a number of obstacles to higher order thinking and to authentic intellectual work which are either peculiar to or are exacerbated in schools of color and schools of poverty (Darling Hammond, 2000; Hamilton, 2003; Hargreaves, et al., 2002; Warren & Jenkins, 2005) C onsulting with classroom practitioners in schools of color and of poverty regarding their teaching experiences generally, followed up with discussions on authentic intellectual work, may provide some insight into the reasons why they above all other teachers particularly do not adopt this instructional framework for their classrooms. Additionally, based on the findings of John Sayes and Thomas Brushs work with Mary (Brush & Saye, 2004; Saye & Brush, 1999, 2007) considering the relationship between classr oom teachers epistemological identities and the obstacles these may present to the adoption of authentic intellectual work may provide ground on which to till. Once the experiential reasons for which classroom teachers do not adopt authentic intellectual work become clear to the research community, they will be better able to address these teachers concerns when promoting authentic intellectual work in their situated contexts. Subject and School Based Instructional Differences This research study focused exclusively on high school world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color. Because of
140 the studys specificity, it leaves open numerous opportunities to widen the research focus, be it to teachers of other social studies disciplines, to teachers in predominantly white schools, and to examining the experiential differences between teachers in schools of means and teachers in schools of poverty. Previously published phenomenological research (Brkich & Wa shington, 2011) examines how government and economics teachers in schools of color experienced using authentic intellectual work in their classrooms. While the research argues that authentic intellectual work presents promise for teachers in schools of col or, particularly relating to teacher burnout prevention and increased levels of student participation, because the studys sample was relatively small, its contributions are limited at best to raising questions and possibly generating theory. This studys coresearchers seemed to consider that while authentic intellectual work had some limited value for the teaching of world history, it might be particularly well suited for classes which have readily apparent connections to the world beyond school, naming ec onomics and government specifically as examples. This may explain in part the experiential differences between this studys coresearchers and those of the Brkich and Washington (2011) study, lending additional weight to its tentative conclusions. Furthermor e, both this study and Brkich and Washington (2011) focused exclusively on teachers working in schools of color and of poverty. Students who attend schools of color and of poverty suffer the brunt of differential instructional quality (Darling Hammond, 2000; Gamoran, 2001; Herman, 1997) lower performance on standardized measures of achievement (Battle & Coates, 2004; Daniel, 2004; Garca & Pearson, 1994; Lee & Wong, 2004; Linn, 2000; Myers, et al., 2004; Schoenfeld, 2002)
141 and the deleterious effects of ed ucational accountability (Black, 2000; Buly & Valencia, 2002; Darling Hammond, 2000; Hargreaves, et al., 2002; Schiller & Muller, 2000, 2003) While Newmann, King, and Carmichael (2007) argue that authentic intellectual work helps close the achievement gap between students of color and their white peers, as well as the gap between students of means and students of poverty, they argue that all students who encounter instruction and produce work based on their instructional theory demonstrate increases in per formance. For this reason, it may be of interest to see if teachers in white schools of means such as the one examined in the works of Saye and Brush (Brush & Saye, 2004; Saye & Brush, 1999, 2007) or white schools of poverty experience either the benef its discussed in Brkich and Washington (2011) or the difficulties discussed herein. Connections to Quantitative Performance Studies A growing body of quantitative research exists which argues that students who are exposed to instruction grounded in the pri nciples of the AIW framework experience gains on standardized measures of achievement. The Center on Organizing and Restructuring Schools (CORS) Field Study (Newmann, et al., 1996) the Chicago Annenberg Field Study (Newmann, Lopez, et al., 1998) and the C hicago Annenberg Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) Gains Study (Newmann, et al., 2001) all claim that students in an urban environment who were taught using, performed work based on, and assessed by the AIW framework made gains of approximately 30% on both teacher produced assessments and standardized achievement measures. Preliminary work conducted by the Social Studies Inquiry Research Collaborative (SSIRC, 2010) supports these findings. Furthermore, while the findings of Saye and Brush (1999) are statisti cally inconclusive regarding factual recall answers, the results demonstrate a
142 significant increase in the complexity and substantiated relevance of students elaborated responses to complex questions, of interest to social studies teachers and students submitting to document based questions on Advanced Placement examinations. However, in spite of the promise this research offers in effecting instructional policy, there are two major considerations which need remain at the forefront of research related to authentic intellectual work. First and foremost, this work raises the specter of teacher resistance to implementing the framework for authentic intellectual work in their classrooms based on their experiences of learning to use it. Previous research on educational reform demonstrates, when classroom teachers feel educational reform is an imposition on their professionalism or runs counter to what they consider to be wise practice they purposefully resist it (Brush & Saye, 2004; Datnow, 2000; Elmore, 1987, 1 995; Gitlin & Margonis, 1995; B. Olsen & Kirtman, 2002; B. Olsen & Sexton, 2009; Saye & Brush, 1999) Thus, if classroom teachers experience the framework for authentic intellectual work as an imposition from without their situational contexts, contrary to what they consider to be wise practice, or even not feasible, they will likewise resist its adoption, irrespective of the quantitative benefits the supporting research promises. Second and finally, these quantitative studies though having pragmatic value for those concerned with educational policy and accountability demonstrate a problematic lack of (e)pistemological awareness (Koro Ljungberg, et al., 2009) The framework for authentic intellectual work holds as its primary criterion the construction o f knowledge, firmly placing it in the epistemological tradition of Vygotsky (1978) and Piaget (2003)
143 However, all quantitative research is firmly situated in the tradition of those like Popper (2010) and Ayer (1952) Thus, those who supposedly champion a constructivist approach to teaching and learning do so through wholly counter constructivist, logically positivist means. This philosophical disconnect is rather troubling, as those who oppose constructivist approaches to teaching (e.g., Bloom, 1988; Hirs ch, 1987; Leming, et al., 2003; Schlesinger, 1998) could invalidate the AIW frameworks proponents on philosophical grounds without any difficulty whatever. Ultimately, further research into the AIW frameworks use and effectiveness ought to account for th ese important qualitative quantitative considerations. Implications for Teacher Education Because this research study focused on learning experiences, it also has a number of implications for teacher education. These implications divide naturally between practicing classroom teachers and teacher candidates, the divergences accounting for the different situational contexts in which these teachers find themselves. Inservice Teacher Education Teacher educators who wish to promote authentic intellectual work to practicing classroom teachers must above all else be respectful of the situational contexts in which they are advancing the instructional framework. Otherwise, this may result in exacerbating the theory practice divide classroom teachers tend to experienc e when working with professors from Colleges of Education, which can cause practicing teachers to reject authentic intellectual work wholesale. Consulting with practicing teachers on an individual basis regarding the particular obstacles they face to the p edagogical demands of authentic intellectual work can help teacher educators better tailor their promotion of the framework. Furthermore, by presenting a willingness to
144 challenge the AIW framework when it appears to be disconnected from classroom teachers classroom realities and by guest teaching lessons grounded in the framework as was done in this study teacher educators can better develop rapport with practicing classroom teachers, all while coming to a better understanding of the frameworks limita tions in the practicing teachers situated contexts. Teacher educators should also limit practicing teachers exposure both to the theoretical foundations of the framework (e.g., Archbald & Newmann, 1988; Newmann, et al., 2007) and to the research base sup porting it (Brkich & Washington, 2011; Newmann, et al., 2001; Newmann, Lopez, et al., 1998; Newmann, et al., 1996) until they are both ready and willing to explore these readings. In particular, classroom teachers who have adopted a logically positivist epistemology may be particularly resistant from the outset (Brush & Saye, 2004; Saye & Brush, 1999, 2007) Instead, focusing exclusively on readings oriented to classroom practitioners (e.g., King, et al., 2009; Newmann, 2000; Scheurman & Newmann, 1998) will help teacher educators bridge the theory practice divide. In particular, King, Newmann, and Carmichaels (2009) recent article in Social Education, which formed the instructional base of this research study, is useful above all others because of the concrete examples it provides of authentic intellectual works implementation in social studies classrooms. Teacher educators can also provide practicing classroom teachers with additional examples of lessons grounded in the AIW framework, which may help k eep the teachers openminded toward the instructional theory. Because authentic intellectual work requires a tremendous time commitment on the part of practicing classroom teachers, ensuring they understand that the expectation is not for them to teach to the highest levels of the
145 AIW framework all of the time is critically important, and may also help lessen resistance. Finally, this study helped showcase several benefits associated with collaborative and collegial learning. By promoting the growth of small learning communities and critical friends groups through the use of National School Reform Faculty (2004, 2008, 2009) protocols, teacher educators can help break down barriers of isolation, both between teachers of the same social studies discipline and between teachers of different social studies disciplines altogether. Additionally, protocols such as the Atlas protocol (National School Reform Faculty, 2004) can help further break down the theory practice divide by allowing practicing teachers to disc uss their experiences of using authentic intellectual work in their classrooms, to solicit constructive suggestions for improving their instruction from their peers, and to brainstorm ideas for the additional implementation of the framework across theirs and their colleagues disciplinary foci. Preservice Teacher Education There exists as good an opportunity to engender acceptance and adoption of the framework for authentic intellectual work with teacher candidates, because it represents a philosophical and theoretical orientation to instruction and because teacher candidates are considerably less likely to have firmly developed epistemological identities. However, in order to avoid perpetuating the theory practice divide when teacher candidates are placed i n their field internships, it is important to increase collaboration between social studies methods instructors and the classroom teachers under whom classroom teachers will be placed during their internships, and to ensure that changes to classroom instruction in the sites of learning (particularly schools of poverty and of color) accompany any changes to methods instruction.
146 Social studies teacher educators interested in pursuing the AIW framework as a vehicle for instruction can endeavor to make authenti c intellectual work a guiding and central principle of their teacher education programs. They can accomplish this all while still meeting considerable learning and performance demands (National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, 2008) and acco unting for the various obstacles teacher candidates may face regarding its implementation during their field placements, particularly if they increase collaboration with mentor teachers and provide opportunities for respectful collaboration and professional development. By doing so, teacher educators have a better likelihood of having teacher candidates adopt the AIW framework while developing their epistemological identities and carry it with them throughout their entire professional careers, without facing considerable resistance to the AIW framework from their mentor teachers. As discussed elsewhere (Brkich & Washington, 2011) because the framework for authentic intellectual work represents a philosophical and theoretical orientation to teaching and lear ning, this can be accomplished with little structural change to existing teacher education programs. In methods courses, program coordinators and instructors can present the framework as the guiding principle of good social studies instruction from the out set by examining the same practitioner oriented readings they would present practicing classroom teachers (e. g., King, et al., 2009; Newmann, 2000; Scheurman & Newmann, 1998) This presentation can take as little as ninety minutes, with sixty minutes dedi cated to small group discussions of the readings by means of the National School Reform Facultys Four As protocol (2009) followed up by thirty minutes of brainstorming the numerous opportunities to implement authentic intellectual
147 work across the num erous social studies disciplines. Furthermore, methods instructors can require students lesson plans and microteaching experiences align with the AIW framework without requiring any additional assignments of them. Additionally, program coordinators and instructors can heavily encourage their teacher candidates to implement AIW grounded lessons into their teaching during their field placements by connecting their evaluation on formal instructional observation (e. g., Educational Testing Service, 2011a, 2011 b) to Fred Newmanns, Bruce Kings, and Dana Carmichaels (2009) standards and scoring criteria for authentic intellectual work. By providing students with these scoring criteria in advance of their lesson planning, social studies teacher educators can fac ilitate their students negotiation, adoption, and implementation of authentic intellectual work into their classroom praxes. Of final note, it is important to recognize that social studies methods instructors themselves may experience the negative affecti ve dimensions related to learning about and using authentic intellectual work as practicing classroom teachers do, which may likewise result in similarly disdainful resistance. Veteran methods instructors, much like veteran classroom teachers, who experience the AIW framework as an ad hominem attack, or who experience practicing classroom teachers exhortations of You learned how to do it at the College of Education, now let me show you how it works in the real world as Sisyphean critiques of their work w ith theory may find themselves discouraged to promote authentic intellectual work in their classrooms. By encouraging teacher educators to view authentic intellectual work as another pedagogical tool their teacher candidates can place in their instructional toolbox, and by ensuring they understand that teaching based on the AIW framework is something which neither needs nor can be
148 accomplished all of the time may foster increased inclusion of the framework in methods classes. Significance of the Study This research contributes to the literature on social studies teachers experiences with authentic intellectual work. It points to the AIW frameworks potential to satisfy multiple and seemingly competing educational goals, to its relationship between positive professional identity development, and to its ability to break down existing and isolating barriers in the secondary schools. It also points to the frameworks potential to alienate classroom teachers and to highlight the negative dimensions of professional identity development frustration. While the qualitative body of research on social studies teachers experiences with authentic intellectual work is still in its infancy, this research sheds considerable light on how social studies teachers negotiate aut hentic intellectual work as an instructional theory in the face of the external pressures they encounter, their previous dispositions to educational theory and research as a whole, and the likelihood of their adopting authentic intellectual work as a guidi ng principle in their classrooms in the long term. Limitations The findings of this work are limited primarily by its sample. The initial study design had accounted for six coresearchers at two separate research sites in two separate school districts. While all six world history teachers gave their consent to serve as coresearchers in this endeavor, the three coresearchers at the second research site were precluded from participating when the school board in the second district denied permission to conduct the study. Additionally, when Jake actively refused to develop a lesson in his world his tory class using the AIW framework as a guide, this further put
149 constraints on the extent to which my coresearchers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in their school of color could inform my own experiences. Even though one may ar gue that Jake did not learn to use authentic intellectual work in his school of color because he did not internalize it and come to agreement with the framework, I contend his interaction with the primary framework document used in this study (King, et al. 2009) his participation in the Critical Friends Reading Group, and his thoughtful intentionality throughout this entire process nevertheless constitute a manner of experiential learning. His resistance to the framework was not entirely uninformed, and as the data story suggests, considerations of authenticity that is, of having students construct knowledge through processes of disciplined inquiry for value beyond school did influence his thinking. While he cannot be said to have learned to use authentic intellectual work in his high school world history class of color, he did learn about authentic intellectual work he just refused to adopt it as a classroom practice. Fortunately, Jakes resistance and negativity did not grossly impact Mikes and Sam s experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in their high school world history classes of color, as both actively Mike and Sam actively developed lessons grounded in the AIW framework, reflected on their experiences in teaching them, and considered additional avenues by which they could include more authentic intellectual work into their classroom instruction. Additionally, by focusing exclusively on world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color, this study forewent including coresearchers both across social studies disciplines and across school contexts. Having also personally taught high school economics and government, it
150 would be of interest to see whether teachers of these social studies disciplines and in fact, all social studies disciplines experience negative affect similar to Jake, Mike, and Sam. In a previous study (Brkich & Washington, 2011) high school economics and government teachers reported feeling excited, but als o very overworked and exhausted when teaching an AIW grounded lesson on polling to their students of color. However, because this study also had a limited sample, its impact is also limited. Finally, hermeneutic phenomenology qua method presents a handful of limitations. First, because it is highly esoteric and requires a deep familiarity with the ontological and epistemological foundations in order to properly apply the method, researchers who are uninitiated to the works of Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Mer leauPonty, and Ricur may be resistant to the work as being overly theoretical and insufficiently practical. Second, because hermeneutic phenomenology takes its grounding in the primary researcher(s) own experiences, the research process remains forever i nfluenced by the researcher(s) subjectivities. However, it is precisely these subjectivities which provide philosophical rigor (through the process of parenthesizing) and practicality (by connecting it to real experiences) which provide the method its stre ngth.
151 CHAPTER 6 EPILOGUE My experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work were, and continue to be, central features in the ways in which I conduct my teaching. However, having discoursed at length with Jake, Mike, and Sam on their experiences of learning about and to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color, I have as van Manen (1990) proposes come to an even deeper understanding of my own. I feel that this deeper understanding has changed the ways in which I view Fred Newmann s, Bruce Kings, and Dana Carmichaels (2007) instructional framework, as well as the ways in which I feel it may or may not be suitable for social studies teachers working in schools of color and in schools of poverty. When I first returned to the Univers ity of Florida in the Fall 2007 semester to pursue my PhD, I had this belief that the framework for authentic intellectual work represented the pinnacle of good teaching, and that social studies classroom teachers who did not purposefully teach in alignment with this framework were somewhat shirking their educational responsibilities: Teachers who teach well are those who teach authentically. And teachers who teach less authentically, while they may not be bad teachers in the sense that theyre evil or dont love their kids, are simply less effective. In my present as remembering (Ricoeur, 1984) I admit I feel considerable shame that not only did I fail to remember my own difficulties with authentic intellectual work when in schools of color, I viewed other classroom teachers with condescension. However, as I progressed through my studies and through this dissertation, my existentialism forced me to take responsibility for this gross arrogance which, instead of helping bridge the theory practice divide, only served to widen it. Acceptance of
152 responsibility for my own condescension, I became aware during the present as experiencing (Ricoeur, 1984) that I had been part of the theory practice divide problem rather than part of the solution. Through the collegi al discussions I enjoyed with my study coresearchers and through my guest teaching experience, I came to a fuller understanding of the frustration, the guilt, the excitement, the stress, the pressure, and the mental exhaustion I experienced: It was a good reminder of what teaching is like in those contexts. There was a considerable element of guilt, that I feel I had failed my students. And it was a mentally exhausting process even coming up with my lesson. Furthermore, I recognized that even though the f our of us experienced the worldhoodof the world (Heidegger, 2008) as it relates to learning to use authentic intellectual work differently, I feel the sympathetic nature of our sufferance allowed me to come to a renewed understanding of what life is like for high school social studies teachers working in schools of color and of poverty, with children who have historically underperformed compared to their white and financially secure peers: This experience allowed me very much the opportunity to change my p erceptions of the framework and of classroom teachers, and to recognize that teachers who work in these contexts do teach well, are subject to abnormal school conditions, and that all teaching to an extent connects to the framework for authentic intellectu al work. Keeping these things in mind as I progress forward will help me become a more responsive teacher educator who is more respectful to the situated contexts in which my teacher candidates will be teaching, as well as those in which currently practici ng classroom teachers operate. Though I still have faith in the worth of authentic intellectual work, and will continue to pursue it both in my own teaching and in the teaching of others, I am once again awakened to the emotional, psychological, and tempor al difficulties associated with its
153 use. Ultimately, as I exist in the present as anticipating (Ricoeur, 1984) I am hopeful my experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work and the new preunderstanding I hold of the AIW framework will shape positively the ways in which I promote it: respectfully, and with an eye to the classroom realities of those whom I would have practice it.
154 APPENDIX A IRB PROPOSAL 1. Title of Project: High School World History Teachers Experiences: Learning to Use Authe ntic Intellectual Work in Schools of Colour (UFIRB #2010U 583) 2. Principal Investigator: Christopher Andrew Brkich, Doctoral Candidate and Alumnus Fellow, University of Florida, School of Teaching and Learning, 2423 Norman Hall, PO Box 117048, Gainesvil le, FL 326117048 3. Project Supervisor: Elizabeth Yeager Washington, Senior Research Fellow and Professor of Social Studies of Education, University of Florida, School of Teaching and Learning, 2423 Norman Hall, PO Box 117048, Gainesville, FL 32611 7048 4. Dates of Proposed Research: August 2010 August 2011 5. Sources of Funding: None 6. Scientific Purpose of the Investigation: The purposes of this research are threefold: 1) to explore the experiences of high school world history teachers teaching within the framework for Authentic Intellectual Work in schools of color (herein defined as schools, the student population of which is at least 50% of color); 2) to explore the experiences of high school world history teachers learning to use Authentic Intellectual Work in schools of color; and 3) to assist in the professional development of high school world history teachers with regards to the framework for Authentic Intellectual Work. The framework for Authentic Intellectual Work is a pedagogical approach to instruction which promotes the construction of knowledge through a process of disciplined inquiry which has value beyond school (Newmann, King & Carmichael, 2007). 7. Describe the Research Methodology in NonTechnical Language: The principal investi gator will recruit high school world history teachers from two schools of color as study participants. The principal investigator will conduct an initial interview lasting approximately sixty minutes with the study participants to determine their previous experiences with authenticity in teaching, as defined by the study participants themselves ( Interview Protocol A, Revised). The principal investigator will then conduct a collaborative twohour onsite professional development experience with the study par ticipants at their respective schools. The study participants will be provided with copies of salient and seminal practitioner oriented literature on authentic intellectual work (King, et al., 2009; Newmann, 2000; Scheurman & Newmann, 1998) and will discu ss these readings in small groups according to the National School Reform Facultys (2009) Four As Discussion Protocol. Their discussions, which will be largely self guided according to this protocol, will be digitally audio recorded. The study partici pants will then develop a lesson based on the framework for Authentic Intellectual Work and teach it to their students. Following this, the primary investigator will conduct two additional individual interviews with the study participants, designed to eli cit their experiences of learning to use
155 Authentic Intellectual Work. These interviews will be digitally audio recorded. The first additional interview ( Interview Protocol B, Revised) will focus on their collaborative learning experience and on how their experience teaching the lesson they had developed contributed to their experience of learning to use Authentic Intellectual Work. The s econd additional interview ( Interview Protocol C, Revised) will focus on their experiences thus far of learning to use Aut hentic Intellectual Work and the factors which contributed most to their learning experiences.. After the third interview, the principal investigator will conduct a second twohour onsite collaborative professional development experience with the study participants at their respective schools. At this professional development experience, the study participants will bring examples of student work which they collected during the lessons they had developed based on the framework for Authentic Intellectual Work (see above). The study participants will have previously removed all identifying student information from these documents prior to the professional development exercise. The study participants will discuss these student work samples in small groups according to the National School Reform Facultys (2004) Atlas Looking at Data Protocol. Their discussions, which will be largely self guided according to this protocol, will be digitally audio recorded. Study participants will also submit to the principal investigator copies of any written lesson plans, worksheets, or other developed artifacts used in conjunction with their planned lessons. Data sources will be restricted to the digital audio recordings of the professional development discussions, the individual interviews, and the collected lesson artifacts listed previously. As issues emerge in the process of collecting data, the researcher will follow up with further semi structured digitally audio recorded interviews which relate to the purpose of the scientific investigation. 8. Describe Potential Benefits: This investigation will shed light on how high school world history teachers in schools of color experience learning to use Authentic Intellectual Work. Direct benefits to the participants include professional development within the framework for Authentic Intellectual Work, extended pedagogical support, and increased levels of comfort in using this framework within their respective classrooms. There are also potential benefits for social studies educators in teacher education programs who must balance the demands of multiple stakeholders, including official standards articulated by policymakers and the perspectives of students from diverse backgrounds in the public schools. Also, as future teachers benefit from this research, the principal investigator hopes that schoolchildren also will benefit through a more robust yet relevant social studies curriculum that is mindful of their diverse backgrounds. 9. Describe Potential Risks: There are no perceiv ed risks for participation in this study. No persons other than the principal investigator and project supervisor will have access to the data collected. All research participants will be assured that the collected data will not be used in any evaluation o f work performance, written or otherwise, for the purposes of contract renewal. The principal investigator will use fictitious names in any
156 written reports and omit specific references to the specific year, semester, or period during which the data were collected. 10. Describe How Participants Will Be Recruited: The principal investigator will invite potential research participants from two high schools of color. The principal investigator will provide all potential research participants with a copy of the recruitment letter ( Recruitment Letter, Revised) as well as the informed consent document ( Informed Consent Letter, Revised). Those interested in participating will be encouraged in returning a signed copy of the informed consent document by post to the principal investigator. Additionally, the principal investigator will also secure official permission from the school boards and the participants schools. 11. Describe the Informed Consent Process: The principal investigator will invite potential research participants to participate in the opening week of the 20102011 school year in individual meetings. In these meetings, all of the research procedures will be explained in full. Potential research participants will be informed that they are not required t o participate; that their participation is strictly voluntary; that they will be assigned pseudonyms throughout the research project; that during interviews, potential research participants may refuse to answer any question for any reason; that participant confidentiality will be assured by the fullest extent permissible by law; and that participants may remove their participatory consent at any time for any reason without let, hindrance, or qualification and without fear of consequence or reprisal. All po tential research participants will receive digital and printed copies of t he informed consent letter ( Informed Consent Letter, Revised) for their records. Potential research participants must return a signed copy of the informed consent letter to the primary investigator. ______________________________________________________________________ Principal Investigator Signature Date ______________________________________________________________________ Project Supervisor Signature Date I approve submission of this protocol to the University of Florida Institutional Review Board. ______________________________________________________________________ Department Chair Signature Date
157 APPENDIX B RECRUITMENT LETTER, REVISED Dear potenti al research participant, I am interested in researching high school world history teachers experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work in schools of color. The reasons for which I am conducting this research is because I am interested in high school social studies teachers professional development experiences, and I am interested in authentic intellectual work. I need up to fifteen volunteers who would be interested in participating in this research study. Those who volunteer agree to par ticipate in an initial interview discussing their experiences to date with authentic intellectual work, lasting approximately one hour. Following this, those volunteering agree to attend a ninety minuteto two hour long collaborative professional development session on authentic intellectual work, in which they will discuss their understandings of several very brief and practitioner oriented readings on authentic intellectual work. Subsequently, the volunteers agree to plan a single lesson based on the principles of authentic intellectual work and to participate in two additional individual interviews lasting between forty five and sixty minutes, planned at a time of common convenience. Finally, the volunteers agree to attend a final ninety minuteto two hour long collaborative professional development session on authentic intellectual work, in which they will discuss student work samples they collected during their teaching experience. For your participation in this study, you may earn up to four inservice professional development points. I assure your confidentiality, and your participation will in no way factor into any official evaluation of your job performance relating to purposes of contract renewal. If you are interested in participating and taking an active role in helping improve the quality of education classroom teachers like you as well as teacher candidates receive from institutions such as the University of Florida, I will collect your contact information such that I will be able to schedule th e collaborative professional development session and interviews at times and locations of common convenience. I thank you sincerely for your time, Christopher Andrew Brkich, MEd Doctoral Candidate, Social Education School of Teaching and Learning Univ ersity of Florida PO Box 117048 Gainesville, FL 326117048
158 APPENDIX C INFORMED CONSENT LET TER, REVISED Dear research participant, I am asking you to volunteer to participate in my dissertation study, which is a study of high school world history teachers experiences with Authentic Intellectual Work in schools of color. Authentic Intellectual Work is a pedagogical framework developed by Newmann, King and Carmichael (2007) which posits that students learn best when they construct knowledge in the classroom which has value beyond school through a process of disciplined inquiry. I am a Doctoral Candidate, Alumnus Fellow, and instructor for the School of Teaching and Learning, which is housed within the University of Floridas College of Education. Elizabeth Yeager Washington, my committee chair and doctoral supervisor, is a Professor within the School of Teaching and Learning, and is als o the director of the Secondary Social Studies ProTeach teacher education program. If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will participate in an initial individual interview on your experiences to date with authentic intellectual work, lasting approximately one hour. Following this, you will participate in a ninety minuteto two hour long collaborative professional development session centering around several practitioner oriented readings on the framework for Authentic Intellectual Work, the di scussions of which will be digitally audio recorded. You will also plan and deliver a lesson based on the principles of Authentic Intellectual Work in your world history class, and the planning documents related thereto and some student work samples with all identifying student information having been removed will be collected. Furthermore, you will participate in two additional individual interviews, both of which will focus on your experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work. Each of these additional interviews will last between forty five and sixty minutes. Finally, you will participate in a second ninety minuteto two hour long collaborative professional development session centering around student work samples you will have collected durin g the lesson you planned and delivered, having removed all identifying student information beforehand. Both the professional development sessions and the individual interviews will be digitally audio recorded. All digital audio recordings will be transcrib ed verbatim. During the interviews, you will not have to answer any questions you do not wish to answer. For your participation, you may earn up to four inservice professional development points. I will analyze your responses and develop some general characteristics and conclusions about this information. There is no risk to you; the data I collect will in no way affect your performance evaluations, nor will they be used as a criterion in any contract renewal process. I will protect your confidentiality to the fullest extent permissible by law, and will use fictitious names in any written reports. Any written reports will omit references to the specific year, semester, or period of the course in which you taught. You can choose not to participate in this stu dy; I will offer you this option before we begin the professional development session and individual interviews. There are no perceived risks associated with participating in this study. There are no direct benefits to you for participating in this study. You are free to withdraw your consent to participate
159 and to discontinue participation in this study at any time without prejudice. If you wish, I will share the results of the study with you upon its completion. By signing this letter, you give me permissi on to collect the data mentioned above and to report the results in published monographs and reports (e.g., in journal articles, in book and research monographs, and at local, state, and national conferences). I will analyze all collected data, and data collection and analysis will be overseen and verified by my committee chair and doctoral supervisor. Please sign and return this copy of the letter in the envelope provided. A second copy of the letter is for your records. If you have any questions regarding the study or the procedures for data collection, please contact me or my doctoral committee supervisor without hesitation. If you have any questions about the rights of research participants, you can contact the University of Floridas Institutional Revie w Board Office at PO Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 326112250. Sincerely, Christopher Andrew Brkich, MEd Doctoral Candidate, Social Studies Education School of Teaching and Learning College of Education, University of Florida PO Box 117048 Gainesville, FL 326117048 I have read the procedures described above. I have received a copy of this description, and I agree voluntarily to participate in this research study. ______________________________________________________________________ Participants Signature Date
160 APPENDIX D INTERVIEW PROTOCOL A REVISED Context 1. Tell me about your experiences working at this school. Be as broad and as descriptive as possible. AIW Background One of the buzzwords used in teaching now is authentic. Im interested in how you make sense personally of this term as it relates to your teaching. 1. Tell me about the time when you first learned about authenticity in teaching. How would you describe this experience? 2. Describe to me some of the experiences have you had with authenticity in your classroom? 3. Please describe your most memorable experience to me. 4. How did this experience make you feel? 5. How did it make you feel about teaching authentically? 6. How have these experiences informed your learning about teaching authentically? 7. Is there anything else you would like to share?
161 APPENDIX E INTERVIEW PROTOCOL B REVISED AIW Current Experiences Prior to this interview, you participated in a conversation with your colleagues regarding a few articles on Authentic Intellectual Work. Then, you developed and taught an authentic lesson in your classroom. Conversational Learning 1. Tell me first about the conversation you had with your colleagues. 2. How do you feel about this kind of conversation as a learning experience? 3. Reflect now on the learning you accomplished during this meeting. Describe to me what you felt was most successful, in terms of your learning, about this conversational learning experience. 4. Describe to me w hat you felt was least successful, in terms of your learning, about this conversational learning experience. 5. Tell me about the hopes and concerns you have for making this kind of learning experience more effective. Experiential Learning (Teaching) 1. Please tell me now about the authentic lesson you developed and taught. 2. How would you describe the influence of the conversation you had with your colleagues on your lesson? 3. Reflect back on your and your students participation in the lesson. Descr ibe to me what you felt was most successful about this lesson. 4. Please describe to me what you felt was least successful. 5. How do you feel this teaching experience contributed to your learning about using authentic intellectual work? Closing 1. Is t here anything else you would like to share?
162 APPENDIX F INTERVIEW PROTOCOL C, REVISED AIW Reflections and Looking to the Future 1. Reflect back on your experiences thus far in learning to use authentic intellectual work. Paint me as broad a picture as you can of these experiences. 2. Why might you use authentic intellectual work in your classroom in the future? How might you use it? 3. Tell me about the hopes and worries you have regarding using authentic intellectual work in your school in the future. 4. Describe the factors which affected your experiences the most positively, negatively, or otherwise? 5. In terms of the process of learning to use authentic intellectual work, how has your thinking changed as a result of this experience? 6. Overall, tell me about your feelings about learning to use authentic intellectual work. 7. How do you feel this experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work will shape your future professional development? 8. Is there anything else you would like to share?
163 APPENDIX G FUNDAMENTAL MEANING PHRASES Brkich, Transcript A Faced with the prospect of drowning in pedagogical frustration and failure, the classroom teacher in a school of color willingly takes on Atlas burden of instructional reflexivity toward authenticity, simultaneously facing exhaustion and elated satisfaction. Jones, Transcript A Jakes initial experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work and exposure to authentic intellectual work was one of disdain and distrust, borne out of the frustrations resulting from the disconnect between his lived experience as a world history teacher to students of color and of poverty, and externally imposed expectations of accountability, testing, and pedagogical theory, all of which are experienced as professional ad hominem attacks. Minsk, Transcript A The experiences of teaching students of color and of poverty in the stifling context of standardized testing is one of frustration and struggle, as the classroom teacher who seeks to provide meaningful learning to all of his students seeks to balance content with process. Recognizing connotatively elements of fun, creative and energizing teaching, though distrustful of COE jargon, particularly when he hasnt heard of the theory, he embraces the opportunity to improve his craft and regain those positive affective feelings through better teaching. Smalls, Transcript A Sams experience of learning to use AIW in his school of poverty and of color is one of frustration stemming from the tensions between teaching for rigor and teaching for relevance, from the time demands teaching for AIW places on him, from the factors external to his context which affect his students learning, from the disconnect between his classroom practice and Ivory Tower theory, and for feeling responsible for his students learning. Brkich, Transcript B The experience of learning to use AIW in a major population of color and of poverty results in conflicting feelings of hopeful excitement and feelings of frustration and guil t. So long as the teacher maintains reflexivity, the feelings of guilt may be assuaged by a desire to improve; if reflexivity is lost, guilt turns to student blaming, and the program of AIW is abandoned. Jones, Transcript B Learning to use AIW in schools of color and of poverty through collegial discussion and practice may lead to the hardening of pedagogical stances. While it may provide teachers with muchneeded feelings of affirmation and camaraderie in light of their pedagogical frustrations, the exper ienced confrontational language of the framework, coupled with content time and background knowledgerelated constraints, can
164 encourage teachers to discuss the AIW framework out of hand as useless Ivory Tower jargon. Minsk, Transcript B Michaels experience of learning to use AIW in schools of color and of poverty through conversation and practice is one of excitement, enjoyment, and fun regarding the collegiality of the experience, removing professional isolation, and a return to the creativity of t eaching years prior to arriving at TJHS. In spite of frustrations with students lack of background knowledge and process skills, Michael accepted responsibility for providing them with relevant and engaging learning experiences, all while struggling to balance both content and process. Smalls, Transcript B Sams experience of learning to use AIW was a mixed one, shaped largely by his taking personal responsibility for his students learning. he felt he gained much in terms of camaraderie, affirmation, and excitement at students levels of participation and achievement. However, he was frustrated by the disconnect between the AIW framework and the realities of his classroom practice, particularly relating to students lack of background knowledge, the time constraints placed on him, and the lack of practical examples. Brkich, Transcript C My experience of learning to use AIW in schools of color and of poverty was one primarily of stress, frustration, and guilt brought on by my own sense of responsibility and by the chasm of the theory practice divide. While there were positive dimensions of the experiences the collegiality, camaraderie, the excitement of planning, feeling the responsibility of being reflexive and of using the framework is both exhausting and unavoidable. Jones, Transcript C The experience of learning to use AIW in schools of color may have no impact on classroom teachers praxes if external factors leave them feeling so deprofessionalised and powerless, to the point that they do not feel t hey can make a positive impact on their students. While recognizing the value of AIW in a rosy colored world, exposure to it may draw attention to the deprofessionalising factors and constraints placed on classroom teachers, and may heighten feelings of de pression and pessimism regarding their effectiveness and their students chances at success. Minsk, Transcript C A classroom teacher, who accepts personal responsibility for his students learning and exhibits reflexivity, experiences learning to use AIW in a school of color in a mixed fashion. While frustrated with external time and accountability constraints, as well as by student follow through on the assignment, the teacher may feel excitement about the reprofessionalisation AIW offers, the collaborati on with peers, and the potential of striking a balance between the twin foci of content and process.
165 Smalls, Transcript C Teachers who accept ultimate responsibility for their traditionally underperforming students learning in schools of color and of pov erty feel excitement when learning to use AIW in that it breaks down isolating barriers and lets them see ways of teaching to higher levels of understanding while still remaining practical, relevant, and engaging. However, upon this, they experience guilt wondering why they havent done this before, and still feel frustrated by students lack of background knowledge, which can make them reserve AIW for their better students.
166 APPENDIX H FINAL HORIZONAL LIST driven by lack of professional knowledge to acquire and improve > responsibility never as successful as I wanted to be > guilt and frustration difficulty relating culturally with students of color > frustration believed teaching was authentic, but uncertain regarding terminology > TP divide experienced staleness felt rewarded by good teaching experiences, but tremendous pressure > conflicting success What did they really learn? > responsibility and guilt associated with pedagogical failures it made me feel like a teacher > sense of pedagogical effectiveness is satisfying fear of administrative repercussions > professionalism sense of addiction to the positive affective dimensions AIW experiences were mentally exhausting time constraint obstacles to teaching AIW all the time > frustration reflexivity resulted in an iterative approach to progressively better teaching pie in the sky > in spite of value, experienced strong TP disconnect discussion degenerated into bitch session FFA > frustration, experienced PC struggle discursive therapy in objecting to the framework > experienced TP divide camaraderie and cohesiveness in objections > collegiality breaks down isolation experienced guilt at previous private condescending toward teachers generally > responsibility, TP divide, guilt, ref lexivity, self improvement conscious avoidance of coresearcher colonization > PC struggle, TP divide frustrated with disconnect between my input of effort and students output of work experienced a resistance and disdain to both theory and jargon > TP di vide
167 experienced AIW framework as an ad hominem attack > TP divide, shutdown increased awareness of the negative affective dimensions of the experience awareness that others may gird themselves against AIW to avoid this misery and suffering believe in the power of the framework > professionalizing necessity to make AIW more practical > frustrated with TP divide worried about teacher burnout frustrated with students lack of BGK, skills, motivation, and work ethic > frustration frustrated with being blam ed for students lack of success considers himself academically oriented, content oriented > holds students ultimately responsible for their success, PC balance feels the need with MP kids to be structured above all > some frustration with discipline d oubtful AIW will work with his kids, only with more advanced students > TP divide unsurprised at the level of agreement during discussion feels isolated at his school pessimistic and depressed over opportunities for his students fails to view self as an authority frustrated by the content driven nature of AP program and administrative pressures as applied to MP kids > PC struggle/balance enjoyed flexibility of honors style classes with MP kids > PC balance, felt professionally respected particularly enjoys the spontaneity and creativity of connectedness lessons > enjoyment, fun, and works to do this conflict between whats important to learn and whats assessed > TP divide feels it is challenging to develop lessons relevant to MP kids
168 excited about less on he developed, which was framework driven and inspired by local paper > excitement, reflexive, responsibility, enjoyment hopes it will generate deep discussion on the issues, but not expecting much in terms of written work > consider difficulty balanci ng what kinds of student work expectations? collaborating was exciting to him, recapturing lost interactions at previous teaching job > excitement, overcomes isolation, camaraderie, professionalism views AIW as an attempt to reprofessionalise the work o f teachers wants to litmus test administrations support > responsibility, professionalism AIW may be compatible to his big picture view of teaching > excitement, PC balance thankful for opportunity AIW offered him to be creative optimism regarding AIW > optimistic excited with students engagement > excitement, satisfied, validated you gotta learn more about these kids, you are so severely white > responsibility to teach responsively rigor and relevance, rigor and relevance > PC struggle sees potential of AIW to solve burnout > hopeful it will help his praxis enjoyed format of NSRF protocol, good way of sharing things felt affirmed by colleagues in their understanding and praxes > helped overcome isolation discussion led to whether kids were capable, belief that MP ones arent > camaraderie teaching experience not as good as would have liked > disappointment reflexivity as to how he would have done the lesson differently feels that to get it done right would require a lot of effort > o verworked, external pressures, exhaustion enjoyed experience because it wasnt the same old PD > TP divide, overcoming isolation
169 AIW made him feel good, learned something new > professionalism AIW made him feel guilty, low expectations > guilt, responsibility, reflexivity designed lesson on placelessness, but not framework guided > no conscious use of theory frustrated with students resistance to lesson, even the best ones frustrated and demoralized by lower students inability to do AIW feels ther e is a coolness factor to AIW > excitement, enjoyment liked the AIW because it wasnt just fluff, but was practical > TP divide
170 APPENDIX I SAMPLE TEXTURAL DESC RIPTION Brkich My experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a school o f color is one of an ongoing swinging between feelings of satisfaction and professional validation and feelings of intense frustration, disappointment, and guilt. The positive feelings create exhilarating highs and the negative feelings devastating lows. I liken my experience of learning to use AIW in schools of color to the cyclical nature of drug addiction, or exposure to teachers crack cocaine, which made me feel like I wanted to teach that way all the time and seek ways to incorporate this pedagogy in my classroom, often at personal cost. Associated with this desire to satisfy my pedagogical fix, I would experience elevated levels of stress and mental exhaustion in planning lessons based on the principles of AIW with the almost desperate hope that a successful lesson would result in me experiencing those positive feelings, or lesson highs. However, the experiences even when as well planned as I could make them always led to feelings of disappointment. My successes were never at the level that I wanted. Even when working with my coresearchers to gain a greater understanding of the AIW framework and its applicability to schools of color, I felt my experiences paled in comparison to those I had while in my doctoral level seminars. Though my learning experiences all had varying levels of success, I still experienced that guilt and frustration, viewing the experiences mostly as failures of mine as an instructor, either because I had made assumptions about their [my students] abilities or becaus e I had failed to be respectful of the situational context in which I and my coresearchers were teaching.
171 Additionally, because of the value I assigned the framework, I found myself feeling frustrated that my students didnt seem to put out what I considered an equivalent amount of work to the effort I put into planning and delivering my AIW lessons. While I felt very excited regarding my students levels of engagement and interest in the lessons, and my coresearchers involvement in the project, the work produced and the transformative experiences fell short. When it came to the assignment portion, even though they were constructing knowledge... their communications might not have been so elaborate.... It wasnt the kind of quality I was expecting, that I would have expected from my undergraduates. Reflecting on what I considered to be my failures resulted partly in feelings of guilt and of frustration with my increasing awareness of the chasm between theory and practice as it relates to the AIW framewor k. In spite of the value I saw in the framework, it felt pie in the sky at times, and the resistance I experienced both from my coresearchers and from my students made me feel guilty for either having held patronizing views of classroom teachers or f or demanding too much of them. However, accepting responsibility for my own failures and guilt, I felt compelled to find ways both to improve upon my teaching and to find ways to make the AIW framework more palatable to classroom teachers. I am left feelin g partly that my exposure to the AIW framework was open[ing] Pandoras Box of instructional pedagogy, releasing all of the misery and suffering associated with the hopeful quest for successful, effective, and validating teaching into the world. However, though this quest may very well by Sisyphean, I feel that I cannot help but be compelled in it.
172 APPENDIX J FINAL LIST OF ESSENT IAL INTERPRETED STRU CTURES Dissatisfaction and disappointment with current level of student performance based on teacher inputs Acceptance of responsibility for students learning (though definitions of end goals vary) Frustration regarding external constraints placed on classroom praxes Anger at feeling deprofessionalised / excited at feeling reprofessionalized Feeling pressured c onstantly for time Agonizing over balancing process learning and content learning Collegial validation Disdain for educational theory (variable levels thereof) Happiness at overcoming teacher isolation
173 APPENDIX K SAMPLE STRUCTURAL DE SCRIPTION Brkich My e xperience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in a high school of color took on an interesting progression from my initial preunderstanding to my refined postexperiential reflective understanding, the latter which constitutes a new preunderstanding for future experiences of learning to use authentic intellectual work. Throughout this process, I traversed the several phases of Augustines distentio animi beginning with present as anticipating, through present as experiencing, and concluding with present as remembering, all while anticipating new experiences. Having accepted from the outset of my career as an educator ultimate responsibility for my students levels of academic success, when I experienced pedagogical shortfalls, I felt as though I had failed my student. Because the experience of failure was existentially my responsibility, this caused me to seek out the advice of those whom I felt were pedagogical experts my former instructors within the College of Education. Because I held them in high regard, I experienced very little disdain and exuded very little resistance initially to the educational theories they espoused, and accepted the worth of the AIW framework uncritically. As my experience of learning to use AIW in high schools of color progressed, other experiential factors imposed themselves, resulting in a shift. Constant competing pressures for my time paperwork, extracurricular supervision duties, grading outside of assigned instructional time, and a content heavy curriculum re sulted in an ongoing struggle to balance what I considered important process learning and the acquisition of social studies content. When presented with the AIW framework as a potential venue to
174 achieve balance in this process content struggle, I was hopef ul I felt professionally empowered to make important pedagogical decisions. However, I began to feel some initial disdain for the educational theorists who seemed to be demanding even more of my time, which was in precious short supply. However, because of my existentialism and because I held myself responsible to ensure my students received a balanced education in my world history classes, compulsively I worked to develop lessons grounded in the framework for authentic intellectual work. Additionally, in spite of my increased efforts, even though I felt my students learning increased and their levels of success with it, because the framework set such a high standard, it felt as though no matter how successful I was, it was never good enough. Disappointment with my students levels of performance even though increased remained perspectively disproportional to my own efforts, and bitterness toward the framework resulted. Fortunately, my experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work in school s of color was not in the end a solitary one. My work with my coresearchers caused me to feel validated professionally as a pedagogue in spite of my own perceived failures, and the camaraderie gained resulted in an ongoing need to continue to pursue AIW as a means of meeting my pedagogical responsibilities. Barring the presence of this camaraderie and professional validation, continuing to pursue the AIW framework in my classes would have been increasingly difficult to justify temporally and psychologically Summarily, my experience of learning to use authentic intellectual work structurally represents an increasing bitterness with the theory over time, balanced by feelings of professional validation. All of this is contained and contextualized within a fram ework of unwavering personal acceptance of responsibility for my own disappointing
175 shortcomings while straining hopefully in an Aristotelian, asymptotic fashion toward a disappointment free teaching experience grounded in the AIW framework.
176 REFERENCE LI ST An act relating to education, Florida House of Representatives, 2006 Sess. (2006). American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 33 40. Anderson, C., Avery, P. G., Pederson, P. V., Smith, E. S., & Sullivan, J. L. (1997). Divergent perspectives on citizenship education: A Q method study and survey of social studies teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 34 (2), 333364. Appl e, M. W. (2004). Controlling the work of teachers. In D. J. Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), The curriculum studies reader (2nd ed., pp. 183197). New York: Routledge Falmer. Archbald, D. A. & Newmann, F. M. (1988). Beyond standardized testing: Assessing authentic academic achievement in the secondary school (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 301 587). Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals. Aristotle. (2002). The metaphysics (J. Sachs, Trans. 2nd ed.). Santa Fe, NM: Green Lion Press. Aristotle. (2004). The Nicomachean ethics (J. A. K. Thomson, Trans.). New York: Penguin Books. Au, W. (2009). Highstakes testing and curriculum control: A qualitative metasynthesis. In D. J. Flinders & S. J. Thornton (Eds.), The curriculum studies reader (3rd ed., pp. 286302). New York: Routledge Falmer. Augustine. (1998). Confessions (H. Chadwick, Trans. 2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Avery, P. G. (1999). Authentic assessment and instruction. Social Education, 63(6), 368373. A yer, A. J. (1952). Language, truth, and logic New York: Dover Publications. Ayres, L. P. (1913). Laggards in our schools New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Banks, J. A., Cookson, P., Gay, G., Hawley, W. D., Irvine, J. J., Nieto, S., et al. (2010). Educat ion and diversity. In W. C. Parker (Ed.), Social studies today: Research and practice (pp. 67 76). New York: Routledge.
177 Banks, J. A. & Nguyen, D. (2008). Diversity and citizenship education: Historical, theoretical, and philosophical issues. In L. S. Levst ik & C. A. Tyson (Eds.), Handbook of research in social studies education (pp. 137 149). New York: Routledge. Barth, J. L. & Shermis, S. S. (1970). Defining the social studies: An exploration of three traditions. Social Education, 34 743 751. Barton, K. C & Levstik, L. S. (2004). Teaching history for the common good Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bastedo, M. N. & Gumport, P. J. (2003). Access to what? Mission differentiation and academic stratification in US public higher education. Higher Educ ation, 46(3), 341359. Battle, J. & Coates, D. L. (2004). Father only and mother only, single parent family status of black girls and achievement in grade twelve and at twoyears post high school. Journal of Negro Education, 73(4), 392 407. Benveniste, L. (2002). The political structuration of assessment: Negotiating state power and legitimacy. Comparative Education Review, 46(1), 89 118. Berliner, D. C. & Biddle, B. J. (1995). The manufactured crisis: Myths, fraud, and the attack on America's public school s. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books. Black, P. (2000). Research and the development of educational assessment. Oxford Review of Education, 26(3/4), 407419. Black, P. & Wiliam, D. (2003). 'In praise of educational research': Formative assessment. British Educa tional Research Journal, 29(5), 623 637. Bloom, A. (1988). The closing of the American mind. New York: Simon and Schuster. Boyle Baise, M., Hsu, M.C., Johnson, S., Serriere, S. C., & Stewart, D. (2008). Putting reading first: Teaching social studies in el ementary classrooms. Theory and Research in Social Education, 36(3), 233 255. Branch, A. J. (2004). Modeling respect by teaching about race and ethnic identity in the social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education, 32(4), 523 545. Brkich, C. A. & Washington, E. Y. (2011). Pedagogical negotiations and authentic intellectual work: A phenomenological examination of high school teachers' experiences. Social Studies Research and Practice, 6(1), 35 57. Brophy, J. (1990). Teaching social studies for understanding and higher order applications. Elementary School Journal, 90(4), 351 417.
178 Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of Learning Sciences, 2 ( 2), 141178. Brush, T. & Saye, J. W. (2004). Scaffolding problem based teaching in a traditional social studies classroom. Theory and Research in Social Education, 32(3), 349378. Buly, M. R. & Valencia, S. W. (2002). Below the bar: Profiles of students who fail state reading assessments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(3), 219 239. Callahan, R. E. (1962). Education and the cult of efficiency Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Carman, T. (2008). Forward. In M. Heidegger (Ed.), Being and t ime (pp. xiiixxi). New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics. Chandler, P. T. (2006). Academic freedom: A teacher's struggle to include "Other" voices in history. Social Education, 70 354 357. Cohen, M. Z., Kahn, D. L., & Steeves, R. H. (2000). Hermeneu tic phenomenological research: A practical guide for nurse researchers Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. L. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Cornbleth, C. (2010). What constrains meaningful social studies teaching? In W. C. Parker (Ed.), Social studies today: Research and practice (pp. 215223). New York: Routledge. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Curry, M. (2008). Critical Friends Groups: The possibilities and limitations embedded in teacher professional development aimed at instructional improvements and school reform. Teachers College Record, 110(4), 733 774. Dahlberg, H. & Dahlberg, K. (2003). To not make definite what is indefinite: A phenomenological analysis of perception and its epistemological consequences. Humanistic Psychologist, 31(4), 34 50. Dahlgren, R. L. (2009). Fahrenheit 9/11 in the classroom. Teacher Education Quarterly, 36(1), 25 42.
179 Dahlgren, R. L. & Masyada, S. (2009). Ideological dissonance: A comparison of the views of eight conservative students with the recruitment document from a southeastern college of education. Social Studies Research and Practice, 4(1), 1 11. Daniel, P. T. K. (2004). Accountability and desegregation: Brown and its legacy. Journal of Negr o Education, 73 (3), 255267. Darling Hammond, L. (1994). Performancebased assessment and educational equity. Harvard Educational Review, 64(1), 5 30. Darling Hammond, L. (1997). The right to learn: A blueprint for creating schools that work San Francisco CA: Jossey Bass. Darling Hammond, L. (2000). New standards and old inequities: School reform and the education of African American students. Journal of Negro Education, 69(4), 263 287. Darling Hammond, L. (2010). The flat world and education: How America's commitment to equity will determine our future. New York: Teachers College Press. Darling Hammond, L. (Ed.). (2008). Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Darling Hammond, L., Ancess, J. & Falk, B. (1995). Authentic assessment in action: Studies of schools and students at work New York: Teachers College Press. Datnow, A. (2000). Power and politics in the adoption of school reform models. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(4), 357 374. Datnow, A. & Castellano, M. (2000). Teachers' responses to Success For All: How beliefs, experiences, and adaptations shape implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 37(3), 775 799. Dewey, J. (1897). My pedagogic creed New York: E. L. Kellogg. Dewey, J. (1906). The child and the curriculum Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Dewey, J. (1910). How we think Boston: D. C. Heath and Company. Dewey, J. (1915). School and society Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Dewey, J. (1916) Democracy and education New York: Macmillan. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
180 Donmoyer, R. & Donmoyer, J. Y. (2007). Readers' theater as a display strategy. In J. G. Knowles & A. L. Cole (Eds.), Handbook of the arts in qualitative research: Perspectives, methodologies, examples, and issues (pp. 209 224). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Dooley, D. (2001). Social research methods (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Duke, N. K. (2000). Print environments and experiences offered to first grade students in very low and very highSES school districts [abstract]. Reading Research Quarterly, 35(4), 456457. Dworkin, A. G. (2005). The No Child Left Behind Act: Accountability, highstakes testing, and roles for s ociologists. Sociology of Education, 78(2), 170 174. Educational Testing Service. (2011a). The Pathwise series of professional development programs. Retrieved February 20, 2011, from http://www.ets.org/pathwise Educational Testing Service. (2011b). Praxis III assessments. Retrieved February 20, 2011, from http://www.ets.org/praxis/institutions/praxisiii/ Elmore, R. F. (1987). Reform and the culture of authority in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 23(4), 60 78. Elmore, R. F. (1995). Structural reform and educational practice. Educational Researcher, 24(9), 23 26. Epstein, T. & Shiller, J. (2010). Race, gender, and the teaching and learning of national history. In W. C. Parker (Ed.), Social studies today: Research and practice (pp. 95 101). New York: Routledge. Estola, E. & Elbaz Luwisch, F. (2003). Teaching bodies at work. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35, 697 719. Evans, R. W. (2004a). The social studies wars revisited. Theory and Research in Social Education, 31(4), 523 539. Evans, R. W. (2004b). The social studies wars: What should we teach the children? New York: Teachers College Press. Evans, R. W. (2010). The social studies wars, now and then. In W. C. Parker (Ed.), Social studies today: Research and practice (pp. 2534). New York: Routledge. Fass, P. S. (1980). The IQ: A cultural and historical framework. American Journal of Education, 88(4), 431 458.
181 Finn, C. E., Jr. (2003). Foreword. In J. Leming, L. Ellington & K. Porter Magee (Eds.), Where did social studies go wrong? (pp. i vii). Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute. Florida Department of Education. (2009). FCAT student performance results: Demographic report Retrieved March 26, 2010, from https://app1.fldoe.org/FCATDemographics/ Frankel, R. M. (1999). Standards of qualitative research. In B. F. Crabtree & W. L. Miller (Eds.), Doing qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 333346). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum. G allagher, S. & Zahavi, D. (2007). The phenomenological mind: An introduction to philosophy of mind and cognitive science. New York: Routledge. Gamoran, A. (2001). American schooling and educational equality: A forecast for the 21st century. Sociology of Education, 74 135153. Garca, G. E. & Pearson, P. D. (1994). Assessment and diversity. Review of Research in Education, 20, 337391. Gardner, D. P. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for educational reform (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 226 006). Washington, DC: National Commission on Excellence in Education. Gee, J. P. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. New York: Routledge. Gipps, C. V. (1992). National curriculum assessment: A research agenda. British Educ ational Research Journal, 18(3), 277 286. Gipps, C. V. (1999). Sociocultural aspects of assessment. Review of Research in Education, 24 355 392. Gitlin, A. & Margonis, F. (1995). The political aspect of reform: Teacher resistance as good sense. American Journal of Education, 103, 377405. Goetz, J. P. & LeCompte, M. D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. San Diego: Academic Press. Gradwell, J. M. (2006). Teaching in spite of, rather than because of, the test: A case of ambi tious history teaching in New York State. In S. G. Grant (Ed.), Measuring history: Cases of statelevel testing across the United States (pp. 157176). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
182 Graff, G. (1993). Beyond the culture wars: How teaching the c onflicts can revitalize American education. New York: W. W. Norton. Grant, S. G. (2010). High stakes testing: How are social studies teachers responding? In W. C. Parker (Ed.), Social studies today: Research and practice (pp. 4352). New York: Routledge. G rant, S. G. & Salinas, C. (2008). Assessment and accountability in the social studies. In L. S. Levstik & C. A. Tyson (Eds.), Research in social studies education (pp. 219236). New York: Routledge. Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative data analysis: An introduc tion Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 191215). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Hamilton, L. S. (2003). Assessment as a policy tool. Review of Research in Education, 27, 25 68. Haney, W. (2000). The myth of the Texas miracle in education. Education Policy Analysis Archives 8 (11). Retrieved April 15, 2008, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n41 Hargreaves, A., Earl, L., & Schmidt, M. (2002). Perspectives on alternative assessment reform. American Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 69 95. Heck, R. H. & Crislip, M. (2001). Dir ect and indirect writing assessments: Examining issues of equity and utility. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(1), 19 36. Heidegger, M. (1982). The basic problems of phenomenology (A. Hofstadter, Trans.). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Heidegger, M. (2005). Introduction to phenomenological research (D. O. Dahlstrom, Trans.). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Heidegger, M. (2008). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics. Herman, J. (1997). Assessing new assessments: How do they measure up? Theory Into Practice, 36(4), 196204. Hess, D. E. (2009). Controversy in the classroom: The democratic power of discuss ion New York: Routledge.
183 Hess, D. E. (2010). Discussion in social studies: Is it worth the trouble? In W. C. Parker (Ed.), Social studies today: Research and practice (pp. 205213). New York: Routledge. Hinchey, P. H. (2009). Finding freedom in the classr oom: A practical introduction to critical theory (Revised ed.). New York: Peter Lang. Hinchey, P. H. (2010). Promoting engaged citizenship and informing public debate: A two fold argument for contemporary issues in education as a social science elective. E ducational Studies, 46(1), 25 43. Hirsch, E. D., Jr. (1987). Cultural literacy: What every American needs to know Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Hirsch, E. D., Jr. (1992). What your 4th grader needs to know: Fundamentals of a good fourth grade education New Y ork: Dell Publishing. Holstein, J. A. & Gubrium, J. F. (2005). Interpretive practice and social action. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 483505). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Horowitz, D. (2004, February 13). In defense of intellectual diversity. Chronicle of Higher Education, 50(23), B12. Horowitz, D. (2007a). Academic bill of rights. Retrieved February 22, 2011, from http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/documents/1925/abor.html Horowitz, D. (2007b). The professors: The 101 most dangerous academics in America. New York: Regnery. Howard, T. C. (2004). "Does race really matter?": Secondary students' constructions of racial dialogue in the social studies. Theory and Research in Social Educati on, 32(4), 484 502. Husserl, E. (1970). The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology (D. Carr, Trans.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press. Husserl, E. (1977). Cartesian meditations: An introduction to metaphysics The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Husserl, E. (1983). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy (F. Kersten, Trans. Vol. 1). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Husserl, E. (1999). The idea of phenomenology (L. Hardy, Trans.). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
184 Husserl, E. (2008). Logical investigations (J. N. Findlay, Trans. Vol. 1). New York: Routledge. Imig, D. G. & Imig, S. R. (2008). From traditional certification to competitive certification: A twenty five year retrospective. In M. Coc hranSmith, S. Feiman Nemser & D. J. McIntyre (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge. James, J. H. (2008). Teachers as protectors: Making sense of preservice teachers' resistance to interpretation in elementary his tory teaching. Theory and Research in Social Education, 36(3), 172 205. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor Civics Education Act, Florida House of Representatives, 2010 Sess. (2010). Kahne, J. & Middaugh, E. (2010). High quality civic education: What is it and who gets it? In W. C. Parker (Ed.), Social studies today: Research and practice (pp. 141150). New York: Routledge. Karen, D. (2005). No child left behind? Sociology ignored! Sociology of Education, 78(2), 165 169. King, M. B., Newmann, F. M., & Carmichael, D L. (2009). Authentic intellectual work: Common standards for teaching social studies. Social Education, 73 (1), 43 49. King, M. B., Schroeder, J., & Chawszczewski, D. (2001). Authentic assessment and performance in inclusive schools (RISER Brief No. 5). M adison, WI: Research Institute on Secondary Education Reform for Youth with Disabilities. Retrieved January 10, 2010, from http://archive.wceruw.org/riser/briefs.htm Koro Ljungberg, M., Yendol Hoppey, D., Smith, J. J., & Hayes, S. B. (2009). (E)pistemologi cal awareness, instantiation of methods, and uninformed methodological ambiguity in qualitative research projects. Educational Researcher, 38(9), 687 699. Kors, A. C. & Silverglate, H. A. (1999). The shadow university: The betrayal of liberty on America's campuses New York: Harper Perennial. Laqueur, W. (1980). The political psychology of appeasement: Finlandization and other unpopular essays Edison, NJ: Transaction. Larson, B. E. (2005). Wise practice in high school social studies: The case of Joe Gotchy. In E. A. Yeager & O. L. Davis, Jr. (Eds.), Social studies teaching in an age of highstakes testing: Essays on classroom practices and possibilities (pp. 153164). G reenwish, CT: Information Age Publishing.
185 Lee, J. & Wong, K. K. (2004). The impact of accountability on racial and socioeconomic equity: Considering both school resources and achievement outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 41(4), 797 832. Lemi ng, J., Ellington, L., & Porter Magee, K. (2003). Where did social studies go wrong? Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. Libresco, A. S. (2005). How she stopped worrying and loved to learn the test... sort of. In E. A. Yeager & O. L. Davis, Jr. ( Eds.), Wise social studies teaching in an age of highstakes testing: Essays on classroom practices and possibilities (pp. 3349). Greenwish, CT: Information Age Publishing. Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher, 29(2), 4 16. Marks, H. M. & Louis, K. S. (1997). Does teacher empowerment affect the classroom?: The implications of teacher empowerment for instructional practice and student academic performance. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19(3), 245 275. Marri, A. R. (2009). Creating citizens: Lessons in relationships, personal growth, and community in one secondary social studies classroom. Multicultural Perspectives, 11(1), 12 18. Marton, F. & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Er lbaum Associates. Mathews, J. (2011, February 11). The myth of declining US schools: They've long been mediocre. Washington Post Retrieved February 17, 2011, from http://voices.washingtonpost.com/class struggle/2011/02/myth_of_declining_us_schools.html McKnight, D. & Chandler, P. T. (2009). Social studies and the social order: Telling stories of resistance. Teacher Education Quarterly, 36(1), 59 75. MerleauPonty, M. (1964). The primacy of perception and its philosophical consequences. In J. Wild (Ed.), The primacy of perception (pp. 12 42). Evanston, IL: Northwest University Press. MerleauPonty, M. (2002). Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, Trans.). New York: Routledge Classics. Moore, M. (2004). Fahrenheit 9/11. New York: Weinstein Company. Moustak as, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
186 Myers, S. L., Jr., Kim, H., & Mandala, C. (2004). The effect of school poverty on racial gaps in test scores: The case of the Minnesota Basic Standards Tests. Journal of Negro Education, 73(1), 81 98. National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (2008). Professional standards for accreditation of schools, colleges, and departments of education. Washington, DC: Author. National Council for the Social Studies. (1994). Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for social studies Washington, DC: Author. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics Reston, VA: Author. National School Reform Faculty. (2004). Atlas: Looking at data. Retrieved April 17, 2009, from http://www.nsrfharmony.org/protocol/doc/atlas_lfsw.pdf National School Reform Faculty. (2008). National school reform faculty resource book: Adult learning in the service of student achievement, 20072008. Bloomington, IN: Author. National School Reform Faculty. (2009). Four 'A's text protocol. Retrieved April 15, 2009, from http://www.nsrfharmony.org/protocol/doc/4_a_text.pdf Newmann, F. M. (1965). The analysis of public controversy: New focus on social studies. The School Review, 73(4), 410 434. Newmann, F. M. (2000). Authentic intellectual work: What and why? Research and Practice Newsletter, 8(1). Retrieved August 28, 2008, from http://cehd.umn.edu/carei/Reports/Rpractice/Fall2000/ newmann.html Newmann, F. M., Brandt, R., & Wiggins, G. (1998). An exchange of views on Semantics, psychometrics, and assessment reform: A close look at authentic assessments. Educational Researcher, 27(6), 1922. Newmann, F. M., Bryk, A. S., & Nagoka, J. K. (2001). Authentic intellectual work and standardized tests: Conflict or coexistence? Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Carmichael, D. L. (2007). Authentic instruction and assessment: Common standards for r igor and relevance in teaching academic subjects Des Moines, IA: Authors. Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Carmichael, D. L. (2009). Teaching for authentic intellectual work: Standards and scoring criteria for teachers' tasks, student performance, and instr uction. Minneapolis, MN: The Center for Authentic Intellectual Work.
187 Newmann, F. M., King, M. B., & Rigdon, M. (1997). Accountability and school performance: Implications for restructuring. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 4175. Newmann, F. M., Lopez, G., & Bryk, A. S. (1998). The quality of intellectual work in Chicago schools: A baseline report Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Retrieved January 9, 2010, from http://ccsr.uchicago.edu/publications/p0f04.pdf Newmann, F. M., Marks, H. M., & Gamoran, A. (1996). Authentic pedagogy and student performance. American Journal of Education, 104(4), 280 312. Newmann, F. M. & Wehlage, G. G. (1993). Five standards of authentic instruction. Educational Leadership, 50(7), 8 12. Retrieved August 28, 2008, from http://pdonline.ascd.org/pd_online/diffinstr/el199304_newmann.html Nickell, P. (1999). The issue of subjectivity in authentic social studies assessment. Social Education, 63(6), 353 355. No Child Left Behind, 20 USC 6301 (2001). Olsen, B. & Kirtman, L. (2002). Teacher as mediator of reform: An examination of teacher practice in 36 California restructuring schools. Teachers College Record, 104(2), 301324. Olsen, B. & Sexton, D. (2009). Threat rigidity, school reform, and how teachers view their work insidecurrent education policy contexts. American Educational Research Journal, 46(1), 9 44. Olsen, D. G. (1995). Less can be more in the promotion of thinking. Social Education, 59(3), 130 134. Onosko, J. J. (1991). Barr iers to the promotion of higher order thinking in social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education, 19 (4), 341366. Onosko, J. J. (1996). Exploring issues with students despite the barriers. Social Education, 60(1). Retrieved October 17, 2008, from http://members.ncss.org/se/6001/600104.html Ozga, J. (1995). Deskilling a profession: Professionalism, deprofessionalization, and the new managerialism. In H. Busher & R. Saran (Eds.), Managing teachers as professionals in schools (pp. 2137). New York: Routledge. Passe, J. & Evans, R. W. (1996). Discussion methods in an issues centered curriculum. In R. W. Evans & D. W. Saxe (Eds.), Handbook on teaching social issues (pp. 81 88). Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.
188 Piaget, J. (2003). T he psychology of intelligence (M. Piercy & D. E. Berlyne, Trans.). New York: Routledge Classics. Polkinghorne, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. In R. S. Valle & S. Halling (Eds.), Existential phenomenological perspectives in psychology (pp. 4160). New York: Plenum Press. Popper, K. (2010). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Routledge Classics. Powers, J. M. (2004). Highstakes accountability and equity: Using evidence from California's public schools accountability act to address the issues in "Williams v. State of California". American Educational Research Journal, 2004(41), 4. Rauch, J. (1994). Kindly inquisitors: The new attacks on free thought Chicago: University Press. Ravitch, D. (1985). The schools we deserve: Reflection on the educational crisis of our times New York: Basic Books. Ravitch, D. (2000). Left back: A century of battles over school reform New York: Touchstone. Ravitch, D. (2003). A brief history of the social studies. In J. Leming, L. Ellington & K. Porter Mag ee (Eds.), Where did social studies go wrong? Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation. Ravitch, D. (2010). The death and the life of the great American school system: How testing and choice are undermining education New York: Basic Books. Ricoeur, P. (1984). Time and narrative (K. McLaughlin & D. Pellauer, Trans. Vol. I). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ricoeur, P. (2009). Hermeneutics and the human sciences (J. B. Thompson, Trans. 5th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Roderick, M. & Engel, M. (2001). The grasshopper and the ant: Motivational responses of low achieving students to highstakes testing. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23 (3), 197 227. Ross, E. W. (2000). Redrawing the lines: The case against traditional social studies instruction. In D. W. Hursh & E. W. Ross (Eds.), Democratic social education: Social studies for social change (pp. 43 64). New York: Falmer Press. Ross, E. W. & Marker, P. M. (2005). (If social studies is wrong) I don't want to be right. Theory and Research in Social Education, 33 (1), 142151.
189 Rumberger, R. W. & Thomas, S. L. (2000). The distribution of dropout and turnover rates among urban and suburban high schools. Sociology of Education, 73(1), 39 67. Russell, T., McPherson, S., & Martin, A. K. (2001). Coherence and collaboration in teacher education reform. Canadian Journal of Education, 26(1), 37 55. Rutherford, F. J. & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans New York: Oxford University Press. Sartre, J. P. (2007). Existentialism is a humanism (C. Macomber, Trans.). Yale University Press. Saye, J. W. & Brush, T. (1999). Student engagement with social issues in a multimediasupported learning environment. Theory and Research in Social Education, 27(4), 472504. Saye, J. W. & Brush, T. ( 2007). Using technology enhanced learning environments to support problem based historical inquiry in secondary school classrooms. Theory and Research in Social Education, 35(2), 196 230. Scheurman, G. & Newmann, F. M. (1998). Authentic intellectual work i n the social studies: Putting performance before pedagogy. Social Education, 62(1), 23 26. Schiller, K. S. & Muller, C. (2000). External examinations and accountability, expectations, and high school graduation. American Journal of Education, 108(2), 7310 2. Schiller, K. S. & Muller, C. (2003). Raising the bar and equity?: Effects of state high school graduation requirements and accountability policies on students mathematics course taking. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(3), 299318. Schles inger, A., Jr. (1998). The disuniting of America: Reflections on a multicultural society. New York: W. W. Norton. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2002). Making mathematics work for all children: Issues of standards, testing, and equity. Educational Researcher, 31(1), 1 3 25. Schoonmaker, F. (2007). One size doesn't fit all: Reopening discussion of the researchpractice connection. Theory Into Practice, 46 (4), 264271. Segall, A. (2006). Teaching in the age of accountability: Measuring history or measuring up to it? In S. G. Grant (Ed.), Measuring history: Cases of statelevel testing across the United States (pp. 105132). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
190 Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Statistical reasoning for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Smith, J. A., Larkin, M., & Flowers, P. (2009). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Spring, J. (2010). Deculturalization and the struggle for equality: A brief history of the education of dominated cultures in the United States (6th ed.). Boston: McGraw Hill. SSIRC. (2010). The Social Studies Inquiry Research Collaborative: Authentic intellectual challenge in social studies classrooms. Paper presented at the National Council for the Social Studies, Denver, CO. Stern, S. M. & Stern, J. A. (2011). The state of state US history standards, 2011 Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Institute. Taylor, C. (1994). Assessment for measurement or standards: The peril and promise of large scale as sessment reform. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 231262. Taylor, G., Shepard, L., Kinner, F., & Rosenthal, J. (2003). A survey of teachers' perspectives on highstakes testing in Colorado: What gets taught, what gets lost (CSE Technical Report No. 588). Santa Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Evaluation, Diversity and Excellence. Tepper, R. L. (2002). The influence of highstakes testing on instructional practice in Chicago. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Chicago. Terman, L. M. (2001). National intelligence tests, 1919. In J. W. Fraser (Ed.), The school in the United States: A documentary history (pp. 207213). Boston: McGraw Hill. Terman, L. M. (2010). National intelligence tests, 1919. In J. W. Fraser (Ed.), The school in the United States: A documentary history (2nd ed., pp. 241 247). New York: Routledge. Terwilliger, J. S. (1997). Semantics, psychometrics, and assessment reform: A close look at authentic assessments. Educational Researcher, 26(8), 24 2 7. Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for Social Studies, 19 TAC 113 (2010). Tyack, D. B. (1974). The one best system: A history of urban education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Urban, W. J. & Wagoner, J. L., Jr. (2009). American education: A history (4th ed.). New York: Routledge.
191 Urietta, L., Jr. (2004). Dis connections in "American" citizenship and the post/neocolonial: People of Mexican descent and whitestream pedagogy and curriculum. Theory and Research in Social Education, 32 (4), 43345 8. Vagle, M. D. (2006). Dignity and democracy: An exploration of middle school teachers' pedagogy. Research in Middle Level Education Online, 29(8), 1 12, from http://www.nmsa.org/portals/0/pdf/publications/RMLE/rmle_vol29_no8.pdf van den Berg, R. & Ros, A (1999). The permanent importance of the subjective reality of teachers during educational innovations: A concerns based approach. American Educational Research Journal, 36(4), 879 906. van Hover, S. D. (2006). Teaching history in the Old Dominion: The im pact of Virginia's accountability reform on seven secondary beginning history teachers. In S. G. Grant (Ed.), Measuring history: Cases of state level testing across the United States (pp. 195219). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. van Manen, M. ( 1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy Albany: SUNY Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (14th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Warren, J. R. & Jenkins, K. N. (2005). High school exit examinations and high school dropout in Texas and Florida, 19712000. Sociology of Education, 78(2), 122 143. Westheimer, J. & Kahne, J. (2004). What kind of citizen? The politics of educating for dem ocracy. American Educational Research Journal, 41(2), 237 269. Willingham, W. W., Pollack, J. M., & Lewis, C. (2002). Grades and test scores: Accounting for observed differences. Journal of Educational Measurement, 39(1), 1 37. Yeager, E. A. (2005). Introduction: The "wisdom of practice" in the challenging context of standards and highstakes testing. In E. A. Yeager & O. L. Davis, Jr. (Eds.), Wise social studies teaching in an age of high stakes testing: Essays on classroom practices and possibilities (pp. 1 9). Greenwish, CT: Information Age Publishing. Yoakum, C. S. & Yerkes, R. M. (1920). Army mental tests New York: Henry Holt. Zimmerman, J. (2002). Whose America?: Culture wars in the public schools Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Zinn, H. (20 05). A people's history of the United States New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics.
192 Zinn, H. & Arnove, A. (Eds.). (2004). Voices of a people's history of the United States New York: Seven Stories Press.
193 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Christopher Andrew Brkich was born in 1980 in PointeClaire, Qubec, Canada, and is the second child of John and Laura Brkich. He was conferred his PhD in Curriculum and Instruction from the University of Florida in August 2011. Christopher Andrew spent hi s formative years in Montral, Qubec. He graduated from Pierrefonds Comprehensive High School in June 1998. He subsequently pursued a Diplme dtudes collgiales in Liberal Arts at CGEP John Abbott College, graduating in June 2000. Following this, he co mpleted his undergraduate studies at Concordia University in May 2004, graduating with a b accalaureate in a rts, with distinction in h istory. Prior to moving to the United States in 2005 to pursue a m asters d egree in s ocial studies e ducation at the Univers ity of Florida, Christopher Andrew taught both e conomics and w orld h istory for the Lester B. Pearson School Board in Montral. He returned to the University of Florida in 2007 to pursue his PhD after teaching World History for a year at Florida Air Academy in Melbourne, Florida. Christopher Andrew is a peer reviewed published author in the field of social studies e ducation. He has presented his scholarship at numerous local, state, national, and international conferences, including the National Council for the Social Studies, the International Society for the Social Studies, the History of Education Society, and the International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry. Christopher Andrew married Katie Lynn Milton in December 2009, and has two beagles n amed Annabell e and Effie. In June 2011, they moved to Statesboro, Georgia, to accept positions in Georgia Southern Universitys College of Education.