- Class Page
- A Story of Qualitative Inquiry
- Analysis of the Story
- Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
- Figure 2-- the Reality about the Process
- Organization of this book
- Additional Readings
- Questions for Consideration
- Suggested Activities
Book Title: Educators as Inquirers: Using Naturalistic Inquiry
Preface
Teacher as researcher, action research, school-based research-- these ideas have been
discussed and proposed in education for many years. Some of the earliest efforts
to encourage educators to gather information to enhance their work came out of Great
Britain (Lawrence Stenhouse, etc.). The notion is logical. It makes sense that people
who teach or administer teachers in schools would want to learf from their personal
experiences and
research and make improvements based on what they learned from both. However, the
predominant focus of research in education continues to be by people from outside
of schools-- by professional "researchers" who use schools as their data sources,
write to one another about what they find, sometimes share the results with school people
in abbreviated form and search for theory, as opposed to practice in addressing problems
of learning and teaching.
Some notable exceptions are Catherine T. Fosnot (1989) and Hitchcock and Hughes (1989).
Fosnot makes an excellent case for preparing teacher candidates by having them study
the learning processes of children in real classrooms under the guidance of a professor who is also studying those processes. She also recommends an interdisciplinary
undergraduate degree for teachers with a focus not only on what is known by the participating
disciplines but what kinds of questions they ask and how one goes about doing inquiry in those fields. The notion of teacher inquiry is central to all she presents,
though she does not recommend specific inquiry methods for teacher use, beyond taking
a constructivist approach (based on the assumption that knowledge is a construction of the knower).
Hitchcock and Hughes urge teachers to be researchers as well; but their recommendations
for doing so appear to impose research on teaching as opposed to integrating these
two activities into an integrated whole which could be viewed by teachers as a natural extension of what they already do as teachers. The message seems to be that teachers
should become more like researchers, inspite of the restrictions on their time and
skills.
It is a major premise of this book that for research to have any lasting influence
on educational practice, educators have to be involved in doing
research of some form. They have to be asking questions and doing a variety of tasks
to answer those questions. Although a few authors seem to agree with this idea,
the dominant practice in education is still for teachers to teach, administrators
to manage, and researchers to research.
I also believe that good educators naturally inquire, and those existing efforts provide
an excellent starting point for encouraging them and others to become fully engaged
in inquiry in their settings and to be the research experts for the entire field
of educational research. Teachers and other educators are better learners if they are
also working toward being good inquirers. This book is intended to substantiate
and expand that claim.
The book is organized around stories about several teachers, student teachers, public
school students, administrators, and a university professor (the author) who are
exploring the idea of educator as learner using naturalistic inquiry concepts and
strategies while engaged in various activities of education. These stories are intended
to demonstrate that there are many different ways to use naturalistic inquiry while
conducting studies and simultaneously doing the work of schooling. All of the participants (teachers, students, administrators, and others) are learners, teachers, and researchers
at the same time. Their activities in these three dimensions are compatible and
actually enhance their performance in all t`ree areas. It is obvious that they are learning to combine these roles as they go. This should inspire confidence in readers
that they too can learn and inquire while
they educate!
Chapter 1: An Introduction
A Story of Qualitative Inquiry
A School Story
January 31
Brrrrr! I roll from my face to my side, groping for something to hang onto and
finally hunch from sitting to a squat, trying to center my nordic skiis under my
soaked flannels. This is my fourth face plant in the last half hour and the strain
is beginning to show. After bussing up to Park City at seven this morning, skiing up the
North side of this mountain for two hours and lunching in the snow on this snowy
ridge near Guardsman Pass since before noon, all 55 of us have been anticipating
the thrill and danger of the nine-mile descent we are now making down the South side into the
Heber Valley. The high school students seem to have varying abilities. Many have
skiied for years, but not on these narrow skiis. Others have no prior experience.
All are adventurous, in my opinion; I glance nervously over the edge of the cliff to my left
and plunge my head into a snow bank to keep from falling off.
About half way down, it begins snowing and blowing. I wish I had my goggles so I
could see better! I am with the teachers (Sid and Cheryl) now. They have been up
and down this mountain many times in the 16 years Unified Studies has been in operation
but they look like they are having fun, trying out some new telemark skiis in this wet
snow. As a university professor interested in innovative programs that last, I am
taking this year to experience the class first hand. I didn't know this could mean
sweat and broken bones!
Suddenly I realize that all the students are in front of us, heading down to the bus
at varying speeds. Sid, Cheryl, Jack (a student teacher) and I have stopped for
some reason and are standing around talking about how great this day has been. Sid
is still ecstatic. Cheryl agrees that it has been a great day but a problem with Steve
Wilson has come up. Jack says he saw him smoking and thinks Steve knows it. Bruce
(another student) was with him but Jack didn't see him
smoking. The class rule is that there will be no smoking, drugs, or alcohol during
school related activities; and if there is, then the student is out of the program.
They note that Steve has not been attending his other classes at all and is frequently absent from Unified. He had a meeting with the principal and his father on Monday,
and it was decided that if he messed up again he would be out of the school for the
year. They debate these facts against the point that they want to do what is best
for Steve and what is best for the rest of the class. They are sure that other students
know about what Steve is doing, and others may be doing it too. Sid comments that
during the first few years they had a lot of trouble with kids drinking alcohol on
their outings. They combatted that and the bad image it gave the program for quite awhile.
There has not been much of that sort of thing in the class during the last two years;
but this group seems more prone to it. The teachers have been concerned more than usual about dealing with the problem this year..
Cheryl suggests that Jack talk to Steve and tell him that he saw him and make a deal
with him to stay with Jack all the time because they have been building some rapport.
I ask if that might be a little rough on Jack! Then Cheryl says that she just doesn't feel right about doing that. Sid is anxious to be skiing on down the trail with
the rest of the class but Cheryl keeps asking what he thinks they should do. After
about 10 minutes in the blinding snow storm, we finally decide to confront Steve
on the next day the class meets about the whole thing and then turn it over to the principal
to see what he will do. Sid and Cheryl want to support Steve and not cut him off
if there is a chance that he might come around.
Three hours later, we are back at school and most of the students have left. The
two teachers, four student teachers and I are talking things over with regard to
Steve. Jack says he smelled more smoke on both Steve and Bruce when he met them
at the bus and he also notes that Steve was one of about 11 who came to 7th period the previous
Thursday, was marked present, and then took off for the rest of the day. He wonders
if Steve just isn't trying enough to do well in the class for them to keep supporting
him? The teachers also bring up the other students and the message that overlooking
this problem might send to them. A major point they have been trying to convey to
this class has been acceptance of the reality of consequences. They reviewed the
rules at the beginning of the class; it should have been clear to Steve that this was a blatant
violation. Dahrl (another student teacher) pointed out that Steve had lied to her
saying he had turned in the budget assignment when he hadn't even been there.
Feb 4
I just spent some time listening to Sid and Cheryl talking with Jack and Steve as
they said they were going to do during our visit in the snow storm last week. When
I came in, they had been talking for quite awhile already. Sid was talking at his
desk; Cheryl was at hers; Jack was on the couch and Steve was in the chair facing the three
of them. Here is most of what I heard them saying:
Sid: I want you to be healthy, and so A can't stand by and not tell you that too
many of my friends are dead or very sick from addiction to nicotine, and other drugs
and it is not a good thing to be stuck to.
Cheryl: I don't expect everyone in Unified to like me or Sid. With 75 people out
there and our being people, some are bound to not like all of what we do. I don't
just go for all of the kids immediately either. But I expect them and me to try
to get to know each other. If they don't invest in other people, or if I don't, we are the
losers because we miss out on what others have to offer us.
Steve: I don't feel that way. I really like this class; in fact it is about all
I come to high school for. There are lots of sub-groups in the class, and some of
them really don't like the way you lecture so much. But anyway, I think I deserve
the punishment for what I did that you set out at the beginning of the year. You really ought
to kick me out.
Cheryl: That is up to the principal. It is a school policy.
Steve: Why are you leaving it up to him?
Cheryl: That is the school's podicy. We are not dumping it on `im; this would be
the same thing we would do if you or anyone were caught smoking here in the school.
I like the way you are open with us, and you seem to get along well with the other
people in the class. You have been in here because we felt you could make a great contribution
to them. That is true for everyone in the class. They know that you have been missing
a lot of school and that you smoke and so on. It is good for the straight A kids to get to know people like you and the contributions you can make to them. They
can learn from you.
Jack: Does this experience seem similar to Hawaii to you? (Steve nodded). I can
see you are trying. I think maybe you ought to go back to Hawaii and have some more
of the experience there (I talked to Jack later. He said that he worked with kids
like Steve in the pineapple plantations of Hawaii for about three years and feels anxious
that he and Sid and Cheryl aren't going to be able to influence Steve at all now
because he is out of their class and their sphere of influence).
Cheryl: Do you know what you want, Steve?
Steve: To be happy.
Cheryl: How do you do that? Do you see how?
Steve: Some days I just have a good time and then set about to have a better time
the next day. The only thing I can't figure out is religion. I need to find out
if there is truth in religion, and if there is, I need to get on the right path.
Cheryl: That question can be a struggle for a long
time. I struggle with some things now
that I used to think I had figured out. Can't live all your life doing what your
parents want. Somewhere inside of Steve Wilson there is a place where you can recognize
the truth for you. You may always have questions about these things, but there are
some bottom line places you can get to and hold tight to. I just don't want this
to be a negative experience for you. This decision has nothing to do with liking
or not liking you-- like Sid said. I would do the same for everyone in the class.
We searched for options but felt we had to do this to be fair given our policies for the class.
You think about it as you go talk to the principal.
Sid: I struggle all the time to know if what we are doing is a service or a disservice
to you and the other students.
Steve: Like Cheryl quoted from Dr. Belt-- some things only have to be decided once
and I don't think you should make an exception for me.
Cheryl: Selfishly, I just don't want to miss the relationship we were developing
with you.
Steve: Maybe we can still have a relationship outside of Unified?
Cheryl: I appreciate your genuine openness with us. I hope you can see how we feel
about it, too. Do what you can the rest of the day to help your group. They have
been countifg on you to do your part for the World Appreciation Day presentations.
Also help others be open with us; if they have things they are unhappy about, we want
them to feel free to come talk to us about those. So go help your group until the
principal comes back and calls you to visit with him.
As Steve leaves, Cheryl talks to Sid and Jack a minute about how happy she is that
Steve accepted responsibility for what he had done; but it seemed a little strange
to her too. Why didn't he argue with them about staying in the class?
Feb 5, 1990
Tape recorded interview with Sid and Cheryl about the Steve Wilson decision
Dave: I came in late on your conversation with Steve last time. Did I miss anything?
Cheryl: Well, he didn't hesitate at all to admit that he had been involved in smoking.
He came in and just shook my hand, and that's what he said he wanted to do-- to
be dropped from the program. He said, "I'd just like to shake your hand, and I appreciate what you've done for me." And I said, "I really don't want not
to see you again3 when you're writing or you're drawing or stuff like that, I really
wish you'd come share your work with me." He said he would like to do that.
Dave: So do you guys feel good about that decision?
Sid: What do you mean, feel good about it?
Dave: Do you think it was the right thing to do?
Cheryl: Yeah, I do. I felt like we had enough time to think about it before we made
it. He kept saying that when he gets up in the mountains or away from the school,
he doesn't even think about it as being school and just lights up. Even so, he's
still not dealing with the fact that he never would have chosen to smoke in front of me.
If he wasn't concerned, why do it behind the water tank?
Dave: How successful would you say this class has been in doing what you wanted for
students like Steve who aren't doing too well in high school generally?
Sid: I think it's been really successful. To deal with this thing with Steve, that's
a hard problem because Steve's exactly the kind of person that we want to have in
the class for a number of reasons. There are just as many reasons why I want to
have Steve Wilson in the class as I do any other person at the other end of the continuum,
an AP student. But at the same time we won't accomplish anything if the class just
becomes a pooling for kids who say, "Yeh, we can get away with things. When we go
on a trip, we can go behind the water tanks and light up or take a flask with us and drink
on the trip." It's a real hard thing. We must deliver the message that we don't
tolerate that and you'll be out of here if you do. But at the same time, we've got
to say, we want you because this is an arena you could be successful in and you can impart
things to other students that are worth while. That's why I'm more worried about
the reaction the class is going to have to this than I am about feeling bad about
Steve leaving.
Feb 6, 1990
I am visiting Unified today. Cheryl is talking to the students about what happened
with Steve and telling them that she wants to air it and get things out in the open.
Sid is talking about how the class is built on trust and how they are bending district policy not to keep the students all within their line of vision. "There is no way
we could keep that policy and do all that we are trying to do in here. So if we
find that we can't trust you, then we will have to change what we do. That could
make the experience completely different for future students." He is giving lots of examples
from rock climbing and belays and other outdoor situations that are built on trust.
On the day Sid and Cheryl met with Steve and agreed with him that it would be best
for him to leave, many of the students were very upset. Some were crying. Some
claimed that Steve was not the onlq one breaking the rules. Some worried that he
would not get into school anywhere else. But Steve left without any accusations against Jack
or Sid or Cheryl. He told his mother later that he was glad they stuck by their
decision because if they hadn't, he would not have trusted or respected them.
Analysis of the Story
An Analysis
What was going on here? What did the participants learn from this experience? What questions were they asking? What was each person hearing, seeing, thifking? How aware were they of what was going on from their own and others' perspectives? What records were kept about this experience? What was there to share about this experience
with others? Under what assumptions were the participants operating? What standards did the participants have for judging the quality of their experience?
Of course, there are many possible answers to these questions and several other questions that could be asked about this event. But in this book, I would like to point out that whatever else they were doing, the participants were conducting a form of naturalistic inquiry while they were learning and teaching. We were not consciously following a linear process, but all of us-- Sid, Cheryl, Jack, Steve (and the other students, though we will not examine them as closely just now), and I were all conducting our own inquiries, learning from the process, and sharing our learnings with others.
I used to believe that people needed to be taught a process and certain activities for conducting research using a naturalistic orientation. But experiences like the one described in this storq have convinced me that most learners are already engaging in many inquiry activities naturally. And I believe that teachers who are busy learning in natural ways are going to exemplify that learning for their students and find better ways to share what they are learning through their inquiries. I would like to support teachers and other educators in their inquiry efforts by inviting you to expand your natural learning activities to include more of what are commonly known as naturalistic or qualitative inquiry activities.
Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
Figure 1 is a simplified representation of some of the activities often used in naturalistic inquiry which were also used by the participants in this story and which can be used by teachers, administrators, full time researchers or anyone interested in learning using their natural skills in lived situations. The figure is a simplification, because in reality, all the activities listed are going on simultaneously in the experiences of the inquirying participants.
Assumptions of Educators as Qualitative Inquirers, See Chapter 2: Assumptions
Develop Relationships,
See Chapter 4: Inquiry Relationships and Roles
Ask Questions,
See Chapter 6: Questions and Focus
Develop A Focus,
See Chapter 6: Questions and Focus
Share With Others,
SeeChapter 9: Sharing through Story Telling
Analysis and Synthesis,
See Chapter 8: Story Reading through Analysis, Synthesis, and Interpretation
Gather Information,
See Chapter 7: Gathering through Observations, Interviews, and Documents
Figure 2-- the Reality about the Process
Figure 2 is an attempt to emphasize this point. All the same activities are presented there but they are represented in many different combinations in an attempt to suggest reality isn't so simple.
One useful metaphor for the naturalistic inquiry activities is holomovement. In his book The Third Ear, Berendt reviews the discovery of holography as follows:
The discovery of laser beams in 1965 lead to a new kind of photographic representation
called a hologram. If you produce a full-length photograph of someone and then discard
all but the head and shoulders so as to enlarge the face, the new picture will once again contain the entire person rather than just a blown up head. In holography,
you can not eliminate anything. Anyone who works with holograms is directed back
to the whole whenever he tries to separate off any partial aspect. David Bohm coin[ed]
the tere holomovement. The word hologram alone implies something static and immovable,
but the world is constantly in motion. The totality is in motion. A hologram, like
a photograph, is only, as it were, a fixed image of a single process of movement
- an abstraction of the entire movement, of the whole. (pp. 107-108)
Naturalistic inquiry is a process
which includes the various activitiess illustrated in Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
to yield both experiences
and products. But any subpart of those outcomes contains the whole process and is
not static but constantly "in process." The point is that the whole experience is
more than just the parts that go into it. Learning through naturalistic inquiry is
a wholistic experience that involves several experiences occuring together harmoniously.
It does not make sense to pull the various activities associated with doing naturalistic inquiry out in isolation, just as parts of holograms can not be isolated.
The processes work together and each activity a naturalistic inquirer might engage
in cgntains the essence of all other activities.
The story told earlier is an illustration of two high school teachers, a student
teacher, several high school students, and a university collaborator conducting naturalistic
inquiry as a means of enhancing their learning and teaching experiences. To clarify the naturalistic inquiry process as applied to learning and teaching and its wholistic
nature, let's further examine the story in light of the summary in Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process. This figure shows several kinds gf activities that have been grouped together
to facilitate this discussion; but please keep in mind that these activities can and
do combine in many different quantities and configurations. Their order in the figure
is almost arbitrary.
As a point of clarification, Sid and Cheryl (the two teachers) were not on this ski
trip explicitly to conduct research. Among other purposes, they were there to teach
high school students how to ski, to help them integrate their experiences in the
out of doors to their lives and several related disciplines (science, social studies, recreation,
art, and English), and to help them learn responsibility. They were in the thick
of this experience and probably did not even think of themselves as researchers.
But the claim of this book is that they were very much conducting inquiry and were
learning while teaching. They were also inviting the people associated with them
to do the same-- the student teachers, the high school students, and me as a representative from a nearby university. Together, as a community of learners, we were engaging
in an inquiry process.
Although all the naturalistic inquiry activities combine in a holistic experience,
several groups of activities will be isolated for the discussion below. Keep referring
back to Figure 2-- the Reality about the Process
to remind yourself that this is an artificial isolation for purposes of discussion only.
Beginning with the "Develop a Focus" box on the left of Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
, it would be fair
to say we were immersed in the ski trip experience with no common explicit inquiry
focus
as the day began. Each participant came into this day with different assumptions
about themselves and the others, about their purposes for being there, about their
roles as learners, teachers, and inquirers, and different standards for judging the
quality of their inquiry efforts. Each participant also came having different relationships
developed with others in the setting, with different perceptions of the possible
roles they and others could play, asking different questions about the scene, using
different skills for gathering information to address those questions, wit` different
ideas about how to analyze and synthesize what they would be learning, and with different
ideas about the communities with whom they might share what they learned through
this experience. These differences and many others based on the participants' backgrounds,
personalities, beliefs, experience, and so on lead to vast differences in awareness
, initial focus
, and openness among the participants. For example, Cheryl and Sid are often focused
on matching their class activities to the weather when they go out on such trips.
They are asking themselves how to keep the students safe while having an adventure.
They are watching to see how the weather changes and how the students are responding
to the experience and how they can help them see what they are experiencing and what
is around them. Cheryl is particularly interested in getting to know a few of the
students better on these trips because they are more open with her on an individual basis
in these settings. As the trip progressed, Steve and his actions precipitated an
opportunity for all participants to re-focus
their individual inquiries and attention to a common project which became the focus
of the story told here. No proposals
were written as part of this inquiry, though they could have been and may yet be
if any participants find that this focus merits the acquisition of funds or formal
review.
The "Keep a Record" box in the center of Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
is associated with activities that facilitate
keeping a record of what we are learning through our inquiry. Sid and Cheryl did
not keep notes or any other kind of record on this
experience. They knew that I was doing so, and we collaborated in this inquiry.
Jack and Steve may have kept a journal and written about this experience. In later
years, all student teachers and students have been encouraged to keep such records.
But in this case, my record formed the basis for the account that was presented here.
This record is probably more elaborate than most teachers' accounts of their school
experiences but some record is usually kept of some of the lived experiences of people in schools. The richer that account, the better the inquiry
. I included records of relationships formed and forming, questions participants
were asking, focuses that were forming, analyses and syntheses that developed, information
that was gathered; in other words, notes on all the other activities
that were going into this experience. I tried to describe
what I was seeing and hearing as well as what I was thinking, feeling, and reflecting
about during the experience. I also kept an audit trail
or record of inquiry decisions that I
was making throughout this experience.
In reference to the "Develop Relationships" box in Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
, it is clear from the
story that Jack had a closer relationship to Steve than did any of the other "authority"
figures in the story. He felt that relationship was jeopardized by the knowledge
he gained through the relationship; but Steve didn't think so. The whole experience
strengthened and clarified the relationships between Steve and the two teachers,
facilitating the inquiry they were trying to make and the inquiries I and the student
teachers were making too. Although it appears that the relationships with Steve were terminated,
they were actually resumed the next year when he returned and completed the full
year in the Unified Studies program. Sharing this experience together influenced
how all of us were able to interact with one another and with the other students also.
As a university person, I was attempting to develop a role
in this scene that would allow me to be trusted by the students so they would talk
to me about their experiences in this program. I found that because I was not one
of the teachers and not a student teacher and certainly not a high school student,
many of the students and teachers didn't know what to do with me or how to treat me. But
after sharing this experience with them, they were willing to give me a place in
their program and many more of them could talk to me about Steve as well as other
angles on their experience after I gained entree with them
in this way. The relationships we all shared grew and changed throughout the study,
allowing us to shift from dearning to teaching and back throughout our inquiries.
We all understood that these relationships were dependent upon our treating one
another ethically
(as Sid and Cheryl treated Steve, in this case) over the entire school year, as well.
The "gather information" box in Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
indicates several ways in which participants may assemble
information from their experiences for use in contemplating the experiences and in
clarifying what other sources might add to their experiences. Simply being involved
and having experiences is certainly a way to collect or generate information. We usually
select aspects of our experience to focus attention on through our senses-- we see
(observations
and document
or artifact reviews), hear (conversations, interviews
, eavesdropping), touch, smell, and taste (through all these collection procedures).
Triangulation
, using several different methods of gathering from several different sources, strengthens
this activity considerably. The teachers, student teachers, students, afd visiting
professor used all their senses and the natural data generation facilities associated with those senses in creating data around their experience in the story told
here. The record used for the story is necessarily told through the sense experiences
I
had. But I attempted to include the perspectives of others as much as possible through
quotations of their words and detailed descriptions of their actions.
The "Ask Questions" box in Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
identifies several types of questions inquirying educators
might make in their studies. It should be apparent from the story that Sid and Cheryl
were asking what would be the best action
to take in this situation for Steve and for the other students. The student teacher,
Jack, was asking what his ethical response should be to a student with whom he was
slowly developing rapport and with whom he hoped to have long term positive influence. I was asking descriptive
questions about how this program and these people teach students to take responsibility
for their own actions and learning. Steve seemed to be asking structural
and contrast
questions about how far he could push his mentors and the institution of school in
learning to take responsibility for his own decisions. These were some of the broad
questions being asked in this inquiry situation. Many other questions about the
context of the story, the nature of the participants, and so on could be asked and may be
as the inquiry continues.
The "Analysis-Synthesis" box in Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
suggests that participants are constantly
interpreting their experiences and the information they are gathering. This may
be done through on-the-spot analyses, such as during the meeting in the snow storm
when Sid, Cheryl, and Jack were attempting to understand Steve and interpret his actions in
light of their larger purposes for the class. When they returned to school and talked
further, they elaborated upon those interpretations, asked more questions, and gathered more information. During the interview with Steve, they refined those interpretations
further, refined their relationship with him, asked more questions, and gathered
more information as they made a decision. They explored the implications of their
interpretations for the other students in the class too. As the recorder and visiting
professor, I made interpretations by what I chose to write down during the experience
and how I chose to write the story. In subsequent chapters, I will illustrate several other types of analysis (domain, taxonomic, conponential)
and synthesis (theme
) that may be helpful in developing even richer interpretations of experiences such
as this. The results of these interpretations may be helpful to educators trying
to make practical decisions and should also be informative to others who make decisions
in other similar settings.
The "Share with Others" box in Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
is a reminder that we learn best what we share with others.
Inquiry is enhanced as we report and expose our experiences and interpretations
with fellow inquirers and other interested audiences. It involves significant personal investment and risk because your perceptions (interpretations) are constantly open
to challenge and inquiry by others who are involved. Sid and Cheryl orally
shared what they were learning with one another and with others internal
to the program such as the student teachers, the school principal, their students,
and me. They have also agreed to allow me to share their experiences and insights
in this book and other written
publications as a means of inviting others outside
the program to join in an ongoing dialogue with us and build a community
interested in how to teach and learn through ongoing naturalistic inquiry.
The circle forming the outer boundary of the entire Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
represents our "Assumptions"
about learning, teaching, and particularly about inquiry. Sid and Cheryl and the
other participants made certain assumptions about their relationships with one another and the values they shared. For example, they assumed that to understand Steve and
what to do about his decision, they would have to interact with him and be influefced
by him. They could not remain immune to his values. They were not "objective."
They also assumed that people have values which help influence what they do and say and
that their
values as teachers and as inquirers would influence not only what they did themselves
but what they interpretted Steve and others to be doing. A major value they seemed
to demonstrate was the importance of students being responsible for their own actions. As a participant in this experience, I assumed that whatever I might say about
this experience might apply in other settings but could not be generalized blindly
beyond situations with similar contexts and time frames. I also assumed that the
reality of this experience was partially defined by the shared experiences of the participants
but also was constructed in slightly different ways for each of them. Thus, I was
interested in understanding each person's interpretation of what was going on from
their unique perspectives. In reaching conclusions about what happened here, we clearly
could not conclude that there was a simple linear causal relationship between what
Sid and Cheryl did and Steve's decision to leave the class. Rather, what he did
shaped what they did and what the rest of the students might do and what Jack was doing.
Lincoln and Guba (1985) refer to this kind of causality as "mutual shaping" which
is what most of us assume goes on all the time in human experience. As will be discussed
in the next chapter Go to the next Chapter
, there were many other assumptions at play in this story as there
are in all human stories. Thus, the circle of this hologram must be broad and encompassing.
The circle in Figure 1-- a Qualitative Inquiry Process
also suggests that there are acceptable "Standards" for conducting naturalistic
inquiry in ways that will encourage readers to find the conclusions credible and
useful. Adherence to some of these standards was subtly indicated in the story through reference to the multiple sources of information used, the comparison of interpretations
from multiple sources, the length and depth of participation by the inquirers, and
other activities which will be explored further in chapter three.
This review of the naturalistic inquiry process in light of an example from a school
setting suggests that many teachers, principals, and other educators probably are
involved in inquiry as part of their work already, as were the participants in this
story. But with a little more focus on inquiry as a basis for educating, they might not
only obtain more valuable insights into helping their students but could also make
discoveries about learning and teaching from their privileged positions inside the
student-teacher relationship to share with others. An this book, I hope you will find that
by thinking of yourselves as inquirying teachers and adminisrators and by further
developing some of your natural inquiry skills, you, like these teachers and their
associates, can learn more about your students and their needs and can modify your practices
in ways that will the attitudes you and your students develop toward life long learning
and inquiry.
Organization of this book
Organization of this Book
The rest of the book is organized around the overview presented in this chapter.
The inquiry process being advocated is not meant to be linear because all these activities
must go on simultaneously, as they did in the story and Figure 2 above. Although
the conventional use of chapters seemed most convenient, every attempt will be made
to relate each chapter's focus to the whole naturalistic inquiry process to emphasize
this point about holism. The chapter topics associated with several of the activities
that typically compose inquiry by educators are presented in the following order but
may be read in any order you prefer:
Chapter 1: Preface
Chapter 2: Assumptionsunderlying the conduct of naturalistic inquiry
Chapter 3: Keeping a Record
Chapter 4: Inquiry Relationships and Roles
Chapter 5: Standards for Judging Naturalisic Inquiry
Chapter 6: Questions and Focus
Chapter 7: Gathering through Observations, Anterviews, and DocumentsChapter 8: Story Reading through Analysis, Synthesis, and Interpretation
Chapter 9: Sharing through Story Telling
Appendix A: A Sample Study, using NI to examine a teacher education program
Appendix B: Another Sample Study by a secondary teacher using NI to examine journal keeping
Appendix C-- A Sample Study, an elementary school teacher using NI to study one student
Appendix D: A Critique<'A> using the Standards
Appendix E: An Example Study by an Administrator, a superintendent of schools studying change
Appendix F: An Example Study by an Assistant Principal studying student retention in an elementary school
Appendix G: An Example Study by a Graduate Student as a district support person studying parent-teacher-student
conferences
Appendix H: Spradley"s Theme Synthesis and Report Writing Suggestions
Each chapter will be organized as follows:
a. Stories from the appendices illustrating educators learning to be inquirers and
building on their natural inquiries will be told to illustrate the points of each
chapter.
b. A discussion of key points that can be drawn from the stories will be given, with
ideas about how the participants (and by implication, the readers) could strengthen
their inquiries through development of specific skills.
c. Additional readings will be identified and annotated.
d. Questions for consideration in reviewing the concepts of the chapter will be asked.
e. Suggested activities the reader should engage in to apply the concepts of the chapter
to their own inquiries will be set forth, including a call for questions the readers
have about the readings and their own projects (these might form the basis of a discussion among people who are learning to conduct naturalistic inquiry together in
a class or cohort setting). If you conduct all these activities, you will conduct
a naturalistic inquiry in the process.
Additional Readings
Additional Readings
Fostnot, Catherine T. (1989). Enquirying teachers enquiring learners: A constructivist approach for teaching
. New York: Teachers College Press.
Hitchcock, G. and Hughes, D. (1989). Research and the teacher: A qualitative introduction to school-based research
. New York: Routledge.
Berendt, Joachim-Ernst (1992). The third ear: On listening to the world.
New York: Henry Holt.
Others should be added from bibiliography provided by Marne'
Questions for Consideration
Questions for Consideration
How is naturalistic inquiry similar to a hologram or holomovement?
Why is the relationship of naturalistic inquiry to holomovement so important to consider?
What other metaphors fit naturalistic inquiry? How about jazz music, particularly
improvisation?
How is naturalistic inquiry related to teaching?
How is naturalistic inquiry related to learning?
Were Sid and Cheryl really doing naturalistac inquiry in this story?
What would you change in their actions, if anything, so they would consider themselves
more rigorous researchers?
Suggested Activities
Now that you have seen other educators in action and have read my analysis of how
similar their learning and teaching activities were to a naturalistic inquiry process,
think about yourself as an educator and respond in writing to the following assignments:
1. Review a particular teaching event that posed an anomoly for you. Review Figure
1 and write some thoughs about how each activity presented there was involved for
you in your teaching event.
2. Respond to this question-- "How might inquiry as described in this chapter enhance
the learning in your classroom or school if you were more aware of these kinds of
activities?
3. If you would like to do a naturalistic study as part of the experience of reading
this book, think of specific occurences in your practice that gave you pause, that
left you with pressing questions. Describe one of these vignettes. Tell its story.
4. What questions did this chapter raise for you?
Go to the next Chapter