S. Kavanagh, A. Resnick, Hala Ghousseini, Elizabeth Schiavone Gotwalt, Eric Cordero-Siy, E. Kazemi, Elizabeth Dutro
{"title":"Breaking the Fourth Wall: Reaching Beyond Observer/Performer Binaries in Studies of Teacher and Researcher Learning","authors":"S. Kavanagh, A. Resnick, Hala Ghousseini, Elizabeth Schiavone Gotwalt, Eric Cordero-Siy, E. Kazemi, Elizabeth Dutro","doi":"10.1080/07370008.2021.2010209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Researcher-practitioner collaborations often stop short of engaging researchers and teachers in collectively negotiating the moment-to-moment improvizational decision-making of instructional practice when students are present. We consider the potential for learning at one boundary that often exists between researchers and practitioners as they collaborate on instructional practice: the boundary between performing-teaching and observing-teaching. We draw on performance studies to conceptualize this boundary as a fourth wall. Our analysis examines researcher-practitioner collaboration across four sites in which participants were learning together about the complex work of facilitating student discussion. We analyze how one boundary crossing routine provided opportunities for researchers and practitioners to interact at the boundary of the fourth wall during enactment of discussion-based instruction with students. To analyze episodes of this routine, we draw on conceptualizations of potential learning mechanisms of boundary crossing in research-practice partnerships. Our findings identify and describe the mechanisms for researcher/practitioner learning that arose when our participants crossed the boundary of the fourth wall: perspective taking, boundary spanning, and recognition of shared problem spaces. We argue that these learning mechanisms create potential for researchers and practitioners to wrestle with and learn about the challenges and opportunities within facilitation of student discussions.","PeriodicalId":47945,"journal":{"name":"Cognition and Instruction","volume":"40 1","pages":"126 - 147"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognition and Instruction","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2021.2010209","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
Abstract Researcher-practitioner collaborations often stop short of engaging researchers and teachers in collectively negotiating the moment-to-moment improvizational decision-making of instructional practice when students are present. We consider the potential for learning at one boundary that often exists between researchers and practitioners as they collaborate on instructional practice: the boundary between performing-teaching and observing-teaching. We draw on performance studies to conceptualize this boundary as a fourth wall. Our analysis examines researcher-practitioner collaboration across four sites in which participants were learning together about the complex work of facilitating student discussion. We analyze how one boundary crossing routine provided opportunities for researchers and practitioners to interact at the boundary of the fourth wall during enactment of discussion-based instruction with students. To analyze episodes of this routine, we draw on conceptualizations of potential learning mechanisms of boundary crossing in research-practice partnerships. Our findings identify and describe the mechanisms for researcher/practitioner learning that arose when our participants crossed the boundary of the fourth wall: perspective taking, boundary spanning, and recognition of shared problem spaces. We argue that these learning mechanisms create potential for researchers and practitioners to wrestle with and learn about the challenges and opportunities within facilitation of student discussions.
期刊介绍:
Among education journals, Cognition and Instruction"s distinctive niche is rigorous study of foundational issues concerning the mental, socio-cultural, and mediational processes and conditions of learning and intellectual competence. For these purposes, both “cognition” and “instruction” must be interpreted broadly. The journal preferentially attends to the “how” of learning and intellectual practices. A balance of well-reasoned theory and careful and reflective empirical technique is typical.