{"title":"Bifurcating Worlds? A Systematic Review of How Visual and Language Data Are Combined to Study Teachers and Their Teaching","authors":"R. Schachter, D. Freeman, Naivedya Parakkal","doi":"10.3102/0091732X20903305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Connecting teachers’ perspectives with their practice is an enduring challenge shaping what and how we understand teaching. Researchers tend to bifurcate teachers’ work between their private and their public lives. These “worlds” bring particular meanings that are rendered through the analyses of visual documentations of teaching and teachers’ language-based accounts of their teaching. Combining these two forms of data is a basic research challenge both operationally and conceptually. Operationally, the researcher determines how the forms are connected and which decisions reflect (and are anchored in) conceptual warrants. This review identified 52 studies that combine visual and language data to study teachers and teaching to examine how data were collected and analyzed in the studies and what types of the theoretical frameworks were used to warrant the interpretations resulting from the connections. The review found only seven studies that balanced both worlds by explicitly warranting how the two forms of data were interconnected. Otherwise, most studies foregrounded one form of data and drew on the other to support or explain the first. Whereas most of the authors rationalized the connection between the forms of data in their studies, few took the more complex step of theorizing how the two worlds were connected. We argue that such incomplete connections risk inaccurately representing the work of teaching. We propose some design questions and research procedures that researchers may use to avoid bifurcating teachers’ worlds.","PeriodicalId":47753,"journal":{"name":"Review of Research in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3102/0091732X20903305","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Research in Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X20903305","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
Connecting teachers’ perspectives with their practice is an enduring challenge shaping what and how we understand teaching. Researchers tend to bifurcate teachers’ work between their private and their public lives. These “worlds” bring particular meanings that are rendered through the analyses of visual documentations of teaching and teachers’ language-based accounts of their teaching. Combining these two forms of data is a basic research challenge both operationally and conceptually. Operationally, the researcher determines how the forms are connected and which decisions reflect (and are anchored in) conceptual warrants. This review identified 52 studies that combine visual and language data to study teachers and teaching to examine how data were collected and analyzed in the studies and what types of the theoretical frameworks were used to warrant the interpretations resulting from the connections. The review found only seven studies that balanced both worlds by explicitly warranting how the two forms of data were interconnected. Otherwise, most studies foregrounded one form of data and drew on the other to support or explain the first. Whereas most of the authors rationalized the connection between the forms of data in their studies, few took the more complex step of theorizing how the two worlds were connected. We argue that such incomplete connections risk inaccurately representing the work of teaching. We propose some design questions and research procedures that researchers may use to avoid bifurcating teachers’ worlds.
期刊介绍:
Review of Research in Education (RRE), published annually since 1973 (approximately 416 pp./volume year), provides an overview and descriptive analysis of selected topics of relevant research literature through critical and synthesizing essays. Articles are usually solicited for specific RRE issues. There may also be calls for papers. RRE promotes discussion and controversy about research problems in addition to pulling together and summarizing the work in a field.