Trends in Research on Teaching: an Historical and Critical Overview

Abstract

The latter examines the overall context of teaching and learning, from local social, political, and economic influences on the school and classroom, to macro-structural forces affecting the purposes and directions of school systems. The chapter begins with a discussion of the historical origins and content of both bodies of investigation; compares research sponsored by gatekeeping organizations in the educational establishment to research done outside of it, and then provides a general critique of the status of research activity and directions in the late 1900s and early 2000s. Educational research had its inception in both the "mental measurement" efforts of the 1930s and the Scientific Management movement of the 1920s and 1930s. These efforts, embodied in both effectiveness and accountability efforts, have dominated what commonly is thought to be research on teaching and learning from the 1930s to the 1970s. The development of so-called intelligence tests and tests of knowledge acquisition were driven by psychologists and psychometricians; their existence made it possible for schools to assess whether or not students were actually learning what was being taught. Demands for accountability also focused on educational outcomes, but primarily in order to assess the effectiveness of investments in school systems and their efficiency in imparting to students knowledge and skills needed for success in the work force. Considerable controversy has existed over whether or not what tests measure actually is what should be taught, or whether tests-or any measures-actually can measure the intangibles of an educational experience. These controversies persist. Further, researchers argue over the best, or even the most appropriate, way to investigate issues of teaching and learning. Notwithstanding, standardized norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests now constitute the "gold standard" for student achievement or outcome data, and investigations of student achievement and how to improve it still constitute the bulk of educational research-especially if state mandated district-wide achievement tests are considered. The bias toward logico-deductive studies and experimentation has been facilitated by the training of educational researchers. Most were, and are, university faculty members with backgrounds in the behavioral sciences and psychology whose disciplines and predispositions favor experimental and quasi-experimental investigation. Consciously or not, these researcher trainers downplayed-and even denigrated as lacking in rigor-other forms of research. 1 They passed this bias on to their students, notwithstanding that sociologists, historians, anthropologists, economists and political scientists also have been doing significant research on educational issues and in educational settings, about schools, teachers and students, and in and out of schools since the 1930s. This work included survey research, which generated much of what is known about the characteristics and attitudes of teachers, students, and parent groups; assessments of school climate; descriptions of the teaching profession, teacher training and organizations; a wealth of systematic observational research 1 Though it should be noted that psychology did provide models that could be adapted to more observational work-the clinical case study and the child study movement.