Commenting on a Commentary

Dawson, K. & Ferdig, R.E. (2006). Commentary - Expanding notions of acceptable research evidence in educational technology: A Response to Schrum et al. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education,
6(1), 133-142

Kara Dawson and Richard E. Ferdig review and expand on the research agenda conversation regarding technology education. I found their commentary interesting for our present place in "yet" another paradigm shift. They pit the "research or perish" motif at Universities against "usefulness for practitioners and policy makers" and call for a "code book" to unify the language being used to discuss educational technology in research. They also note that there needs to be further research on teachers' beliefs on technology in their practice, and a move move away from self-reporting and more teacher in practice studies. They also call for a more interdisciplinary approach and to use ideas, terms, and concepts from psychology and other disciplines for the development of a common heueristic.

At my juncture as a scholar-in-training, I wrestle with the deeply felt practitioner part. My work as a classroom teacher allowed me hands-on, in the trenches, every day experiences. This new work, University work, has me wrestling with the validity of publishing for researchers and not for teachers who can use all the help they can get. Most of my reading thus far has been playing "catch-up" to the conversation I never had the luxury to hear as a classroom teacher. In fact, I feel cheated that so much scholarly work occurred in the academic world, but never trickled down to my public school practice. This is not good.

Even so, I feel this commentary has a place on my blog because it gives me ideas for audiences and what needs to be said next.

Dawson and Ferdig spend a lot of time discussing the importance of mentoring doctorate students. I have a funny thought: what if it was NDLB (No Doctorate Left Behind) and University teachers were governed by how well they made all doctorate students successful, and financial sanctions fell on those places that couldn't do it. I believe the way academics write and deliver knowledge might change drastically. But, this is only an aside.