Jack's Intro to Work & Research CEP 900 & CEP 930 Summer 2010 Hybrid Cohort Cary Roseth & Matt Koehler

1. Jack’s Intro(to work & Research) CEP 900 & CEP 930 Summer 2010 Hybrid Cohort Cary Roseth & Matt Koehler June 22, 2010

2. My “Charge” • Introduce yourself and describe your research interests • Discuss the evolution of your research interests. • Some specific questions: • What is a “good” research question and how do researchers find them? • What does it mean to think like a researcher? • What makes research convincing to you? • What does it mean to develop a critical perspective? • How would you describe the nature of academic reading and writing?

3. My Research Focus • I am interested in the nature of human learning • With mathematics as particular human competence • Learning is the process of developing new or richer views of the world; learning is change • Learning (surprisingly) is often ignored in place of curriculum, teaching, assessment, technology use • This interest in grounded in my experience as a teacher of mathematics (what are they thinking?)

4. More on Math Learning • Sadly, mathematics is a dangerous subject (for many) • Sadly (again), school is often boring, not a place of wonder, exploration, and figuring out • For me, mathematics remains wonderful and is fully within the reach of all people to understand, not memorize • My professional goals • Reveal what kids “know,” how “knowledge” is structured, and explore how that knowledge was learned • Support teachers in understanding more than they did as students • Levering assessment out of the 19th century • Knowing mathematics = assimilation of some school lessons + a great deal of individual sense-making and construction

5. What’s Changed? • Basic project hasn’t changed since grad school • Become more knowledgeable across years and projects • More confident about my message; issues relate to where to take it • Become sadly (3rd time) sensitive to the inertia of educational systems • Look to make small scale ripples of goodness; just need some partners

6. “gOOD” research Qs • Segue: These questions put me in teacher mode • Two types of questions • Those we really want answers to • Those we can actually answer • Being a scholar means managing the gap; getting the second set of questions closer to the first • Good RQs have well-defined nouns and verbs • Ambiguity seems often not a problem for the field; it is to me • Research is a kind of communication; ambiguity is usually not good in precise communication

7. Thinking Like a REsearcher • One feature: Think always about reasons; educational practices should happen for reasons; pursue some design/intentions; Designs should make principled sense • An associated feature: Adopting a critical perspective: When an argument is advanced, are there holes? Where are they? • Design: Looking for promising settings—where you dig in and use your data to make a point

8. Convincing Research • Basic terms are clearly defined • Method is well-described and evidence suggests that it has been followed • Results seem plausible; not from Mars • Coherence with other studies

9. What’s A critical Perspective? • It is what you are here to develop! • First step: Being “critical” does not mean “being negative” • Background premise: Simple solutions (work great for all) generally don’t exist in education • Programs and perspectives compete with each other in goodness and cost • Your job: Acknowledge the competitive field • Question your own assumptions and favorite approaches & programs

10. Academic Literacy • To reading and writing, I would add speaking • Academic language patterns can separate and isolate people (e.g., via jargon) • Positive elements: Precision & reasoned argument • Be careful about words we take for granted, e.g., “understanding” • Educational practices require intellectual support; academic literacy is like the preparation of legal briefs—argue for a position, with conceptual and empirical support