In this article, the authors challenge historical relations of power, which have valued academic knowledge over the experiential knowledge of teachers and claim that such knowledge is valuable and should be seen as legitimate. At the same time, though, they argue that there is a need to assess the knowledge produced by teachers and academics and offer a conceptual apparatus for conducting such assessments. According to the authors, assessment needs to be an ongoing process that occurs within a collaborative setting where differences in perspective are used as strengths to aid researchers (both teachers and academics) in critically examining their perceptions. More specifically, the authors suggest that by incorporating both insider and outsider knowledge (i.e., experiential and traditional forms of academic knowledge) into teacher research reports, a relational type of assessment can occur where both types of knowledge forms can be scrutinized.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adair, V. (2001). Poverty and the (broken) promise of higher education. Harvard Educational Review, 7192, 217-239.
2.
Anderson, G. (1989). Critical ethnography in education: Its origins, current status and new directions. Review of Educational Research, 59(3), 249-270.
3.
Apple, M. (1979). Ideology and curriculum. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.
4.
Apple, M. (1982). Education and power. London: Routledge Kegan Paul.
5.
Beyer, L. (1996). Creating democratic classrooms: The struggle to integrate theory and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
6.
Bloor, M. J. (1983). Notes on member validation. In R. M. Emerson (Ed.), Contemporary field research: Acollection of readings (pp. 156-172). Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.
7.
Brinberg, D. , & McGrath, J. E. (1985). Validity and the research process. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
8.
Bullough, R. , & Gitlin, A. (1995). Becoming a student of teaching: Methodologies for exploring self and school context. New York: Garland.
9.
Cochran-Smith, M. , & Lytle, S. (1993). Inside outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York: Teachers College Press.
10.
Collins, P. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge consciousness and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge.
11.
Fine, M. (1994). Working the hyphens: Reinventing self and other in qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 70-82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
Fishman, M. , & McCarthey, L. (2000). Unplayed tapes: A personal history of collaborative teacher research. New York: Teachers College Press.
13.
Gage, N. (1989). The paradigm wars and their aftermath. Teachers College Record, 91(2), 135-150.
14.
Gitlin, A. (1996). Gender and professionalization: An institutional analysis of teacher education and unionism at the turn of the twentieth century. Teachers College Record, 97(40), 588-624.
15.
Gitlin, A. , Barlow, L., Burbank, M., Kauchek, D., & Stevens, T. (1999). Preservice teachers’ thinking on research: Implications for inquiry oriented teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 753-769.
16.
Gitlin, A. , & Burbank, M. (2000, April). Academics’/ Teachers’ views on research: Implications for the restructuring of educational institutions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
17.
Guba, E. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29, 75-91.
18.
Harding, S. (1991). Whose science whose knowledge: Thinking from women’s lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
19.
Hargreaves, A. (1994). Changing teachers changing times: Teachers’work and culture in a post-modern age. New York: Teachers College Press.
20.
Hargreaves, A. (1996). Revisiting voice. Educational Researcher, 21(1), 12-19.
21.
Hong, L. (1996). Surviving school reform: A year in the life of a school. New York: Teachers College Press.
22.
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as a practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.
23.
Howe, K. (1988). Against the qualitative-quantitative incompatibility thesis or dogmas die hard. Educational Researcher, 17(8), 10-16.
24.
Lampert, M. (2000). Knowing teaching: The intersection of research on teaching and qualitative research. In B. J. Brizuela, J. P. Steward, R. G. Carrillo, & J. G. Berger (Eds.), Acts of inquiry in qualitative research (pp. 61-72). Boston: Harvard Educational Review.
25.
Lather, P. (1986a). Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a soft place. Interchange, 17(4), 63-84.
26.
Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. New York: Routledge.
27.
LeCompte, M. , & Pressile, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
28.
Miller, J. (1990). Creating spaces and finding voices: Teachers collaborating for empowerment. New York: State University of New York Press.
29.
Paris, C. (1993). Teacher agency and curriculum making in the classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
30.
Pateman, C. (1970). Participation in democratic theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
31.
Pinar W. (1980). Life history and educational experience. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 2 (2), 159-212.
32.
Roman, L. , & Apple, M. (1990). Is naturalism a move away from positivism? Materialist and feminist approaches to subjectivity in ethnographic research. In E. Eisner & A. Peshkin (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate (pp. 38-73). New York: Teachers College Press.
33.
Schulz, R. (1997). Interpreting teacher practice: Two continuing stories. New York: Teachers College Press.
34.
Smith, D. (1992). Sociology from a woman’s experience: A reaffirmation. Sociological Theory, 10, 88-98.
35.
Smyth, J. (1991). Teachers as collaborative learners. Milton Keyes, UK: Open University Press.
36.
Vargas, L. (1996, April). When the other is the other: Implications for teacher diversity in higher education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Communication Association, New York.
37.
Villenas, S. (2000). The colonizer/colonized Chicana ethnographer: Identity, marginalization, and co-optation in the field. In B. J. Brizuela, J. P. Steward, R. G. Carrillo, & J. G. Berger (Eds.), Acts of inquiry in qualitative research (pp. 75-94). Boston: Harvard Educational Review.
