Paper Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Lines of Partnering in Design-Focused Research-Practice Partnerships: Using Collaborative Reflection for Cultural Exchange and Problem Solving

Sat, April 9, 4:05 to 5:35pm, Convention Center, Floor: Level One, Room 102 B

Abstract

Problem
Research-practice partnerships are a hopeful arrangement of coordinated expertise and an ideal context for research and development efforts that produce innovative and effective designs for learning (Coburn, Penuel, & Geil, 2013). However, negotiating a research-practice partnership can be complicated, as the histories of researchers and practitioners are often laden with power differentials, competing aims, and pragmatic constraints. This poster answers the research question: How can a collaborative reflection practice help navigate these tensions and support desirable goals for both research and practice?

Theoretical Framework
We interpreted results from this experiment using a lens of collaborative design research, the goals of which are to bridge the cultures of research and practice in education. We developed a conceptual model for how design-focused research-practice partnerships operate—the practices, participant roles, and cross-cutting elements that govern their productive constitution and operation (Authors). We hypothesized that reflective praxis (Gutierrez & Vossoughi, 2010) could mediate productive cultural exchange within a large-scale research-practice partnership.

Research Context, Methods & Data Sources
We designed our reflective activities within an ongoing research-practice partnership consisting of two districts, a local science nonprofit, and a research university in the Pacific Northwest. In this project, over 200 teachers participated in science-related professional development during which teachers adapted science units to include lessons on engineering design, explanation, and argumentation from evidence (NGSS Lead States, 2013). Five of these teachers and their classroom practices are the focus of this study. The data corpus analyzed here includes 10 hours of recorded co-design meetings, fieldnotes of 30 events (PD, classroom lessons, etc.), and collaborative, reflective fieldnotes. Data were open coded and then triangulated across sources to draw conclusions and implications.

Findings & Discussion
First, we found that, through teacher-researcher collaboration, research and development became more relevant to practice. The teachers designed and adapted instructional materials that built on research ideas, but were better suited to the local classroom culture. This made the local theory of instruction (Gravemeijer & Cobb, 2006) explicit and supported local attempts at innovation.

Second, shared construction of instructional artifacts mediated research-practitioner discourse and sense-making around locally-relevant, research-based implementation. This resulting “multi-voicedness” honored the variable expertise of those in the group.

Third, collaborative reflection depended on shared responsibility around both the research and implementation of the instructional designs. Co-development of instructional tools coupled with co-teaching of these designs allowed the researcher and practitioner to share reflection and responsibility for both the research and practice aspects of implementation.

Design Implications
Collaborative reflection facilitated cultural exchange between researchers and practitioners. The researchers gained a deeper understanding of the pragmatics of instruction and the science learning that artful pedagogy can enable, and the teachers were able to expand their repertoires of science teaching. This study has implications for both social learning theorists and educational practitioners seeking to build transformative, multi-voiced opportunities for professional learning across practice communities.

Authors