Category: Research Methods

Posted on

Concepts and Reflections: The Journey Begins

 

Photo by Nghia Le on Unsplash

What I have learned this semester is a huge question. To be honest, I, like most of my students, thought I would enter class and “do” the courses. I am not sure if that comes from a place of arrogance on my part, or if it was uncertainty. As the classes moved forward, I was finding myself meta-cognating on my practice. I found myself engaging on the possibilities of researching my own practice, with the aim of improving myself as an educator. I found myself embracing the ideas, and possibilities, of networks beyond my own jaded views of the social mediums. I found myself listening to my colleagues, and their diverse experiences and fields; learning more about what I could gleam from them. From Kindergarten teachers to high school, north and south, east and west, we are all struggling with how to open our ideas of learning, instead of trying to protect our classroom bubble. We, as educators, struggle with our practices, whether semi-retired, or 3 years in. We, as educators, can all learn and adapt our classrooms for the good of the students, ourselves and our schools. This is just the start of our journey as a cohort, but we are going to grow together as a community. The following are some thoughts I have, as to what I have learned this semester.

I heard, many years ago, that I should look at inquiry as a teaching tool. As I looked at the classroom I was running, with the individualized learning and streamed software, I realized this was, in fact, an inquiry classroom. Mic drop
. I win. However, when the idea that there are different levels of inquiry, was brought to my attention, I was forced to pick the mic back up, as I was not doing it very well. That is not to say that students were not successful in my class, it is just that there was not as much success as there could have been. I went too far at the start, and did not properly incorporate all the scaffolded levels of inquiry. I jumped right to guided inquiry, which left some students behind. I had to adapt on the fly. That is to say, I had to, as the researcher of my classroom, redefine the method, and try the next cycle again.

In the ideas of research in the forms of diary-based research, action research, and phenomenology, are all valid. For me to move forward in my practice, I must reflect. I must see, in real time, what is happening and act on rectifying, or enhancing, a situation to allow for movement forward. Furthermore, I need to reflect on what is happening in the class, and adapt my ways of facilitation: that would be action research. Education is beyond numbers, and counts, as each individual learner is different. There needs to be more than one way for them to see and react to their learning. To do something well with one student, may also work with another, later on. When learning becomes more individualized, the ideas of how to educate each person must be adaptable. Phenomenologically speaking, I must help the students to share their lived experience, as learners, by allowing them to share their lived experience with a project. I think group-talks between classmates about a project will allow for a shared experience and deeper level understanding of their own thoughts, and the thoughts of others. This process will, hopefully, help them to see the project in different lights and lenses of understanding. Furthermore, there may be an overarching struggle with the assignment, that are seen by the groups of students, and that group and I may come up with, a great way to move themselves forward. This should be documented by myself, and allowed as an exemplar to future students. The more tools that are in the kit, allows for an increased ability to reach a myriad of students and their needs. As I have alluded to in a previous post, our practice is, in essence, research. Moreover, when doing research on our practice we become both the researcher, and the researched.  

There is a desire to reach the level of depth in inquiry. In the 568 class, run by Trevor MacKenzie, we took a look at the levels of inquiry, shown using a diagram of the pool (see above). There are many levels, or depths, of inquiry. They range from: starting with structured, controlled, guided, and ending with free inquiry.  I know, ideologically, that I can not just throw the students into the deep end (free). That would be a huge mistake. However, we must not keep them in the shallow end due to our comfort. The pool metaphor is apt because if one were to go into a public pool, they would see that there are people in all the depths. Some shallow, some deep. In my inquiry classroom, the ideal situation would be to have that “public pool mentality”. Have the kids swimming everywhere based on their abilities. I would strive to move the students from the shallow to the deep through structured, and controlled inquiry. However, once in the free inquiry, it is not good enough to just tread water in the deep end, we should aim to be diving and grabbing objects off the pool floor; we should always push our ability. How would I move them through different depths? Observation, journaling, and revision through the natural flow of action research.

As inquiry evolves in my classes, and my school, choice will be even more valuable as we are exiting the age of teacher as “dispenser of all knowledge” and moving towards having them acquire the knowledge through personal preference and passion. It is essential that the experiences of inquiry are built, or scaffolded, through previous inquiry knowledge, and attempts, on both our parts, as educators, and on the part of students. Every swimmer starts in the shallow end with water wings and feet on the floor. That is essential because we are teaching them a new skill so they don’t drown. To put a student in the position of “drowning” is not acceptable. Furthermore, putting ourselves as educators in a position to drown is equally unacceptable. Assumptions of a student’s abilities can lead to problems. There are students who may max-out at the guided stage, or controlled stage, and there are others who will excel at the free stage way faster than we anticipated. That, as an idea, sounds like a diverse and functional inquiry based classroom to me. 

In my Photography 11 class, in the past few years, I have taken a criteria assignment, inquiry approach, that is teacher led, but with a lot of freedom in execution. An example being, with fast vs slow shutter speed. There is a requirement as to the number of each type of photo that must be handed in, with a personal reflection attached. However, what students take pictures of is up to them. Freedom is very important and allows for a vast variety of work. However, when they get to Photography 12, the way in which they move themselves forward, in the class, is deep-end, free inquiry. I have exemplars, that I show the class at the beginning of the year to help them see how much work is involved to get to the end project. I conference often with the students, and pull many back to the shallower ends of the pool, if needed. I have had 3 students actually complete a totally unguided, free inquiry project, and the results were outstanding. It was great to see the students fully immersed in their learning, by challenging themselves in their work. The buy-in was huge. Furthermore, the buy-in is still very high, even in the shallower end inquiries. It is the idea of choice that is driving the success in my classes.

My goal, as an educator, is to put this into effect in all my classes. I am making strides, but have a long way to go, in creating a cohesive practice. Every step forward is movement towards 

the end goal of true inquiry, and I am realizing that steps are enough. As I mentioned earlier, to try to make the shift in one leap was not efficacious, to either myself or the students. I have to create a space of comfort and understanding to allow my students to be willing to step out of their comfort zones. I appreciate all that the students have given to me, and my practice, in terms of trust and work. I know that, together, we will keep growing our abilities, as people, to become truly engaged life-long learners.

Andrew Vogelsang

 

Posted on

515 Assignment#2- Phenomenology in Practice

Photo by Jonatan Pie on Unsplash

Max Van Manen, in his 2014 book, Phenomenology of Practice, states, “[phenomenology]
.tries to grasp attentively the living sense of the experience before we have lifted it up into cognitive, conceptual, or theoretical determination or clarity.”(Pg. 27) What is being presented here is the idea of the depth of the experience that is lost in the attempt to describe or remember the experience itself. Furthermore, the experience, at the moment, is actually multiple experiences that have their own important qualities that lead to the understanding of thought, and cognitive presence, and how that pertains to what the experience was, not as you simply remembered it.

Max Van Manen works as a professor emeritus at the University of Alberta, after retiring as a Professor from that same university in 2008 (“Max van Manen » Biography,” n.d.). He was born in the Netherlands and received his teaching qualifications before immigrating to Canada. He further received his Masters and PhD degrees at the University of Alberta. Van Manen’s experience in the Netherlands made him ask why there was a, “deep intellectual chasm that existed between the pedagogical approaches to education in the Netherlands and the strong behaviourism and systems analysis of North American education” (“Max van Manen » Biography,” n.d.). Van Manen’s later research was broken into 6 research phases on phenomenological understanding. 

Chapter Review

In the second chapter, Meaning and Method, of his book Phenomenology of Practice (2014), Van Manen goes into detail as to what is, and is not, phenomenological methodology, in research. He further talks about how most qualitative and quantitative methods can, and do, have issues with explaining phenomenon. That is to say, “
the phenomenality of human experience cannot be adequately captured with the clarity of analytic concepts, objectifying theme, the purity of philosophical prose, the laws of logic, the abstractions of theory, the codifications of scientific method, and the traditional rationalities of philosophical systems” (Van Manen,  2014, Pg 29). Van Manen further states that,” Some of these schemes [procedural methods of analysis] are periodically proposed in qualitative research literature, but they fail for the simple reason that
, there is no method to human truths” (Pg. 30). Furthermore, Van Manen makes the argument that in trying to ritualized, through experimental structure, the truth of experience leads only to miss grasping the actual experience (truth) one is trying to research. (Van Manen, 2014) In essence, life is reflexive and loses its power of experience when it becomes an objective structure to explain a past moment. Basically, we trivialize, and fail to explain the experience when we put it into packages of words, for communication, and understanding.

Van Manen sums up the chapter at the beginning with following points to help the reader:

  • Phenomenological research begins with wonder at what gives itself and how something gives itself. It can only be pursues while surrendering to a state of wonder.
  • A phenomenological question explores what is given in moments of prereflective, prepredicative experience—experiences as we live through them.
  • Phenomenology aims to grasp the exclusively singular aspects (identity/essence/otherness) of a phenomenon or event.
  • Phenomenological reflection and analysis occur primarily in the attitude of the epoche, the reduction, and the vocative-variously understood.

(Van Manen, 2014, Pg. 27)

If this reader were to attempt to summarize what Phenomenology is in practical terms, it would have to be by paraphrasing an example from Van Manen (2014). Imagine a book on a table. It is a book, objectively. In our shared lived experience, it is a book on the table. However, if we had both read that book (lived experience), the phenomena of us reading it would be seen as a different experience for each of us. One may have hated the book, where as another may have been transformed emotionally by it. Objectively, it is still the same book, and our lived experience is that we both read it, but our personal experiences of that book are very different. Therefore, both can say they read the book (language), but the book meant more to one than the other (experience) (Van Manen, 2014). Surprisingly, the book analogy can go further. Imagine that there is a book on the table and one person enters the room. That book is objectively there, however its meaning at that moment is subjective. Perhaps that person sees the book and reminds him/her of; reading it and how that felt, or that the book needs to go back on the shelf, or the book can be used a coaster for a cup of coffee. The use of that book is subjective to the needs and perceptions of that user at that time. (Van Manen, 2014) The question is then raised as to how this would be used in a research setting? This author feels that Van Manen sees Phenomenology as an introspective, and non-reflective look at the lived experience as it relates and feels to the person experiencing it.

Article Connection

The other journal article read for this paper was, A review of the risks associated with children and young peoples social media use and the implications for social work practice by Mark Willoughby (2019). This article is a literature review on the work done thus far, to inform social workers of methods and understanding of youth and their connections to social media. The literature review reveals 8 areas where  literature and research combine, thereby providing assistance to social workers in their practice.

If one were to look at research stemming from the questions raised in Willoughby’s article through a phenomenological approach, there are many possibilities. If the focus was, “Social workers must develop their understanding of different social media platforms to enable them to identify risks and maximize the opportunities” (Willoughby,  2014, Pg. 136), one would have to look, for example, at social media as a medium that means different things to the person using it. Furthermore, the phenomenological approach would look, not only at the medium itself, but the way the medium, and the message, affects the individual reader (experience). How does the reader’s past/present mental mindset and experiences aid in shaping that experience? Also, what they experience, at the moment, without reflection, when they are engaged in social media use. I would employ a journal technique that would require the person to document immediately, their response to the message they are receiving. One could pair that with descriptive interviews to look deeply at the moments, with the diary there, to take the person back to the emotions of the moment and therefore limiting their unintentional downplaying of the experienced feelings. This method is also encouraged by Arthur Sloan and Brian Bowe in their 2014 article, Phenomenology and Hermeneutic Phenomenology: the Philosophy, the Methodologies and Using Hermeneutic Phenomenology to Investigate Lecturers ‘ Experiences of Curriculum Design. Sloane and Bowe state that, “[w]hether using descriptive or hermeneutic phenomenology as a methodology, data are often found by using the techniques of personal interviewing, analyzing written accounts such as documents or diaries and/or by making observations of subjects in contexts or environments” (2014, Pg. 12).  Therefore, one needs to find out how they felt right then, not ask them what they thought after they could incorporate it into their schema of understanding.

If the social workers were to become savvy to the social media platforms, then they would have a better understanding and ability to meet the client with a shared lived experience mindset and look at a situation and discuss the differing interpretations. As Christine Greenhow and  Beth Robelia talk about in their article, Old Communication, New Literacies: Social Network Sites as Social Learning Resources, allowing for, “[u]nderstanding better how such identity develops and how learning occurs in the social and technical contexts young people currently inhabit—e.g., how and with whom expressions are crafted, displayed and utilized, and ideas evolved and distributed through interaction and negotiation—might suggest improvements to instructional designs in formal education” ( 2009, pg. 1136).  The idea behind this article is understanding the world and experience of young people is important to understanding them as educators. Moreover, if this is applied in the field of education, would it not, logically, cross over to the field of social work?

In this way of research, the research and the the researcher, are in essence, the researched. Not only does the methodology and structure change with every situation, but every situation is it’s own piece of research. Furthermore, the reader, would be the people directly effected; that being the person and the social worker. The end goal of the research would be micro in scope as it will lend to understanding for both the social worker and client as having shared lived experiences.

Phenomenology is a deep dive into the experience of people at a level far beyond cursory. It takes into account not only what is objective (happening) and goes into the subjective (experience of the person) to increase the understanding of the non-reflective response. As van Manen mentions, though some other qualitative disciplines aim to catch and describe experience, it is through the lens that they capture the experience that forces them into a paradigm locker, that negates the true experience of the person.

References:

Greenhow, C., & Robelia, B. (2009). Old Communication, New Literacies: Social Network Sites as Social Learning Resources. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 1130-1161. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01484.x

Max van Manen » Biography. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.maxvanmanen.com/biography/

Sloan, A., & Bowe, B. (2013). Phenomenology and hermeneutic phenomenology: the philosophy, the methodologies, and using hermeneutic phenomenology to investigate lecturers’ experiences of curriculum design. Quality & Quantity, 48(3), 1291-1303. doi:10.1007/s11135-013-9835-3

Van Manen, M. (2014). Phenomenology of Practice: Meaning-Giving Methods in Phenomenological Research and Writing. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.

Willoughby, M. (2018). A review of the risks associated with children and young people’s social media use and the implications for social work practice. Journal of Social Work Practice, 33(2), 127-140. doi:10.1080/02650533.2018.1460587

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on

515 Week 3 Post- Research as Practice.

Photo by Dylan Gillis on Unsplash

As a teacher, I am a researcher. I research myself, and my methods, as well as the learners, and their output, in my room (not for public consumption but my own edification). Wow, that sounded clinical; and it is. Reflection is merely the vehicle that allows for understanding and improvement. I would call this an action research approach. In the chapter, Getting to Grips with Perspectives and Models in the book, Action Research in Education by Mary McAteer (2013) it was discussed how the method of action research is a cyclical entity that always loops back to the redefinition of the question, and moving into a new phase of the research. McAteer goes on to describe this in an educational setting by saying, “that action research has a very specific purpose, ‘enabling professionals to understand their practice better, and use that enhanced understanding in order to effect changes in practice’” (2013, Pg. 3).

At the end of the day we all want to improve. I do not believe that there is an educator in my building that believes they have it all figured out, and that nothing that needs to change in his/her practice. We are always doing research on our methods: in every lunch room discussion of a lesson, every talk in a department meeting, every interaction with students, and the environment of the school (one could call this a literature review, but I digress). We see faults in ourselves and our practices, not because we are self-deprecating, but we want to improve the learning of our students. It is futile to believe that we do not reflect, so why not give ourselves the credit that we are engaging in research.

Action research steps are as follows (McAteer, 2013, Pg 7):

  • Plan: I make my lesson.
  • Act: I do it in the classroom.
  • Observe: be aware as to how the message is being received, understood and acted on.
  • Reflect: think of how it went and then readapt for the next lesson.

And the cycle goes on.

I would argue that we are not doing that research for each lesson but in-lesson as well. We have all started with a planned activity and observed that it is not effective for a variety of reasons. We, as professionals, will then reflect and re-plan, on the fly, to take the class (researched and readers), and/or learners individually, where they need to go. That reflection and pre-planning may be for only a few students in the room as the rest are doing fine. Therefore, you start to realize that each class is a mini-research project and each individual is its own plan.

So if we go into the steps laid out above, we can see that the natural flow of learning, and being, is represented in action research. It is the process of life. For example, I make a plan as to how I am going to replace the radiator in my truck. I order the parts and act on replacing the parts. I observe how the process is going, while I am experiencing the unforeseen issues of hose connections and worn bolts. I reflect on the process once finished and make a better plan for the next time I have to replace a part in my truck (check hose connections and for stripped bolts). I have learned how to better do that action. Therefore, I will assert, that life, no matter the situation, is action research.

In short we are all researchers in our professions and personal practice. That is not clinical at all: That is real life.

Andrew Vogelsang

 

 

Posted on

Abuse Online Based on Gender

In the reading that we did for today’s class, we looked at a few articles written by Dr. George Veletsianos and his colleagues. In the paper, Women scholars’ experiences with online harassment and abuse: Self-protection, resistance, acceptance, and self-blame, the idea about harassment due to gender and other aspects was addressed. Furthermore, in class today he raised the idea of media personalities being attacked online. I was thinking of the harassment angle as I was having my morning coffee after reading the article last night when I ran across this tweet thread because I follow a person who commented:

 

 

 

Kasie Hunt is a news anchor for MSNBC. I understand the US, and the rest of the world, are becoming ever more polarized and myopic in individual personal views and the way we are able to see the other people and their views. The fact that she has to even answer that attack is disgusting. Some will say, “she doesn’t have to address it.” However, is that not unintendedly promoting this behaviour? I point out this tweet because it is not at all uncommon. Negative responses and tweets, in my opinion, usually leads to a devolution of the comment thread which is backed up by the work of Veletsianos et. al., Public comment sentiment on educational videos: Understanding the effects of presenter gender, video format, threading, and moderation on YouTube TED talk comments. (2018).

In closing, I will state that I think Twitter and other social media tools have a phenomenal ability to promote ideas, talk to others and network. They are revolutionizing the way we communicate and learn. However, nothing is all bad or all good. If you are a person, like me, who uses it responsibly, than all power to you. However, the negative aspects are, in some cases, so bad that I think the ownership of behaviour should be more stringent. There is no real deterrent if one can create an anonymous account, get kicked out, and make another. How this is done will have to be tackled by better minds than me. That being said, I would like to see more controls and responsibility.

Andrew Vogelsang

Posted on

515 Assignment #1a Week 2: Leaving the Methodological Sandbox

 

Photo by Alexander Dummer on Unsplash

When I was in my undergrad, in Psychology and Criminology, I took multiple research methods and statistical courses. They were a prerequisite. In my time there, it was clear as to which form of research was acceptable if you wanted research to have any weight. Quantitative research was the way.  Validity, reliability, replicability, and generalizability were the chants. Vignettes and case studies were cute and cuddly but not  “real” science.

I should preface this by saying that this was in the early 2000’s and things may very well have changed. That being said, qualitative research was fluff in the eyes of many when I went to school. Can it be counted? How do you measure that? Is it significant and how can you prove it is? That is how we were taught to think, to write, and to exist as social scientists in order to be accepted as scientists. I was never truly indoctrinated by this, however the expectation was there. That was the sandbox in which we were expected to play.

As to the reading this week, Assessing the Quality of Mixed Methods Research: Toward a Comprehensive Framework by Alicia O’Cathain (2014), I found it nice to see the idea of mixed methods. However, what I also saw was the need for everyone to put in there own criteria; so much that the method almost became unsustainable.  I saw that people dogmatically need to use their methods’ wording. Do transferability (qualitative) and generalizability (quantitative) not mean the same thing? I do not, and have never, understood the cemented way people see research. In my opinion, if something is found, no matter the method, that helps us as people understand a situation better, is that not a positive? I found, in my undergrad, the tolerance of some towards the qualitative field of study to be like life was to Hobbes in his work Leviathan, “nasty, brutish and short”.

In the education field, there are a lot of studies done at every possible angle. However, which are best? For example, what is more telling research; a study on the number of kids, by percentage, that report bullying at their school every year or a study that looks at the affect of bullying, through interview,  on those who have been bullied, or do the bullying, as the researched? I contest that both are important and that neither one excludes the other. Would it not make sense as a researcher to look at a school that statistically has a lot of bullying and then look into the specifics of that school through interviews. The results of this could lead the; school boards, principals, teachers, parents, as the readers,   to have a greater understand the issues.

I am aware that we are looking at two different types of research (quantitative and qualitative) and that each has their own standards, and that is needed. However, human experience is beyond any one methodology as it it is extremely complex. One can count the number of times someone has been pushed in the halls, but should we not be equally interested in why He/she was pushed and how it made them feel?  Multiple methods can, and should, be used in examining a situation. To be honest, I find strictly quantitative research bland and cold as a reader when describing people and groups. Always have. However, the qualitative element attached to the quantitative element, I feel, paints a fuller picture of the situation.

Andrew Vogelsang

Posted on

Methodological Dichotomy: Past Practice vs. Future Outcomes

Teaching is a funny thing. Right when you think you have it figured out you decide to try something new. Why? Because you realize what you’ve done can be better. I worked in the restaurant industry for 17 years; I adapted to new restaurants, new positions, and new leadership roles. One thing that is true about the industry is that it is incredibly stressful, but it is consistent. A full restaurant with massive table turnover never really varies from one to the next. Classrooms on the other hand, change from day to day. When entering the teaching profession I thought that I knew what being both proactive and reflective in a stressful environment meant. That is until I entered the classroom.

The one thing I’ve learned in my last 8 years of teaching is that I can always be better. There are always better ways to make sure that all learners are engaged, involved, and challenged. Part of the vocation is reflection. I find it essential to look at my classes and see areas in which I can improve. Thus, my practice must constantly evolve because I can always be better. That is where I think I will incorporate a diary into my tool box. After reading, Research Diary: A Tool for Scaffolding (Engin, 2011), I started to look at a diary as more than just a tool for CBT (cognitive behavioural therapy) and teenagers. As a Psychology major, I tend to see the world in that lens. Engin says, “
[she] became aware that her research diary was scaffolding her own construction of research knowledge.” (pg 296). Engin is saying that if she could use the diary to build her understanding, not only of the research itself, but her methods and intentions, than her research methodologies would be more sound. I diary as well, but in my head. However, what do I retain of my insights?  I find myself, at the end of every semester, wondering what I could have done better and how I would go about making that change. However, by the end of the semester, how much have I forgotten about what happened in my class? 5 months and 25 kids x 4 classes. That is a lot to expect to remember. If I were to diary daily, or at least weekly, I could remember with greater detail the areas in which something really worked or didn’t. I could write down what was intended and what ended up happening. I could avoid the 20/20 hindsight of somehow convincing myself that what worked is what was actually intended. If I were to start looking at the outcomes of a lesson, or unit, as it pertains to the intent of the lesson/unit in the first place than I would be able to either change my intentions because the outcome was better than I intended; or change the methodology I used so I could get the desired outcomes for the lesson/unit. I know that the idea of switching methodologies to steer outcomes is taboo in science and data collection because is it really reliable to cherry-pick the data you like to strengthen your position? However, in the classroom, the steering and scaffolding are essential to get the required student learning. My classrooms, and the learning that takes place there, are the research. My teaching and lesson success are the researched. I am the researcher. But what are the readers, the students and parents, expecting to see in my classroom and my delivery?

In this week’s classes we looked at the dichotic view some hold of what it is to properly educate. When we looked at the articles, Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Ananlysis of the Failures of the Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching by Kirschner, Sweller &Clark (2010) and Teaching for Meaningful Learning: A Review of Research on Inquiry-Based and Cooperative Learning by Barron& Darling-Hammond (2008) we saw two very divergent views of what is successful educational theory. Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark argue that, “
based on our current knowledge of human cognitive architecture, minimally guided instruction is likely to be ineffective”(pg. 76).  Whereas Barron and Darling-Hammond state that, “[students] gains in factual learning that are equivalent or superior to those who engage in traditional forms of learning.” (pg1 of book excerpt). I believe that this is the crux of where we find ourselves in the real world: Divided. As mentioned by Dr. Irvine in class, a colleague of hers likes to explain education as a pendulum. A ball swinging from extreme to extreme forever trying to correct the failings of its past position. As I teach my law students, life exists in the gray area. Finding a central position, though ideal, is not as easy as it sounds. I believe that, for example instituting a fully inquiry based system of learning without addressing the base knowledge required to start is a poor pedagogical choice. However, I believe that teaching nothing but facts and not allowing for individual thought and expression is equally as detrimental. The gray area is the fusion with sound scaffolded knowledge leading to an open expression of their learning.

We are products of our own education and of our own educational and chronological history. The parents to whom I will try to explain my new philosophy of the classroom, both inquiry and project based learning models, are products of their educational history. Students, who resist the change because they are products of their educational history and they have mastered the ways to succeed in the older, more familiar, style. We as educators have a unique job because everybody thinks they know what that job is. Almost everybody’s gone to school; therefore they understand being a teacher because they’ve seen people teach and have been taught themselves. The way they were taught will greatly influence their value on how I educate and education as a whole. Our classrooms are a research experiment for all to watch. We have to make sure our research (our practices) are sound, valid, and reliable. That does not mean that we only do what has been done before, because if we fail to define a new path forward in our own classrooms, that fit us as individual teachers, then our essence as an educator and facilitator will not be genuine.

I have failed in my classroom more times than I can count. Not because I am bad at my job, but because my expectations are high and I love taking risks and trying new ways of engaging learning and learners. There is always a better way to reach a student. There is always a better way to explain a problem. There is always a better way to teach a software program. I can always be better, more concise, more available, and more aware. In short, I can be better. I, like all of you, show up to work everyday ready to do my best. I, like all of you, do my best; and I, like all of you, show up the next day striving to do better than the day before.

By: Andrew Vogelsang