border crossings and other journeys- re-envisioning the doctoral preparation of education...

8/13/2019 Border Crossings and Other Journeys- Re-Envisioning the Doctoral Preparation of Education Researchers

1/4

http://er.aera.netEducational Researcher

http://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.3102/0013189X030005003

2001 30: 3EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHERLauren Jones Young

ResearchersBorder Crossings and Other Journeys: Re-envisioning the Doctoral Preparation of Education

Published on behalf of

American Educational Research Association

and

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Educational ResearcherAdditional services and information for

http://er.aera.net/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://er.aera.net/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.aera.net/reprintsReprints:

http://www.aera.net/permissionsPermissions:

http://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Jun 1, 2001Version of Record>>

at University of Manchester Library on November 26, 2013http://er.aera.netDownloaded from at University of Manchester Library on November 26, 2013http://er.aera.netDownloaded from
http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3http://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3http://www.aera.net/permissionshttp://www.aera.net/reprintshttp://er.aera.net/subscriptionshttp://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3.refs.htmlhttp://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3.full.pdfhttp://www.aera.net/http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://www.sagepublications.com/http://er.aera.net/alertshttp://er.aera.net/alertshttp://er.aera.net/subscriptionshttp://er.aera.net/subscriptionshttp://www.aera.net/reprintshttp://www.aera.net/reprintshttp://www.aera.net/permissionshttp://www.aera.net/permissionshttp://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3.refs.htmlhttp://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3.refs.htmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3.full.pdfhttp://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3.full.pdfhttp://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3.full.pdfhttp://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3.refs.htmlhttp://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3.refs.htmlhttp://www.aera.net/permissionshttp://www.aera.net/permissionshttp://www.aera.net/reprintshttp://www.aera.net/reprintshttp://er.aera.net/subscriptionshttp://er.aera.net/subscriptionshttp://er.aera.net/alertshttp://er.aera.net/alertshttp://www.sagepublications.com/http://www.aera.net/http://edr.sagepub.com/content/30/5/3http://er.aera.net/


2/4

Theme Issue:Researchfor DoctoralStudentsin Education

Although the researchpreparation ofdoctoralstudentsis a centralissuein the current context ofdis-

cussionsabouteducationand educationalresearch, it isalsoanissuethat is infrequently thefocusofexplicitexamination or research.Thearticlesin this theme issuearepresentedhere to stimulatedis-cussionandresearchon this importanttopic.

BorderCrossingsand OtherJourneys:Re-envisioning

theDoctoral Preparation ofEducation Researchers1

byLaurenJonesYoung

Canprospective scholars be prepared to appreciate and learn

from the presence ofepistemologicalcontroversy and diverse

perspectives?How might graduate programs in education de

velopresearchers who have the capacity to appreciate and per

haps use multiple perspectives and methodologies?

Giventhe finite amount of time in graduate school, and stu

dents' needs to (a) become expert enough in a given domain/

methodtosaysomething new and different, and(b)be abletomake

athoughtful match between research problem and perspective/methodology, how should we organize research preparation in

doctoral study, and towhatend? Is it even realistic to consider

preparing researchers tousemultiple methodologies and to work

from differentperspectives?2

Three scholarsAaron M. Pallas, Mary Haywood Metz, and

RebaN. Pagewere invited to think about the preparation of

new generations of education researchers in light of these ques

tions. Their observations, concerns, and proposals for change

emerge during an era of unprecedented diversity in terms of the

wayswe study "our right to thebeliefswe have"(Honderich, 1995)

and during a timewhenthereare few common setsofjudgments

about modesofinquiry. Moreover, educationisafieldthatby defi

nitionis multidisciplinary. It draws on a widening array ofdis

ciplines for epistemologies,methodologies, and theoretical ap

proaches to study education phenomena, resulting, according to

Schoenfeld(1999),inasituation in whichthereis"no canon,there

are no core methods" (p. 167). Questions such as those posed

aboveunderscore a fundamental uncertainty(aswellassignificant

disagreement, discord, and dispute) in the fieldofeducation as a

whole about not onlywhat is and is not education research, but

alsoaboutwhatknowledge counts, bywhatevidence, and accord-

Educational Researcher,Vol.30,No.5,pp.3-5

ing to whom (Lagemann,2000; Lagemann&Shulman, 1999;

Miller, 1999;Tooley&Darby, 1998;Viadero,1999).

Theseconcerns about the foundations and parametersofedu

cation research are not trivial and go far beyond the boundaries

ofany arcanediscussionofepistemologicaldiversity. The broader

context in which we conduct education inquiry presents its own

demands. First, education is a field riddledwithconsequences in

everyday experience and politics, and our epistemologies are in

tegrally linked to how we can best serve children. Both the pop

ular culture and our own observations tell usthatwe needbetter

approaches to solve the social problems that confront us. In a

country in which thereis widespread concern about the quality

ofeducation and about the utility ofresearch for advancingthat

education (National Research Council,1999),we must ask how

our academic and cultural experiences, points of view, social

commitments, traditional and nontraditional sourcesofknowl

edgeimprove learning and life chances for a diverse population.

Forexample,how should children be taught to read or to engage

with mathematical ideas? Should failing schools be reconsti

tuted? How might the achievement gap be closed? Fundamen

tally, improvements in children's learning and development hinge

on the richness of our understandings, which, in turn, depend

considerably on the quality of our research. We faculty in edu

cation need to address these questions head on ourselves in order

to strengthen the preparation (and future research) ofour grad

uate students, who are uniquely positioned to do this work, and

to do itbetter,in a pluralistic, global environment.

Second,while education is a field characterized by diversity in

its membership, particularly in comparison tootherdisciplines,

it has been slow to embrace the deeper meaningofthis diversity.

Among the 6,559 doctorates in education granted in 1998,

about 19 percent were awarded to people of color, up from

13 percent in 1978.3In addition, morethan62 percent ofthose

JUNE/JULY20oi"j[7

at University of Manchester Library on November 26, 2013http://er.aera.netDownloaded from
http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/


3/4

receivingdoctoratesin education in 1998 were female compared

to40percentwhowerefemaleand earning education doctorates

twentyyears earlier(Sanderson,Dugoni, Hoffer,&Selfa,1999).

Yet,despitetheirgrowing presence in doctoral programs, people

of color remain underrepresented amongthecontributors to

knowledge production,withcritical consequences for thenature

and range ofperspectives,understandings, and paradigmsthat

informthiswork (Gordon, Miller,Rollock,1990).JustasWilson

observed in1974,thatthe experiencesofaminority scholar may

be heuristically important in thedevelopmentofsuitablehy-

potheses andin theinterpretationof data (even as he cautioned

thataresearcher's unique history cannotbesubstituted for knowl

edgegainedthroughvalidscientificinquiry),Kathleen Hall(1999)

reminds us more recentlythatembracing those who have been

"excluded, denigrated,orsilenced" means much morethanrewrit

ing textsfor inclusionoftheirvoices,perspectives, and experiences.

Rather, she writes, "newareasof inquiry have been created,and

manyoftheage-oldcanonical master narratives produced atthe

center have been displaced, challenged bytheoften contradic

toryorincommensurable versions emerging from theincreas

ingly powerful peripheries"(1999,p.139). Asthe populationof

graduate studentsineducation becomes increasingly heteroge

neous, both the pressure and urgency to betrulyinclusive grow.

It iswithinthis context,then,ofdiverseideas,waysofknow

ing, perspectives, and participantsin afieldwhose exigencies call

for insight, and call for it now,thatPallas,Metz, andPagestrug

gletofigureout howtohelp doctoral studentsdeveloptheirown

understandingsandprofessional ethics. Theysliceintothese

questions and provoke us tothinkmorecarefully about our con

ceptionsofwhatitmeanstoknow and learnineducation.Not

surprisingly,welearn thatit is noeasierto reform graduate

educationthanitistoimprove K-12 schooling, and we should

applaudPallas,Metz, and Pageforarticulate descriptions of theinstitutional, intellectual, and often personal difficulties encoun

teredin thework of helping studentstogain understanding of

morethanone epistemological perspective. Although the papers

developedindependently, these authors work together to tackle

troublesome concerns posed aboutthesubstanceandscope of

doctoral preparation in education.4Theysuggestdifferent starting

points,discussdifferent types ofgraduatestudents, and forward

different goals,yet each exploresanotion of epistemologicaldi-

versitythatholdspromisefor effectivechange.In"PreparingEd

ucation Doctoral Students forEpistemologicalDiversity," Pallas

pressesuswithrecommendationsfororganizing experiencesin

education schools intended tomove students beyondasingleepistemological perspective. Metz, in "Intellectual BorderCross

inginGraduate Education: A Report FromtheField," brings

poignant insights to the important but taxing workofpreparing

novicestoappreciateandlearn from epistemological premises

and perspectives different fromthetraditionsoftheirown edu

cation scholarship.In thethirdpaper, "Reshaping Graduate

Preparation in EducationalResearch Methods:OneSchool'sEx

perience,"Pagetakes us inside a storyofcurriculum change de

signedto help students develop multiple perspectives intheirre

search. Born from experience and from mindful reflections,the

papersthatfollow offer thoughtful, and attimes provocative,

commentary onissuesimportant tothefuture ofthe field.

And itisthe future to whichwemust lookifthesediscussions

are to effect the transformative workthatremains.AsPallas asks

in the introduction to his paper, "Dowewant to prepare novice

researchersforthe worldofeducation research asitis,ordo we

want toprepare themfor theworld asitmight become?"All

threeauthors opt for thelatterview and invite faculty to engage

openly inadiscussionaboutvalues,about purpose, and aboutvi

sion.They argue especiallyforthoughtful, intentional,and re-

flexive considerationofsystematic experiencesthatpreparenoviceresearchersineducationtodealwithepistemological diversity.

Eachauthorcallsforrichoccasionswhere students have oppor

tunities to learn multiple epistemological perspectives in order to

be abletoengagemeaningfullywithmembersofothercommu

nitiesofeducation practice. Metz, forexample,writesofthe im

portanceofresearchers learning to "read each others' workacross

different kindsofresearch" andofresearchers learning "to build

on work from traditionsother thantheoneinwhichthey find

theirintellectual homebase."Yetsignificant caveats to construct

ing such opportunities remain. Forexample,how many episte-

mologiesshould students encounter, which ones, at what point

inthedoctoral experience should thesebeintroduced,and to

what levelofexpertise should students be prepared? Should this

kind of curriculum be required of all who seek the doctoratein

education or should alternative coursesofstudy be developed for

thosewithdifferent career interests? Or,asPageasks,"Should all

students, regardlessoftheircareer aspirations or talents, be com

petentinoneoreven severalmethodologies?"Theseissuesde

mandtheirown kind of considerationcurriculum reform,in

factifstudents aretobe providedwithopportunitiestoexpe

rience the practice and scholarshipofresearchofthe sortthatthe

authors describe. Despitethefactthatcurriculum development

isnotbusiness-as-usualinmost research institutions, theseau-

thors urgeusto look beyond individual course titles and create a

courseofstudy founded on facultyideasabout substance and anappropriate sequencingofideasand experiences.

Curricular change can be slow andmessy.We learn fromthe

experiences and reflections inthesepapersthatthe kindofhoped-

for curricula will take timetodevelop and will need timeforre

finement. Agreeingtoexperiment alongthelines introduced by

Pallas,Metz, andPagewillrequire hard and longdiscussionand

will necessitate bridging deep differences among faculty about

what students should know and be abletodo.In aclimatein

which public discourse about the doctoral curriculum is largely

absentand inwhich reward structures support individualistic

pursuits more often thanoverall programmatic development

(Gumport, 1997),moving thisvisionforwardwillrequire going

againstthe grain.Pallas,Metz, andPagecallfor including inthe

discussionofepistemology a much wider group of facultythan

thosewithprimary responsibilityformethodologycourses.In

fact,theycall forallfaculty toassumeresponsibility for explicat

ingtheassumptions,goals,andepistemologiesthatundergird

theirresearch,theircourses,andtheirinitiation ofdoctoral stu

dentsintoprofessional lifein thefieldofeducation.

Students, too, urge us forward and ask to be partofthis con

versation. Education students bringawidearrayofprior experi

ence totheirdoctoral programs; manyenterprogramswithsev

eral yearsofpracticeinK-12 schoolingandother education

contexts. Theyalsobringwith themtheirown cultural histories

andwaysof knowing and beinginthe world.In thesameways

T|| EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHER

http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/


4/4

thatwe acknowledge epistemological diversityacrosspractices of

research, wealsosee a diversityofepistemologyamong the prac

titioners, the community groups, and the family members that

we and our students study. We need only look at our students to

seehow values and cultures influence the sense we make of our

observations and the meaningsthatwegivethem.Scholars,too,

are persons;thuswe must acknowledge the relationship among the

researcher, the research, and the researched (Neumann,Pallas,&

Peterson, 1999;SiddleWalker, 1999), aswell as the factthatdiversity in one arena may necessitate diversityacrossarenas. It fol

lowsthatthe preparation thatwe construct for our students will

need to foster deep cross-cultural understandings and a "multi-

lingualism" that will enable them to cross borders in knowl

edgeable,ethical, and respectful ways.

In conclusion, let usreturnto the ultimate purposeofprepar

ing future researchers in the field: the improvement ofeducation.

Aswerethinkand expand our conceptions ofwaysof knowing

and modesofinquiry, werethinkand shed new light on the prob

lems of teaching and learning, including the teaching and learn

ingthattake place in graduate education programs.Pallas,Metz,

and Pagerathercourageously set out some of the challenges ofre-envisioning the preparation of education researchers.What

theypropose is very hard work, but comes at a promising time.

The urgency of the need to improve the practice of education

may well serve tostrengthen the kinds of professional commu

nities of inquiry that can make us (and our doctoral students)

betterresearchers. In fact, thecurrentclimateofepistemological

uncertaintyin the field presses usintothe collaborative activity

encouraged by the authors ofthese papers. The processofschol

ars and studentsofeducation addressingissuesofvision,making

the implicit explicit, reflecting and critiquing work, honoring ex

perience and culture in moreintentionalcommunitiesofinquiry

may well advance knowledge and understanding in the field. The

practiceofresearcherswithdiverse perspectives tanglingwith thewarrants andclaimsofinquiry has traditionally served to transform

knowledge and understandingwithinany field.Whatpromise at

thismoment for thisfield, whose contributions can have signif

icant consequences for learnersofallages.

NOTES

1The opinions expressed inthispublication are those of theauthor

alone and do not necessarily reflect the viewsofThe Spencer Founda

tion.I gratefully acknowledge the constructive and invaluable insights

and contributions ofvalued friends andcolleagues,CatherineA.Lacey

and Mary C. Visconti. Ialsoacknowledge the helpful comments pro

videdbyEducational Researcherreviewers.2

These questions were posed toPallas,Metz, and Page at the April2000AERAsymposium,"EducatingaNext GenerationofEducational

Researchers:PossibilitiesandChallenges."3The percentages(19%and13%,respectively) refer to doctorates in

education awarded toU.S.citizens; in 1998,11.5%ofU.S.-baseddoc

toraterecipients in education were African American; 5% Latino; 2%

Asian/PacificIslander; and 1% American Indian/Alaskan Native.4Education facultyarenot alone inthisencouragement to embrace a

spiritofexperimentation in our graduate programs. The "Re-Envisioning

the Ph.D." project funded by the Pew Charitable Trusts hasengagedin

anationaldialogueto answer the question, "How can we re-envision the

Ph.D. to meet the needsofsocietyofthe21stcentury?" The Woodrow

Wilson National Fellowship Foundation has launched a new initiative,

theResponsivePh.D. project,intendedto "providearicherpurpose and

aricherpopulation" for Ph.D. education in the humanities and social

sciences (Smallwood,2001).And the Carnegie Foundation for theAd

vancementofTeaching recently announcedanew program to study the

Ph.D. and doctoral education.

REFERENCES

Gordon, E. W., Miller, F., & Rollock, D. (1990).Copingwithcom-

municentricbiasin knowledge production in thesocial sciences.Ed-

ucationalResearcher, 19(3),8-13.

Gumport, P. J. (1997).Public universities as academic workplaces.

Daedalus, 126(4), 113-136.

Hall,K.(1999).Understanding educationalprocessesin an eraofglob

alization: The view from anthropology and culturalstudies.InE.C.

Lagemann&L.S.Shulman(Eds.),IssuesinEducationResearch:Prob-

lemsand Possibilities.SanFrancisco:Jossey-BassPublishers,121-156.

Honderich, T.(Ed.). (1995).TheOxfordcompaniontophilosophy.Ox

ford:Oxford UniversityPress.

Lagemann,E.C.(2000).Anelusivescience: Thetroublinghistoryofed-

ucationresearch.Chicago:The UniversityofChicagoPress.

Lagemann,E.C , & Shulman,L.S.(1999).IssuesinEducationResearch:

ProblemsandPossibilities.SanFrancisco:Jossey-BassPublishers.

Miller, D. W. (1999).The black holeofeducation research. Chronicle

ofHigherEducation,August 6:A17.Washington, DC.

NationalResearchCouncil. (1999).Improving studentlearning:Astrate-gic plan for educationresearchanditsutilization.CommitteeonaFea-

sibilityStudy for aStrategicEducation Research Program. Washing

ton,DC:NationalAcademyPress.

Neumann,A.,Pallas,A.M.,&Peterson,P.L. (1999).Preparing educa

tionpractitioners to practice education research. InE.C. Lagemann

& L.S.Shulman(Eds.),IssuesinEducation Research:Problems and

Possibilities.SanFrancisco:Jossey-BassPublishers,247-288.

Sanderson,A.R., Dugoni,B.,HofFer,T., &Selfa,L.(1999).Doctorate

recipientsfrom UnitedStatesuniversities:Summaryreport 1998,Table

Chicago:National Opinion Research Center at the University of

Chicago.

Schoenfeld,A.H.(1999).Thecore,the canon, and the developmentof

researchskills:Issuesin the preparation ofeducation researchers. InE.C.Lagemann&L.S.Shulman(Eds.),IssuesinEducationResearch:

Problems and Possibilities. San Francisco:Jossey-BassPublishers,

166-202.

SiddleWalker,V.(1999).Culture and commitment:Challengesfor the

future trainingofeducation researchers. InE.C. Lagemann &L.S.

Shulman,IssuesinEducation Research:ProblemsandPossibilities.San

Francisco:Jossey-BassPublishers,224-244.

Smallwood,S.(2001).Wilson Foundation announces plan to increase

the valueofthe Ph.D.ChronicleofHigherEducation,January 17.

Tooley,J .,&Darby,D.(1998).Educational research,acritique:Asur-

veyof publishededucational research. London, England:Officefor

Standards in Education.

Viadero, D. (1999).What is (and isn't) research?Education Week,

18(41), 33-38.Washington,DC:Editorial Projects in Education.

Wilson, W.J.(1974).The new blacksociology:Reflections on the 'in

siders'and 'outsiders' controversy. InJ.E.Blackwell&M.Janowitz

(Eds.),Black sociologists: Historicaland contemporary perspectives.

Chicago:UniversityofChicago Press,322-338.

AUTHOR

LAURENJONESYOUNGis Senior Program Officer at the Spencer

Foundation,875NorthMichiganAve.,Suite3930,Chicago,IL60611;

[email protected].

ManuscriptreceivedDecember 7, 2000

Revision received February21 ,2001

AcceptedMarch8, 2001

JUNE/JULY 2001 | | ! ~

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/http://er.aera.net/mailto:[email protected]

border crossings and other journeys- re-envisioning the doctoral preparation of education...

Documents