Comments on: David Labaree’s Three Rules For New Education Researchers

By: dy/dan » Blog Archive » Other People’s Problems

dy/dan » Blog Archive » Other People’s Problems — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 21:56:06 +0000

[…] I'm grateful to instructors like Labaree and Stevens who urged us all to quit trying to solve the problem and focus first on describing the domain of the problem and its range of solutions. With that […]

By: A Sermon on Educational Research: Relevance « GOD & MATH: Thinking Christianly About Mathematics, Education

Thu, 14 Jul 2011 00:50:03 +0000

[…] one of my favorite blogs, dy/dan, and a post on David Labarree’s “A Sermon on Educational Research”, when discussing relevance in education and educational research: There’s also the relevance […]

By: Suzanne Galvez

Suzanne Galvez — Mon, 11 Jul 2011 16:24:58 +0000

O.K., interesting reading. I got a kick out of the sarcasm. (Then again, I think Steven Colbert is hysterical…) Keeping an eye on the big picture, staying focused, working efficiently are all important qualities. I have been SO guilty in the past of taking off on some tanget that has caused me more work than I care to admit! When all is said and done I look at it and think “I didn’t even answer the question!” Back to the drawing board… It’s important to keep open to discoveries along the way. As for myself, if I can stay focused on my topic and sift through irrelevant information to glean the truly relevant information, I’ll be happy.

By: Joe Henderson

Joe Henderson — Sat, 09 Jul 2011 17:09:34 +0000

From the Journal of Cell Science:

http://www.sciencenet.cn/upload/blog/file/2010/11/2010111932427962698.pdf

Relevant here, I think.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 07 Jul 2011 15:18:49 +0000

It’s not “be irrelevant, wrong, and lazy”, it’s “be more irrelevant, wrong, and lazy than your first inclination.”

Imagine research strategies lie on a spectrum between perfectionism and carelessness. Most researchers skew so far toward the perfectionism side (myopia, perfect truth, diligence) that if they actually aim for being a little more careless (irrelevant, wrong, and lazy), they’ll end up back in the middle of the spectrum.

The problem is that it’s a heck of a lot more complex than that. Sometimes, being a balanced person is the best way to move forward. Sometimes, being at the extremes is the best way to move forward. If you’re to the point of realizing that, there’s not a lot for you here in this article…which makes it seem like Labaree followed his own advice a little too far. ;)

By: Amy

Amy — Wed, 06 Jul 2011 17:21:55 +0000

Labaree’s so much fun! I don’t know him personally, but I’ve read his work and his syllabi- they have a similar bite to them.

By: Jason Dyer

Jason Dyer — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 22:04:56 +0000

This reminds me a little of Rosenblatt’s Nine Antirules of Journalism, if you’re into the contrary thing.

By: Kate E Farb-Johnson

Kate E Farb-Johnson — Tue, 05 Jul 2011 13:54:44 +0000

I see Labaree’s first point as an strong critique of the idea that educational research should start with a problem. This idea bothered me when I first studied educational research, because I think that scientific research starts with a question, something the researcher doesn’t know and wants to. Starting with a problem to solve leads to confirmation bias, as well as huge gaps in the knowledge base of educational research.

The second point could be a response to the limited nature of educational research methods. Two major factors make it hard have a lot of confidence in even the best educational research. One is that education is contextual: a teaching technique that is effective in one class with certain students in a given school might be a disaster in another context. Looking a broad range of contexts is often prohibitively time consuming, so results are often only tested in one context. The second problem is that it’s nearly impossible to run a controlled experiment in education. Partly this is context again: who the teacher is is a variable that generally can’t be controlled for with reasonable sample sizes. Additionally, a educational research experiment generally can’t be blind, as both the teacher and the students know whether they are doing something different from usual. Given these limitation, saying to researchers “seek truth, but accept that you will be wrong,” may be the only way to move forward honestly.

By: Daily Links 07/04/2011 « Working at the edge

Daily Links 07/04/2011 « Working at the edge — Mon, 04 Jul 2011 03:33:44 +0000

[…] David Labaree’s Three Rules For New Education Researchers […]

By: blaw0013

blaw0013 — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 18:22:06 +0000

I read the three points as sarcasm; critique of modern research practice. I read Dan’s commentary as an activist’s response to the crap that is produced in the name of social science (educational) research, that grand effort to describe to the blind person what is. He argues a more powerful purpose for research is to make people think.

I suggest this provocation pushes the researcher to consider his/her conceptual framework quite carefully, at the macro-theoretical level: what is your ontological position? What is the status of reality, objectivity, subjectivity, truth, relativism? What is your epistemological foundation? (a ridiculous few math educators have left behind behaviorism as a theory for learning) And on…

Visit the announcement for a gathering of math educators who do intentionally conduct research to provoke thinking at .