I thought the article Does Anybody Really Care?:Research and Its Impact on Practice, by Julie E. Wollman-Bonilla was particularly relevant to our discussion about research inside the classroom in our last class. Personally, I too find research difficult to envision, causing me to look at such articles as more theory based then practical. This especially rings true to teachers who researchers fail to realize are quite occupied with the ‘daily rhythms of the classroom.’ Even the author goes on to state that her article on science writing, although accurate, failed to “reflect the multiple, conflicting perspectives and activities that were, on any given day, reality in classrooms alive with first graders, their teachers, and often parent or senior citizen volunteers.”

When teachers are the professionals that are practicing, refining, and reflecting, each day, I can see where their frustration toward research stems from. “Every few years a brand new research-proven program is foisted upon them by the local school board (and the old one forbidden), making it difficult for them to tech in ways they have refined though practice enhanced by ongoing professional education.” (314) If I have been working year after year in order to tweak and change, and alter my curriculum to benefit my students, I too would be quite opposed to new research that comes right in, making all your hard work seem irrelevant. And although I have just begun to step foot into this struggle for power I will not be one to approach teaching as “simply about adopting an expert’s method or faithfully executing lesson plans from a teacher’s manual.”

It is quite obvious that politicians, or ‘scavengers who care about research only insofar as it can be used to promote their own ends, are only focused on turning out a better job market not better citizens. So how then, is research really serving teachers, if we are not listening to them? “These neo-liberal reformers appear champions of the less-privileged, but their interpretations of research reveal a belief that the value of education is tantamount to its ability to help students secure high-paying jobs. Underlying this belief is the unquestioned assumption that all students see, or must learn to seek access to the desirable jobs and material goods these reformers enjoy.” Another issue that came up while reading this article was in Wollman-Bonilla’s explanation of misinterpreting or re-interpreting research. “Still, I fear that the article might be read, or re-interpreting, as a call for fill-in-the-black genre worksheets, to be turned in to the teacher as sole audience…” (317) The multitude of worksheets that are being used to have students turn in perfect automated, one way thinking work has come up many times in our graduate class discussions. Maybe misguided and misconceived research has a strong hand in creating this kind of curriculum. Even I was shocked to read that Delpret’s work, which I am somewhat familiar with, was largely turned around in such a manner.

I agree that I would be ideal ‘rather than helping to reproduce social problems that classrooms mirror, research may serve the goal of slowly overcoming these problems to achieve academic and social equity, true community, and a heightened sense of personal and social responsibility for researcher producers, participants, and consumers,” but will this kind of outlook or change ever come to fruition?