Have you ever thought about the potential for unintended consequences in acquiring disciplinary expertise? While one might assume that you see the rewards as worth the risks, this might not be the case, as some of you might be in the program more for the post-credential opportunities than for a genuine desire to become an “expert.” How does all of this relate to your situation and also to the current state of Doctoral Education in Education?
Kurt here...ad;fhjadvmlavscgluigmahl;z,;fkla,x;risdv'a,'ps'p.rac,'ryacv,p
ReplyDeleteAmber here, not sure I'm on target, but taking a stab it it...The post-credential opportunities are nice, but not enough to see me through to the end and not my primary motivation in pursuing a Ph.D. in education. I’m driven by the relevance of education as both a field and an enterprise. Education is a relevant enterprise to me as a parent of children in elementary, middle and high school. As a professional educator, education is relevant. As a citizen, education is relevant. As a student, education is an interesting field of study worthy of scientific research. Connecting the relevant to the interesting seems like a good fit to me. Perhaps education is too broad to be a discipline. Discipline or not, the furtherance of our knowledge in the field to improve the enterprise is a worthy endeavor in which I’d like to participate.
ReplyDeleteDid anyone else think the chart in Richardson’s article would make a nice resource when writing the reflective essay/improvement plan assignment?
This is Patricia. I was caught by surprise by the topic of our readings. When deciding to pursue my Ph.D. I never thought that there was so much research and debate about the process of becoming a Ph.D. As I said in class, I am not aspiring to become an expert, just more knowledgeable about certain topics. I did not know that Education was not considered a discipline by some and I think I need a better understanding of what is considered a discipline and what is not. At my daily full time job I hear over and over an over again teachers complaining about professors and researchers "hiding in their offices" in university buildings and developing research and theories that nobody can really use in our schools at this point. I think my dare to myself as I go through this process is to focus in learning about research that produces results that can be easily and effectively implemented. When reading about educational theory, educational research and educational practice I believe we need to maintain a strong link among them because neither one is really useful without the other. Amber, I do believe the chart is a very useful tool to "self-analyze" our progress as well as to keep us grounded in the future once we become doctors.
DeleteMicol, trying for brevity, but struggling to stay succinct--
ReplyDeleteI'm still thinking about the questions brought up in class: "What is a discipline?" and "What does it mean to become an expert?" I see a discipline as primarily an academic construct, and (conveniently for me, since I've never neatly fit into that structure) it's an academic construct that appears to be getting jostled. I suspect that it is because of historical factors and convenience that universities have long been divided into disciplines, and it seems that the cordoning of departments was not only artificial but also not sustainable. (And yet I'm not entirely sure that the inter- or trans- or multi-disciplinarity that has replaced the focus on stand-alone disciplines is always entirely natural, either, and may sometimes be equally forced. I'll leave that for some other blog post.)
I think there is much more potential for innovation and application in interdisciplinarity than there is when disciplines are sequestered. And yet the focus on interdisciplinarity definitely makes "expertise" more elusive. No longer can expertise even mean mastery of a single subset of a defined discipline.
In class, Patricia brought up the idea that you can never really be an expert in anything (though you can overconfidently assert that you are!) and I tend to agree with this, at least using a dictionary definition of expertise. So I overconfidently propose altering the traditional definition and suggest instead that academic expertise comprise foundational knowledge in the discipline(s), but equally importantly, an understanding of both the big unanswered questions in the field and where or how answers to those questions could be sought and maybe found.
The field of education is at an advantage in one way: it encompasses multiple disciplines and brings in humanities, science and of course social science. (This is addressed directly in "Stewards of a Field, Stewards of an enterprise" and indirectly in "Doctoral Education in Education.") At the same time, this can be a disadvantage, as people (in government policy, but elsewhere as well) seem to naturally bristle at the idea of free-flowing or vague fields (even as they promote multidisciplinarity, I suppose).
Education is unique, “expert” status is bestowed on the credentialed and uncredentialed alike by public perception as much as a University. Politicians, reporters, parents, teachers, administrators, and students are to some extent an expert of a small part of Education. This permits some people to boldly critique and debate issues associated with Education. (I think Amber mentions this.) I think that the free use of the term “experts” devalues the credentialed because “if everyone is an expert, no one is.”
ReplyDeletePersonally, I am afraid of the term “expert,” due to a sense of modesty. Partially because as a teacher, I have benefited from being a generalist patch-working ideas and techniques from a variety of sources. I like being a generalist, and I am afraid that if I become an “expert” of a specific corner of education I could get lost in the focus. I could loose my sense of where I am in the big picture. Caution is merited.
I think Mikol is onto it. I would playfully add that Education is not a discipline. It is the Trans discipline; the unifying glue of humanity; the catholic constant, predating, superseding, transcending mere Disciplines.
Andy
I found the Richardson article interesting. I never really pondered how the outside world views the field of education. His concept of being a steward of education was intriguing and made me think about my motivation, perceived path to finishing, and what I plan to do with the degree. Will I just finish and move on or will I make a contribution and fulfill the notion of being a steward by furthering my field? This very question provided fuel for thought.
ReplyDeleteI guess my primary motivation for embarking on this degree path was to gain knowledge in my area and to satisfy my curiosity for learning. While I feel I have a good base of practical knowledge in my niche (reading and language arts), I really wanted to develop a broader curriculum and learning knowledge base. While I do want to acquire that extensive knowledge necessary to effect positive change, I do agree that there is a certain fallacy with the notion of being an “expert”. Practically speaking, as we discussed in class, I do not believe that it is possible to ever become an expert as knowledge is constantly evolving and changing. Being an expert denotes someone who is never wrong; continued knowledge comes from questioning and being questioned.
Richardson was spot on when he talked about the different forms of knowing. Working in a school, I’ve always tended to focus on the practical side of knowledge. Richardson’s article really made me think broadly about what I considered formal knowledge. I think I have previously viewed formal knowledge as something established that I was going to learn. It is easy to forget the formal knowledge is not always established; it is acquired through contact with people in the field, dialogue among peers, reading of others’ work, and through staying abreast of current research. I definitely see myself as remaining in a school-based role upon finishing the PhD program. I chose the instructional leadership tract because I want to focus on improving instruction in schools by working in a school-based capacity. This might not jive fully with Richardson notion of being a steward of education but I do hope to use my credentials to effect positive change in whichever district I find myself working.
Christina
Adding something to my previous post (was too quick with the "publish" button)....
ReplyDeleteWhile I believe that "expert" might not be the best moniker, I do believe that individuals can develop expertise in an area provided that they continually stay on the forefront of issues, research, and theories in their field. I think it is important to keep in mind that an expert can also be thought of as someone with specialized knowledge in a certain area - they don't have to be the be all and end all.
I like your idea, Christina, of an expert being a specialist, rather than a know-it-all. Education is too broad and evolving for anyone to know it all.
DeleteAmber
Divya.
ReplyDeleteAs I progressed in the discipline of psychology, from choosing a major, to choosing electives as an undergraduate, and then choosing a graduate program, I zeroed in on my career path and research interests. Seeking disciplinary expertise through doctoral education was a natural step for me having learned early on that for a career in psychology (research or practice) I most certainly would need an advanced degree. Also, I enjoy learning and have always loved being a student.
I am very interested in topics related to assessment and measurement, methodology and statistics. While Richardson would put my interests in the ‘traditional discipline and education’ category, it has not been so clear cut for me as I find my place in the doctoral program. My interests can be matched to a wide range of graduate programs from basic research in quantitative psychology or biostatistics to application-oriented research & evaluation programs in education departments. The ed. Psych. program provides a balance and, I like to think, falls in Pasteur’s Quadrant- engaging in basic research but also aiming for high application to the enterprise of education. My training and knowledge is in psychology, is research-oriented, and I want to be a researcher. But, I want to contribute to the field of education, on which my ‘practical knowledge’- knowledge of educational policy and the “system”, the enterprise - is very limited. Looking at Golde’s statistics and description, this is not the typical profile of a doctoral student in education. What are the characteristics then of a doctorate in education, with expertise in educational psychology? Is she a specialist in the enterprise with solid research skills? Or is she a specialist in research with sound knowledge of the education enterprise? As Amber and Patricia noted, Richardson’s “Crucial elements” table is a good starting point which can guide doctorate programs and students assess strengths and identify weaknesses.
In the past, I really have not considered any type of
ReplyDeleteeducation to have unintended consequences, although I
probably should have. I have always combined my own formal learning with informal learning, though, and that might make a difference. Reading Richardson, I decided that the
two main unintended consequences which one should guard
against are 1) having a discourse community define
criteria which are overly limiting, thereby reducing the
complexity or potential of what is being learned and 2)
becoming an expert without taking the important step of
addressing misconceptions, in other words, beliefs become
validated simply because one is an "expert."
I think that to address the first problem,
interdisciplinary understanding (like taking all of
methods courses which we take, or taking courses/co-
curriculars outside the field) is key, and for the second,
setting up discrepant events (which cause the student to
question preconceived ideas and then test or look at them
further) is important. Awareness of these two limitations
is also important - it motivates us to address them. For
example, I always try to remind myself to listen before
speaking :-) and to remember that there is always more to
be learned and what has been learned might be only one side to the story...
(this is Joy)
This is Joy again. Does anyone else get a serious formatting problem when they copy from notepad? What do you do about it? Thx.
ReplyDeleteI realize now that, in addition to acquiring much negative wealth, I might also acquire the inability to write succinctly. While I like to read thought provoking essays on pretty much any topic, I found 'Stewards of a Field' to be almost mind-numbingly repetitive. The parsimonious 'Doctoral Education in Education' covered pretty much all of the same ground and added some gender angles that the previous article did not.
ReplyDeleteI have been informed by more than one mentorish figure that I did not 'need' a PhD for my career and, while I am currently unsure as to which path I shall walk while pursuing my VCU-funded doctorate, I am certain that my 'expertise', such as it is, will become more sharply expert-like but never quite expert.
I also think that those who don't consider education a discipline do so because of the tools that education and 'education' have given them. I challenge anyone to argue cogently the position that education is not a discipline by forsaking all of the tools that they have acquired through all forms of education.
I have a slightly non-traditional take on this as I was taught that teaching is a science and that anyone can learn anything. Ours is the science of learning. I am here to learn more about how we learn so I can help others learn.
Jenelle here…
ReplyDeleteThe only unintended consequence I have encountered so far in this Ph.D. journey is that people keep asking me “Why.” Why are you going through all this trouble? Why are you going through these classes when you have a great job you love? Are you going to make more money? The money is the most common question. In short, my friends and family do not see the merit of 3 years to get a few more letters behind your name. At least, not yet… I intend to change their minds!
When they do pepper me with “Why” questions, the only thing I can say is: I know I can do more. I know I can do more for children and adults with autism. I want to be able to dissect and apply best practices and then share those practices with my co-workers who usually have limited access to that type of information. This program will be a stepping stone to creating greater change, and reducing suffering for chronically vulnerable and special needs populations.
Similar to others, I also had not expected such debate on whether education was a discipline or not. Special-interest fields such as special education, the field I am engulfed in, is even more surprising when discussed at the doctorate level. I’ve actually been asked, “How can you even get a doctorate in special education?” or “Does that even exist?”
Well, yes. It does. And I love it.
I have to agree with other posts about the Richardson’s discussion of practical knowledge and formal knowledge (p. 257ish). It continues to astound me that clinicians and administrators alike in the special education field can hold the positions they hold yet run at the sight of a temper tantrum from a special needs child. Once an employee moves into a “higher up” position, it is almost as if certain aspects of a job are deemed beneath them. In my experience, special education in a private day school setting is filled with drool, diaper changes (sometimes teenage diaper changes – take a two year old “occupied” diaper and multiply it by 2 boxes of wet wipes and you will get an idea of what I’m talking about), and even aggression or self-injurious behavior. Practical knowledge in handling these situations is vital to meeting not only educational/life skill goals but also safety goals for staff and students.
To end, what I carry with me from these readings is that despite the notion that careers continuously evolve, I am hoping the advancement of formal knowledge will enhance my practical knowledge, not simply replace it.
Serra--Admittedly, I had not thought of unintended consequences of acquiring disciplinary expertise…perhaps that is partly my “polyanna” attitude about lifelong learning and embracing this PhD challenge, but I also did not embark upon this path thinking that I would end up an expert as a result of having three extra letters after my name. As I reflect now, I have noticed an unintended consequence as I talk with others who don’t know me well about my doctoral studies—many either assume I want to be an administrator or they are confused about what purpose a PhD in education can serve. I find myself being defensive of my field (special education) and of my desire to pursue a PhD. While I feel that part of my doctoral experience is to help me determine my future career path, I feel strongly that I want to work on the development of dedicated, quality future special education personnel. This may mean becoming a member of the professoriate, but it may not. I only know for certain that this pursuit of expertise will change my career path; I do not see myself returning to my former P-12 workplace.
ReplyDeleteI think being an expert, regardless of your particular field or discipline, implies that you not only have extensive knowledge about the topic but that you have also learned how to think about and critically investigate that field or discipline. While I do not expect my doctoral studies to make me an expert in all the knowledge there is about special education, I do expect it to teach me how to think like an expert, like someone who knows what questions to ask, where to look for answers, how to stay current, and how to know what she doesn’t know. I doubt I will ever use the term “expert” to describe myself in any serious way, but I will claim to be someone who knows a lot about special education overall.
(This is Katie...)
ReplyDeleteI was intrigued by Richardson’s article because the field of educational scholarship is somewhat new to me. While I have spent the past twenty years in the classroom, sixteen of those as an English teacher, I did a Master’s degree in literature rather than in education, and I am struck by how much has changed in educational theory and research since my undergraduate days. While I loved the coursework of my literature degree, I found that most of the knowledge gained was not applicable to the secondary school classroom; ninth graders are not quite ready for advanced literary theory! I finished my Master’s program and continued to teach as I had before, perhaps with a broader view and certainly more well read. In some instances the knowledge I had gained served to pull me farther away from my students. It was easy for me to get caught up in the pursuit of lofty ideas, but what impact did that really have on my role as a classroom teacher? Returning to school for a doctorate in education, I find that the practical knowledge I have gained from years in the classroom shapes everything I read and everything I learn. I am finding theoretical backing for practices I have seen work with real students in real settings, and I am challenged to gain expertise that will help me approach old problems with new vision. In this sense I am driven to be what Richardson calls a “steward” of the field, and my motivation to pursue this degree is to expand my knowledge base (specifically related to learning disabilities) so that I can better serve the students I teach.
I am amazed by the advances that have been made through research over the last twenty years, and I think it is easy for educators to get caught in a rut, teaching the same material in the same way, year after year. As an Academic Resource Teacher, I am responsible for giving classroom teachers the tools to educate students with learning disabilities using best practices, and it is my challenge to be on top of the latest research and methods. After finishing my degree, I hope to stay in my current job and to share what I have learned with my students, their parents, and my colleagues. This is knowledge that can be put to work to make real differences in the lives of real people, something my literature degree, while rich and challenging, could never do.
Erika here -
ReplyDeleteTo directly address the question, I have to admit that before needing to create a response for this class, I hadn’t really thought of education in terms of unintended consequences. This isn’t to say that I haven’t noticed that I haven’t encountered people with very strong beliefs, many of which have been incorrect. The section regarding “Beliefs and Misconceptions” by Richardson talked about this issue – but I think the interesting piece in this section is when Richardson notes that Ph.D. students should become aware of how these beliefs are formed and what it would take to change those beliefs. I can’t help but to wonder how this could even be done – as education is a widely discussed and debated topic, or if it’s even entirely possible to change someone’s strong misconceptions.
The second part of the response about whether there was a desire to become an actual “expert” brought me back to the brief passage by Golde and Walker. I couldn’t help but to wonder whether there was the lack of desire to be an expert, or lack knowledge of what it takes to be an expert. The authors state that “critics perceive a lack of quality in educational research, especially in dissertations” (p 249). I have to say that after reading the rest of this passage, I wasn’t surprised by this statement. The majority of this passage speaks to the differences between education students and those in arts and sciences, including statements that might lead one to believe that the type of students that enter into education programs may be interested more in improving the “enterprise” rather than the field of study and research. I think this also directly relates to the statements by Richardson when she differentiated between knowledge and understanding. For someone interested in improving the “enterprise” of education, a breadth of knowledge may be able to adequately meet these needs, while someone looking to gain expertise will need to strive towards that “ownership”, or understanding.
Mandy
ReplyDeleteFor many people, the word “expert” has the connotation of someone who knows everything there is to know about a particular field or discipline and has nothing left to learn. This surprises me because when I think of an expert I think of someone who is so knowledgeable about their field that they are able to recognize where knowledge (including their own) is lacking. In a way, they know what they do not know, and have the means and expertise to go about answering the important questions in their discipline.
With that being said, I believe that one of the unintended consequences of acquiring expertise in a discipline could result in becoming that “expert” who feels they no longer needs to learn anything new. Richardson’s section on beliefs and misconceptions speaks to this. As students who have come through various programs and work experiences, we all hold beliefs about the educational system. These beliefs may range from assumptions about how educational policy is written to ideas about how children acquire literacy skills. However, those beliefs will, and should be, challenged throughout our doctoral studies. This can be accomplished through a doctoral program in education that aims to develop expertise in students by combining the elements of scholarly inquiry found in Richardson’s table. Since we know that experts have a deep and expansive knowledge base, the various tracks, or disciplines, should aim to develop this breadth of understanding in doctoral students. We also know that experts often work together and use various tools, such as technology or statistical analyses, to investigate problems in their field. A doctoral program in education can facilitate this aspect of expertise development by bringing students from all tracks together through shared classes or research opportunities, allowing experts in multiple areas of education to share their knowledge and utilize the tools of their field to apply their deep understanding. This would lead to the development of experts with open minds and the ability to challenge commonly held beliefs in various areas of education.
With this view, it makes sense (to me) to think of education as “inter-disciplinary.” We as students will become stewards of our “sub-disciplines” within the field of education. As such, we should discover and investigate important issues while understanding the history and best practices of our chosen disciplines. Additionally, we have obligations to the enterprise of education. This holds true for the doctoral student who plans to re-enter the world of K-12, or the “practitioner,” as well as for those who plan to work in higher education after completion of their program. Through our studies and experiences we should learn to communicate, as Richardson describes, both normative and epistemic research and analyses in order to aid in the enterprise of education and help the public, policymakers, researchers and colleagues to identify problems and investigate solutions in the educational system.
Sarah…
ReplyDeleteWhen I began applying to PhD programs my thoughts were not on becoming an expert, but learning more about the field of education and being able to apply what I learned through course work and research in a classroom setting. I actually never even thought about being an expert, or believe I will be an expert when I graduate. An unintended consequence about expertise may be that the person assumes they know everything about their field, and therefore does not keep up with current and new research. Another consequence may be be that the expert narrows their thoughts and views too much and overlooks research/ideas from other disciplines that could be useful. I think the point of a PhD is to help you build thinking skills that will allow you to make informed judgments about research and problems within your field. However, I also believe the skills you gain through a PhD program will help you make informed judgments about other subject areas as well.
While a PhD program in Education is different than PhD programs in other subject areas, I think the unique aspects, such as all the specializations, have the opportunity to help build “stewards of a field.” For example, the numerous sub disciplines within education give students an opportunity to be exposed to more practical knowledge, and help point out misconceptions an individual may hold about a different sub discipline. For example, a Special Education PhD student may be able to point out a misconception an Educational Psychology PhD student holds about special education. I believe the chart Richardson provides is a great resource that I will hold onto throughout the program and frequently check to make sure I am taking advantage of the PhD program.