Teacher+Problem+Finding

= = = = = = = = = = = = =media type="custom" key="3972109"= = = = =

= = =[|Teacher Problem Finding] =

= =

“The Problem with Problems”

Graham Wallace (1926) in //The Art of Thought// wrote, “The little girl had the making of a poet in her who, being told to be sure of her meaning before she spoke, said, ‘How can I know what I think till I see what I say?’” (p. 106). I believe thinking is an act of creation, therefore the child would not know what to say until she was “in the moment.” Thinking in the moment and “on the fly” are key tenets of the situativity theory of cognition (Greeno, 1998). The situativity theory of cognition claims thinking is complex, radical, individual, yet inextricably bound to, and motivated by, the conviviality social human interaction affords. Tell me, what is more convivial than the art of teaching?

Rife with complexities and unknowns, emotion, morality, hope, and tremendous potential for intrapersonal and social transformation, the dance of teaching and learning is awesome (in both the //huge// and the //totally awesome 1980s// sense). When teaching and learning happen daily in our unique classrooms it feels like home, or at least community. What if we combine an existing community of learners with a theory of cognition that holds thinking takes place mostly “on the fly”? We might theorize that the community would be a group of folks, teacher(s) and students, who reside together over time teaching and learning from each other in pursuit of multiple goals which change moment to moment, day to day. We could also theorize (and know from experience and intuition) varying, multiple //problems// would inevitably and necessarily arise.(1)

//The Problem// is the Central Problem
Assuming it is the teacher’s responsibility to attend to those problems, how does the teacher determine which problems are problematic; those disruptive to student learning, for example? Presently, after a cursory scan of the research, I realized a framework to help teachers determine which problems to “find” does not exist. To illustrate why “the problem with problems” is important to me I will provide a classroom-based scenario typifying a problem.

//Imagine a high school history classroom. Add to your vision a teacher and a class full of students. The question of the day: What are the historical implications of Obama’s election as President? Students have pulled their desks together in small groups of 4-6, a form of discussion which with they have plenty of practice. The teacher walks around the room as a participant-observer. After about 10 minutes of lively small-group discussion the teacher hears a loud thud in the back of the room. It sounds like someone smacking the table or forcefully dropping a book. The teacher then hears a student exclaim, “You are full of B S man! There is no way Obama is gonna be any different than any of the other A holes we’ve had as President! What, just because he’s black?”//

It is at this moment when the teacher’s familiarity, practice, and agility with a model of problem finding and defining would be most useful. Why? Because according to the situativity view of cognition, the one to which I subscribe, thinking happens mostly “on the fly.” The teacher in our scenario has to find and define the problem, determine if the problem is indeed problematic, and create a response which achieves their pedagogical values and instructional goals—all “on the fly.” I sincerely believe most of what happens on a given day in the classroom can be characterized by problem (recall my definition here) or not-problem. In other words, teachers and students go about the enterprise of teaching and learning together until “something” happens to disrupt the flow. Problems disrupt the flow. A teacher’s response to a given problem i.e., whether the “find” the problem or “let it lie;” whether the problem is characterized as a student-centered problem or a domain-centered problem, for example, determines how the community of learners moves on after the disruption.

//Quest-ioning//
How can we train teachers to be diligent problem finders? Is there a framework teachers might be able to employ to help them find and define problems in their classrooms? If such a framework does exist how might teacher-educators facilitate the mastery of said framework? Finally, if the hypothetical framework were mastered by preservice teachers, how would (if at all) they employ it once they were in the field fulltime? A lot of questions for sure.

“All research begins with questions, and good research begins with good questions,” (Lagemann, 2008, p. 424). According to the same author, the current state of research in education calls for more relevant research tracks. One of the themes she recommended was problem finding.

The only way to move beyond intuition and folk theorizing of teacher problem finding is to conduct a systematic inquiry into the phenomenon using a variety of methods. Otherwise, I believe the topic will continue to reside on the margins of educational research because of how ubiquitously transparent it is to everyday teacher cognition and action.

Problem finding is relatively uncharted territory in the field of educational research, especially teacher research, I intend to focus all methodologies on uncovering in the most unbiased way, if a Teacher Problem Finding model is relevant, practical, needed, and usable for teachers. Otherwise the research remains a purely academic exercise rather than a meaningful contribution to the most //awesome// work around—teaching __and__ learning.

Footnote
(1)For the sake of consistency and clarity I have elected to use the term //problem// to characterize what other scholars might refer to as “challenges,” or “obstacles,” or “conundrums,” or “learning opportunities.” A problem, as it is used in this essay, begins as a values-neutral conflict between the goals of any two (or more) actors participating in a shared social endeavor e.g., learning, working, playing, etc.media type="custom" key="3972035"