**2.1 Purposes of conducting research inside of teacher education**

Noffke has described three main roles research can play in shaping teacher education: political, professional, and personal [7]. To Noffke, teachers' research can be used in ways that reveal that the political nature of teaching as research creates sites to explore questions of power, fairness, and ethics. The professional aspects of research relate to the growth of classroom practice in ways that use action research to bridge the traditional theory/practice knowledge gap. Finally, the personal elements of research reveal the potential for action research to lead to self-knowledge and fulfillment, deeper understanding, and greater sense of belonging as a teacher. Noffke did not suggest that the political, professional, and personal aspects of learning to conduct research as part of teaching must be engaged with separately or in any particular order. Instead, the purposeful overlap of these elements in teacher education has the greatest potential to create lasting change in teachers' understandings and practices.

**349**

**3.1 Method**

*Preparing Practice-Based Researchers for Diverse Classrooms: A Pathway for Teacher Education*

Practice-based research, which has recently been reconceptualized by Sailors and Hoffman [6], draws on action research [8], design/development research [13], and transformative research [14] framings. In this type of research, teachers begin by asking questions about things which feel unresolved in their practice, and they start by closely observing the ways in which their teaching is currently working to identify the underlying structures. This re-searching around an environment that is well known to a teacher is a key element of action research, since it invites teachers to challenge their own assumptions about what is effective, and for whom, in their teaching. At this stage, teachers begin collecting data, often in the form of student work samples, notes, and audio or video recordings of their teaching, and they begin analyzing this data to look for possibilities for change. Once they identify an alteration or intervention that could make their teaching more equitable, they put it to work and collect further data on the elements of the intervention that are working well, and those that they could further change. Teachers continue engaging in iterative cycles of growth and reflection. Sometimes this work leads to teachers sharing their findings in collaborative communities with one another, or the field more broadly, but constructing generalizable findings is not the purpose of practice-based research. Practice-based research is similar in many ways to teacher and practitioner research [10] in that it is research done by teachers, typically in their classrooms and within the contexts in which they work. However, one distinction is the iterative design of practice-based research combined with its intentional focus on realizing more equitable possibilities. This type of research highlights that teachers are never finished in their quest to create more equitable and responsive spaces for racially, culturally, and linguistically diverse students. As teachers

identify challenges and find ways to make their practices more equitable, additional challenges will invariably arise, and will need to lead to further changes in teaching practices. Practice-based research is both powerful and necessary because it creates

In order to uncover what is already known about the utility of conducting research on ones' own teaching as part of teacher preparation, a systematic review of literature was conducted. Consistent with the timeframe in which the teacherresearcher movement began to face resistance, this review is bounded from 1990 through 2019. To focus on a content area that is most commonly controlled by external mandates, assessment policy, and external pressures [3] this review focuses on preservice literacy teachers. Drawing on Noffke [7], this review is based on the research question: How have teacher educators engaged with the political, profes-

sional, and personal dimensions of preservice literacy teachers' research?

Following Cooper's [15] integrative review guidelines, included studies (1) were peer-reviewed journal articles and reports of research which drew on empirical data (2) included explicit research questions or described a research focus, as well as a description of methods, data sources, analysis, and findings; (3) were published in English, and (4) focused on preservice literacy teachers conducting research. The area of interest was established using a combination of three sets of search terms: preservice teachers (i.e., university students seeking initial certification to teach),

the potential for ongoing critical reflection and growth.

**3. A review of literature on practice-based research**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96398*

**2.2 Practice-based research: an innovative framework**

*Preparing Practice-Based Researchers for Diverse Classrooms: A Pathway for Teacher Education DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96398*

#### **2.2 Practice-based research: an innovative framework**

*Teacher Education in the 21st Century - Emerging Skills for a Changing World*

suggestions for teacher preparation are provided.

strategies for action.

have continued into the present day.

**2. Background on research conducted inside of teaching**

**2.1 Purposes of conducting research inside of teacher education**

In 1946, Kurt Lewin [8] proposed action research as a challenge to experimental research that "produces nothing but books" (p.35) and served only to "diagnose" (p.37) rather than provide solutions to societal challenges. Growing up in a Jewish family in pre- World War Two Germany, Lewin learned through personal experience that when leveraged by those in power, research could serve as a way to legitimize the marginalization of particular ethnic groups. In conceptualizing action research, he took a more equitable, situated perspective and attempted to engage practitioners across professional fields in being part of the process of finding

Given their location as sites of inequity and equity, action research eventually came to be situated inside classroom contexts. Although there were a few early trailblazers, the teacher-researcher movement primarily rose in the United Kingdom in the 1970s and 1980s [9], and in the 1980s and 1990s in the U.S., spurred by notable scholarship [10]. However, in the U.S., momentum stalled in the 1980s and 1990s as calls to standardize teacher education and enhance accountability led to increased state-level control [11]. At the same time, and as a form of resistance to the ways research was being used with authority to control teachers' and teacher educators' practices, some teacher educators argued that preparation for research ought to be a necessary component of teacher education to support quality teaching and professionalize the field [12]. These arguments

Noffke has described three main roles research can play in shaping teacher education: political, professional, and personal [7]. To Noffke, teachers' research can be used in ways that reveal that the political nature of teaching as research creates sites to explore questions of power, fairness, and ethics. The professional aspects of research relate to the growth of classroom practice in ways that use action research to bridge the traditional theory/practice knowledge gap. Finally, the personal elements of research reveal the potential for action research to lead to self-knowledge and fulfillment, deeper understanding, and greater sense of belonging as a teacher. Noffke did not suggest that the political, professional, and personal aspects of learning to conduct research as part of teaching must be engaged with separately or in any particular order. Instead, the purposeful overlap of these elements in teacher education has the greatest potential to create lasting change in teachers' under-

experiences, when policymakers attempt to control every aspect of teachers' practices, it can limit teachers' ability to be responsive to students' interests and needs. This problem becomes even more pronounced as research suggests teachers' practices must become more adaptive—not less— to meet the needs of diverse learners [4, 5]. In addressing these challenges, one facet of teacher preparation that invites teachers to define challenges and design solutions is practice-based research [6]. The possibility of conducting research on ones' own teaching holds tremendous potential to help teachers engage with the political, professional, and personal aspects of teaching [7]. In this chapter, the history of and methods for research conducted by teachers is reviewed. Then, a systematic review is conducted to demonstrate the ways in which this type of preparation can function. Finally,

**348**

standings and practices.

Practice-based research, which has recently been reconceptualized by Sailors and Hoffman [6], draws on action research [8], design/development research [13], and transformative research [14] framings. In this type of research, teachers begin by asking questions about things which feel unresolved in their practice, and they start by closely observing the ways in which their teaching is currently working to identify the underlying structures. This re-searching around an environment that is well known to a teacher is a key element of action research, since it invites teachers to challenge their own assumptions about what is effective, and for whom, in their teaching. At this stage, teachers begin collecting data, often in the form of student work samples, notes, and audio or video recordings of their teaching, and they begin analyzing this data to look for possibilities for change. Once they identify an alteration or intervention that could make their teaching more equitable, they put it to work and collect further data on the elements of the intervention that are working well, and those that they could further change. Teachers continue engaging in iterative cycles of growth and reflection. Sometimes this work leads to teachers sharing their findings in collaborative communities with one another, or the field more broadly, but constructing generalizable findings is not the purpose of practice-based research. Practice-based research is similar in many ways to teacher and practitioner research [10] in that it is research done by teachers, typically in their classrooms and within the contexts in which they work. However, one distinction is the iterative design of practice-based research combined with its intentional focus on realizing more equitable possibilities. This type of research highlights that teachers are never finished in their quest to create more equitable and responsive spaces for racially, culturally, and linguistically diverse students. As teachers identify challenges and find ways to make their practices more equitable, additional challenges will invariably arise, and will need to lead to further changes in teaching practices. Practice-based research is both powerful and necessary because it creates the potential for ongoing critical reflection and growth.

## **3. A review of literature on practice-based research**

In order to uncover what is already known about the utility of conducting research on ones' own teaching as part of teacher preparation, a systematic review of literature was conducted. Consistent with the timeframe in which the teacherresearcher movement began to face resistance, this review is bounded from 1990 through 2019. To focus on a content area that is most commonly controlled by external mandates, assessment policy, and external pressures [3] this review focuses on preservice literacy teachers. Drawing on Noffke [7], this review is based on the research question: How have teacher educators engaged with the political, professional, and personal dimensions of preservice literacy teachers' research?

#### **3.1 Method**

Following Cooper's [15] integrative review guidelines, included studies (1) were peer-reviewed journal articles and reports of research which drew on empirical data (2) included explicit research questions or described a research focus, as well as a description of methods, data sources, analysis, and findings; (3) were published in English, and (4) focused on preservice literacy teachers conducting research. The area of interest was established using a combination of three sets of search terms: preservice teachers (i.e., university students seeking initial certification to teach),

research (i.e., action, practitioner, or teacher research or inquiries), and literacy (i.e., reading, writing, dialog, and English Language Arts). These terms were used to search three major databases between the years 1990 and 2019. Through this process, 454 abstracts were examined, and 82 studies were ultimately determined to be relevant to the research question.

#### **3.2 Analysis**

Analysis began with listing each study's participants, program focus, description of research engagement, methods, secondary purposes of the study (e.g., the development of data literacy) research questions, and findings. Each study was also coded for three *a priori* categories consistent with Noffke's [7] definitions of research as inviting opportunities for political, professional, and personal growth. Studies were coded as: (A) politically engaged if the authors described their purpose as supporting preservice teachers' knowledge and practices for serving racially, culturally, and/or linguistically marginalized students; (B) professionally engaged if the authors described their purpose as supporting content, curricular, and/ or pedagogical knowledge for teaching; and (C) personally engaged if they were framed as supporting teachers' identity development, self-actualization as decision makers and/or sense of belonging in the field and with colleagues.

#### **3.3 Description of studies**

The 82 included studies all took place in literacy teaching contexts where English was the primary language of instruction. These studies were conducted most commonly in the United States of America, but also included those from Canada, Great Britain, Australia, Spain, Chile, Mexico, Turkey, China, Namibia, and Israel, Common designs were a study conducted by a preservice teacher as a single-semester course project, or a two-semester capstone or portfolio that spanned multiple courses in a final teacher education program year. The vast majority of studies involved teacher educators conducting action research on their own practice while studying their students' uptake of action research for themselves.

#### **3.4 Findings**

Analysis revealed that 46 of the 82 studies (56%) engaged with political dimensions of teaching, 65 (79%) engaged with professional dimensions, and 67 (82%) emphasized the personal. (**Table 1**). Further detail in each category is provided.

#### *3.4.1 Political facets of teachers' research*

The 46 studies included in this category emphasized the liberatory potential of research to have a positive impact on students from marginalized communities. Eight studies in this category were designed with the intention of using research to prepare preservice teachers for work in urban schools with racially diverse learners [16, 23, 24, 27, 40, 49, 80, 97]. Others were designed to support groups of students such as English Learners who primarily spoke other languages [18, 31, 52, 54, 70, 87] or low-socioeconomic-status rural students [64]. In some studies, the political dimensions of teaching were accessed through research involving caregivers. Lazar [50] explored how preservice teachers' research that involved interviews with their students' caregivers might lead them toward more sophisticated understandings of the strengths and needs of families from marginalized communities. Lazar found that some preservice teachers began the program with fixed ideas about

**351**

*Preparing Practice-Based Researchers for Diverse Classrooms: A Pathway for Teacher Education*

**(46/ 82)**

Abbate-Vaughn (2006) [16] X X X Amir et al. (2017) [17] X X Athanases et al. (2013a) [18] X X X Athanases et al. (2013b) [19] X X X Athanases et al. (2015) [20] X X X Barnes (2006) [21] X X X

Bennett et al. (2016) [23] X X X Berghoff et al. (2011) [24] X X Brass (2014) [25] X X Broaddus (2000) [26] X X X Brock et al. (2013) [27] X X Charbonneau-Gowdy (2015) [28] X X

Davis et al. (2018) [30] X X

Duffield and Townsend (1999) [33] X X Dunlap and Piro (2016) [34] X X Everett et al. (2008) [35] X Ferguson and Brink (2004) [36] X X X Gore and Zeichner (1991) [37] X X X Grisham et al. (2000) [38] X X

Hagevik et al. (2012) [40] X X X Hayden and Chiu (2013) [41] X X X

Kindle and Schmidt (2011) [43] X X X Kindle and Schmidt (2019) [44] X X

Kosnik and Beck (2000) [46] X X X

Landay (2001) [48] X X

Lazar (1998) [50] X X Levin and Rock (2003) [51] X X López-Gopar (2014) [52] X X X

Lysaker and Thompson (2013) [54] X X X Mastrilli and Brown (1999) [55] X X X

**Professional (65/ 82)**

**Personal (67/ 82)**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96398*

**Study Authors, (Year) Political** 

Basmadjian (2008) [22] X X

Clayton and Meadows (2013) [29] X

de Oliveira and Shoffner (2009) [31] X X Dikilitaş and Wyatt (2018) [32] X

Grugeon (2005) [39] X

Hoppey (2013) [42] X

Knight et al. (2000) [45] X

Kucan (2001) [47] X

Lawrence et al. (2017) [49] X X

Love (2009) [53] X


*Preparing Practice-Based Researchers for Diverse Classrooms: A Pathway for Teacher Education DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.96398*

*Teacher Education in the 21st Century - Emerging Skills for a Changing World*

makers and/or sense of belonging in the field and with colleagues.

their students' uptake of action research for themselves.

*3.4.1 Political facets of teachers' research*

be relevant to the research question.

**3.3 Description of studies**

**3.4 Findings**

**3.2 Analysis**

research (i.e., action, practitioner, or teacher research or inquiries), and literacy (i.e., reading, writing, dialog, and English Language Arts). These terms were used to search three major databases between the years 1990 and 2019. Through this process, 454 abstracts were examined, and 82 studies were ultimately determined to

Analysis began with listing each study's participants, program focus, description of research engagement, methods, secondary purposes of the study (e.g., the development of data literacy) research questions, and findings. Each study was also coded for three *a priori* categories consistent with Noffke's [7] definitions of research as inviting opportunities for political, professional, and personal growth. Studies were coded as: (A) politically engaged if the authors described their purpose as supporting preservice teachers' knowledge and practices for serving racially, culturally, and/or linguistically marginalized students; (B) professionally engaged if the authors described their purpose as supporting content, curricular, and/ or pedagogical knowledge for teaching; and (C) personally engaged if they were framed as supporting teachers' identity development, self-actualization as decision

The 82 included studies all took place in literacy teaching contexts where English

Analysis revealed that 46 of the 82 studies (56%) engaged with political dimensions of teaching, 65 (79%) engaged with professional dimensions, and 67 (82%) emphasized the personal. (**Table 1**). Further detail in each category is provided.

The 46 studies included in this category emphasized the liberatory potential of research to have a positive impact on students from marginalized communities. Eight studies in this category were designed with the intention of using research to prepare preservice teachers for work in urban schools with racially diverse learners [16, 23, 24, 27, 40, 49, 80, 97]. Others were designed to support groups of students such as English Learners who primarily spoke other languages [18, 31, 52, 54, 70, 87] or low-socioeconomic-status rural students [64]. In some studies, the political dimensions of teaching were accessed through research involving caregivers. Lazar [50] explored how preservice teachers' research that involved interviews with their students' caregivers might lead them toward more sophisticated understandings of the strengths and needs of families from marginalized communities. Lazar found that some preservice teachers began the program with fixed ideas about

was the primary language of instruction. These studies were conducted most commonly in the United States of America, but also included those from Canada, Great Britain, Australia, Spain, Chile, Mexico, Turkey, China, Namibia, and Israel, Common designs were a study conducted by a preservice teacher as a single-semester course project, or a two-semester capstone or portfolio that spanned multiple courses in a final teacher education program year. The vast majority of studies involved teacher educators conducting action research on their own practice while studying

**350**
