9/10/2008
I’m in the early phases of designing the study, simultaneously navigating site access and participant consent. This involves negotiating with principals at both schools, crafting an appropriate proposal to submit to the district, as well as collaborating with potential participants. I feel a constant tension in trying to balance designing a study that is insightful and true to the goals I have, as well as remaining open to participants’ agendas.
How to be open and upfront with the participants regarding the perspective I bring and the objectives I have without completely influencing the direction of the project as a whole; that is the driving question for me at this point. My interest here is to conduct a collaborative project that is responsive and creative, taking in participants' ideas and perspectives regarding their coteaching experiences.
My gut reaction is to let them know upfront that I am interested in the project because of the unique combination of potential and challenge I see in coteaching for ELLs in public schools: Potential in that collaborative efforts can expand our horizons, resources, and push us in new directions trying new approaches etc.; and challenge because collaboration is essentially about human relationships and all relationships are complex. This also brings up concerns of power and hierarchy in relationships. As coteaching relationships are embedded in schools, there are structural/institutional forces bearing down on them that challenge/hinder their potential. As an example, coteaching is being PUSHED from the state/district/school level, with the expectation that ESOL Ts do more collabs every year.
How does this insititutional pressure affect coteaching relationships?
How can an explicit effort at critique and reflection (the T Inquiry Group) challenge and offset these constraints? LARGER IMPACT ON POLICY/DESING, ETC???
