Abstract
In the lead chapter of the first Handbook of Research on Teaching published by the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Gage (1963) called for a paradigm of research that identified associations between characteristics of teaching and subsequent student learning. A rich body of research followed, and some 20 years later, Shulman (1986), in the third AERA Handbook, reported that research linking the processes of teaching to the outcomes of student learning was “the most vigorous and productive of the programs of research on teaching during the past decade” (Shulman, 1986, p. 9). At the same time, a growing postmodern critique of positivist and post-positivist research paradigms questioned the possibility of a cumulative science of teaching and learning.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Boellstorff T. Coming of age in Second Life: An anthropologist explores the virtually human. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2008.
Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
Gage N. Paradigms for research on teaching. In: Gage NL, editor. Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally; 1963. p. 94–141.
Gutiérrez K, Morales Z, Martinez D. Re-mediating literacy: Culture, difference, and learning for students from nondominant communities. Review of Research in Education. 2009;33:212–245.
Hamilton D, McWilliam E. Ex-centric voices that frame research on teaching. In: Richardson V, editor. Handbook of research on teaching. 4th ed. Washington DC: AERA; 2001. p. 17–46.
Holland, D., Lachicotte Jr., W., Skinner, D., & Cain, C. (1998/2001). Identity and agency in cultural worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Nuthall, G. (2001, April). Student experience and the learning process: Developing an evidence based theory of classroom learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, Washington.
Nuthall G. Relating classroom teaching to student learning: A critical analysis of why research has failed to bridge the theory-practice gap. Harvard Educational Review. 2004;74:273–306.
Reeves T. Design research from a technology perspective. In: van den Aaker J, Gravemeijer K, McKenney S, Nieveen N, editors. Educational design research. Oxford: Routledge; 2006.
Shulman L. Paradigms and research programs in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. In: Wittrock MC, editor. Handbook of research on teaching. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan; 1986. p. 3–36.
Sloane F. Normal and design studies in education: Why both are necessary. In: van den Aaker J, Gravemeijer K, McKenney S, Nieveen N, editors. Educational design research. Oxford: Routledge; 2006.
Walker D. Toward productive design studies. In: van den Aaker J, Gravemeijer K, McKenney S, Nieveen N, editors. Educational design research. Oxford: Routledge; 2006.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Sense Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Davis, A. (2012). Commentary. In: Kaur, B. (eds) Understanding Teaching and Learning. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-864-3_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-864-3_24
Publisher Name: SensePublishers, Rotterdam
Online ISBN: 978-94-6091-864-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)