(Week 7) Alternative ways of learning

The reading by Eisner (1997) provided a lot of information about alternative forms of representation which can be used to convey what we have learned about the educational world.   It also addressed their limitations. The first part of the article which caught my eye was the bottom of page five where he mentions that, "research does not belong to science alone".  I agree, especially when you consider qualitative research which has continued to grow in popularity especially at graduate levels of study.  In week 5, the article by Ulrich (2000) talked about bridging the divide between the "professional" and the "laymen" and I feel that part of this answer would be to consider other forms of representation whether it be stories, pictures, diagrams, drama or theater.  In one of the breakout sessions during this class, our group had a very interesting discussion about the power of art and of photography in relaying messages and/or information.  We talked about how the terminology used by academics in quantitative research is, by nature, very exclusive of the average person.  

This line of thinking also makes makes me reflect back on my post for Week 3 where Schon talked about the differences between the higher ground and the swamp and how academics are so far removed from the everyday issues/problems common people face in the world.  All this begs the question, "What is the best method to advance human understanding?".  In the field of education, we should be more open to alternative forms of representation such as "Action Research" which, in my option, supports the growth of ideas at the classroom level.  All too often we overlook the firsthand knowledge the teachers bring to the table based on authentic experiences for what is written in academic journals.  I agree with how  Eisner describes research as a way for people "to reduce what we have learned to text and number" and how we "often talk about knowledge as if it is consisted of measurable units".  This, unfortunately, often describes what information we widely accept and which we do not.