立教大学

The ‘traditional’ empirical model in education (and, indeed, in many fields) sees researchers external to the research context drop by, collect data, and leave. It takes without giving anything directly back to the people who have offered (or been obliged) to participate. Practitioner research attempts to disrupt this ethically-vacuous approach, engaging teachers (and learners) in exploring educational processes and practices in their own contexts. As practitioner researchers, we aim to understand or improve the quality of classroom life for all in an educational group in conjunction with those in the group. We also strive as much as possible to deepen our understandings via tools of inquiry that do not burden research participants further in their already busy (educational) lives. Additionally, practitioner research has long been emphasized as an emic form of research. Rather than the ‘drive by’ attitude of external researchers who, by definition, can know next to nothing of the particularities of the educational context in question, practitioner research might help to obtain more nuanced understandings of additional language learning and teaching.

As its title implies, the Centre for Foreign Language Education and Research at Rikkyo University has as its mission the promotion of cutting-edge additional language education and research. Yet, in the day-to-day practice of language education, the potential for research often gets pushed to one side as we strive to do our best with what is right in front of us – our next class. This online symposium thus brought a carefully gathered group of scholars together with participants in educational settings from around the world. We sought to offer both experienced and emerging perspectives on the ethics and conduct of classroom practitioner research via short case studies, panel discussion, and question-and-answer.

It was anticipated that the symposium would lend momentum to those wishing to try implementing or further deepen their understandings of practitioner research. Thus, the following four panelists offered their own perspectives on the ethics and conduct of practitioner research. Below is a summary of each panelist’s contribution.

The first presentation was offered by Ema Ushioda, a Professor and Head of Applied Linguistics at the University of Warwick (UK), known for her work on motivation and autonomy in language learning. Ema raised the point that much classroom research in language education is conducted by ‘third-party’ researchers external to the classroom communities under focus. In contrast to such ‘third-party’ research, Ema argued that practitioner research is more likely to be shaped by the local needs and priorities of teachers working with particular groups of students. Thus, practitioner research has clear social value and meaning for the communities directly involved, and its outcomes and insights may also have wider resonance for other teachers and classrooms in similar contexts or facing similar issues. Nevertheless, Ema also raised some ethical complexities faced by those wishing to conduct practitioner research, such as balancing teaching and researching, and the associated identities and relationships.

The second presenter was Richard Pinner, an Associate Professor in the Department of English Literature at Sophia University (Japan), whose research focuses on the dynamic relationship between authenticity and motivation in language teaching and learning. During his short talk, Richard explained in practical terms what he does in his classes and how he makes research a part of regular teaching practice. He described his employment of an approach that utilises elements of autoethnography, exploratory practice and evidence-based reflective practice. Richard outlined some of the methods he utilizes in day-to-day classes and how data is generated as a natural by-product of the type of teaching he does. He finally commented briefly on why he feels such an approach is (more) ethical and why it can benefit his students and his own practice as both a teacher and a researcher. His stance that “teaching is research” was a key message.

The third presenter was Sal Consoli, an Assistant Professor in the Department of English and Communication at the Hong Kong Polytechnic University (PolyU), whose research focuses on the psychology of language learning and teaching with emphasis on learner motivation and engagement. Sal began by situating his presentation amidst an ongoing discussion of classroom research, pointedly raising the question, “For What and for Whom is Practitioner Research?” He drew on one of his past research projects (conducted in Argentina) to show that even teachers with no initial interest in research can indeed come to see the benefits of empirical work when relevant to their classroom realities. In the example study, a group of primary and secondary school student-teachers completing a teacher preparation programme engaged in several classroom research projects. Reflecting on the project, Sal noted that via their experiences with practitioner research the student-teachers came to feel part of a wider international community of practitioners, and developed a reflective attitude towards teaching.

The final presenter was Richard Sampson, an Associate Professor at Rikkyo University (Japan), whose research focuses on the social and dynamic emergence of L+ emotions and motivation from a complexity perspective. Richard’s short presentation provided an overview of specific action research. He used the study to exemplify the way in which action research might not only involve typical cycles but also diverge on different paths or ‘spirals’. Richard showed how his research split right from the very start into two such spirals, which evolved in parallel over a semester and involved different yet concurrent change-action. Via the spirals, Richard contended that he was able to work with his learners to deepen understandings about social motivation on different levels – at the societal level of absorbed messages about the L+, and at a more personal, classroom level through students’ actions. Richard also critically reflected on his research processes, noting the need for practitioner researchers to be sensitive to unexpected directions and outcomes of their actions.

※記事の内容は取材時点のものであり、最新の情報とは異なる場合があります。