Thesis on family literacy with LEP adults and reflective journal keeping

Writing reflective journals while carrying out research is an effective part of data gathering. Currently in education, it is very common to have pedagogy students write in reflective journals as they put into practice what they are learning (McDuffie, 2001; Soltys, 1997; Krol, 1996; Dana, 1992). This practice should carry over with any solid teacher/researcher not only to monitor student or personal growth, but also to have a detailed record of classroom experiences. These records prove invaluable, especially when trying to share what was learned with other teachers and practitioners. Upon reviewing literature in the field of education, I found multitudes of articles that mentioned using reflective journals as one aspect of data collection, as well as a pedagogical practice for preservice teachers. Within the field of linguistics and language teaching, however, journals were mentioned much less, except in exercises with students in the classroom. Journal writing was also often used as a method of authentic assessment and self-evaluation on the part of the students. Nevertheless, with the exception of the thorough Summer 2001 issue of New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, journal writing on behalf of the teacher/researcher is not a practice commonly discussed in the literature specific to TESOL and ESL teachers.

Including reflective journals in the definition of “valid” research, however, is a current issue of debate within the Research Interest Section of the TESOL organization. In the December/January/February 2003 issue of TESOL Matters, senior lecturer in TESOL, Simon Borg, confronted this question in an article entitled “Research in the Lives of TESOL Professionals.” Borg specifically discusses this current argument between researchers and teachers, and the conflicting types of research they find valuable. He states that both parties need to gain a greater awareness of the other’s perspective concerning what is considered acceptable, qualified research. Concerning the definition of research Borg states the following:

It seems unhelpful that, within a professional teaching organization such as TESOL, the notion of research that is often asserted … is one that excludes the kinds of inquiries that are most relevant, feasible, and accessible to the majority of members…Data collection methods in TESOL … need to be defined more broadly to encompass not just those most commonly associated with research, such as questionnaires; a wide range of other possibilities exist, such as teachers’ reflective journals and classroom observations. (p. 5)

If teachers and researchers could come together in their perceptions of what is worthwhile, the expertise of both parties would be better put to use. Researchers who are proponents of quantitative data need to understand that through the use of journals, teachers can record their close interactions and observations from learners and better emphasize their roles as learners and researchers themselves.

In the same vein, there are additional innovative research methods that are slowly entering the field. Qualitative, naturalistic studies are currently gaining respect, in particular those that involve personal reflection.

In contrast to experimental and quantitative studies that manipulate factors in order to produce generalizations, naturalistic studies explore the meanings and interpretations teachers give to their everyday lives. As educational researchers recognize the complexity of teaching and of learning to teach, more and more studies are turning to such qualitative methods. (Colton & Sparks-Langer, 1991, p. 42)

For example, Simmons and Damico’s (2001) article entitled Intervention Outcomes: A Clinical Application of Qualitative Methods states in its abstract that the assessment methods used in this particular case study included ethnographic interviewing and journal writing. The abstract continues to claim that these “descriptive data provided a socially valid and consumer focused method of tracking outcomes” (p. 21). This article is one that admits to using journal writing as a valid source of data collection. When it comes to the value of recording this type of information, I enthusiastically echo Wrigley in her wish that

teachers could be enticed to document progress in a more systematic fashion, so that the magic that happens can be studied and evaluated. I wish there were an easy way to share with others in the literacy field the vast amount of knowledge that exists in the hearts and minds of teachers. (1995, p. 137)

Journal writing on behalf of the family literacy teacher benefits so many involved in the learning process: it benefits the teacher, the students, prospective teachers and practitioners for years to come—if they are allowed access to these journals.

Through repeated reference to teachers’ journals in the family literacy literature, reflective journal writing covertly takes a role as an authentic source of data collection. Paratore (2001), Handel (1999), and Taylor (1997) are three researchers who often included journal reflections from various teachers in their books. Some statements were transcribed from interviews; others were taken directly from teacher journals. Readers can literally see the reflection and learning occurring in these entries. One of the benefits of these entries is that they allow for dual learning. For example, as one reads Antonucci’s following journal excerpt, internal dialogue within the reader also acts as a teaching tool:

It’s on my mind so I must write it. We have three students here eager and willing to read. But it’s so disappointing that for so many reasons the other students can’t come… After a year and a half of working with parents, I have learned that despite the many absences that prevent them from attending the center and completing a planned lesson, their literacy learning continues as they work through the hundreds of problems and new situations they face each day. (1997, p. 187)

Not only do we learn from her experience, but we also find ourselves sorting through our past experiences to remember when we may have felt similarly. With a little more reflection, we also discover that we are subconsciously thinking of ways to prevent this from happening. Experiences and voices of benefit to many are documented permanently through accurate, consistent journal writing.

Among the many ideas she promotes in her writings, Auerbach also supports journal writing to collect data. Teachers participating in her training regarding participatory curriculum implementation wrote and talked about their practices on a regular basis, “using similar questions to describe and analyze what was happening in their classes” (1990, p. 90). This activity assists teachers to better process what they are experiencing, to monitor their own professional development, and to help them act upon what they are learning on a daily basis (McDuffie, 2001).

Especially useful are journal entries kept while trying to implement a new idea, or change a particular behavior. When starting small and gradually implementing new approaches, “it may be helpful to keep a journal in which you record issues as they come up, write observations, and evaluate new things you try” (Auerbach, 1990, p. 239). In these settings, keeping an accurate journal of insights, plans implemented, and questions for consideration is “critical to the success of an individual’s research” (Lewison, 1999, p. 526). I experienced this personally as I kept detailed journal entries of each day I spent with my students during project implementation. As I read and reread these entries, I found myself learning more about myself as a teacher, more about my students as people, and more about how to better implement a program amongst second language learners.

[Previous] | [Next]