FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2994436922> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2994436922 startingPage "6" @default.
• W2994436922 abstract "Educators frequently claim that the projects in which they are involved are democratic. However, considering the multiple and often conflicting notions of democracy and democratic education, are there any shared understandings of what either of those notions means? Does the claim that a project is democratic carry with it any shared assumptions, commitments, or obligations? In this response, I extend the conversation started by the authors of that article by proposing a critical democracy audit of their education project, and I offer a preliminary collection of questions, developed from recent literature on democratic education, that might be considered for use in such an audit. This article is a response to: C. Buxton, S. Kayumova, and M. AllexsahtSnider. (2013). Teacher, Researcher, and Accountability Discourses: Creating Space for Democratic Science Teaching Practices in Middle Schools. Democracy & Education, 21(2). Article 2. Available online at http://democracyeducationjournal.org/home/vol21/ Iss2/2. In this response to “Teacher, Researcher, and Accountability Discourses: Creating Space for Democratic Science Teaching Practices in Middle Schools” (Buxton, Kayumova, & AllexsahtSnider, 2013), I pose several sets of questions to interrogate the LISELL project the authors describe in their paper. The LISELL curriculum project claims a democratic goal— to increase ELL middle school students’ fluency in using scientific language and thereby promote their ultimate ability to participate in a democracy. However, in terms of democratic education practice, other aspects of the project are troubling. Reading “Teacher, Researcher and Accountability Discourses,” I was struck by elements of the authors’ curriculum project, professional development program, research report, and discourse analysis that seemed less than optimally democratic, especially with respect to the participation and representation of the middle school teachers involved. My critique’s theoretical framework is an extension of Dewey’s (1916/1966) vision of education for democracy, as articulated by Benson, Harkavy, and Puckett (2007) in Dewey’s Dream: Universities and Democracies in an Age of Education Reform. Within this extended vision, teachers— those who are called upon to educate youth for participation in a dynamic democratic society— enjoy abundant, authentic opportunities to participate as professionals, develop robust democratic skills, engage their students in democratic learning, and exercise agency and authority in their professional lives. This vision is aligned with views of teachers as curriculum designers rather than mere curriculum users (Connelly & Clandinin, 1992; Craig, 2009). It is supported by Kincheloe, who argued in 1991 (and again in 2003), that teachers should engage in qualitative research as a path to empowerment. My theoretical position is aligned with those who resist the controlling and deskilling of teachers in a neoliberal age (e.g., Apple, 1988). My critique is offered in the spirit of DarlingHammond’s summary of the new ideal: moving beyond a world in which those who think and plan are separated from those who teach and do the work; they are working to understand schooling, teaching, and change by engaging in the work as well as by studying it and by creating collaboratives for democratic work and action. (DarlingHammond, 1996, p. 15) I call my proposed questions a critical democracy audit, modeled after democratic audits that have been designed to assess Kathleen Greene is a professor and teacher educator in the Education and Youth Studies Department at Beloit College. She teaches a range of subjects, including science and math teaching methods, courses on higher education, and an introductory, foundations course, Education in a Democratic Society. She completed her doctoral work in science education at the University of Wisconsin– Madison." @default.
• W2994436922 created "2019-12-13" @default.
• W2994436922 creator A5091721838 @default.
• W2994436922 date "2013-01-01" @default.
• W2994436922 modified "2023-09-22" @default.
• W2994436922 title "Critical Democracy Audits--A Response to Teacher, Researcher, and Accountability Discourses: Creating Space for Democratic Science Teaching Practices in Middle Schools." @default.
• W2994436922 cites W1482304107 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W1502673353 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W1513088263 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W195948191 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W1963575775 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W2002958666 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W2014062063 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W2070736203 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W2107394059 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W2119131973 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W2167269746 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W224164727 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W250439537 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W2617955768 @default.
• W2994436922 cites W562316309 @default.
• W2994436922 hasPublicationYear "2013" @default.
• W2994436922 type Work @default.
• W2994436922 sameAs 2994436922 @default.
• W2994436922 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2994436922 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2994436922 hasAuthorship W2994436922A5091721838 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConcept C2776007630 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConcept C2780805685 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConcept C2781246837 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConcept C47177190 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConcept C555826173 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConceptScore W2994436922C144024400 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConceptScore W2994436922C17744445 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConceptScore W2994436922C19417346 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConceptScore W2994436922C199539241 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConceptScore W2994436922C2776007630 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConceptScore W2994436922C2780805685 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConceptScore W2994436922C2781246837 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConceptScore W2994436922C47177190 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConceptScore W2994436922C555826173 @default.
• W2994436922 hasConceptScore W2994436922C94625758 @default.
• W2994436922 hasIssue "2" @default.
• W2994436922 hasLocation W29944369221 @default.
• W2994436922 hasOpenAccess W2994436922 @default.
• W2994436922 hasPrimaryLocation W29944369221 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W1520317201 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W171808498 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W1945420283 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W1987079986 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2005492047 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2139994631 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2154015374 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W216343800 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2257828920 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2290977432 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2804306218 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2883169803 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2972464774 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2993407401 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2993957287 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W2994118363 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W309118154 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W463991432 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W58543610 @default.
• W2994436922 hasRelatedWork W657386678 @default.
• W2994436922 hasVolume "21" @default.
• W2994436922 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2994436922 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2994436922 magId "2994436922" @default.
• W2994436922 workType "article" @default.