Being Explicit about Modeling: A First Person Study in India by Rohit Boggarm Setty A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Educational Studies) in the University of Michigan 2013 Doctoral Committee: Professor Deborah Loewenberg Ball, Chair Professor David K. Cohen Professor Nita Kumar, Claremont-McKenna College Assistant Professor Matthew Stephen Ronfeldt “If your method reaches only the attentive student, then you must either invent new methods or call yourself a failure. ” - Reynolds Price, Feasting of the Heart © Rohit B. Setty 2013 Acknowledgements Writing a dissertation is a luxury in many ways. The process affords a student a chance to commit time and energy to think about one thing in a sustained focused manner over a long stretch of time. Although some readers may view this as a drawback, for me it was a source of joy. As a result of my indulgence, I likely imposed more on others than I should have. My family, friends, and colleagues have been unconditionally generous. To them, I express my gratitude here. Amanda, a remarkable teacher in her own right, has shared this entire journey with me. Our conversations about the teaching-learning interaction, and the children that sit at its heart, taught me a great deal. Questions that overwhelmed me were easy for her, and her perceptiveness helped me find my way. In my eyes, this is a joint production. Being able to share this dissertation with my best friend was a luxury. Writing a dissertation demands some clarity of thought, and the ability to express those thoughts to others. No keener interrogator exists than Shalini, who as an 8 year old distilled down what I was doing in more certain terms than I could at the time: “ So, you basically teach teachers about teaching. Why didn’t you just say that?” Gayatri took it upon herself to make me smile every day of this journey. She never failed. Her winsome exuberance is unparalleled, and she has been an anchor that grounds me in the joy of family. Both Shalini and Gayatri continue to be remarkable reminders for me about what it means to be confronted with the prospects of learning, accept the challenge, and thrive. To them both, I say thank you. To step back a bit in time, I thank my parents, to whom I owe my work ethic and determination. They gave me the freedom to explore the world on my terms, and the tools to achieve the tasks I set for myself. Their thoughtful guidance and support has meant a great deal to me. To my brother, Raj, I will always be grateful that you prodded me and challenged me to read more as a young child and watch TV less. Thank you. I turn now to my teachers, and the committee that guided this project. During the early years of my doctoral career, I was blessed to work with remarkable academics, who were superlative teachers, and I also received a great deal of support from the staff at the School of Education. I owe everyone in the building a debt of gratitude, but undeniably Donald Freeman, Pamela Moss, Mary Schleppegrell, Addison Stone, Magdalene Lampert, ii Kathleen Graves, Amita Chudgar, Joan McCoy, Mary Delano, and Bob Bain all helped me to make the strides I have taken in this dissertation. I also had the luxury of working with a committee that was dedicated to helping me succeed, and were the utmost professionals throughout our yearlong conversation. Each one of them pushed me to be better, and their suggestions and thoughtful guidance moved me well beyond the initial territory I laid out for this research. Deborah Loewenberg Ball, David K. Cohen, Nita Kumar, and Matthew Ronfeldt pressed me to find the currency of my ideas, but did so without asking me to surrender my own intellectual voice. All of their tenacious questioning caused me to pause over my own assumptions, which I feel is an invaluable necessity of social science research, but the flavor of it was always cordial, professional, and supportive. Their encouragement was remarkable. And, a special thank you to my colleague and friend Matthew Ronfeldt. You were a knight, your support immeasurable. I often said throughout this process that there was no better person to do a study of modeling with than Deborah Ball. As a model, and through our conversations, Deborah taught me about teaching, teacher education, modeling, mentoring, advising, managing organizations, writing clearly, speaking cleanly, listening, and putting family above all else. Deborah’s impeccable ability to discern and synthesize ideas, willingness to play with data, and commitment to my success was truly a luxury. I am humbled and honored to have worked with her, and I look forward to continuing the conversation. Many other friends supported me in this process. To Ander Erickson, Mandy Benedict-Chambers, Justin Dimmel, Tim Whittemore, Shweta Naik, Florencia Gomez, Kelly McMahon, and Michaela O’Neill I owe a great debt. Also, I thank the University of Michigan, the U.S. State Department and the USIEF, which administers the Fulbright grant, the National Council of Educational Research and Training, and the Regional Institute of Education in Mysore for their generous support. Finally, all of what I was able to accomplish in India is due to H. Kumaraswami, V.D. Bhat, Ms. Bindiya Somaiah, Audrey and Dolly, Vasudeva Murthy, and the teachers that worked with me during this study. Their candor, guidance, and facilitation was the linchpin for this work. It was an honor to work with them. iii Table of Contents Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................................ ii List of Tables .................................................................................................................................................. vii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... viii List of Boxes ..................................................................................................................................................... ix List of Appendices ........................................................................................................................................... x Abstract ............................................................................................................................................................. xi Chapter 1: Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 1 Fueled by beliefs, rather than systematic study ................................................................................... 3 Beliefs in Teacher Educator Modeling I: Common Faith in Learning from Sensory Experience . 4 Beliefs in Teacher Educator Modeling II: Uncomplicated Views of Teaching ...................................... 9 Beliefs in Teacher Educator Modeling III: Convictions Privileging Technique over Principled Practice ............................................................................................................................................................................. 13 Research Questions ..................................................................................................................................... 21 Prerequisites ................................................................................................................................................. 21 Why “Dialogic” Modeling? ......................................................................................................................................... 22 Why A First-person Study? ....................................................................................................................................... 23 Why India? ....................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Overview of Dissertation Chapters ........................................................................................................ 29 Chapter 2: Foundations in the Literature for the Work of Explicit Modeling in Teacher Education ............................................................................................................................. 32 Modeling .......................................................................................................................................................... 32 Modeling in Teacher Education .............................................................................................................................. 34 Explicit Modeling in Teacher Education ............................................................................................................. 36 Donald Schön’s Three Modeling Strategies ....................................................................................................... 38 Examples of Explicit Modeling Practices: “Thinking Aloud,” “Meta-Commentary,” and “Professional Critique” ............................................................................................................................... 43 “Self-conscious Narrative” .......................................................................................................................................