Analyzing the ideas of Dana and Yendol-Hoppey, I found that the authors are focused on the process of conducting the classroom research. The authors describe the current trends into education. Thus, they provide the stories of schools and the teachers methods of increasing of the results.
For Dana and Yendol-Hoppey, the teachers are the generators of the ideas about teaching and learning who should develop the new practices and approaches in order to provide more knowledge for students.
Although Dana and Yendol-Hoppey argue about the conducting inquiries that may help to involve the practitioners and make them being more active in shaping the direction of teaching as the profession, both authors emphasize a significant impact of the gathering as the key aspect of teaching as the complex discipline.
Dana and Yendol-Hoppey uses the term of “wondering” in order to indicate an importance of the passionate approach of the practitioners as the power that helps conducting the process of teaching.
According to the authors, the circumstances within the teaching practice require the process of conducting the classroom research by the use of one’s own knowledge, professional skills and experience. It is necessary to simplistically focus on the results according to the particular situation and agendas. The examples and exercises of the book demonstrate the process of inquiring into one’s teaching practice.
Both researchers emphasize a significant role of the collaboration and the gathering while conducting the research. As it is possible to notice that the process of teaching is the complex, the conducting of the research can be difficult task.
Therefore, it is important to use the collaborative resources and ideas. However, on the other hands, the authors indicate that the current educational system, its structure and organization provide a number of obstacles to gathering.
Although the present educational system drives to privilege the numerical assessments, it is important to legitimize non-numerical evidence. In this case, it is necessary to gather the ideas, skills and experience in order to prove the value of the non-numerical system as a possible alternative. Both the teachers and students should be interested in the practical result of the process of teaching and learning.
Teachers should try to involve students not only using the marks, but describing the value of the practical result. Only the understanding of the results can push students to be more active and concerned with getting more knowledge. At the same time, teachers should be also interested in their work, using the modern facilities and correcting their usual approaches according to the current demands within the educational system.
According to the view of academics Csikszentimihalyi, Feist and Eysenck, people always provide higher results when they work independently and can be free from interruption. In spite of Dana and Yendol-Hoppey, Csikszentimihalyi and Feist indicate that individuals are not conjoint by the human nature. Therefore, the statement to “always collaborate” is incorrect and controversial.
Eysenck also emphasizes the essential power of individual work and freedom of being involved to the common process of thinking. Although the psychologists are right taking about an importance of the independent thinking, such approach can be not adequate while investigating the process of teaching and learning. There can be the circumstances when it is better to work alone, focusing on the task.
However, most of the students demonstrate better results working in the teams or within their classroom. At the same time, the approach of gathering is absolutely helpful within the process of developing the most useful and appropriate programs, developing the new ideas or searching the perspectives.