Article
Author
In their introduction, Kannapel, Coe, Aagaard, and Reeves (1999) say, "this evolved more into a study of systemic reform in schools located in rural places than a study of rural schools per se'' (p. 5). This is an important distinction, invisible to many researchers. Unless one studies the context in which the school is embedded-and that context is rural-it can't be a study of rural education; it is a study of education taking place out in the country. There are three dangers in using an exclusively geographic definition for rural education: (a) researchers make causal inferences between behavior and geography that aren't supportable, (b) they miss asking more important questions, and (c) our understanding of the world is not increased.
Keywords:
How to Cite: Haas, T. (1999) “A Reply to Kannapel, Coe, Aagaard, and Reeves”, Journal of Research in Rural Education. 15(1).