Unit title Research Methods in Education Code ED50102 Spring/Summer 2006.

Tutor Jack Whitehead

UPDATE 12 June 2006

1) Aims

1a Examine critically the specific nature of research and enquiry in education, and its relationship to enquiry in other social science disciplines;

I am assuming that Catherine Snow was correct in her Presidential Address to AERA in 2001 when she wrote about the importance of learning how to make public our knowledge as professional educators and about the need to generate standards for the systemization of our personal professional knowledge and to connect our professional knowledge to bodies of knowledge established through other methods (for example through social science disciplines):

"The .... challenge is to enhance the value of personal knowledge and personal experience for practice. Good teachers possess a wealth of knowledge about teaching that cannot currently be drawn upon effectively in the preparation of novice teachers or in debates about practice. The challenge here is not to ignore or downplay this personal knowledge, but to elevate it. The knowledge resources of excellent teachers constitute a rich resource, but one that is largely untapped because we have no procedures for systematizing it. Systematizing would require procedures for accumulating such knowledge and making it public, for connecting it to bodies of knowledge established through other methods, and for vetting it for correctness and consistency. If we had agreed-upon procedures for transforming knowledge based on personal experiences of practice into 'public' knowledge, analogous to the way a researcher's private knowledge is made public through peer-review and publication, the advantages would be great (my emphasis). For one, such knowledge might help us avoid drawing far-reaching conclusions about instructional practices from experimental studies carried out in rarified settings. Such systematized knowledge would certainly enrich the research-based knowledge being increasingly introduced into teacher preparation programs. And having standards for the systematization of personal knowledge would provide a basis for rejecting personal anecdotes as a basis for either policy or practice." (p.9)

Snow, C. E. (2001) Knowing What We Know: Children, Teachers, Researchers. Presidential Address to AERA, 2001, in Seattle, in Educational Researcher, Vol. 30, No.7, pp.3-9.

1b Examine the theories and forms of explanation used in educational research; and the types of knowledge generated in educational research.

In responding to aims 1a and 1b I would like to be clear about different meanings of research in education, educational research and education research and with some of the problems of bringing together educational research that is concerned with generating explanations about educational influences in learning and research in education that is concerned with generating and testing theories in the philosophy, psychology, sociology, history, politics, economics leadership, management and theology of education.

One way of handling the distinction might be to use the terms 'education research' and 'educational research' more carefully. In this paper, I have so far used the broad term education research to characterise the whole field, but it may be that within that field we should reserve the term educational research for work that is consciously geared towards improving policy and practice..... One problem with this distinction between 'education research' as the broad term and 'educational research' as the narrower field of work specifically geared to the improvement of policy and practice is that it would mean that BERA, as the British Educational Research Association would have to change its name or be seen as only involved with the latter. So trying to make the distinction clearer would also involve BERA in a re-branding exercise which may not necessarily bet the best way of spending our time and resources. But it is at least worth considering. (Whitty, 2005)

Whitty, G. (2005) Education(al) research and education policy making: is conflict inevitable? Presidential Address to the British Educational Research Association, University of Glamorgan, 17 September 2005.

1c Address the major ways of designing and conducting research studies to address a range of issues and problems in education;

1d Consider the relationship between research, policy and practice in education;

2) Learning Outcomes

2a understand the relationship between different kinds of knowledge and forms of explanation in educational research;

I will focus on the idea of 'paradigm wars' discussed by Robert Donmoyer when he edited Educational Researcher and drew attention to very different interpretations of validity – do see if you understand Patti Lather's idea of 'ironic validity'. I also like the point below from Alasdair MacIntyre where he is

First the practical problem: Today there is as much variation among qualitative researchers as there is between qualitative and quantitatively orientated scholars. Anyone doubting this claim need only compare Miles and Huberman's (1994) relatively traditional conception of validity <'The meanings emerging from the data have to be tested for their plausibility, their sturdiness, their 'confirmability' – that is, their validity' (p.11)> with Lather's discussion of ironic validity:

"Contrary to dominant validity practices where the rhetorical nature of scientific claims is masked with methodological assurances, a strategy of ironic validity proliferates forms, recognizing that they are rhetorical and without foundation, postepistemic, lacking in epistemological support. The text is resituated as a representation of its 'failure to represent what it points toward by can never reach.... (Lather, 1994, p. 40-41)'." (Donmoyer, 1996 p.21.)

Donmoyer, R. (1996) Educational Research in an Era of Paradigm Proliferation: What's a Journal Editor to Do? Educational Researcher, Vol. 25, No.2, pp. 19-25

The rival claims to truth of contending traditions of enquiry depend for their vindication upon the adequacy and explanatory power of the histories which the resources of each of those traditions in conflict enable their adherents to write. (MacIntyre, 1988, p. 403)

MacIntyre, A. (1988) Whose Justice? Which Rationality? Duckworth; London.

2b how new knowledge in education is generated and the relationship between research and professional knowledge in education;

2c understand key concepts in educational research (e.g, objectivity, subjectivity, reflexivity) and how they inform research studies;

"The words 'objective' and 'subjective' are philosophical terms heavily burdened with a heritage of contradictory usages and of inclusive and interminable discussions.

My use of the terms 'objective' and 'subjective' is not unlike Kant/s. He uses the work 'objective' to indicate that scientific knowledge should be justifiable, independently of anybody's whim: 'If something is valid', he writes, 'for anybody in possession of his reason, then its grounds are objective and sufficient'.

Now I hold that scientific theories are never fully justifiable or verifiable, but that they are nevertheless testable. I shall therefore say that objectivity of scientific statements lies in the fact that they can be inter-subjectively tested. The word 'subjective' is applied by Kant to our feelings of conviction (of varying degrees)...... I have since generalized this formulation; for inter-subjective testing is merely a very important aspect of the more general idea of inter-subjective criticism, or in other words, of the idea of mutual rational control by critical discussion."(Popper, 1975, p.44)

Popper, K. (1975) The Logic of Scientific Discovery, London; Hutchinson & Co.

"Reflexivity requires an awareness of the researcher's contribution to the construction of meanings throughout the research process, and an acknowledgment of the impossibility of remaining 'outside of' one's subject matter while conducting research. Reflexivity then, urges us "to explore the ways in which a researcher's involvement with a particular study influences, acts upon and informs such research." (Nightingale and Cromby, 1999, p. 228).

"There are two types of reflexivity: personal reflexivity and epistemological reflexivity. 'Personal reflexivity' involves reflecting upon the ways in which our own values, experiences, interests, beliefs, political commitments, wider aims in life and social identities have shaped the research. It also involves thinking about how the research may have affected and possibly changed us, as people and as researchers. 'Epistemological reflexivity' requires us to engage with questions such as: How has the research question defined and limited what can be 'found?' How has the design of the study and the method of analysis 'constructed' the data and the findings? How could the research question have been investigated differently? To what extent would this have given rise to a different understanding of the phenomenon under investigation? Thus, epistemological reflexivity encourages us to reflect upon the assumptions (about the world, about knowledge) that we have made in the course of the research, and it helps us to think about the implications of such assumptions for the research and its findings." Carla Willig, (2001) Introducing Qualitative Research in Psychology (p. 10).

Retrieved on 30 May 2006 from www.psy.dmu.ac.uk/michael/qual_reflexivity.htm

2d be able to access, evaluate and review critically relevant research literature;

Do please access the three Elliot Eisner papers of 1988 on the primary of experience and the politics of method, of 1993 on forms of representation and the future of educational research and from 1997 on the problems and perils of alternative forms of data representation. His 2005 book on Reimagining Schools: The selected works of Elliot W. Eisner (London & New York, Routledge) contains these three papers. You can also access the three papers by following the e-journal instructions from http://www.jackwhitehead.com/monday/libraryejournals.htm

I will be using the distinction between educational research and education research in my critical evaluations of relevant research literature. I will be distinguishing educational research in terms of explanations of educational influences in learning and education research as the data gathering and theory generating and testing activities of education researchers.

2e be familiar with the major paradigms within which educational research is conducted; and understand how they relate to research in other social science disciplines;

Distinctions are often drawn between quantitative and qualitative research paradigms. In America the Federal Government is only funding quantitative research that conforms to controlled experimental designs. You could say that such research can be understood in terms of a quantitative research paradigm.

In my study of different kinds of data I have always found the following distinctions useful. They help me to critically evaluate research that gathers data on educational influences in learning that are nominal (you can categorise using a criteria of quality) or ordinal (you can categorise and order the data into a taxonomy to which parametric statistics can be applied) but applies an inappropriate statistical technique that requires ratio or interval data where you know the relationship between the intervals in the category system (parametric statistics).

Levels of Measurement see - http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/PA765/datalevl.htm

* Nominal data has no order, and the assignment of numbers to categories is purely arbitrary (ex., 1=East, 2=North, 3=South, etc.). Because of lack of order or equal intervals, one cannot perform arithmetic (+, -, /, *) or logical operations (>, <, =) on nominal data.

* Ordinal data has order, but the intervals between scale points may be uneven. Rank data are usually (see below) ordinal, as in students' rank in class. The interval distance from the top student to the second-highest student may be great, but the interval from the second-ranked student to the third-ranked may be very close. Because of lack of equal distances, arithmetic operations are impossible with ordinal data, which are restricted to logical operations (more than, less than, equal to). For instance, given a person of rank 50 and a person of rank 25 in a school class of 100, where rank 100 is highest achievement, one cannot divide 25 into 50 to conclude that the first person has twice the achievement of the second. However, one can say the first person represents more achievement than the second person.

* Interval data has order and equal intervals. Counts are interval, such as counts of income, years of education, or number of Democratic votes. Ratio data are interval data which also have a true zero point. Temperature is not ratio because zero degrees is not "no temperature," but income is ratio because zero dollars is truly "no income," For most statistical procedures the distinction between interval and ratio does not matter and it is common to use the term "interval" to refer to ratio data as well. Occasionally, however, the distinction between interval and ratio becomes important. With interval data, one can perform logical operations, add, and subtract, but one cannot multiply or divide. For instance, if a liquid is 40 degrees and we add 10 degrees, it will be 50 degrees. However, a liquid at 40 degrees does not have twice the temperature of a liquid at 20 degrees because 0 degrees does not represent "no temperature" -- to multiply or divide in this way we would have to be using the Kelvin temperature scale, with a true zero point (0 degrees Kelvin = -273.15 degrees Celsius). Fortunately, in social science the issue of "true zero" rarely arises, but researchers should be aware of the statistical issues involved.

2f identify appropriate topics for enquiry and formulate research questions;

Everyone has identified appropriate topics of enquiry and formulated appropriate research questions.

Look up the Teaching and Learning Research Project at http://www.tlrp.org/proj/index.html

Evaluate the topics in relation to the appropriateness of the research questions.

http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/research/

Scroll down the page and access the latest newsletter. Note the difference between research informed professional practice and research-based professional practice. Evaluate the content of the latest newsletter in terms of the appropriateness of the research questions.

2g be familiar with, and understand how to apply, a range of research strategies and designs appropriate to educational problems (e.g. survey,

experiments, case study, ethnographic approaches, biographical/narrative approaches).

see http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/qualapp.htm

2h understand ethical considerations, such as the connection between researcher and researched in educational settings;

Download the Ethical Guidelines of the British Educational Research Association from:

http://www.bera.ac.uk/publications/guides.php

Check that ethical approvals have been agreed with parents, pupils and headteacher before publication of your accounts.

3) Skills

3a Application of a critical understanding of issues in educational research by evaluating examples of published research (T/A).

3b Evaluating the claims of research and theoretical knowledge (T/F/A)

3c Problem analysis, research and critical reflection/evaluation (T/F/A)

3d Independent work and self-directed learning (F)

3e Group and team work (F)

3f Individual and group presentation skills (F)

3g Written communication (A)

3h Develop skill in communicating research to different audiences (T/F)

Check to see if you feel the need to enhance any of the above skills in the Tuesday evening sessions.

4) Content

4a Purposes for research in education.

Are you sufficiently confident for your satisfaction that you can articulate purposes for research in education?

4b Major forms and traditions of research in education and their methodological implications (e.g. research on educational policy; educational settings; pedagogy; pupil learning and achievement).

Are you sufficiently confident that you are aware of research in the philosophy, sociology, psychology, history, economics, politics, leadership, management, curriculum and theology of education with the methodological implications of carrying our research in these forms and fields of knowledge? Are you sufficiently confident that you can distinguish between research on educational policy; educational settings; pedagogy, pupil learning and achievement from spectator and living perspectives:

Existentialists such as Gabriel Marcel (cf. Keen, 1966) distinguish between "spectator" truth and "living" truth. The former is generated by disciplines (e.g., experimental science, psychology, sociology) which rationalise reality and impose on it a framework which helps them to understand it but at the expense of oversimplifying it. Such general explanations can be achieved only by standing back from and "spectating" the human condition from a distance, as it were, and by concentrating on generalities and ignoring particularities which do not fit the picture. Whilst such a process is very valuable, it is also very limited because it is one step removed from reality. The "living" "authentic" truth of a situation can be fully understood only from within the situation though the picture that emerges will never be as clear-cut as that provided by "spectator" truth."

Burke, A.(1992, p.222).

Burke, A.(1992) Teaching: Retrospect and Prospect. Footnote 6 on p. 222, OIDEAS, Vol. 39, pp. 5-254.

4c Critical literature review; and interpretation of research findings and claims to knowledge.

4d Key concepts in educational research (e.g. objectivity, subjectivity and reflexivity); their application in the conduct of a research study.

4e Identification of researchable problems in education and formulation of research questions.

Do just check that we have covered 4c-e in our sessions and in the resources above.

4f The logic of research designs and strategies on educational topics.

In relation to the logic of research designs and strategies on educational topics I want to make a clear distinction between propositional logic, dialectical logic and inclusional logic in educational enquiries.

I'd like to focus on Popper's rejection of dialectical logic – from the perspective of propositional logic -

In answering his question, 'What is Dialectic?', Popper (1963) rejects dialectical claims to knowledge as, 'without the slightest foundation. Indeed, they are based on nothing better than a loose and woolly way of speaking' (p.316)...... We see from this that if a theory contains a contradiction, then it entails everything, and therefore, indeed, nothing. A theory which adds to every information which it asserts also the negation of this information can give us no information at all. A theory which involves a contradiction is therefore entirely useless as a theory (Popper, 1963, p.317).

Popper, K. (1963) Conjectures and Refutations, Oxford: O.U.P.

And to consider the relationship between Popper's rejection of dialectical logic and Ilyenkov's embrace of dialectical logic with its nucleus of contradiction:

If any object exists as a living contradiction what must the thought (statement about the object) be that expresses it? Can and should an objective contradiction find reflection in thought? And if so, in what form? (Ilyenkov, 1977, p. 320)

Ilyenkov, E. (1977) Dialectical Logic, Moscow; Progress Publishers.

Both propositional and dialectical logics will be related, following Rayner (2006) to inclusional logics of enquiry which are grounded in a relationally dynamic awareness of space and boundaries that are connective, reflexive and co-creative.

(See Rayner, 2006) Essays and Talks About Inclusionality by Alan Rayner - http://www.bath.ac.uk/~bssadmr/inclusionality/ )