F2F interviews: often produce richer content than email of telephone (not sure, feel like it could be biased and/or lead to the interviewee to be less honest?)
Leading epistemological and ontological perspectives: unstructured vs structured then positivism, emotionalism and consructionism.
Neo-positivism: ‘facts about beahviours/practices/attitudes/values etc. Establish a context-free truth, interview as a pipeline for transmitting knowledge.
A possible way of checking for consistency: repeat interviews (a counterargument is offered below…). Allows the participants to reflect on interviews, and then develop their response.
Romantic researcher: establishing a rapport between the subject and the interviewer.
Story telling is more likely to reflect real life
Researcher might reject old opinions about not getting involved, because it might produce a more honest and compassionate interview methods.
Active interviewing:
Interview subject moves from a repository of knowledge to a productive source of knowledge – the subject must be stimulated. The interviewer must lead them in an intellectual way to prompt a deeper level of reflection.
Subjects and interviewer collaborate on knowledge development and production of meaning.
A good interview follows feminist values i.e. minimising the power of the interviewer. A feminist uses informed consent forms and collects people randomly.
Warm interviewing does not guarantee authentic responses – can be led by the idiosyncratic nature of the interview.
Repeat interviews: don’t always guarantee better information, the variation of account may be due to the subject’s inclination to not repeat themselves.
Romantic interview benefit: they may produce more varied information, which means richer points of reflection for the interviewer. Not necessarily ‘better’ information.
Localism: include ethnomethodology – conversation and discourse analysis. Emphasising the accumulation of knowledge, a clear writing style and the possibility of generalisation.
Major issue: narrow research, a myopic interest in details of the interview situation, no more than talk informed by cultural norms. May not gain subjective reality.
Critique of emotionalism and romanticism: not always relevant for addressing less personally sensitive issues.
Understanding how the meaning-making process takes place is as critical as apprehending what is being conveyed.
Jorgenson (1991) – in investigating how people see themselves in family. Rather than asking the researchers for information on how family is defined, she asked the interview subjects to define and explore family. This became a much richer source of information (and could be helpful for students i.e. how do you define mattering). But difficult to know if the subjects are responding to the positionality of the researcher and responding appropriately.
In dialogicinterviews: it may be that you end up leading the conversation i.e. the example of the grade received at primary school (p.14), the interview asked the student to expand on the dissonance they experienced as a result of this. This may have led the interview into a specific direction. The fact that it was historic might mean that they were more likely to be influenced and led by the interviewer. It may also be that the interviewer had a negative opinion of grades, so lead the direction of the feedback. Interviews are complex.
Framing questions takes real skill! It is not easy.
Fundamentally, interviews rely on the interviewee wanting to state their experiences and knowledge for the benefits of the interview and the research project (p.16)
Difficult to express knowledge in words: a lot of knowledge. People know a lot but are often unable to articulate it well (and to a stranger!!). (p.16)
In interviews with managers: they often communicate a much more impressive and competent management approach to what exists in reality (!) this is often a reflection of management training they have been on, and ‘knowing what to say’. People may be smarter in using words, rather than in practice. Often the practice is talk. (p.17)
Experience freedom with justice: read beyond my guide to get other perspectives.
A form of self-reflective practice.
Systematic investigation into your own behaviour.
Does not begin with a fixed hypothesis (!) check what type of methodology that is.
Identifying a problematic issue, imagining a solution, trying it out, evaluating it, and changing practice based on evaluation. Basic problem solving process, but turn it into ARP you need to rationalise why the work is needed (including data – with evidence).
We already have a lot of professional knowledge, and we know how to uncover new knowledge, this just provides the scaffolding to do so.
Aiming to influence your colleagues for the better.
You must evaluate your situation – are you really improving the situation? Need to consider a suitable metric for measuring this.
ARP is a means of celebrating our development.
We review current practice
Identify an aspect we want to investigate
Imagine a way forward
Try it out
Take stock of what happened
Modify what we are doing
Monitor
Review and evaluate modified actions
And repeat
Practice is non-linear, people are unpredictable.
Action research can help us make sense of our lives, arguably we can look beyond the surface structure of method.
There are no overarching rules of values for us to abide by – that can make things more challenging.
Not unusual for value systems to be in conflict (that’s a perfect connection to me!). ARP is driven by values.
The action plan that is most popular is Jack Whiteheads: ask critical questions about your own practice and find out answers for yourself. Only you can say what is right for you and your situation, the process of using questions is as useful as finding answers.
Jumping off prompts:
What issue am I interested in research?
Why do I want to research this issue?
What kind of evidence can I gather to show why I am interested in this issue?
What can I do? What will I do?
What kind of evidence can I gather to show that I am having an influence.
How can I explain that influence?
How can I ensure that any judgements I might make are reasonably fair and accurate?
How will I change my practice in the light of my evaluation?
Must provide evidence that you have improved practice if you claim that.
Identifying the conditions that cause the issue and then examine how you can change the conditions. Be practical and ask if I can actually do something about the situation. If it is outside of your scope, be realistic and leave it. So, aim to address one small aspect of your work.
Formulate the question as ‘How do I’:
I am asking a real question about something that is important to me, and I am hoping to find ways of engaging with it;
I am a real person;
I am trying to improve something; this might be my own understanding, or it might be an aspect of the social situation I am in (remember: improvement does not mean perfection. Any improvement is still improvement, no matter how small).
‘We are not aiming for end products’: it is unlikely that we will ever get to a situation where our work and situations are entirely congruent with our lives. But we are not aiming for ‘end products’; we are aiming to find right ways of living.’ LOVE THIS.
Aim to gather as much data as you feel are right – people often gather too much to begin with.
Important to consider a ‘validation group’ – invite to look at your work from time to time, to offer feedback. This is drawn from your professional circle, and are 4-10 people. Scrutinise your data and listen to your progress reports. They can offer critical feedback.
How do you explain your educative influence – how can you show that your influence was as you wished it to be. You need to know how they perceive their relationship with you. Remember you are not trying to show cause and effect, but it should be changes took place as you changed your practice, particularly in myself, and my relationships evolved.
‘The word ‘prove’ does not exist in ARP, but you can provide reasonable evidence […] you need other people to critically validate your claim.’
Perhaps in addressing one issue, you will uncover a new issue. There is no end – it resists closure. Each ending is a new beginning. You are thinking and searching all the time, you are never complacent.
Criteria are set in the values that inform practice. Make your criteria clear so that you are able to demonstrate that your research is evidence-based. For example:
Do you show that you are trying to live in terms of what you believe in?
Do you show that you can hold yourself accountable for your claims to knowledge?
Do you show how you have changed your own thinking and practice, and how this has possibly influences others educationally.
Learning is a lifelong process which is as natural as breathing.
Check your perceptions against others perceptions of you – it is a negotiation. Therefore it moves from i-enquiry to we-enquiry.
Case study as a research method:
Need to demonstrate how we are practicing what we preach.
‘[…] students who do not feel like they belong rarely stay in college. In fact, students ‘who do not have a sense of belonging complain that their college experience is like ‘stopping by the mall’ to get what they need on the way to somewhere else’ (Jacoby & Garland, 2004-2005, p.65)
Strayhorn’s definition of belonging: ‘In terms of college, sense of belonging refers to students’ perceived social support on campus, a feeling or sensation of connectedness, and the experience of mattering of feeling cared about, accepted, respected, valued by, and important to the campus community or others on campus such as faculty, staff, and peers.’ (p. 24)
‘[…] in essense, sense of belonging is a ‘feeling that members matter to one another and to the group, and a shared faith that members’ needs will be met through their commitment to be together’ (McMillan and Chavi, 1986, p.9) (Question: Do you think college students today feel like their institutions need them to exist and vice versa?)’ (p.24)
On the objective importance of ‘belonging’: ‘People will change their style of dress, buy a new car, build a brand-new home, change academic majors, join a fraternity or sorority […], cut their hair or dye their hair blue to gain acceptance, to experience community, or to feel a sense of belonging.’ (p.29).
Strayhorn, T.L. (2020) Belonging in Online Learning Environments [online]. Interrogating Spaces Podcast. [Viewed 15 April 2021]. Available from: https://interrogatingspaces.buzzsprout.com/683798/4795271-belonging-inonline-learning-environments
Available at: http://journals.staffs.ac.uk/index.php/ipihe/article/view/224/352 (Accessed: 17 August 2022)
Paper considers how to foster belonging in response to Covid-19 and global calls for racial justice
Recommendations are ‘myth-busting belonging’ to consider the implications for educators in planning and delivering the curriculum, putting UAL implementing equitable policies and practices as central.
One of the three AEM strands is: Fostering Belonging and Compassionate Pedagogy.
what does this mean and is this globally recognised amongst all organisational stakeholders?
‘We (Hill and Bunting: Educational Developers) define belonging as a social and relational construct rooted in human connection.’ (p.2)
On methodology: ‘we draw together, and critically reflect upon, the experiences of thirteen course teams across the six UAL Colleges […] we reflect upon our conversations with academics and technicians and their experiences of fostering student’s sense of belonging during the past year of online and blended teaching in response to the pandemic. We have facilitated 23 synchronous workshops around the themes of ‘Belonging online’, ‘Debiasing’, ‘Microaffirmations’ and ‘Courageous conversations’ (Hill et al., 2020) and have curated a range of multi-media resources, including our own series of podcasts, that are provided for staff to engage with asynchronously. We follow a constructive change approch (Lueddeke, 1999) and support course teams to reflect on teaching interactions […] in relation to bias, racism, oppression and silencing (Mountford-Zimdars et al. 2015; NUS/UUK, 2019).
‘several sources indicate that issues of belonging persist at UAL particularly for students of colour. Comments and experiences captured within the nSS/USS open comments, @UALTruths, Decolonising the Arts Curriculum Zine, UAL Creative Mindsets and UAL Student voices, all speak to student feelings of isolation, loneliness, not ‘fitting in’, being an outsider, and being stereotyped’ (pp.3-4).
‘In UK HE, belonging became a prominent topic following the publication of Liz Thomas’ (2012) HEFCE funded ‘What Works? Student Retention and Success Programme’ report. The report found that feelings of isolation and not ‘fitting in’ (i.e. unbelonging) were the most common reasons for students to consider withdrawal from undergraduate study.’ (p.4)
This research uses a psychological stance on defining belonging:
‘students’ feelings of being valued, respected, supported, included, and that they matter by teachers and peers, so that they feel part of the university learning community’ (Hill et al., 2020, p.4) […] a transitory concept that can be lost and found […] is at higher risk during moments of vulnerability and change. As belonging exists at difference levels within HE, such as class, university, and course – it is possible to feel both belonging and unbelonging simultaneously.’ (p.5)
‘As Vanessa May states (2013, p.154) ‘who can achieve belonging and where is always tied to issues of power and inequality [within society].’ Due to the intersections of identities no student will experience belonging in the same way (Cureton and Gravestock, 2019_. Belonging is an inherently individual experience (Riley, 2018) and, as there is not a ‘one-size fits all’ intervention to create a sense of belonging (sic).’ (p.5)
Their podcasts had the following features, and they provide their rationales for these as follows:
‘Dialogic: […] to align problem-posing education with the quest for social justice’ (p.8)
‘Asynchronous: […] synchronous learning is biased’ as it ignores difference in time zones, can be culturally unaware, is problematic for those with families, is elitist when involving auto-visuals and relies on linguistic capital (Bali and Meier, 2013)’ (p.8).
‘Affective: […] acknowledge that the act of embodied listening provoked an affective response from voice, accent, tone, timbre, atmosphere and that this opened space to further reflect on values of compassion and empathy’ (p.9).
‘Addressing epistemic and procedural needs: […] revealing tension between ‘how do I do this?’ and ‘why am I doing this?’ […] the relationship between the ‘procedures and lived realities’ (p.9).
Myth-busing on belonging:
‘The unexamined importance of the academic role in fostering belonging by proactively connecting with students was found to be overwhelming by some staff as they realised that the ‘onus is on me’ […] preexisting concerns about boundaries and becoming ‘friendly’ with students are exacerbated by the hyper-availability of being in the online context due to the pandemic’ (p. 11).
‘Connected to a focus on building peer relationships, is a problematic emphasis on arranging extra-curricular social activities’ (p.11).
‘ […] students are ‘incorporated’ into academic communities. This projects an opinion onto students of what it means to belong at university and can result in pressure being placed on students to ‘fit in’ (Strayhorn, 2019) and gain cultural caputal (Bourdieu, 1977) by confirming to pre-existing norms of the global North’ (p.13).
‘The idea of education as a form of healing’ (p.13)
‘The need to design spaces and frameworks to encourage students to build listening skills were seen as key factors in creating compassionate, anti-racist learning environments and discussed Gilbert’s micro-skills on compassion as an example (Gilbert, 2016)’ (p.14).
On limitations to belonging: ‘to create a culture of belonging, the institution needs to take responsibility in designing policies and infrastructure that can engender it (Thomas 2012).
Conclusion:
‘The importance of ongoing reflexivity at an institutional level to challenge myths and normative assumptions around fostering belonging cannot be underestimated […] support and commitment from snr leadership to develop compassionate policies and practices for staff is essential to effect structure and cultural change […] and we encourage the use of creative arts-based methods for educational development to remind each other that listening is a force for change (Rogers, 1980)’ (pp.17-18).
OK, so I think there’s a lot of scope here. For one, as a relative layman to the discipline, I don’t feel like I have learnt anything new today. I also feel like there’s suggestions towards how belonging can be fostered, but not a way of suggesting how one might monitor it?? Obviously it should be proactive, but there were only quite wooly recommendations around how these could be implemented. Furthermore, this was during the time of majority online-delivery, we’re in a different space now. We’re perhaps dealing with students whose very framework for ‘belonging’ has shifted.
‘It involves you thinking carefully about what you are doing, so it becomes critical self-reflective practice.’ (p.23)
I hadn’t realised it was reflective – can check with course team.
‘[…] there is no such thing as ‘action research’. It is a form of words that refers to people becoming aware of and making public their processes of learning with others, and explaining how this informs their practices.’ (p.24)
‘[The] idea of showing how you are trying to live your values in your practice is at the heart of debates about demonstrating and judging quality and validity in action research. It includes issues relating to:
IDing and articulating your values, i.e. what gives meaning to your life and practices;
Whether you really are living and practising in the direction of your values, and how you test the validity of what you are saying when you claim that you are;
how you justify those values as their emerge in your practice; this involves interrogating your values and seeing whether they are the right ones for you and your situation; as well as whether your values are shared by others in, say, culturally diverse settings;
how you judge quality of practice and research in relation to whether you have helped yourself and other people to come to think for yourselves and develop critical perspectives on what you are doing and saying.’ (p. 26)
OK so this is where the reflective element is going to come in. It would be helpful to think about methods whereby I can analyse that without being biased.
Key terms:
ONTOLOGY: the way we view ourselves, ‘who do I think I am?’ Influences how I position myself in the research. What do I believe in?
EPISTEMOLOGY: ‘what do I know and how do I come to know it?’ How will I form knowledge?
METHODOLOGY: how I do this research
SOCIO-POLITICAL INTENT: my research needs to be understood in relation to what you intend to do and how you intend to do it. (paraphrased from p.27)
‘Ontological issues: […] action researchers accept the responsibility of ensuring that their own lives are in order before they make judgements about other people’s. This means honestly critiquing their practice, recognising what is good and building on strengths, as well as understand what needs attention and taking action to improve it’ (p.28).
‘We can adopt an outsider or an insider perspective, or various points in between. Researcher positionality is a major consideration in deciding which approach to take.’ (p.28)
‘We can move action research from its currently dominant surface-level focus on methods and practices to the deeper levels of moral accountability, so that we can explain why we do what we do’ (p. 37)
I think this is a really nice sentiment to include in my writing.
‘Education research, including action research; is always socially, culturally, historically and politically situated, undertaken by a real person or persons, within a particular context, for a particular purpose […] ‘when speaking about educational research in general, and action research in particular, it is important to remember that the conversation is being conducted in a cultural, historical and socio-political context.’ (pp. 38-39)
This is super important to think about when searching for the right methodology:
‘Typologies of knowledge: There are different kinds of knowledge and different ways of coming to know (i.e. different epistemologies) […] Which ones you choose depend on your positionality, reflecting your attitudes to and relationships with others.
Forms of knowledge: […]
Propositional knowledge refers to knowledge about facts and figures. Knowledge exists ‘out there’ external to a research, whose job is to discover it and pass it on to others who may use it and perhaps exchange it for other goods […];
Procedural knowledge refers to procedures, skills and technical capabilities. ‘Know how’ is not a fixed body of knowledge external to ourselves but involves practical procedural knowledge. ‘I know how to do this’ refers to actions in the world, and the claim to knowledge can be tested by demonstrating, for example, that you can mathematics or ride a bike.
Personal knowledge, also called tacit knowledge refers to a subjective, intuitive way of knowing that cannot be rationalised. Often we cannot articulate what we know, we ‘just know’ […] refers to the latent knowledge […] researchers always need to link their ways of knowing with the capacity to reflect on what they are doing and why they are doing it.
Propositional knowledge […] refer to abstract, analytical ways of thinking and knowing […] we view reality and knowledge as objects external to ourseles; we study them and make proposals about how they work, and why they work as they do […] when we think and express our knowledge in propositional ways, we make positive statements about the way we think about things (example from <https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-analysis/#:~:text=By%20%E2%80%9Cpropositional%20knowledge%E2%80%9D%2C%20we,obtains%20when%20Susan%20knows%20Alyssa. ‘by “propositional knowledge”, we mean knowledge of a proposition – for example, if Susan knows that Alyssa is a musician, she has knowledge of the proposition that Alyssa is a musician. Propositional knowledge should be distinguished from knowledge of “acquaintance”, as obtains when Susan knows Alyssa.”>
Dialectical forms of logic: refer to the capacity to accept and incorporate contradiction. We view reality as something we are part of, not separate from. Knowing becomes a process of creating new forms out of previous ones, a process of becoming, of coming into being. It works on the principle of question and answer, where one answer generates a new question, so nothing is ever complete or final […]
Relational forms of logic: […] fluid forms of thinking when we recognise ourselves as in relation with our contexts, including the people and objects we are with […] it is also part of many so-called indigenous ways of knowing (Thayer-Bacon 2003)
Dialogic forms of logic: […] we are always in relation with other people […] this way of thinking is important for developing communities of practice […] where you enter into and ‘dwell in’ the spirit of the community.’ (pp.40-42)
Important in considering the types of knowledge that respondents will produce to survey including students and staff. Personal knowledge is interesting – I think personal knowledge is important for this i.e. you don’t have to know how and why you feel that you do not belong, the feeling of not belonging is important for the data.
Typology of human interests:
‘Habermas (1972, 1987), a major theorist in social science, rejected the view that knowledge generation is a neutral activity carried out by an external ‘mind’ somewhere, resulting in the production of ‘pure’ knowledge. Instead, he suggested that knowledge is an activity undertaken by a real person who is driven by particular desires and interests. From this perspective, knowledge is always constituted of human interests. Habermas categories personal-social practices as three broad sets of interests: the technical, the practical and the emancipatory.’ (p. 44)
This is really interesting as it suggests to me that all knowledge is intrinsically biased – I want to research belonging because I felt like I didn’t belong at university. Do I want to find out that students also don’t feel a sense of belonging, because the subconscious motivation of my research is to find community? I don’t know, it makes me think I’ve got to be really rigorous with my decision on a methodology.
Critical implications for action research (this is so interesting!):
‘Many contexts in which action research approaches are used […] draw on the idea of empirical research (where conclusions and decisions are based on valid data or evidence), so action research is (mistakenly) placed in the social sciences. This may be because the traditional model for managing learning (usually other people’s learning) continues to be a mode of instruction. People are expected to receive information and apply it to their work. The locus (focus/concentration) of power is in the external researcher or provider who gathers data about the situation and theorises what is happening in the situation. People then become data to be manipulated and spoken about. Boundaries are established in terms of what can and cannot be done. The collegial and humanitarian values base of human living is systematically factored out, to be replaced by values of self-interest, power and control. Participants are discouraged from acting as agents, and are instead required to become skilled technicians whose job is to apply received knowledge generated by so-called ‘experts’.’ (pp.46-47).
I absolutely love this critical implication for ARP!! It brings in the need to decentralise the power away from me as a researcher and instead strive for a participatory design model (for both research and solutions). This will also negate the risk of me struggling with any unconscious.
Interpretive research (sometimes called interpretative research):
‘In empirical research, participants act as data whose personal involvement is factored out; any personal intervention would contaminate and potentially skew the results. Interpretative approaches, however, acknowledge the contributions of practitioners as real-life participants in the research […] the question always remains, however – who generates the theory and therefore who owns the research?’ (p.47)
‘This interpretative view of the research process and the positioning of the researcher and research participants is potentially little different from that of traditional empirical research. The same power relationships exist in terms of who is regarded as a legitimate knower, whose practice is to be studied, and whose knowledge counts.'(pp.48-49)
Interesting to think that I’m still in a position of power because I’m asking them, I’m studying ‘them’. It seems almost unavoidable?
Critical-theoretical approaches:
My own summary: this approach criticises other methodologies use in social scientific enquiry as they failed to recognise the ‘historical, cultural and social situatedness of researchers. People could not comment on their experience unless they understood how that experience was shaped by their own situatedness. They could not be free until they realised they were unfree […] a new approach […] enabled peple to become aware of the historical and cultural forces that had influenced them and their situations. Peple needed to appreciate the power-constituted nature of their lives, and learn how to challenge. This view came to stand as an ideology critique that enabled people to find ways to recreate their personal and social realities.’ (p.49) Exactly this!!
Critical implications of critical theoretical approaches: ‘The aim of critical theory is to critique, not to initiate or manage change. While critical theorists appear to support action, they tend to remain at the level of rhetoric, their theorising is limited to propositional statements rather than being embodied in their own practices as they engage with changing social processes. This is the main limitation of critical theory as a theory for social renewal. It stays in the abstract linguistic level of description and propositional explanations [critical theory has amazing powers for social renewal, provided critical theorists themselves take the all-important step of showing how their theories work. This would mean transforming abstract theories into concrete action plans, acting in the direction of those plans, and producing accounts of practice to show how they were able to work towards social transformation’ (p.50) A LOT OF FOOD FOR THOUGHT, HERE.
‘I like the idea expressed in the old Irish saying, ‘We live in the shelter of one another’, similar to the African idea of ‘ubuntu’ (I find myself in you). To check that our practices are as we wish them to be, and make claims that we understand and do things better, we have to provide evidence to show how and why things have changed because of our influence. The process of research becomes the practice, and because the process is one of learning, evaluating and acting, it therefore stands as a form of research. The boundaries are dissolved: knowledge, interests and practices are within a life.’ (p.51) There are a lot of blurred lines (gross) with Action Research, I think I have to relax a bit about how to structure it like any other research project.
Key theorists in action research:
Need to think deeply about my ontological and epistemological stance: ‘[…] do you see yourself as thinking free, seeing the possibilities in everything, and willing to find out what others say and do, so you can learn with and from them? Which literatures do you draw on to develop your understandings? You need to think for yourself, because powerful voices mandate what action research is and is not; and we learn to believe those voices, and opt for one form or another, without considering that there may be more authentic and credible voices to listen to. ‘(p.55)
I suspect my ontological perspective puts values on my ability to espouse the knowledge of others and synthesise my experiences with theirs. However, I believe I have to let this go and exist in the uncomfortable space where I truly lean into the unknowingness of the project.
‘Reason and Bradbury […] suggest that accounts may be seen as first-person, second-person and third-person action research, as follows:
First-person action research occurs when an individual practitioner reflects on their personal practice and offers an account of what they are doing and thinking.
Second-person action research is when people enquire with others about how they can address issues of personal concern.
Third-person action research aims to connect individual researchers with wider communities, whether face to face or virtually at a distance (see Reason and Bradbury, 2008, p.6)
Even though I don’t want to fit within the paradigms of others too much, I think this is a helpful way of eventually understanding what my project is doing!
(p.57)
From the case study on p.68:
‘I initiated dialogue with the staff: dialogue takes a group beyond any single individual’s understanding, and requires everyone to interrogate their assumptions and regard one another as colleagues. I also learned to change public perception of myself as ‘the man with the answer’, to encourage mental models to be modified and disagreements to be bridged (although not always resolved).’ (p.68 – Eric Deakins, New Zealand).
What we need to know to use our knowledge for personal, social and environmental betterment, how action research can help in the process, and the kind of mindset necessary
‘[…] the values as well as the knowledge they inspire need to be under constant critical review. What action research stands for is the realisation of human needs towards autonomy, loving relationships and productive knowledge, as well as the urge towards freedom of thinking and choice, creativity and self-realisation.’ (p.72)
Extract from p.77 case study: ‘I am being accountable because I am engaging in action research and offering it up for the critique of my peers. The two are becoming one and the same educational process.’ (Case study: Jane Renowden, UK, 2012)
How do we do action research? Planning and doing a project
this is helpful:
‘General principles in planning:
We review our current practice;
identify an aspect we wish to investigate;
ask focused questions about how we can investigate it;
imagine a way forwards;
try it out, and take stock of what happens;
modify our plan in light of what we have found, and continue with the action;
evaluate the modified action;
and reconsider what we are doing in light of the evaluation. This can then lead to
a new action-reflection cycle…’ (p.90)
‘Whitehead (1989) […] proposes that you begin with your enquiry by identifying a situation where your values are denied in your practice: you may believe in social democracy but you do not always give people an opportunity to state their point of view for example […] then transform into a coherent action plan as follows:
What do I need to investigate?
How do I wish to investigate it?
How do I show and describe the current situation as it is?
What do I think I can do about it? What will I do about it?
How do I show and explain the situation as it develops?
How will I ensure that any conclusions I draw are reasonably fair and accurate, by inviting the critical responses of others and myself?
How do I communicate the sigificance of what I am doing?
How will I modify my practices and thinking in light of the evaluation?’ (p.91)
(Could only access the abstract so here is the briefest notes…)
‘Conceptually, the review reflects a social cognitive perspetive on motivation. This theoretical framework maintains that individuals have psychological needs, that satsifaction of these needs affectsperception and behaviour, and that characteristics of the social context influence how well these needs are met. The concern here is how schools, as social organisations, address what is defined as a basic psychological need, the need to experience belongingness. The findings suggest that students’ experience of acceptance influences multiple dimensions of their benhaviour but that schools adopt organisational practices that neglect and may actually undermine students’ experience of membership in a supportive community.’
Key points of reflection from this article is how belongingness is necessary for good mental health, which has a holistically positive impact on the student experience and continuation and retention. the third level of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is love and belonging needs. Humans are social creatures that crave interaction with others. This level of the hierarchy outlines the need for friendship, intimacy, family, and love. humans have the need to give and receive love, to feel like they belong in a group.
Tinto. V. (2008) ‘Access Without Support Is Not Opportunity’, Inside Higher Ed. Available at: https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/06/09/access-without-support-not-opportunity (Accessed: 16th August 2022)
‘Basical skills learning communities proved to be particularly effective when the faculty and staff changed the way they taught the courses. Rather than rely on lecture and drill, they employed pedagogies of engagement such as cooperative learning and problem-based learning. As a result, students not only learned the material of the courses in a connected manner, they also learned that material together. As one student told us, ‘we learn better together’ […] ‘It has benefited me because I have gotten to know people. I am not alone anymore. It has helped me feel more comfortable, more confident. The more confident I feel, the better I do.”
Importance of creating communities as part of access in HE.
‘Can you imagine what changes we might achieve if we were all willing to use evidence to reconsider our own practices and together think differently about what we do.’
Love this so much, think it could be a nice opener quote.
‘The fact is that many colleges speak of the importance of increasingly the retention of low-income students and sometimes invest considerable resources to that end. But for all that effort most institutions do not take the student success seriously […] they adopt what parker calls the ‘add a course’ strategy in addressing the issues that face them […] Need to address the issue of student retention, in particular that of new students? Add a course, such as a Freshman Seminar, but do little to reshape the prevailing educational experiences of students during the first year […] the result is that efforts to enhance student retention are increasingly segmented into disconnected parts that are located at the margins of institutional academic life. Therefore while it is true that there are more than a few retention programs on our campuses, most institutions have done little to change the nature of college life, little to alter the prevailing character of student educational experience, and therefore little to address the deeper roots of student attrition. to be serious about the success of academically underprepared students, institutions would recognise that the roots of their attrition lie not only in student backgrounds and the academic skills they bring to campus, but in the very character of the educational settings in which students are asked to learn…’
Just stresses the importance of having an integrated and universal approach to a problem.
Wilcox, P., Winn, S. and Fyvie-Gauld, M. (2005) It was nothing to do with the university, it was just the people: the role of social support in the first year experience of higher education. Studies in Higher Education. 30 (6), pp. 707–722. DOI: 10.1080/03075070500340036
‘Here the concept of ‘social support’ is used to analyse interviews with 34 first-year students, investigating the processes through which social integration (or lack of it) influenced their decision as to whether or not to leave university. Our data support the claim that making compatible friends is essential to retention’ (p. 707)
‘[…] most research on the first-year student experience has focused on social support within the academic environment, perhaps understandably so, but this has inevitably meant that less attention has been paid to students’ experience of the wider social world of the university (Haselgrove, 1994). Those authors who have investigated aspects of students’ lives outside their course have found that the wider student experience plays a significant role in their decisions about staying at university of leaving.’ (p.709).
Even though this is a 2005 study, it still stands that I don’t think (!) there are formal reporting metrics for these softer external aspects of the student experience. Is there?
FYI there is a good model and rationale for methodology on p.710 i.e. how samples were chosen, selection of the ‘constant comparative method of grounded theory’.
‘Of the 12 interviewees who withdrew, only one student was clear that his decision to leave was due solely to having made the wrong choice of subject. The remaining 11 students discussed between four and nine different factors, each of which contributed to their ultimate decision to leave, and three themes emerged – social support, academic and material factors […] the first of the three themes that emerged from our data, the creation of social support, ran through the majority of our interviews.’ (pp. 711-712).
Acknowledging that belonging (i.e. a social factor) is not the be-all and end-all, but it is one of the three key factors identified and it’s something that arguably received less attention than academic (i.e. unhappy with course or struggled with independent study) and material (i.e. finances or accommodation).
‘Ozga and Sukhnandan argue thatwe need to understand non-completion as a ‘process of student-institutional negoti-ation’ (1998, p. 319). We agree, but argue it is also about students negotiating betweenthe old life they have left behind (family, home and friends) and the new life they haveahead of them. This is a complex process and ‘finding your place’, as one studentexpressed it, between old and new creates tensions which have to be resolved. Makingand maintaining social support with peers and (to a lesser extent) staff is central tothis process. Scheff (1990, p. 4) argues that the maintenance of social bonds is the‘most crucial motive’ for humans and threats to social bonds generate intense feelings.Indeed, survival is threatened when they do not exist, as Zoe explains:
Looking back now I think why did I get so upset? Because you do feel really lonely and I think that really plays on your mind, so that you feel so bad, that you feel so, you know, you are just so desperate to go home, you really are desperate. … I think I went home for thehalf-term or something like that, I think I remember driving back up again thinking please, crash the car so that I didn’t have to go back. Just thinking ‘I so don’t want to have to go back’ so, and that’s how bad it got, wanting to crash the car so I didn’t have to go back.
(Zoe, 20, withdrew; her emphases)
‘Students who fail to make compatible friends, or who continue to spend too much time with former friends or existing boyfriends/girlfriends, are fare more likely to report being homesick and, as Mackie (1998) found, they are likely to go home frequency and thus become more socially isolated at university In our sample, three-quarters of the students who withdrew talked about the difficulties of making friends’ (p. 714)
‘The key issues raised by students in relation to social support in the academic side of their new lives were relationships with staff, especially personal tutors, and relationships with other students on the course’ (p. 716)
It would be interesting to unpack how both staff and students feel about being ‘friends’ with their course staff.Is it a valid form of friendship? A substitute if friendship with peers does not form? Free comments might be enlightening here.
‘[…] Suzanna, who experienced a number of personal problems during her first year, said that her tutor played a central role in her decision to stay on her course: I felt that I could tell her things and just and she helped me so much Like it if wasn’t for her I would have just left uni, I would have. (Suzanna, 21, stayed). However, a number of those who withdrew failed to get on well with their personal tutor. These students identified problems around lack of approachability, failure to listen and lack of availability of the personal tutor: My personal tutor, I wasn’t particularl impressed with, that he intimidated a little and I don’t, I felt that he didn’t particularly listen and I don’t think he would have been my first choice to have gone to about anything then.’ (Fiona, 18, withdrew).
I wonder if staff fully comprehend this?
‘Our findings indicate that new students need support to deal with not only the academic culture shock of adapting to the higher education environment, but also the emotional shock of moving from the familiar home environment to a very different life at university. If academic staff are aware of the intense anxiety and fear that new students experience in relation to the social aspects of transition to university, personal tutors can play a significant part in conveying to students that these feelings are not unusual’ (p.719)
Low-hanging fruit for Get Ready.
‘[…] the limitations of our research raise methodological questions around how best to capture the complexity of students’ social interactions over time’
This is, in part, the focus of my study – how do we measure something as intangible as belonging? Institutions can’t conduct qualitative research with every student. So, what is the alternative? What methodology could be used?
‘what we are suggesting is that any analysis which fails to look at how social relationships are accomplished (or not) cannot give a full account of student retention.’ (p. 720).
Professor Liz Thomas, July 2012. Available at: https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/what_works_final_report_0.pdf
A note for reflection on all of this – it was published 10 years ago, and I would argue that if we take the covid19 social study into account, one can reasonably expect that there has been a change in how students engage with others and build a sense of belonging. If the majority of these findings are based on students aged between 18-21, as the study suggests, then the majority of findings suggest that are based on the responses of millennial students. I believe there’s reason to consider how these responses have changed for gen z.
‘We are confident that the range of issues examined using mixed methods provides powerful evidence of the importance of student engagement and belonging to improve student retention and success. There are of course challenges associated with identifying cause and effect…’ (p. 10, referring to data set on p. 9)
‘The findings of this programme [the What Works? Student Retention and Success programme] present a compelling case that in higher education, belonging is critical to student retention and success. Although other studies have pointed to this and many staff in universities would readily accept this contention, we argue that the implications are very often not addressed in institutional priorities, policies, processes and practices.’ (p. 10)
‘[As of 2012, in the UK] only 1 in 12 students, or just over 8% leave HE during their first year of study, surveys undertaken by What Works? (WW) project teams found that between 37% and 42% of students think about withdrawing from HE […] this means that […] a significant minority of students considering withdrawing, and thus improving student belonging should be a priority for all programmes, departments and institutions.’ (p. 12)
On reasons for thinking about leaving: ‘Survey data (Projects 1, 5 and 7) and qualitative research (Project 4) identify academic issues, feelings of isolation and/or not fitting in and concern about achieving future aspirations as the primary reasons why students think about leaving. Project 5 finds that students who think about leaving are less satisfied with their university experience and appear to be less engaged with their peers and their institution; students who did not think about leaving appeared to have a better understanding of the university processes and were more likely to report a positive relationship with staff and students. Students are particularly likely to consider leaving a) after Christmas and b) during the first semester (project 5) which supports the wider evidence that the majority of students who leave do so during their first year.’ (p. 12)
On belonging: ‘we draw on both psychological and sociological traditions to inform our understanding of these issues: the psychological literature is used to define belonging at the individual level, while the sociological literature is used to explain how the potential mismatch between a students’ background and that of the institution may result in students not feeling like they belong, and leaving early.’ (p. 12)
Definitions of belonging:
Individual level: belonging = subjective feelings of relatedness or connectedness to their institution: ‘Feeling connected (or feeling that one belongs in a social millieu)’ (Vallerand, 1997, p. 300)
‘the extent to which students feel personally accepted, respected, included, and supported by others in the [school] social environment’ (Goodenow, 1993a, p.80)
‘regular contact and the perception that interpersonal relationships have stability, affective concern, and are ongoing (Baumeister and Leary, 1995)
In education environments:
Students’ sense of being accepted, valued, included and encouraged by others (teacher and peers) in the academicclassroom setting and of feeling oneself to be an important part ofthe life and activity of the class. More than simple perceived likingor warmth, it also involves support and respect for personalautonomy and for the student as an individual.
Goodenow, 1993b, p. 25
The sociologists view: (all p. 13)
Bourdieu and Passeron’s 1977) theories of cultural capital and habitus view the problem structurally, as being embedded in the way that higher education institutions function.
‘Cultural capital’ incorporates ways of speaking, behaving and interacting, which are learned through interactions with family and social institutions such as homes and schools (McLaren, 1989; Meadmore, 1999) and is, therefore, class-related.
‘Habitus’ is the disposition to act in certain ways determined by cultural capital and is the embodiment of cultural capital. Educational institutions have an identifiable habitus (Reay, David and Ball, 2001). Students whose habitus is at odds with that of their institution may feel that they do not fit in, that their social and cultural practices are inappropriate and that their tacit knowledge is undervalue, and they may be more included to withdraw early (Thomas 2002).
The relationship with engagement (all p. 14)
Social engagement can create a sense of belonging and offer informal support through interaction with friends and peers.
Participation in academic, pastoral and professional development services […] often contribute to developing students’ capacities to engage and belong in higher education.
Astin’s theory of student involvement (1984) found that student persistence is often related to levels of student activity and contact with the institution and peers (this one is p. 17)
Tinto’s 1993 student integration model, which identified academic and social integration and institution and goal commitment as key variables contributing to students’ decisions about withdrawing (p. 17)
The report proposes that student belonging is achieved through:
supportive peer relationships
meaningful interactions between staff and students
developing knowledge, confidence and identity as successful HE learners
an HE experience that is relevant to interests and future goals (pp. 15-16)
‘Effective interventions start pre-entry, and have an emphasis on engagement and on overt aademic purpose. The develop peer networks and friendships, shape realistic expectations, improve academic skills, develop students’ confidence, demonstrate future relevance and nurture belonging.’
The What Works? model:
p. 18
The figure unpacked:
Early engagement: engagement to promote belonging must begin early and continue across the student life cycle (p.16).
Early engagement should begin early with institutional outreach interventions and (…) extends throughout the process of preparing for and entering HE. Pre-entry and induction activities should (…) facilitate students to build social relationships with current and new students and members of staff, and engagement students with information that will enable them to assess whether the course is relevant to their current interests and future aspirations (p. 17)
Implication for me and my research? That this ideally needs to start pre-arrival, but that belonging is something that should be assessed early on in the student journey (i.e. incoming cohorts) and corrective action taken immediately. How could this be done? How could it integrate into Get Ready?
Engagement in the academic sphere: engagement and belonging can be nurtured through the institution (academic, social and professional services), but the academic sphere is of primary importance to ensure all students benefit (p.17).
(…) the What Works? programme identifies the importance of engagement in activities with an overt academic purpose, through high quality student-centred learning and teaching strategies. Such approaches facilitate staff and student interaction (and also promote) peer interaction and the development of long-lasting friendships. (p. 17)
Vincent Tinto’s influential work points to the importance not just of academic interaction, but also of social engagement (Tinto, 1993). This is strongly supported by the findings from the What Works? projects, and from other institutional research in the uK (Thomas, 2002; Wilcox et al., 2005). The What Works? evidence reinforces the vital role of friendship to many students, especially when they face difficulties. It is clear, however, that the academic sphere can play a central role in developing these friendships (p. 18).
(On ‘professional services’, including academic support): Many students (…) are not aware of the services and/or do not use them. professional services can be particularly effective when they are delivered via the academic sphere, rather than relying on students accessing these services autonomously (p. 18)
So, perhaps the focus on things like ‘Big Welcome’ miss the mark? We simply need to be investing in an effort to cultivate belonging at a course level.
In terms of being embedded onto the courses, this is something I believe AS do effectively. Do we have data sets on how familiar students are with our services? The evidence from the What works? programme suggests that professional services make an important contribution to the development of some students’ knowledge, confidence and identity as successful HE learners, both pre- and post-entry (p. 18).
Developing the capacity of staff and students to engage: the capacity of students to engage and staff to offer an engaging experience must be developed, thus a partnership approach in which everyone is responsible for improving student belonging, retention and success is required. (p. 17)
What Works? project research with part-time, mature and local student found a highly instrumental approach to HE, which corresponds with a devaluing of social aspects of an HE experience, reflected in comments about ‘not needing more friends’ (this suggests) students need to be educated about the value of widespread engagement in their HE experience, and encouraged and facilitated to engage in appropriate opportunities, and given the necessary skills (p. 18).
It would be interesting to reflect on how we are able to quantify that to both staff and students? Is there a shared understanding of what we mean by ‘engagement’? How can it be measured or assessed in a meaningful way to encourage belonging? Do we communicate the importance of ‘engagement’ with students? Is it culturally located? Is it ableist? Otherwise exclusive? How do we overcome barriers to this?: ‘A uniform approach to encouraging engagement may create pressure for conformity and result in alienation and disengagement (Mann, 2005)’ (p. 19).
Institutional management and co-ordination: at the senior level the institution must take responsibility for nurturing a culture of belonging and creating the necessary infrastructure to promote student engagement, retention and success. This includes the use of data to underpin student retention and success (p.17)
Again, necessitates a need to be able to define and quantify belonging? It sounds like it is important to develop a shared understanding of what belonging means (co-designed with the students) in order to ensure this is what is being delivered.
Practical implications (p. 20):
‘Our analysis finds that the exact type of intervention (…) is less important than the way it is delivered and its intended outcomes. (…) should aim to nurture a culture of belonging through supportive peer relations, meaningful interaction between staff and students, developing students’ knowledge, confidence and identity as successful HE learners and an HE experience that is relevant to interests and future goals.’ (p. 20)
In terms of locating this work within my field of Academic Support, meaningful interaction between staff and students seems tangible. I would be interested to know about the patterns between student retention and time spent in elective Academic Support sessions i.e. drop-ins and tutorials.Anecdotally, these often offer both sides opportunity to build a meaningful relationship which can anchor students.Could this be measured?
‘An opt-out’ rather than ‘opt-in’ approach should be the norm, and particular attention should be paid to students who opt out, with additional support provided if necessary’ (p. 20)
This is dependent on resource. It would be ideal to have all students opt-in to regular tutorials in that critical early stage, but there isn’t the resource. Could there be something resource-lite that could be trialled on this principle i.e. an email sent to a year group on one course, with the option to opt-out. These emails would be written by me and offer a regular point of contact and asynchronous resources? Is that feasible?
‘Activities should proactively seek to engage students, rather than waiting for a crisis to occur, or the more motivated students to take up opportunities. Students who most need support are the least likely to come forward voluntarily (Baumgat and Johnstone, 1977; Bentley and Allen, 2006; Chickering and Hannah, 1969; Eaton and Bean, 1995). If students have to opt in it is important to make it transparent how students can and should engage, and why’ (p.20).
For attrition, does the university reach out to students to ask why they left? If so, can I access this data?
‘Collaborative: activities should encourage collaboration and engagement with fellow students and members of staff’ (p.22).
What instances of this are there? Could this be something that is integrated into the email campaign/community? Is there are well documented instances of staff-student collaboration and then there has been pipeline analysis into how this has affected students retention, that would be interesting?
‘Monitored: the extend and quality of students’ engagement should be monitored, and where there is evidence of low levels of engagement follow-up action should be taken’ (p. 21).
What methods do we current use to measure engagement? Is it effective? Are they repeatedly reconsidered to ensure they are fit for purpose and epistemologically sound?
NOTE: to summarise p. 23, many students leave university because they didn’t have enough info before they arrive and/or due to poor course/institution choice. As such, there’s an emphasis on pre-entry. I think this has to realistically fall outside of the purview of AS, but interventions such as Get Ready do foster ‘early engagement to promote integration and social capital’ (p. 23).
Induction (p. 25)
‘Induction activities have an impact on retention and success through:
socialisation and formation of friendship groups, which provide a support network and promote social integration
informing expectations of HE and helping students to be effective learners by developing their confidence and their academic skills
developing relationships with members of staff, allowing students to approach them subsequently when they need to’ (p. 27)
The What Works? project found that effective induction programmes have the following elements:
take place in the academic sphere with other students from the same programme;
take place over an extended time period
use icebreakers to help students get to know each other
involve small group work;
provide students with informal opportunities to get to know their teaching staff or tutors;
provide information online and readily accessible to students;
engage students in the process of understanding the academic expectations and procedures. (p.27)
Reflections for LCC – I think we actually do really well with most of these things but we don’t provide students with ‘informal’ opportunities to get to know their teaching staff or tutors. Struggling to think of a way of doing this which wouldn’t be totally contrived.
In the Nottingham Trent case study (p.28) they emphasised opportunities for students not living in halls of residence and on the needs of mature, international and local students. I often got the sense that we programmed these groups as afterthoughts in the broader programme, and this was reflected in the survey feedback. However, as this aspect doesn’t specifically tie into the scope of Academic Support, I won’t be investigating it further.
Learning and Teaching:
‘The What Works? project found the following factors contribute to a sense of belonging in the academic sphere:
staff/student relationships: knowing staff and being able to ask for help;
curricular contents and related opportunities: providing real-world learning opportunities that are interesting and relevant to future aspirations;
learning and teaching: group-based learning and teaching that allows students to interact with each other, share their own experiences and learn by doing. A variety of learning experiences, including work placements, and delivery by enthusiastic lecturers were found to be important to;
assessment and feedback: clear guidances about process and transparency about criteria;
personal tutoring: as a means of developing a close relationship with a member of staff who oversees individual progress and takes action if necessary, including directing students to appropriate services;
peer relationships and cohort identity: having friends to discuss academic and non-academic issues with
a sense of belonging to a particular place within university i.e. a department building or a small campus (p.31)
Reflections on the above for my purposes: group-based learning and teaching that allows students to interact with each other and share their experiences is something that is done regularly in Get Ready, probably have to get some more face to face time now that I’m returning to teaching onsite.Thinking about personal tutoring, and how i’m often told it makes a big difference meeting with me regularly and building up a relationship/familiarity. Also, I’m left to consider what the consequence has been for being away from campus for so long, and how that literally ‘space’ of belonging was missing for many. Has that impacted their sense of belonging?Could it be something we think about in the new building i.e. around the academic support office, we can have a student wall.
Staff/student relationships:
‘Many students find it difficult to approach academic members of staff, but they value being able to ask staff for clarification, guidance and feedback. Students who feel that they have a less good relationship with academic members of staff are more likely to think about leaving. Good relationships are based on the informal relationships that recognise students as individuals and value their contributions (…) What Works? survey evidence found that students who are thinking about leaving feel more distant from their teaching staff than those who have not considered withdrawal (Project 5) (…) the evidence suggests that a good relationship with staff motivates students and encourages them to work hard and achieve more, and vice versa (…) (p.32).
‘Students value relationships that have the following characteristics:
Staff know students, including their names, and view them as individuals (projects 4 and 5);
staff appear interested in students and their progress, not just their problems (projects 4 and 6);
staff are available and respond to students contact in an appropriate and timely way (project 4);
staff value the input of students and respect them, irrespective of diversity and difference (projects 4 and 5);
students are able to approach staff for support (projects 3, 4 and 5);
students want relationships with staff that are ‘less formal, like a mentor’ rather than ‘formal, like a teacher’. (pp. 33-34)
For my preliminary questionnaire, these could form the basis of my questions to students i.e. thinking of teaching staff you engage with, do you feel like they know you, your name, and view you as an individual? I can look at the project questionnaire for examples.
Curriculum contents and pedagogy (p.36)
‘Strategies to make learning and teaching more engaging include:
a) Active learning: engaging students in problem- or practice-based learning drawing on the real world (Projects 4, 5 and 7)
b) Collaborative learning and small group teaching, allowing students to share their own experiences, both in the classroom and beyond (Projects 3, 4, 5 and 7)
c) Enthusiastic and knowledgeable lecturers (Projects 4 and 5) […] Yorke and Longden (2008, o, 48) says that ‘those teaching first-year students should have a strong commitment to teaching and learning’.
d) offering a range of learning experiences (Projects 4 and 5)
e) having work placements and field trips (Projects 3, 4 and 7)
[…] much of the good practice […] identified in relation to learning and teaching reflects Chickering and Gamon’s (1987) seven effective educational practices that impact on student learning and educational experiences. This can. now be understood as a learner-centred paradigm (Huba and Freed, 2000) which allows students to construct knowledge through a more active and authentic learning process facilitated by the academic member of staff’ (pp.37-38).
Assessment and feedback (pp.38-39)
‘Students who have a clear understanding about the assessment process and expectations have higher confidence levels and are less likely to think about leaving early. What Works? evidence suggests that an understanding of assessment should be developed early, and students need to have positive relationships with staff so that they can ask for clarification.’ (p.38)
ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPORT (p.44)
‘Two projects demonstrated that developing academic confidence facilitates student retention and success (projects 5 and 6). A survey of leavers (project 3) found that 43% felt that not being given ‘helpful academic support by my department’ was at least some influence on their decision to leave (a major influence for 16%), and 25% of respondents regarded the fact that they did not know where to go to seek academic help or advice was of some influence (a major influence for 6%). The findings suggest that some students (at least about 1 in 6 or 7 students) at some stage seek either academic or personal support from their department and, for whatever reason, do not receive this, and this may contribute to early withdrawal‘ (p.44)
‘[…] What Works? evidence suggests the following effective approaches to providing academic development and support:
a) students prefer to receive their academic development and support within their academic department
b) sharing concerns allows students to realise that many of their worries about studying are normal and/or shared by others
c) investing time to enable students to understand academic development, to reflect on their learning and to undertake follow-up work
d) personal tutors emerged as a popular and effective way of receiving academic development and support. In an institutional survey on sources of support personal tutors scored more highly as the preferred source of help and advice for study concerns
e) peer mentoring can also provide students with access to useful academic development and support, especially as a mentor can appear more accessible to students than members of staff.’ (p.44)
Reflecting on what the consequences of this would be for my study – it is a means of locating my research within my area of practice. This study is old now, but the suggestion that Academic Support can mitigate against student withdrawal is promising. It sounds like the way we are going abut it locally follows best practice from these recommendations.
[On the subject of personal tutors, which by this study’s definition, closely resembles the role of an AS lecturer – see p.45] ‘evidence has shown that personal tutors can improve student retention and success in the following ways:
a) enabling students to develop a relationship with an academic member of staff in their discipline or programme area, and feeling more ‘connected’
b) helping staff get to know students
c) providing students with reassurance, guidance and feedback about their academic studies in particular
[Successful personal tutoring is:
a) proactive rather than relying on students finding and accessing tutors
b) early meetings with students (Tomas et al., 2010)
c) students have a relationship with the tutor and the tutor gets to know the students
d) structured support with an explicit purpose
e) embedded into the academic experience and based at school or faculty level
f) strong academic focus
g) identifying students at risk and providing support and development (Thomas et al., 2010)
linked to student services, students’ union and peer mentoring or similar peer scheme to provide pastoral and social support and referring students for further support where appropriate.’ (p. 46)
Interesting case study of academic development and support:
PASS: Personal and Academic Support System: proactive support for students, Department of Biological and Medical Sciences, Oxford Brookes University (p. 47)
In summary, these case study had all students enrolled onto a personal and academic support system ‘PASS’. This involved group tutorials with personal tutors which taught academic skills but mostly developed good working relationships between students and staff. A more natural way of creating those bonds. Max.8 students in each tutorial group. The outcomes were assessed and contributed 30% of the module assessment. The result of the intervention was: ‘student progression and retention statistics […] have risen from 83% in 2004-05 to 92% in 2007-08, an improvement that has sustained to date (2012) (p.48).
The importance of family and friends
‘Friends are one of the most important reasons students who are thinking about withdrawing decide to stay in HE (Project 5) […] What Works? evidence shows that friendships and peer relations have the following benefits […]:
a) promote academic intergration and belonging;
b) develop students’ confidence as learners in HE;
c) improve students’ motivation to study and succeed;
d) offer a source of academic help and enable students to copy with their academic study;
e) share tacit knowledge, such as module choice and how to prepare for assessments;
f) provide emotional support;
g) offer practical support;
h) allow students to compare themselves against others and gain reassurance’ (p. 52).
‘Evidence from the two What Works? projects suggested that the following groups of students find it harder to make friends:
students with family commitments;
students who live at home and commute to participate in HE;
mature students;
Nursing students;
part-time students;
international students. ‘ (pp.52-53)
‘Two projects identified the importance of social spaces for students to meet and spend time with each otherl these were particularly valued by students who live at home. Project 3 found that virtual social spaces could also fulfil a useful function in facilitateing students to get to know each other, again especially for students who do not live in student accommodations.’ (p. 53) Interesting to think how this can be incorporated into my ‘come study with me’ sessions.
‘The What Works? studies identified a number of methods by which staff could nurture cohort identity and belonging:
a) icebreakers and team building activities in class;
b) assessed and non-assessed group work in the class and outside of formal teaching time;
c) field strips, residential activities and course-related events (the example given here is that the lecturer came to the pub with them…)
d) pre-entry and induction activities;
e) a space within the academic milieu where students spend time together;
f) staff organised social activities;
g) peer mentoring’ (pp.54-55).
Just thinking about how we can not only foster friendships in a meaningful way in the classroom, but how we can also offer students solutions to this through our own contact with them. Not all students will find it easy to make friends with their peers, how can that gap be filled?
‘The Sandbox Studio: a course-specific social space, Department of Psychology, University of Sunderland’ (p.59)
‘The Sandbox Studio integrates social interactions with an academically focused environment. It is a dedicated space within the Psychology Department where Psychology students are encouraged to spend time both socialising and exploring psychological concepts together. It was designed on the initiative of a Principle Lecturer in the Department and has a rationale of focusing students’ attention on the campus, encouraging them to use time between structured sessions effectively. It is equipped with sofas and cushions, a whiteboard, a DVD player, films, novels, design and architecture magazines, video games and an Xbox plus other psychology-related materials […] feedback from students indicates that they value the Sandbox for providing a social space within the University […] following the introduction of the Sandbox Studio (and ongoing problem-based learning activities) in 2008-09, progression of Psychology students from L1 to L2 increased from 77% in 2007-08 to 82% in 2008-09 to 85% in 2009-10′ (p.59)
Interesting to reflect on whether this come be something we offer in the new building? Could it be integrated with the Academic Support/Student Services space more readily? Also, how could these Sandbox environments be created in a meaningful way online?
Professional services (p. 62)
‘The majority of students who think about leaving do not make use of institutional support and professional services, but rather they seek advice from friends and family, at least initially. Knowing professional services exist is reassuring, but many do not know what is available […] professional services could consider how they an provide information to friends and family.’
This is an interesting thing to consider along the lines of belonging – would building a relationship with family/friends be helpful to improve sense of belonging? Integrate more effectively and holistically into students’ lives? What would this look like? Website isn’t very proactive… something to think on.
Student capacity for participation and belonging (p. 66)
‘As discussed above in relation to friendship and peer support, some students do not recognise the value of engagement, particularly in activities that do not have an over academic purpose’ (p. 66)
‘[Instead of induction focusing on giving students info, it should] develop their capacity to engage and belong […] perhaps focusing on the capacity to develop: supportive peer relations; meaningful interaction with staff; knowledge/skills; confidence and identity as a successful HE learner; and an HE experience that is relevant to interests and future goals’ (pp. 66-67)
Makes me think that there is real value in ‘showing your working’ to students. In Get Ready, it’s OK to say that this is what we are going to do and this is how it is going to help you. Same for embedded and elective and introductions to academic support… need to update intros!
Institutional reflective checklist (p. 72)
‘To what extend does the institution actively nurture a culture of belonging to maximise the retention and success of all students? More specifically:
a) How would you define a culture of belonging in your institution? What are the strengths and weaknesses of your organisation?
b) Do senior institutional leaders and managers believe in and promote an organisation that all students and staff are likely to feel like they belong to?
c) To what extent do institutional policies, documents and publications promote the idea that all students belong?
To what extend do all staff feel responsible for student belonging, retention and success through accountability, recognition, support and development and reward structures?
a) How would you describe the attitudes of the majority of staff towards the issues of (i) improving student retention and (ii) maximising the success of all students?
b) do human resource policies identify student retention and success, or student-centred learning, teaching and support as a priority at your institution?
c) do institutional policies and procedures hold staff accountable, and provide recognition, support, development and reward for enhancing the student experience?
To what extend are student belonging, retention and success mainstreamed into pre-entry interventions, transition and induction, learning, teaching and assessment and professional services?
a) does a commitment to student engagement, retention and success – and belonging – inform work in these key areas?
b) is there a coordinated approach to improving student retention and success (e.g. through a strategy and a high level committee?
c) to what extent is the access agreement used to promote the access and success of students from targeted groups?
To what extent is high quality, student-centred learning and teaching seen as integral to student belonging, retention and success?
a) what is the relationship between student engagement, retention and success and the learning and teaching strategy?
b) does academic staff development and training focus on promoting student engagement and belonging to maximise the success of all students?
c) are all staff teams from programmes with lower rates of non-continuation and completion held accountable?
To what extent does the institution develop the capacity – understanding, skills and opportunities – for all students to engage, belong and be successful?
a) how is the induction process organised? Does it go beyond transmitting information to developing the capacity of students to engage?
b) to what extend is the expertise of the professional services embedded into the mainstream curriculum to develop all students?
c) is student engagement encouraged and facilitated by staff?
To what extent does institutional data and monitoring support student belonging, retention and success through identifying poorly performing departments, programmes and modules, and student behaviour that increases withdrawal?
a) is there an accepted data source and process that is used to monitor withdrawal across departments, programmes and modules?
b) what follow-up is taken when areas are identified as having a poor continuation or completion rate, and does it involve a wide range of staff and further resource?
c) which indicators are used to monitor student behaviour and performance, and how are students at risk dealt with?
To what extent do all students feel like they belong at the university or college, and that they are supported to maximise their success?
a) How would you know if students feel like they belong?
b) Which groups of students may have the most difficulty in engaging in your institution?
c) In what ways could you make it easier for all students to feel like they belong?
I think this could be a really nice checklist to run by senior management and student-facing staff to a) map the landscape and b) see if there really is a shared understanding of, and investment in, student belonging institution-wide.
When this study was done in 2012, the researchers said they were ‘stood on the precipice of radical change’ (p.74) because higher student fees were about to come in. The covid-era has introduced another era of radical change, so now is the right time to be exploring and redefining belonging for this brave new world.
‘Socrates asked questions, Aesop told stories. In learning contexts, the use of Socratic dialogue involves the teacher asking questions that the student tries to answer. On Aesopic dialogue (Ferguson et al., 1992) the student asks questions and the teacher answers with stories. Stories are powerful and memorable means of making sense of the world and engaging imaginatively in learning.’
How have you come to the decision to do research? What are your motives? Write a short story about it.
My teaching journey has grown out of my experience of undergraduate study. A first generation disabled student from a low-income household struggling through an elitist Russel Group university on an access scholarship. I felt less like a token mascot – perhaps that would have been better in some ways? – more like a poor relation. Every tutorial, class and dissertation meeting was a burning reminder of inferiority. It wasn’t just the staff, but my peers. The faculty dogmatically cultivated an ethos of superiority, and for a time I tried to deconstruct my identity to fit in. I suspect that’s why when, a few months ago, a peer from my course commented ‘you say you didn’t have the cultural capital, but you seem to talk the talk!’ My immediate response to this comment is what has lit a fire under my desire to research; there was a time where that would have been the greatest compliment. To hear that I had dissected away my true self to reveal an acceptable academic would be an honour and a pass into belonging. However, as those words left his mouth I felt an intense anger. A tightening of my stomach and chest as I recalled three years of trauma, making myself smaller, steeling myself to walk into the studios each morning. One can’t just change oneself without losing oneself, and this process often involves self flagellation which can be both metaphorical and literal. For me, the metaphorical self punishment was accompanied by anorexia and addiction which continued well after I received my degree. I don’t remember what I said in response to my peer that day, I was lost for words. The trigger didn’t lie so much in what he said, but in the subtext: an assertion that my identity again was fair play for discussion, and not on my terms. I am privileged in many ways. My positionality is host to many of society’s ‘gold stars’: I’m white, now middle class, and heterosexual. I have a psychological disability, but it’s often easy to conceal so allows me to pass as able if I choose to. At UAL we have students who are not just first generation, but are also people of colour, and/or identify as LGBTQIA+, and/or have a visible disability. We know that a sense of belonging-ness is integral to student attainment, continuation and retention, but we do not have a metric for that. Furthermore, we know it isn’t sufficient to rely on KIS data to ensure the safeguarding of our learners. It doesn’t tell us the underlying story, and it can encourage a false sense of self-satisfaction, a dangerous fairy tale that we are ‘doing enough’. My research aims to unpack how we can tangibly enhance and measure belonging within our pedagogy. Supported by an extensive literature review, first hand research via listening rooms, and collaborative analysis and interpretation through members of our learning community, I hope this work will be the start of a longterm dialogue where our institution becomes a meaningful ally to our students.
What might you research?
‘Whatever the initial impetus, the ‘what’ should come from a genuine desire to find something out, or else it is unlikely that the study or the enthusiasm for it will be sustained.’ (p. 12)
Why is your research needed?
‘…is there a wider need and can this be confirmed?’ (p. 13)
Get feedback from peers and others in professional and research contexts
Gather background information on your research proposition and its ethical implications
Contextual/literature reviews i.e. ‘mapping the terrain’:
Essential to have some idea of who else has contributed to the ‘map’ and what ‘projections’ (perspectives and methods) they have used. The review allows you to acknowledge their different contributions, but also encourages you to state your views critically (…) by the end of this process you should be in a good position to ‘locate your position’ within the professional context and formulate a viable research question in ‘uncharered terrain’ and an appropriate research strategy’. (p. 14)
So what?
‘By this stage you should be in a position to make a conclusion and what you have discovered and its value and significance to the wider research context. At PhD level this should be a new contribution to knowledge. At Masters level you should be able to demonstrate a critical evaluation of your research context and show that you have an understanding of methodological issues. Your research findings need to be made ‘accessible’ and presented in a variety of imaginative ways. The thesis – your argument – may comprise several complementary but coherent elements – a body of work, a written text, other supporting material in various formats. It will be necessary to ‘defend’ your argument – especially for a research degree – in an examination viva. An important part of any thesis is the identification of future research leading on from your work. This brings the research process full cycle – the identification of new research questions and new territory to be explored.’ (p. 16)
Back to basics:
‘What could research in Art and Design be? Why might artists and designers do research? BEFORE WE ASK: How might artists and designers do research? (p. 18)
Ontological and epistemological questions.
Paradigms of inquiry:
‘According to Guba (1990), the choice of methodology should be a consequence of ontology and epistemology – that is, methodology is evolved in awareness of what the researcher considers ‘knowable’ (what can be researched, what is an appropriate research question), and in an awareness of the nature of knowledge and the relationship between the researcher and the ‘knowable’. For instance, the positivist paradigm of inquiry is characterised by a ‘realist’ ontology (reality exists ‘out there’), and an objectivist epistemology (the researcher is detached); methodology is therefore experimental and manipulative. in contrast, the constructivist paradigm is characterised by a ‘relativist’ ontology (multiple realities exist as personal and social constructions) and the epistemology is subjectivist (the research is involved); as a consequence, methodologies are hermeneutic (interpretative) and dialectic (discursive). What might characterise an ‘artistic’ or ‘designerly’ paradigm of inquiry? It is our collective task to develop this, and will require contributions from many practitioner-researchers over the coming years. Guba’s analysis of both positivist and post-positivist provides us with a framework to help describe and contextualise in philosophical terms, the research we do, and reveal our belief and motives for this research.
p.20
Reflective practitioner:
‘Reflection-in-action’ is a particular activity of professional practitioners and involves thinking about what we are doing and reshaping action while we are doing it. In this sense it is improvsational and relies of feeling, response and adjustment.’ (p. 23)
The practitioner-researcher:
‘Robson points out a major disadvantage as that of ‘insider’ problems – the difficulty in adopting an open-minded approach and now allowing preconceptions to cloud the issues. Given that absolute objectivity is impossible, this is a challenge for all researchers – positivists and post-positivists! It can be addressed to some extent by always exposing ideas and practices to other professionals for feedback, support and advice. In seeking the views of others, which will inevitably be subjective, we can develop inter-subjective views, which are less likely to be one-sided. Of course, keeping a critical view of your research at all times is essential. However, the advantages of the practitioner-researcher role are compelling: your ‘insider’ knowledge, experience and status usually lends your research credibility and trustworthiness in the eyes of your peers, that is, you are not an ‘external’ researcher. Most important, you are inquiring as a reflective practitioner, acknowledging the complexity, dynamism and unpredictability of the real world.’ (p. 23)
Actions for reflection:
Consider what characterises your professional context? How do the best ‘professionals’ operate in that context?
In what ways are you already, or could be in the future, a reflective practitioner?
What problems do you think you might encounter being a reflective practitioner-researcher? (p. 24) ACTION: RESPOND TO ABOVE.
Visualising research:
Andrew Stonyer’s PhD ‘The development of kinetic sculpture by the utilisation of solar energy’ ‘demonstrates the beginnings of inquiry through practice.’ (p. 26)
From these examples (the book includes examples of MPhil and PhD students A&D work from pp. 27-29) ‘the starting points for research are issues arising from practice, usually the researcher’s own practice (providing a personal rationale), but also issues that can be recognised as valid in the wider professional context (providing an external rationale). This practice-based approach to research naturally prompts us critically to consider and evaluate methods used in practice as to their appropriateness as robust and rigorous methods for accessible and disciplined inquiry, for:
Experiencing/exploring, gathering, documenting information and generating data/evidence,
Reflecting on and evaluating information, selecting the most relevant information,
Analysing, interpreting and making sense of information,
synthesising and communicating research findings, planning new research.’ (p. 30)
Using more than one method to gather information on an issue: triangulation.
(p.31)
Purpose of a contextual review:
Rationale:
Why is your research needed and what evidence is there to support this? (Rationale)
Who else in the field has addressed signifiant aspects of your research question? (Competitors, contributors, co-operators)
When (and possibly where) was the research carried out? (Currency, cultural context)
How has the research been carried out, and what are the implications of this for your methodology and specific methods?
What aspects remain unexplored or require further work? (‘Gaps’ in knowledge, new ground)
There are two phases for a contextual/literature review:
Initial surveys to establish the proposal’s rationale and viability, to provide some background information, and to help focus the proposal.
The use of these sources to develop a critical review of your research context, leading to the development of your question and shaping a convincing argument. (p.36)
Don’t rush the mapping stage: it is important that the scope of the inquiry is feasible, and therefore a balance has to be maintained between breadth and depth. Initially it is important to cast the net very wide and develop an overview and understanding of the field. This is the mapping stage and can help in deciding what comes within the scope of the research and, equally important, what lies outside. (p. 37)
What is critical thinking?
it evolves ‘meta-thinking’ […] and self-evaluation. it involves not jumping to conclusions too quickly and maintaining an open mind, considering all aspects of an issue before making up your mind. It involves maintaining some degree of distance in order to prevent personal bias or prejudice interfering with your reasoning.
It encourages questions (‘why’s that…’)
Imagining (‘what is, how about…’)
Connecting (‘try linking this to that…’)
Interpreting (‘could this mean…’)
Applying (‘I’ll try this out…’) p. 38
Developing convincing arguments:
Toulmin (1958) developed a model of a structure of an argument:
Claim: an arguable statement, for example formal research in Art and Design is an important activity.
Evidence: data used to support the claim, for example an analysis of the Higher Education Statistics Agency data reveals a rapid increase in completed research for higher degrees in the creative arts and design between 1994 – 2002.
Warrant: An expectation that provides a link between the evidence and claim, for example formal research in Art and design should be encouraged.
Backing: Context and assumptions used to support the validity of the warrant and evidence, for example formal research should be encouraged because it contributes to the rigorous investigation of practice encouraging new developments and new roles for practitioners.
Intellectual standards:
There are ‘intellectual standards’ that you can apply to check both your own use of critical skills and those of others:
Clarity: is a statement expressed in the best way? How else could it be expressed? Is it sufficiently elaborated? Is there too much jargon/over-specialised language? Are there relevant examples or illustrations?
Accuracy: is this true? Can its accuracy be checked? Is it appropriately attributed? A statement can be clear but inaccurate, for example ‘all research in art and design is practice based’.
Precision: is there enough detail to explain the meaning? Could it be more specific or more clearly defined?
Relevance: how is this related to the topic? Is it truly relevant? Is it out of context?
Depth: are the complexities of the question addressed? Is the statement qualified by reason and evidence? Is it superficial treatment?
Breadth: are there issues that have been omitted? Is there another way to look at this? are there other acknowledged perspectives on this? Is a balance provided? E.g. an argument can be accurate, precise, relevant, and in-depth, but it might ignore other views. For example, a strong argument for the effectiveness of distance learning would lack breadth if it ignored a comparison with other modes of learning or failed to consider the cost involved in buying equipment and spending time on-line.
Logic/reason: you should definitely combine ideas to develop an argument, but if the ideas don’t support each other or aren’t sequenced properly/contradict themselves, there’s no logic there. (p. 40)
The importance of playing devil’s advocate:
Deliberately take a conflicting or different (possibly uncomfortable) position in order to see things from another perspective. It can make us aware of the limits of our knowledge and understanding.
Try to outline the strengths and weaknesses of different positions in order to explain/justify/defend your preferred position. Flexibility of thinking is a creative characteristic. Playing with ideas, adopting an ‘imaginative’ agenda’, extends our capacity for creative response and may even prompt a shift in position and an advancement of understanding. Another useful device for making sense of, and understanding, ideas is to develop a conceptual framework. For example, if we were trying to evaluate and make sense of ‘research’, we could develop a framework for understanding it by using a concept map:
Purpose of research
Types of research
Kinds of research questions
Methodological assumptions
Related literature/public output
Scale and scope of research
This kind of conceptual framework allows us to develop an overview of the topic/idea and to begin to ask questions of it. The overview could then be used to develop a more subject specific framework. (p. 41)
What to do when you have LOADS of reading to do:
Obtain the source and don’t forget to capture the referencing details for your bibliography
Try to get a quick overview of content and structure – look at the abstract/index/chapter section headings
Keep our keywords and research descriptors in mind – they are like the ‘spectacles and sieves’ to help you focus and select
Scan and skim read (try scanning down the middle section of the page, the theory is that your peripheral vision picks up the rest
Read more carefully the various sections that seem significant
If you photocopy sections, use coloured highighters on the copy to code key content
Extract key information only – you can always go back to it later. (p. 45)
Example of a contextual review in art and design:
p. 50
Many artists struggle with writing…
But – if you adopt an honest approach to writing, your enthusiasm and belief in the research will see you through. It’s tempting to want to use ‘research speak’ or ‘critical theory’ mode and become really overly complex and over intellectualised. But the most important thing os that your work is clear, concise, and allows you to demonstrate that you understand your context and that you can locate your research within than context (p. 52)
‘Mapping the terrain’ of your contextual review:
For it to be useful to you, you must organise and classify your research. You may want to do this in chronological order, you may want to group those which look at a similar theme, you may want to group them by methodology. You might even want to group them using a few different ways and then you have several different maps which help you decide which is the most appropriate way of structuring your review.
You may want to use a mindmap where you use particular key words at the centre
You may want to use a matrix i.e. two different dimensions e.g. references against concepts. It can be especially useful to make comparisons against authors. It can also be helpful to point out gaps e.g. if there is a lack of references against a concept then there is a gap in that research. (pp. 54-55)
When it comes to writing the review:
You should only select what you think is the most relevant sources.
Before you start writing, it’s a good idea to do a mindmap of your key ideas and arguments now that you’ve mapped out the rest of your terrain. Example below:
(p. 56)
Final thoughts on mapping the terrain through contextual reviews:
‘How can you know what’s new if you don’t know what already exists? How can you progress on your journey of discovery unless you are aware of the surrounding landscape and the nature of specific features of the terrain? How can you avoid dead ends or going over old ground? Answer – by making a thorough survey of what is out there and developing a critical understanding of what is directly relevant to your own research context […] some travellers keep a ‘journal’ as a way of reflecting on, and making sense of the experience of exploration, though plotting key coordinates on their map. The reflective journal helps you to see where you’ve been, know where you are and, most importantly, imaging where you want to be.’ (p. 63)
Ch. 3: Locating your position – orienting and situating research
Remember that your contextual review is an ongoing process essential for framing and, sometimes, reframing your project.
Map analogy: (p. 67)
Contextual review should have provided you with an overview picture and an understanding of your particular research context: MAP OF THE WORLD.
Contextual review will have enabled you to locate your research proposal in relation to that context: MAP OF THE COUNTRY.
Identification and evaluation of the most important research and practice in that context should enable you to focus on a particular area. Acknowledging what has already been achieved and what might still be explored and evaluated: MAP OF THE CITY.
The identification of a specific research question: STREET MAP. Your own house can clearly be seen.
A good question:
A good question is hard to come by, so you shouldn’t rush landing on one. For example, ‘Did God create the university’ is a metaphysical question and can’t be answered by inquiry. Questions like ‘is practice more important than research’ would provoke heated debate but will remain an issue of personal belief, so is no good. Some questions that can be answered definitively have the unfortunate side effect of being uninteresting i.e. ‘how many completed PhDs are there in Art and Design.’ Most research questions in our field don’t have easily quantifiable answers and can’t be ‘proved’ in the scientific sense. So the best you can do is provide a ‘credible argument based on good quality evidence’ i.e.:
‘How can new technology be integrated into ceramic designer-maker practice?’
This can become a proposition: ‘the use of new technology can introduce sustainability into ceramic designer-maker practice.’
You can then develop an argument which persuades us that this is the case or not.
This research proposition helps us to develop the plan of work and guides the methodology and use of specific methods. (p. 67)
Advice on developing a research question:
Step 1: Know the area
Your contextual review will provide you with an understanding of this.
Step 2: Widen the base of your experience
Look at other research questions in this area, did you read any theses look at a similar theme? Similar journal articles? Select them, evaluate them.
Step 3: Consider using techniques for enhancing creativity
Using brainstorming techniques to develop questions, or playing devil’s advocate and deliberately taking a conflicting or different position in order to see things from another perspective and so raise a range of possible research questions. You can then use a mind-map to focus those down.
Step 4: Ethical considerations
Have you acknowledged that you don’t know something, which is why you want to do some research in order to learn and discover new things? Assumed a position of humility? Have a genuine desire to learn something new? Accepted the formal framework of academic research, complete with ethical obligations? (pp. 68-69)
Steps for ethical consideration:
Step 1: Clarity of research framework and participants’ involvement
Make it clear to your participants that you are conducting a research project and the purpose of the project.
Explain how you will operate as a researcher within the project e.g. participant observer.
Discuss the kind of involvement the project requires of them.
Respect the wishes of those who decline taking part. If appropriate, find out why – it could be useful research information.
Step 2: Gaining permission and access
Make sure you have explicit, documented permission to carry out all aspects of research e.g. access to special archives or other bodies of sensitive information.
Ensure that your research does not exploit the participants in any way.
Agree to keep the research material confidential until it needs to be communicated as part of the research findings.
Step 3: Use of data/information resulting from participants’ involvement
Share your developing understanding of the research with your participants by regularly reporting progress. Get their feedback on this and integrate into the research anything that improves their accurate representation.
If you want to include quotes from participants, or visual material of them. They should have the opportunity to check the material before publication.
In reporting your research, apply judgement and sensitivity so a snot to misinterpret or misuse information with regard to participants (pp. 70-71)
Managing project information involving practice:
If your practice is part of the research project:
For example, part of your documentation is sketchbooks, portfolios, photographs, digital images, video and audio etc. Organise in a purposeful way in relation to the stages of the research process i.e. are these part of the: background/introductory material; contextual material/evidence; information on the use of various methods and evidence from their use; information/evidence for evaluation and analysis; or material for conclusions and discussion.
Colour coding project information:
Colour coding information is helpful to quickly identify different types/sections if information.
For example, you may want to colour-code various thematic areas of your literature review, so new information can be colour coded and more easily related to the appropriate section.
Use of icons/symbols:
Same as colour coding, but uses icons/symbols instead.
Reflection journal:
Having all the material in one place is very helpful when it comes to evaluation and analysis.
For example, storing studio/workshop activity information – an activity log; at other times it may function as a diary; it may contain documentation of WIP, help you contextualise your project; it could indicate pace and progress of your project.
Bibliographic database:
Your bibliographic database will need revisiting regularly and may require you to update your lit review.
Important to regularly survey your context for new developments which might help to share and reshape your research. Good research is responsive to new developments.
Project specific glossary:
Many research projects need to define the terms used in the research in order to develop clarity and shared understanding.
Other databases:
As your project progresses you will want to make new databases i.e. for contacts, resources, images, other media etc.
Software for managing research information:
If applicable.
Proformas:
Devising simple proformas can be a good way of storing and organising notes on meetings, exhibition visits, other events etc. The use of a consistent structure can serve to remind you of your key objectives, as well as providing a means of comparing information from one similar event to the next (share the example of the proforma for gathering information for lit review).
Documentation related to other research methods:
Photography for research purposes: photography alone is insufficient. It needs annotation – labelling and expanding with key information. Audio and video files need clear labelling and a short summary on a word document of the same name. (pp. 86-89)
Ch. 4: Crossing the terrain – establishing appropriate research methodologies
We need to be open minded and critical about evidence, recognising that whilst there may be corroborating evidence, there may well be conflicting or ill-fitting information. Disappointing and difficult though this may be when it happens to you, it’s essential that you acknowledge and discuss this, and make some sense out of it. There might be an opportunity to try another research method, or to take findings back to participants to discuss. Above everything, it is important to understand and acknowledge the complexity of a research issue than try to uncritically ‘paper over the cracks’ of a less than perfect’ investigation (p. 98)
Primary vs secondary data:
Secondary data already exist (remember that datum is singular and data is plural). They’ve likely already been processed in some way. Therefore, with secondary data it can be hard to take a ‘fresh view’ of the material because of the convincing arguments that have already been made. But, different analyses and interpretations can be made by others, and it’s entirely possible that an independent and original contribution to knowledge can be made by the reinterpretation of existing data.
Primary data are those discovered or generates as a result of the application of research methods. Often ‘raw’, could be incomplete and/or only give a partial view. Could be opinion polls, transcripts or design prototypes. Primary data is important but you should acknowledge that it is ‘risky’ i.e. it’s new, hasn’t been subject to scrutiny beyond the particular research project it’s from, and so you really need to be rigorously critical of it.
Choosing a research methods:
So important to pilot any approach you choose, check the appropriateness of the methods and your methodology. A few hours doing a ‘dry run’ sounds annoying, but it can prevent hours of delays and headaches further down the line.
You should keep in mind that your research method should be:
Responsive to the research context and appropriate for use in it (relevant and ethical)
Valid – acceptable to other researchers; useful in reality; meaningful to users within a particular context (internal validity); wherever possible generalisable to wider contexts (external validity); as dependable and trustworthy as possible
Used with the utmost rigour (applied consistently, with discipline and care)
Documented and described thoroughly and clearly in any report of the research, so that it might be usable by other researchers (accessible, explicit and transparent). (p. 102)
Types of methodology:
We are going to look at some common types of methodology often seen in visual research, as well as those we take from social sciences.
Practice-based methodology
Observation
Visualisation
Photography
Video
Sketchbook
3d models/maquettes
Reflective journal/research diary
Audio reflection
‘Sweat box’
Case study
Interview
Questionnaire
Personal constructs
Practice-based methodology:
Definition/function
Developing and making creative work as an explicit and intentional method for specific research pruposes, for example gathering and/or generating data, evaluation, analysis, synthesis, presentation, communication of research findings
Context for use
Research for higher degrees, distinct from ‘practice as usual’ in its use of practice within an academic research framework, which is accessible, transparent and transferable (in principle if not specifics) the work might embody research concepts, provide visual evidence and/or illustrate research findings in some way.
Tools required
Any of the tools used in the development and making art/design work; essential to document the process. Must have explicit criteria for evaluation and analysis
Advantages
Researching and learning through doing to develop ‘deep’ understanding; the participant researcher has an informed perspective on issues relating to practice
Disadvantages
Open to criticism of over-subjectivity is not within a formal framework and/or lacking methodological transparency
Ethical considerations
Requires a high degree of integrity and honesty in evaluating and communicating the outcomes from practice
Further references
Douglas, A. and Scopa, K. (2000) Research through practice: positioning the practitioner as researcher – http://www.herts.ac.uk/artdes/conex/res2prac
Examples of the role of practice in research for higher degrees
– Investigating the subject/content/context of one’s own activity in order to advance or innovate; understanding one’s own creative process – Discovering something new about ways of approaching/doing your practice by experimentation – Understanding a range of different practices – using your practice to contrast/compare those of the practitioners – Using the skills of the artists/designer to visualise and understand complex processes (perhaps in other field) – making the invisible visible.
Observation:
Definition/function
To watch something closely and accurately record it to capture data relevant to the research project issues (note how you need a firm hypothesis i.e. it’s not possible to use an observation model if you’re expecting yourself to record everything)
Context for use
SO: self-observation. For example a designer recording themselves make work in order to become more aware of their creative process. NPO: non-participant observation. Researcher attempts to remain objective and detached from the thing being observed. PO: Participant observation. The researcher engages in the activities they set out to observe, becomes involved, empathises, observes through the experience of engagement.
Tools required
A range of qualitative and quantitative techniques.
Advantages
Relatively easy.
Disadvantages
All kinds of observation can be obtrusive to natural activities, perhaps causing changes in behaviour (the Hawthorne effect) PO requires trust to be gained from other participants SO can be too self-conscious unless it is carried out regularly
Ethical considerations
Possible invasion of privacy
Further references
Robson, C. (1993) Real World Research, Chapter 8, Observational Methods; Chapter 3, Ethical Considerations, pp. 29-35 (Sage)
Visualisation:
Definition/function
Visual thinking, making visible ideas through a range of techniques in order to explore research project issues and/or present research findings
Context for use
In practice-based research: making use of visual expertise to externalise and communicate concepts, interpretations, evaluations, and so on In collaborative research: a means of sharing information, gaining feedback and generating new ideas
Tools required
Drawing, diagrams, concept maps, mind maps, flow charts, storyboards, matrices, network displays etc.
Advantages
Visual overview of complex material improves its digestibility Increase importance of the visual in the 21st century, so, makes sense
Disadvantages
Possible or deliberate ambiguous nature of some visual material
Ethical considerations
All images are socially and technically constructed – visualisations should not deliberately mislead, should be used with integrity and care.
Further references
Tufte, E. (1997) Visual Explanations: Images and Quantities, Evidence and Narrative (Graphics Press).
Photography:
Definition/function
Providing evidence of particular significant features related to the research project issues, or part of the practice
Context for use
Analysis of visual data, presentation of research findings. For research purposes, photos need to be annotated, identifying the kinds of data presented in order to be useful evidence.
Tools required
Appropriate hardware. Suggest standard proforma for consistent annotations.
Advantages
Ubiquitous technology and presents complex detail
Disadvantages
Annotation is essential yet often overlooked
Ethical considerations
Possible invasion of practice. Edited works should not deliberately mislead. Should be used with integrity and care.
Further references
Banks, M. (2001) Visual Methods in Social Research (Sage)
p. 109
Example of annotated photography, p. 109
Video data: as above
Sketchbook:
Definition/function
A portable book or bound collection of sheets that contain the development of ideas over time, and subsequent reflection and analysis. Can be analogue or digital.
Context for use
In practice-based research, to capture and store a range of visual ideas, data/information, to encourage visual thinking. Could be seen as a log book equivalent.
Tools required
Relevant analogue or digital tools
Advantages
Availability and accessibility in most situations, non-preciousness, a space for experimental thought, capacity for tracking developments over time, reflective and analytical space
Disadvantages
Some practitioners may prefer a more haptic/hands-on approach – there are limits to 2D and sequential structures
Ethical considerations
Possible reluctance to make accessible such a personal document, or to be meaningful honest with it knowing it will eventually be public. Should be used with integrity and care.
Further references
Klee, P. (1968) Pedagogical Sketchbook (London: Faber and Faber)
(p. 112)
(p. 112)
3D models/maquettes
Definition/function
Physical models or computer model
Context for use
In practice-based research, where two-dimensional information in insufficient for understanding and communicating ideas/structure/form/texture etc.
Tools required
Any relevant material and process, or computer-aided design
Advantages
Allows exploration and presentation of spatial and tactile data
Disadvantages
Models/maquettes take up space. Often required to be documented via photo/video.
Ethical considerations
Should not deliberately misrepresent e.g. misleading scale.
(p.113)
Reflective journal/research diary
Definition/function
Reflective journaling is a purposeful process and framework to help you explose and explore various models of practice. The journal is a repository for a range of information which is added to and consulted on a regular basis. Probably contains lots of different information.
Context for use
In practice-based nature, to help capture the dynamic and reflexive nature of practice. Invaluable for the regular documentation of the application of methods and evaluation of their outcomes.
Tools required
Off-the-shelf large format diary or a digital version. You may want to prep space for a development log, documentation of work in progress and completed, contextual references etc.
Advantages
A comprehensive store of practice-based thought and action, with evidence and example. Could form an important part of a ‘portfolio’ of research evidence/learning
Disadvantages
An idiosyncratic set of information, possibly little use to others but value to you as a reflective tool.
Ethical considerations
Should provide an honest picture of development and progress.
Further references
Newbury, D. (2001) ‘Diaries and field notes in the research process’, Research Issues in Art, Design and Media, Issue No. 1, Autumn.
(p.114)
Audio reflection (as above)
Case study
Definition/function
Case – a single instance or example of something. ‘A formal collection of evidence presented as an interpretative position of a unique case… reports on a project or innovation or event over a prolonged period of time or by telling a […] story as it has evolved.’ (McKernan, 1998, p. 74)
Context for use
Where a complex something/someone/situation needs to be studied qualitatively, intensively, in-depth and comprehensibly. Similarly, in Art and Design research where the case may be a practitioner, an environment, for example a studio/workshop, a project, a commission, a consultancy, a learning setting and so on.
Tools required
Can be all sorts of data, any imaginable.
Advantages
Lets you study something in depth and breadth, reality, use of multi-methods aids corroboration and validation, produces credibly and accurate account of setting and action.
Disadvantages
Specific and idiosyncratic example/case, so generalisations beyond the specific case can’t be made (unless a load of cases are studied). Super time consuming, critical view sometimes difficult as researchers can be influenced by respondents (if used).
Ethical considerations
Permission/authorisation required, ensure permissions have been given for use of data, used with integrity and care.
Further references
McKernan, J. (1998) Curriculum Action Research: A Handbook of Methods and Resources for the Reflective Practitioner, Chapter 4, Observational and Narrative Research Methods, pp. 74-83 (Kogan Page).
(p. 117)
Interview
Definition/function
A key method in seeking the particular opinions of others about an identified research topic. A purposeful conversation initiated by the interview and focused by him/her on content specified by research objectives.
Context for use
In case study research where a particular and in-depth view is required, helpful in the exploratory stages of research to elicit views, identify variables, important factors as a method of structuring further research.
Tools required
Recording equipment, could set up a listening room.
Advantages
A good way of finding out a person’s values, preferences, attitudes, beliefs and feelings; opportunity for direct verbal interaction, encouraging in-depth response – a discursive method, can be done at a distance using telephone or online.
Disadvantages
Prone to subjectivity and bias (leading questions), the setting of the interview can influence the quality of the responses, for example formal or informal, time-consuming, if recording tools and notes are not used the interviewer could have poor recall.
Ethical considerations
Participant(s) must have given authorisation before recording, ensure confidentiality, ensure permissions have been given for public use of data, edited work should not deliberately mislead – editing can present an extremely selective, and possibly distorted view, should be used with integrity and care.
Further references
Keats, D. M. (2000) Interviewing: a Practical guide for Students and Professionals (Open University Press)
(p. 118)
Questionnaire
Definition/function
A key method in seeing the general opinions of many others about an identified research topic. A purposeful survey in order to gather data at a particular point in time to describe the nature of existing conditions or identify standards against which existing conditions can be compared, or determine the relationship that exists between specific events.
Context for use
One of the most commonly used descriptive methods; useful for identifying trends in large populations, can yield good generalisations.
Tools required
Paper or preferably web-based proforma. Design should be simple but engaging; sampling and size are important – who are involved and why?
Advantages
Capacity for a large and widely distributed sample; more economical in time and money than interviewing; anonymity of respondents may encourage greater honesty; allows for quantitative data to be collected.
Disadvantages
the larger the sample the more generalised the response; the larger the sample the more time it will take to analyse; low return rates (20% is considered good!), no clarification of responses possible (if you’ve ensured it is anonymous), responses may be questionable either due to poor design or as a result of ‘questionnaire fatigue’ on the part of the respondent; if quantitative data are selected then statistical analysis is often required in order to establish whether the results are statistically significant.
Ethical considerations
Questionnaire MUST include information about the purpose of the research and how the resulting data will be used; ensure confidentiality; should be used with integrity and care.
Further references
McKernan, J. (1998) Curriculum handbook research: a handbook of methods and resources for the reflective practitioner, Chapter 4, non-observational, survey and self report techniques (Kogan page).
(p. 119)
The benefit of choosing multiple methods:
Using different methods allows you to get a fox on something in order to understand more fully the complexity of issues by examining them from different perspectives, and generating data in different ways by using different methods. The more information we have from varying perspectives, the more able we are to test our ideas and eliminate bias that might arise from each method. So, choose your convoy!
As always, remember to state your rationale for using several methods, and to describe clearly how they interrelate.
You may want to map out your different methods visually to help you to rationalise and explain your decisions when it comes to communicating your study.
Really outdates example from 1994-1997, maybe try to remake one for my dissertation/thesis presentations.
4.4 Considering preliminary evaluation and analysis
It’s important to be able to play with your data. No, really.
Sort the data in as many different ways as possible (do not discount anything initially)
Making data as visual as visual as possible (using colour coding, symbols, mapping, and so on) so that patterns can be seen, for example recurring themes.
Discus the data with participants/collaborators for feedback
Fundamentally, remember to make the invisible, visible. The implicit, explicit.
It’s an iterative process: – As you generate and gather evidence, you must be constantly weighing up its value, quality, and potential significance. – You should go over old ground and ensure you haven’t missed anything that could be valuable. Keep an open mind, and be critical in order to avoid only seeing those things we want to see – a ‘mirage of an oasis in the desert’. (p. 125)
Ch. 5: Interpreting the map: methods of evaluation and analysis
Evaluate your methods and methodology:
If you find that your methodology is inappropriate, this throws the validity of the research into question.
An example of this is how early research into creativity adopted a purely scientific approach, trying to ‘measure’ and ‘explain’ the ‘results’ rather than understand the person and the process in relation to the outcomes.
How do you do this? Speak with dissertation supervisors and peers. Do they feel that your research is generating/yielding good quality data? Are there flaws in the research methods e.g. inaudible interview recordings, incorrect transcription etc.
Ideally, you should revise the study and reapply a more appropriate methodology/use your methods more effectively. If that isn’t a possibility, then discuss the limits of your research in your dissertation. Critically evaluate them as part of the analysis of your work. (p. 129)
Validity and reliability: towards research quality
In scientific methodology, validity and reliability are the corner stones of research. They are also important in our fields, but perhaps we should think of it more as ‘trustworthiness’. To establish trustworthiness – ask yourselves these questions:
Have you don a good, thorough and honest job?
Have you tried to explore, describe, explain in an open and unbiased way?
Or are you more concerned with delivering the required answer or selective evidence to support a case?
If you can’t answer these questions as yes, yes and no respectively, then your findings are worthless (Robson, 1993, p. 66)
Spectacles and sieves: criteria
We know that evaluation and analysis is important in research, but nothing can be evaluated or analysed without criteria with which to make judgements/assessments.
For example, you cannot analyse or evaluate what is ‘good design’ without criteria for doing so. For example, you might pick three criteria: effectiveness, efficiency, economy, Then these are also unpacked to provide more focused criteria (which will make your job easier) i.e. ‘effectiveness in relation to context and aesthetics; efficiency in terms of function and use; economy in terms of cost and use of materials.
Criteria allow us to focus, capture and distil value and meaning.
Never assume that your initial set of criteria is perfect: the only way that you’ll find out if they work or not is to play around and try them out. As soon as you apply them, you might realise they are unsuitable. Like always, it’s a good idea to talk through your criteria with a peer or supervisor. That gives the other person the opportunity to reveal strengths and weaknesses you might not yet have considered. (p. 131)
(p. 132)
Final considerations for analysis:
Analysis shouldn’t be the last phase of your research process. It should happen throughout and is cyclical and iterative, serving to inform and drive your work.
The broad aim of analysis is to look for meanings and understanding.
Analysis should achieve a sense of the whole
Analysis is a reflective activity, moving from the data to a conceptual level. It is helpful to track this process of reflection using a reflective journal – it helps you shift from the details to the bigger picture, and also provides accountability of the analytical process.
A key tool of analysis is comparison – exploring similarities and differences will help you to form categories and boundaries for your data.
Be alert to the limits of evidence – if it’s inadequate then you need to acknowledge it.
Important to recognise that analysis is never exhaustive and never finished. It is ‘kind-of’ completed when the research question has been addressed, so it’s important to state to the reader the scope and confines of your analysis. Analysis only ‘ends’ after new data no longer generates new insights, thus exhausting the data.
Framework for analysis:
The use of existing frameworks for analysis helps to link your research outcomes to established research.
Share an example of an analysis framework in the presentation i.e. hyperrational reading of an object etc.
Making sense
The outcome of analysis should be to create a ‘big picture’. Ideally, ideas that are valuable and applicable in broader contexts.
Your interpretation must be based on the available evidence, so all research evidence must be accessible to your reader so that they could make their own interpretations if they wanted to. Include primary data in appendices, and make sure it’s accessible.
An example of an experimental framework for analysis:
Analysis using triangulation (p. 137)
A good examples of visual analysis to draw on:
Visual Explanations: images and quantities, evidence and narrative (1997) Edward R Tufte (requested e-book from library, but lots of copies available in main collection at 741.622 TUF)
Three major activities in analysis:
Data reduction
Data display
Drawing conclusions from the above two
This is Miles and Huberman’s ‘three concurrent flows of activity in analysis (p. 144). We can break it down further:
Data reduction: any structure or tools that encourage you to sort, select, focus, order, simplify data; for example, applying criteria, coding data by colour of symbols, condensing, grouping, clustering etc.
Data display: any structure/tools that present data in an organised and usually compressed visual format so that the reader can gain an overview and understanding of the whole (literally ‘see’ what you mean
Drawing conclusions: interrogate i.e. how many times, are themes apparent, what relationships exist, how does this relate to existing concepts etc. (p. 145)
‘University as we understand it today can be traced to a western genealogy’ (Icaza and Vásquez, 2018, p.111) cited in p.7.
Calls to decolonize teaching and learning interrogate the extent to which universities in their current state are able to offer a learning environment that can be effectively engaged with by everyone. p. 7
‘For Fomunyam (2017, p.6797) decolonisation is a move ‘away from the political or traditional notion of decolonising which means the process of relinquishing control of a territory by the coloniser to the colonised, to the more rigorous intricacy of shedding away colonial legacies from the education system be it material or ideological’. Expectations, goals, and the process to achieve the decolonising agenda are further complicated by the origins of the institution itself. Abdi (2020, 06:00) raises the question, ‘to what extend can we actually do that work [decolonising in practice] within systems and within organisations that are not designed to do that work’. p.11
‘Indigenous knowledge is local knowledge: knowledge that is unique to a given culture or society […] Indigenous knowledge is not yet fully utilised in the educational development process.’ Oladimeji (2018, pp. 95-100, cited in Tran, p. 13).
‘Decolonising reading lists is not about kicking out white scholars on the basis of their whiteness, but rather critically thinking about their arguments and assumptions and reading them alongside scholars that produce alternative knowledges from non-Western standpoints.’ (Haffner, 2018, cited in Tran, p. 13)
Inclusivity and Decolonizing – what’s the difference?
‘Morgan and Houghton (2011, p.5) define an inclusive curriculum as ‘one that takes into account students’ educational, cultural and social background and experience as well as the presence of any physical or sensory impairment and their mental wellbeing.’ (p.14)
‘Get educated about decolonisation and end its conflation with equality, diversity and inclusion initiatives.’ (Liyanage, 2020, cited in Tran, p.14)
‘A decolonised curriculum would bring questions of class, caste, race, gender, ability and sexuality into dialogue with each other, instead of pretending that there is some kind of generic identity we all share […] Ultimately, to decolonise it to ask difficult questions of ourselves.’ (Gopal, 2017, The Guardian cited in Tran, p. 15)
‘Despite the paradox of working under (what purports to be) a ‘decolonial’ agenda, widespread calls to decolonise our universities have further embedded rather than dismantled whiteness, thus continuing to characterise the careers, wellbeing, and daily lives of faculty of colour […as…] institutions advance rather than dismantle racism by adopting the work of a few racially minoritised groups, but exploitatively draining the useful parts of their scholarship to meet institutional metrics and marketise fashionable buzz-words that appear to social media hashtags.’ (Doharty, Madriaga, and Joseph-Salisbury, 2020, pp.1-9, cited in Tran, p.27)
NOTE: Bernadine Idowu-Onibokun contributions, featuring student voices, is a really rich source of reflection. p. 35 onwards.
Reflections from philosophy student from Idowu-Onibokun’s contribution which is an insightful jumping off point for my action-research: ‘I was offered a chance to explore different opinions and thoughts on particular subjects like existentialism, evil, and religion in general. However, this did not change the fact that as a student coming from an underfunded state school with a less economically robust background, I found university challenging and inclusivity only extended to a point. Especially as the gaps in my learning, due to a lack of preparation from my secondary school, meant that I lagged somewhat behind my peers despite my ability to engage in class.’ (pp.39-40).
‘Lecturers faily to listen and understand what coming from a disadvantaged background looks like.’ (p. 41)
The TRAAC Model: CH. 3
A reflective and reflexive entry point to help encourage challenging conversations around decolonizing teaching and learning.
Each aspect of the TRAAC model explores different areas in which inequalities might appear in teaching, and require the user to reflect on their own position and perspectives, as well as those which they have incorporated into their teaching.
Teaching Approach segment of TRAAC:
‘Decolonising pedagogy aims at interrupting Eurocentric knowledge at the level of the classroom with the hope that these interventions help undermine historical distributions of power structures.’ (Zembylas, 2017, p.495).
‘Power in a university classroom is linked to how students are being led to learn. Such power may be expressed explicitly or implicitly, conscious and unconsciously. When an individual(s) deliver a class, an array of teaching approaches may be used […] through the student-centred approach, the teacher becomes more of a facilitator than instructor.. ‘Students react positively when allowed to make decisions about theirown learning.’ (Harden and Laidlaw, 2012 p.80)
‘When support is made explicit and accessible through various avenues by staff, students’ mental health and general wellbeing are highlighted as priorities’. (p. 52)
‘Engaging in peer teaching observations can help to uncover what power dynamics are generated from our teaching. going to observe others teach and developing through peer feedback can help to fill the gaps in our knowledge as it can be difficult to understand how our actions and approaches are being interpreted and understood by others.’ (p. 54)
Relationship segment of TRAAC:
The power of storytelling as a decolonising approach and tool for inclusivity has been discussed by scholars in different fields of research (Bisht, 2017; Dumbrill and Green, 2008). The act of storytelling is personal yet communal at the same time with values and lessons being shared. The behaviour of a group during shared storytelling is one that is united as people are sat around together on equal footing. ‘Stories in Indigenous epistemologies are disruptive, sustaining, knowledge producing, and theory-in-action. Stories are decolonisation theory in its most natural form’ (Sium and Ritskes, 2013: ii). While students should feel empowered to speak knowing their stories will be respected, it should not be an expectation that students share their personal experienced. Reflecting on different avenues of entry into deeper discussions across areas of study is important as they can significantly impact on students’ teaching and learning experiences.’ (pp. 54-55)
‘The question on shared connections also implicitly asks individuals to consider those they feel they do not have shared connections with, and how connections can be formed with these students so as to develop a classroom environment that is inclusive for all.’ (p. 55)
‘It can be helpful for staff to note down how they would describe their different student groups and examine what their descriptions releave about the ways in which students are being positioned or located in comparison to themselves.’ (p. 56)
‘In a study of how race impacts the univesity experiences of BAME students at Goldsmiths College and Goldsmiths Students’ Union, Akel (2019, p.17) notes, ‘it became clear through the data collection process that many students favoured building student-academic relationships with their tutors when they shared an ethnic identity.’ p. 57 NOTE: Interesting to reflect on how this might feed into tutorials – I most often see European white female students, female students from mainland China, and female students from Korea. I can count on one hand the number of black students and male students I have seen in tutorials – it is worth reflecting on what I am doing to perhaps alienate these students. Is this something which is reflected in the rest of the AS team?
Activity and Assessment segment of TRAAC:
‘Marginalised groups such as women; non-white people; lesbian; gays; bisexuals and transsexuals (LGBT); young people and people with disabilities have been, and continue to be pathologised, dominated and even exploited through both qualitative and quantitative research […] the fact remains that research plays a role in the marginalisation process.’ (p. 58)
Content segment of TRAAC:
‘Portelli (1993, p. 343) differentiates between the ‘formal curriculum […] which is officially recognised,’ ‘the actual curriculum, that which is actually carried out’, and ‘the hidden curriculum [which] is usually contrasted with the formal curriculum and may form part of the actual curriculum.’ ‘At a micro-level, the hidden curriculum is expressed in terms of the distinction between ‘what is meant to happen’ that is, the curriculum stated officially by the educational system or institution, and what teachers and learners actually do and experience ‘on the ground’, a kind of de facto curriculum’ (Sambell and McDowell, 1998, p. 392). Cotton et al. (2013, p. 192) note, ‘In higher education, [the hidden curriculum] may be made up of societal, institutional or lecturers’ values that are transmitted unconsciously to students.’ (p. 62)
Moving away from Passive Inclusivity CH. 5
A significant amount of scholarship has focused on how diversifying and internationalising a curriculum can help to achieve greater levels of inclusivity. Highlighting greater levels of visible globaility across a module or program helps to familiarise students with a variety of contexts and studies. This is indeed important and behind these choices should be reflections and reasoning as to why they were chosen, contemplation of how they might be effectively explored in class, and what opportunities will be given for students to thoughtfully question and critically discuss the knowledge(s) put forth to them.’ (p. 88)
‘a diversified curriculum created for diversity’s sake highlights rather than values difference’. (p. 89)
‘Feelings of belonging should help students to feel empowered to raise questions while surrounded by supportive peers and colleagues. If this is what belonging can be said to be, how can it be measured? Levels of engagement may be one answer, but attendance records and data concerning the amount of time a student may be spending on a program’s VLE platform can be interpreted differently. Student retention and attainment may be another way of looking into levels of belonging, but while such information may help to show which students are continuing and progressing well, it does not offer an explanation as to why this is not the case for all students. It has previously been argued that when materials are made relevant to students, engagement levels increase as students become more connected to their curriculum. As a result, feelings of belonging are enhanced. But materials cannot be expected to speak for themselves, their exploration needs to be facilitated by the teacher who helps to open up different avenues for further discussion.’ p. 91
‘Gomes (2018, p. 201) underlines the need to ‘investigate and accept shared responsibility for ameliorating colonialism, including linguistic. imperialism […] ‘treat prior cultural and rhetorical knowledge as an asset for learning and a resource for writing; recognise students’ experience and expertise with culture and language’ (p. 93)
‘It [is] important to acknowledge the limitations of language and question the extent to which a decolonised curriculum can be achieved through problematising the language of instruction. By doing so, students and staff become engaged in a critical dialogue that is a learning experience for all involved.’ (p. 93)
NOTE: Interesting to consider from an ‘approaching research perspective’ for my AS teaching: ‘efforts to carry out research online via search engines are subtly influenced by popularity algorithms which themsevles have not been tested for assumptions which may hunder inclusivity and decolonisation. These search results may unconsciously influence our perception of materials we come across online’. As Richardson Jr (2011, p. 1) points out, ‘the most authoritative pages may not be retrieved at the top, rather only the most popular pages. Not surprisingly, an English language website is most likely the top page or even fills the first pages of the retrieval set. I suppose you could call that a kind of cultural imperialism.’ p. 94
IDEA FOR ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT:
How do we measure ‘belonging’. Traditional metrics indicate problems but don’t inform us of anything we can do to resolve them. What is belongingness – having tutors that look like us (reflect on student contributions above)? Having curriculum that reflects and values their cultural capital and knowledge?
‘Research consists of three steps: the posing of a question, the collection of data to answer the question, and presenting an answer to the question.’ p.11
There’s a chance a definitive answer can’t be found and further research now needs to be done. But I need to remain aware that my own opinion should not influence it, or collect data that is biased towards the answer I want. Need to be open minded, and prepared to ‘be surprised’. p.12
RDF: Researcher Development Framework: ‘…articulates the knowledge, behaviours and attributes of successful researchers and encourages them to realise their potential’. p.1, cited in p.13. Four domains of attributes identified:
A. Knowledge and intellectual abilities
B. Personal effectiveness
C. Research governance and organisation – knowledge of the standards, requirements and professionalism to do research
D. Engagement, influence and impact – the knowledge and skills to work with others and ensure that the research process and findings have an impact beyond the confines of the project.
For research completed within HEIs, I can refer to ‘The Concordat to Support Research Integrity‘ (Universities UK, 2012):
This concordat seeks to provide a comprehensive national framework for good research conduct and its governance. As signatories to, and supporters of, the concordat to support research integrity, we are committed to:
maintaining the highest standards of rigour and integrity in all aspects of research
ensuring that research is conducted according to appropriate ethical, legal and professional frameworks, obligations and standards
supporting a research environment that is underpinned by a culture of integrity and based on good governance, best practice and support for the development of researchers
using transparent, robust and fair processes to deal with allegations of research misconduct should they arise
working together to strengthen the integrity of research and to review progress regularly and openly.
Ch.2: Approaches to research
Quantitative researchers collect facts and study the relationship of one set of facts to another. Use structured and pre-determined research questions, conceptual frameworks and designs. They are likely to provide quantified and possibly generalised outputs.
+ve: More objective, findings can be generalised to whole populations, statistical tests can be applied to the data in making statements about it and survey responses can be automated.
-ve: No account taken of human-ness of subjects, research is dependent on tool chosen, descriptive data meaning it’s difficult to identify reasons for the data or interpreting it, and focus of research can’t change during the process and it will invalidate study.
Qualitative researchers want to understand individuals perceptions of the world. Generally non-numerical data and usually broader research questions at the outset.
+ve: Allows exploration of behaviour; suitable for culturally based or inter-personal topics; allows researcher to reflect on their experience as part of the process; small participant numbers; allows use of ‘insider perspective; can identify constructs which are usually hard to quantify i.e. ‘anxiety’; and focus can be changed in the midst of the study if needed.
-ve: Unanticipated results or results contradicting hypothesis are common; ethics can be time-consuming; process is time-consuming; findings cannot be tested for statistical significance; findings can’t be generalised; greater risk of researcher bias.
Mixed methods: using a combination of the above two.
Hypotheses: i.e. statements of belief can be qualitative, quantitative, or both.
Triangulation: by combining qualitative and quantitative data you get a more comprehensive perspective than if you just used one, and you can confirm findings by drawing on different sources of data. (p.26)
Action research is where ‘a problem involving people, tasks and procedures cries out for solution, or where some change of feature results in a more desirable outcome. (Cohen et. al, 2011, p.344).
A key consideration for case studies is the idea of relatability i.e. how easy would this translate to, for example, a lecturer in another institution. If there’s no relatability, it won’t produce good knowledge.
Other generalisations:
Statistical generalisations: claims that there is an x% or y% chance that what was found in the same will also be found through the population.
Fuzzy generation: studies of singularities and claims it is possible/likely/unlikely that what was found i the singularity will be found in similar situations elsewhere.
(Bassey, 1990, p.12)
Survey: usually aims to represent the population proportionally in some way – think about what characteristics of the total population need to be represented to enable you to say with confidence that your sample is representative i.e. age, education, postcode, ethnic group, SEC, political affiliation etc. Dependent on what I choose as my research purpose.
Main purpose of the survey is fact finding. Not good for asking why or demonstrating a causal relationship.
Applied research is scientific study and research that aim to solve practical problems, so it aims for external validity i.e. findings of the research study will apply to people and contexts outside of the research study. Applied research often uses experiments as a principle research method.
Experimental style:be careful with saying that experiments will demonstrate cause and effect. They can do, but the research design would need to be brilliant and you’d need to have a massive sample group. Unless you can do the above (which I wouldn’t have time do) you have to ensure that all possible causes have been considered.
Ethnography and the ethnographic style of research
Ethnographic research is about developing an understanding of how a culture works:
Participant observation, interview, mapping and charting, interaction analysis, study of historical records and current public documents, the use of demographic data, etc. But ethnography centres on the participant observation of a society or culture through a complete cycle of events that regularly occur as that society interacts with its environment.
(Lutz, 1993, p.108)
The grounded theory approach: idea is to generate theories from the data gathered. They start with a research question but not a hypothesis, nor do they begin their investigation with a thorough lit review. Instead, analysis takes place as data are collected i.e. ‘the researcher examines the findings of an interview or of participant observation and then proceeds to the analysis of those findings before any other data are collected. As the research proceeds, there will be more data collection and more analysis, and so on until theoretical saturation is reached, or the stage at which the collection of further data will not generate new theories. It is at this point that the researcher can be confident that the research process has been both comprehensive and exhaustive.’ (p.37)
You need to guard against going down ‘just one more data collection path’ or ‘pursuing just one more line of enquiry’: you can get trapped in the maze of research, following different paths but not reaching the exit i.e. actually completing the study (p.37).
Thematic analysis:if there is a theme that keeps arising, that might then organically become a new area of interest and study. For example, if you had a few interviews where students reported the same specific thing, that becomes an interesting theme to explore further. You might want to go back to all participants and ask them a further questions.
Narrative inquiry and stories:
A narrative approach to inquiry is most appropriate when the researcher is interested in portraying intensely personal accounts of human experience. Narratives allow voice – to the researcher, the participants and to cultural groups – and in this sense they can have the ability to develop a decidedly political and powerful edge. (Gray, 1998, p.12)
Ch.3: Planning the Project
Don’t choose a topic before you’ve done the groundwork.
After ‘100 hours of study’ I won’t be in a position to make recommendations for fundamental chance to any system. However I might be able to suggest desirable changes in practice.
Process for getting started:
Begins with a research problem – make a list of all the different areas that interest you
Talk to colleagues about potential ideas – they may be aware of something that could cause difficulties at some stage, or other people who have done similar work that I could talk to.
Post on LinkedIn about the research I am doing and if anyone else is researching the same area?
Try to narrow it down to two research questions which are: realistic and feasible, clear, of sufficient importance, and ethical. ‘Something about first generation students’.
Consider the purpose of the study: ask questions of your question, pick it apart. This will give you a clear idea of where you are headed.
Before producing the project outline for discussion with tutor, use the following as a check-list: Purpose clear? Is it valuable? Focus clear? Do you have a rough idea of your key questions i.e. a couple of avenues to go down? Do you have a rough idea of what information might be needed?
Timing:
Produce a Gantt chart detailing at what stage all data should have been collected, analysed and drafts produced.
Often the associated research will take longer than expected, at some stage you need to give yourself a hard deadline to end research.
Keep records of all supervisory meetings
Research diary:
A document to track the process of your research in your final report PERHAPS I CAN DO THIS ON MURAL?
Try to add a date to every comment i.e. ‘do this tomorrow’, ‘write this up before Thursday’ so it’s tangible.
Ethics and Integrity in Research
Check UAL research practices – what are their ethics?
The research protocol is an essential part of research – a full description of the research that can act as a manual to ensure adherence to the methods outlined. It will likely include: a title, abstract and summary, background or rationale of the study, aims and objectives, experimental design and methods, ethical considerations, benefits of the study, resources and costs.
You shouldn’t just expect the participant to sign it straight away – give them plenty of time to go over it and give them the opportunity to negotiate any of the elements they are uncomfortable with. Think about using DocuSign for the convenience of the respondent.
Confidentiality and anonymity: practical distinction – confidentiality is a promise that a participant will not be presented in the research in any way that could identify them, anonymity goes one step further by guaranteeing that even the research is unable to identify the participant. (p.69)
Think about ways I’ll manage data sets online when I’m gathering them – I must password protect (behind UAL credentials is fine).
Ethical research in practice, the problems of ‘inside’ research and personal codes of practice:
In case study of research in an education institution, researcher found that objectivity was difficult to attain and he felt that gaining ‘confidential knowledge’ had the potential for affecting his relationships with colleagues. This is such an important part, it probably has to be focused outside of AS primarily.
Relate your research report to the pragmatic concerns of the institution (so first generation KPIs?)
I will be required to publish my research, so must keep that in mind.
Ch.5: Reading, Referencing and the Management of Information
Reading:
Need to accept that I can’t read everything – I need to set a deadline for finishing my reading.
Look out for recurring themes, categories and keywords that will become increasingly important in my search for a structure or framework for your own research.
Consider using Bibliographic software i.e. EndNote, ProCite or Reference Manager. EndNote works with a lot of export functions on online texts, so – preferable?
Read critically – examine how authors classify their findings, how they explore relationships between facts and how key issues emerge – may give me ideas on how to manage my own data.
Consider making a note of key words or categories when writing up my notes so I find it easier to find later.
Ch.6: Literature Searching
Online search facilities beneficial to finding sources: Web of Knowledge and COPAC.
Define the parameters of your search (search limiters) and key words. Ask myself: am I only interested in materials in English? Do I want contemporary sources? Do I want a single country focus? More specific – London (very specific demands of HEI study in an expensive metropolis). Include the location of your study i.e. university/school. What is the relevant discipline area? Does it matter whether members of my sample are in education?
Ensure you have SCONUL access for your research.
Check out resources available at:
The British Library
Bielefield Academic Search Engine (BASE)
Harvard’s Open Collections Program (OCP)
Interdisciplinary source of research from university digital repositories (OAISTER)
Evaluating sources:
Have you only drawn on source material that supports your argument? Make the effort to consult a wide range of sources.
Critically examine the evidence.
Consider whether the research is well designed and whether the data collection instruments suitable for purpose.
Review the source for any partisanship or bias.
PART 2: Selecting Methods of Data Collection
Constraints:
Even if you are short on time, you should make the effort to cross-check findings and use more than one method of data collection. This multi-method approach is known as triangulation.
Reliability and validity:
Reliability of the method of data collection. E.g. a question that may provide one type of answer on one occassion but a different answer on another is unreliable. Respondent may have just watched a show that altered their opinion on something, or they might be stressed out, tired, jovial – all these things could affect their responses. Best idea is to make a note of this in the limitations as don’t have time for double testing.
Validity of your data collection method would be does thing thing measure the thing that it is supposed to…or not? Like epistemological concerns. Good to get a second opinion from a peer or tutor.
My aim is go gain as REPRESENTATIVE A SAMPLE GROUP AS POSSIBLE. So, reflecting on the demographics of UAL/LCC as a whole, what does my sample group have to look like?
Documentary evidence:
Its approach is derived from historical methods, which are concerned with the problems of selection and evaluation of evidence.
Content analysis:
Content analysis is a ‘systematic, replicable technique for compressing many words of text into fewer content categories based on explicit rules of coding’ (Stemler, 2001).
It is a research tool to analyse the frequency and use of words or terms or concepts in a document with the aim of assessing the meaning and significance of a source.
Start with a research question and then choose a ‘sampling strategy after the coding or recording units have been defined (i.e.) units (…) are sampling units like health policy statements or leaflets in GP surgeries, which will then be analysed in sentences or paragraphs, using categories such as the purpose of the policies or advice given to patients.’ (p. 152)
‘After analysing word frequency, it is valuable to assess the context of the key words to test for consistency. Stemler (2001) gives advice about valuable software used for content analysis, much of which allows the researcher to see how the word was used in context. Content analysis of documents using simple word counts can be arid in its approach if the nature of the documents is not analysed in the way suggested below and this may not be appropriate for many small-scale studies.’ (pp. 153-154).
Critical analysis of documents:
External and internal criticism.
External criticism: is a document genuine (not forged) and authentic (it is what it purports to be and truthfully reports the subject).
Internal criticism: contents of a document is subject to ;rigorous analysis’ (p. 154)
What kind of document is it?
What does it actually say? Certain types of document use specialised language which must be mastered, and private correspondence may use language in an idiosyncratic way.
Who produced it and what is known about them?
What was its purpose?
When and in what circumstances what is produced?
It is typical or atypical of its type?
Is it complete? Has it been altered or edited?
What is known about the author’s social background, political views, aims and past experience?
Did the author experience or observe what is being described? If so, were they an expert on what was being witnessed and a trained observer of the events described?
Did the author habitually tell the truth or exaggerate, distort or omit?
How long after the event did the author produce the document?
‘Gaps in the evidence can sometimes be very significant, as they may indicate a prejudice or a determination to ignore a proposed change. Decide whether a particular political affiliation might possible influence the tone of emphasis of a paper and try to come to a conclusion based on all the available evidence’. (pp. 155 – 156)
Considerations for online research:
‘People behave differently online and offline and so only research could not reflect the ‘real world’.
Exaggerated views were a result of the anonymity the internet afforded and therefore research findings using views from online sources would lead to inaccurate conclusions about something or someone.
Impulsive comments posted online may result in researchers using a view that does not accurately reflect someone’s ‘normal’ viewpoint but instead only something they held for a moment in time.
Inaccurate profiles taken without further context would lead to inaccurate information and findings’ (ALL ABOVE: Beninger et al. 2014:2)
If you are using social media posts to support your research, you should try to reach out to them to explain what you are doing and so that they have a contact detail. They may wish to view your research eventually. If you are using online content from under-18s or vulnerable adults then you must have DBS clearance.
‘On the other hand, the advantage of the researcher of gathering data from social media is that, if the particulants are not aware of the researcher’s study in advance, their social media interactions will not be influenced by it and will therefore be authentic.’ (p.169)
Approaches to online research:
Boolean Search: ‘George Boole was a British mathematician whose work on logic is the foundation of our digital world. hE ESTABLISHES boolean logic, a theory of mathematics in which all variables are either ‘true’ or ‘false’ or ‘on’ or ‘off’. Boolean Search is a way to organise your search by using a combination of keywords and the three main Boolean operations: And, Or, Not, (…).
Using ‘and’ between words means results will be shown which include both of the keywords i.e. not treated as separate keywords
Using ‘or’ between words means results are shown which contain the keywords together or separately
Using ‘not’ between keywords means results are shown which contain the first key word but results that also include the second keyword or only include the second keyword are excluded
Set up Google Alerts
Pocket: Pocket is a tool that enables you to save anything that is of interest that you don’t have time to read so that you can access it later. Pocket is a browser extension that adds an icon to your toolbar. When you come across an article or website or vide, you click on the Pocket icon and it saves the URL. It works across devices so you can read the content on your phone later.
Ch.10: Designing and Administering Surveys
Difference between surveys and questionnaires:
A questionnaire is a set of written questions used for collecting information that is not then aggregated for statistical purposes. A survey … gathers information that is used to come to a conclusion about what a group of people think or how they behave, or a combination of the two: ‘an example of a questionnaire would be a teacher asking students questions sbout how well they have understood a topic, with the aim of identifying those pupils experiencing difficulties. There is no intention here to quantify or analyse the data of the class as a group. On the other hand, if the teacher wanted to find our how many students were having difficulty understanding the topic across 10 classes, this would be a survey, as some method of quantifying the data would be involved.’ (p.188)
You must specify in your questions exactly what information you wish the respondents to provide
‘Operationalizable’: ‘the rules we use to link the language or theory (concepts) to the language of research (indicators)’ p.194. I.e. if we want to understand something about class (a concept and therefore not observable), what can we observe in the world which manifests class? That is, what indicators can be used for class so that we can obtain data about class.’ (Rose and Sullivan, 1996, pp.12-13)
Don’t assume, don’t use double questions i.e. ‘did you do this and this’, don’t use leading questions.
Drawing a sample:
A random sample will give each of the individuals concerns and equal chance of taking part i.e. you go through an alphabetical list and list every other name.
You may want representative subgroups i.e. an appropriate proportion of men and women, individuals in different age categories or some other sub-group.
‘Opportunity samples’ are when you are forced to interview anyone from the total population who is available and willing at the time. Efforts should still be made to select as representative a sample as possible.
Piloting the survey:
Data gathering instruments should be piloted to test how long it takes recipients to complete them, to check that all questions and instructions are clear, and to enable you to remove any items that do not yield usable data.
Allows you to do a preliminary analysis to determine whether your survey ‘works’ as expected.
Sample questions to ask the pilots of the survey:
How long did the survey take you to complete?
Were the instructions clear?
Were any of the questions unclear or ambiguous? If so, please say which and why.
Did you object to answering any of the questions?
In your opinion, has any major topic been omitted?
Was the layout of the survey clear/attractive?
Any comments?
Distribution of surveys:
Under no circumstance can you distribute your surveys until you have obtained clearance to proceed from your supervisor, your institution’s research committee, ethics committee and any other body that has responsibility for scrutinizing students’ topics, project plans and proposed methods of collecting data.
The rights of respondents and your rights and responsibilities: Respondents should be provided with a written statement about their rights and your responsibilities and the purpose of the research. Make it clear that official approval has been given and say what will be done with the completed surveys.
Make sure to put a data of submission in the letter and the survey: give respondents a deadline to respond within.
Ch. 11: Planning and conducting interviews
Think this chapter was all common sense, but if I need to look back on this for notes or for a class, the checklist from pp. 221-224 are helpful.
Ch. 12: Diaries, Logs, Critical Incident, Blogs and Vlogs
Critical Incident Technique (CIT): any specificable human activity that is sufficiently complete in itself to permit inferences and predictions to be made about the person performing the act. To be critical the incident must occur in a situation where the purpose or intent of the act seems fairly clear to the observer and where its consequences are sufficiently definite to leave little doubt concerning its effects.’ (Flanagan, 1954, p.327)
Essentially nothing dramatic, just a task or an event that makes the difference between success and failure in carrying out important parts of the job i.e. a nurse doing handovers on shifts.
Diaries: can be a good way of recording data but expects the participants to contribute a lot of their time. Furthermore, they may record an atypical week, or they may record differently because they are conscious that their responses are being analysed. But, every research instrument can succumb to bias.
Ch. 13: Observation
Solo observers are always in danger of accusations of bias or misinterpretation. If you are researching in your own professional area, try to persuade a friend, colleague or fellow student to join you for as many observation sessions as possible. (p.243)
Observation can be: structured, unstructured, participant or non-participant.
Unstructured observation: as in grounded theory, the researcher will postpone definitions and structures until a pattern has been observed…and then continues with the fieldwork in order to elaborate these while the data are still available for access.’
Participant observation: the researcher involved in the daily life of an individual, group or community and listening, observing, questioning and understanding (or trying to understand) the life of the individual(s) concerned. Downside – probably biased and idiosyncratic.
Structured observation and keeping records: you will have already formulated a hypothesis or identified the objectives of your study and the importance of observing some aspect of behaviour will have become apparent.
Your goal is always to record and observe in as objective a way as possible. Observation schedules can be a good solution to this concern. They can take the form of a checklist, diary, chart, time or critical incidents log.
Think about what you want to find out and what would be important events to happen during observation, so that you know in advance what would be important and not important to your records.
PART 3: INTERPRETING THE EVIDENCE AND REPORTING THE FINDINGS
Ch. 14: Interpreting the evidence and reporting the findings
Think about the type of average you would want to use i.e. the mean, the median or the mode.
The mean is adding all the values together then dividing by the number of values,
The median enables us to find the middle value (useful where then are extremes at one or both end of the range that might affect the mean average). To find the median, the values must be listed in order and then the middle value used.
The mode is the most frequency recurring value
If responses aren’t clustered around the mean value, then it’s helpful to consider the range, interquartile range and standard deviation.
The interquartile range: removes the importance of extreme highs and lows in the range. The highest and lowest quarter of percentages are omitted and the interquartile range of the middle 50 percent of the values are counted.
Standard deviation: uses values for the group as a whole rather than a section. It is a measure of how dispersed the data is in relation to the mean. Low standard deviation means data are clustered around the mean, and how standard deviation indicates data are more spread out. This can’t be done ‘by hand’ and must be done on a computer, but loads of programmes work it out for you.
