Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
METHODS IN CONTEXT - Coggle Diagram
METHODS IN CONTEXT
QUESTIONNAIRES:
- OPERATIONALISATION OF CONCEPTS
- turning abstract ideas into a measurable form
- difficult to turn sociological ideas e.g 'cultural capital' into language pupils will understand
- this may produce answers based on a pupils misunderstanding of a question
- over-simplifying questions decreases value of answers
- SAMPLING
- schools keep lists of pupils, staff & parents which provide accurate sampling frames for sociologists which they can draw a representative sample
- however schools may not keep samples that are relevant to the researchers interest e.g ethnic group.
- schools may deny access to such confidential information.
- distributing questionnaires is easy due to a large numbers of applicants however they may need schools permission
- parents harder to locate so using the school to distribute them is effective, e.g giving it to pupils to take home
- young children open to peer pressure so its hard to prevent distributed questionnaires from being discussed( participant bias)
- researcher doesn't have to be present to complete so problems with status differences overcome
- questionnaires appear to be a formal document so students may be put off- those with anti- school subcultres may refuse to participate
ACCESS & RESPONSE RATES:
- schools may be reluctant to allow distribution of questionnaires due to disruption it may cause or. objection to researchers topic. e.g under-age sexual activity
- questionnaires conducted in schools = higher response rates because one consent is given, teachers/students may be under pressure to cooperate
- head may authorise out of lesson time to complete questionnaires.
- higher response rate = more representative data
- lengthy questionnaire = low response rate
PRACTICAL ISSUES:
- gather large amounts of factual information quickly & cheaply
- limited: doesn't obtain explanations for the correlation of variables.
- written questionnaires unsuitable for those who cannot read well, eg young kids or those with certain learning abilities.
- questionnaires written in ellobarote code, w/c students may misunderstand therefore giving inaccurate answers
- children have a shorter attention span so questions need to be brief which limits info that can be gathered.
- teachers may recognise researchers overall intention when completing questionnaire due to being educated and professional and so adjust their answers accordingly- reduces validity
-
- ANONYMITY & DETACHMENT
- useful when researching sensitive topics e.g bullying due to anonymity- overcome fear and embarrassment - as a result response rates = higher and more details revealed about experience of being bullied- increases validity
- pupils may nor be reassured their identities will be kept secret as questionnaires = detached - no contact with researcher
- e.g studying w/c under achievement, students may be embarrassed bout poverty
- lack of rapport due to no contact with researcher = less honest responses
INTERVIEWS
- PRACTICAL ISSUES:
- young peopleslnguistic skills less developed (less articulate, reluctant to talk, limited vocabulary ,shorter attention span) = possible misunderstanding so incorrect/incomplete answers reducing validity
- children may have difficulty in keeping to the point so training needs to be more thorough for interviewing children which adds to the cost and time
- interviews > questtionares as children have better verbal skills > literacy
- schools have informal communication channels so contents of interview spread influencing responses, reducing validity
- location of interview can be problematic- schools represent authority and student may feel uncomfortable
- unstructured interviews take hours to conduct , teachers would have to complete outside school hours, parents have busy work schedules
RELIABLITY & VALIDITY: - structured interviews are standardised due to precise questions so are reliable
- structured interviews lack validity as young people are unlikely to respond to informal styles- interviews seems too much like a teacher
- personal interviewing styles however lack reliability due to obtaining different results
IMPROVING VALIDITY: (GREENE & HOGAN 2005)
- use open-ended questions
- not interrupt answers
- tolerate long pauses
- avoid repeating questions since it makes children change their first answer as they think it was wrong
- ACCESSIBILITY & RESPONSE RATES:
- POWNEY & WATTS the lower the hierarchy of interviewee = the more approvals that have to be obtained e.g students need parents, teachers
- schools may be reluctant to allow interviews during school hours due to disruption of lessons or disapproval of topic
- parental permission may be required
THE INTERVIEWER AS A 'TEACHER IN DISGUISE'
- if interviewees have less power than interviewer, they may see its in their best interest to lie, exaggerate or conceal information or seek to please which reduces validity
- interviewers likely to be adults, and children may see them as authority figures - 'teacher in disguise'
- may give most socially desirable answer to see approval e.g lying about how much time they spend on homework
- w/c parents may see interviwer as having higher status than them so may feel questions are patronising or intrusive
GROUP INTERVIEWS:
- students may be influenced by peer pressure and conform to peer expectation rather than expressing what they truly think - reduces validity
- free-flowing nature makes it impossible to standardise, reducing reliability
- GREENE & HOGAN argue its suitable for pupils- safe peer environment that they are familiar with in classrooms
- reduces power imbalance found in one-to-one interviews
- can reveal social interactions between pupils
OBSERVATIONS
STRUCTURED
PRACTICAL ISSUES: - can easily be converted into quantitative data through FIAC- counting the number of times each type of behaviour occurs
RELIABILITY & VALIDITY:
- structured observational techniques such as FIAC likely to be easily replicated as it only uses 10 categories of classroom interaction
- simply counting classroom behaviour and classifying it into categories ignores meanings that pupils and teachers attach to it
UNSTRUCTURED:
PRACTICAL ISSUES:
- heaver it may be easier to gain permission to observe rather than interview - parents permission is less likely to be needed as its just observing normal school behaviour
- personal characteristics such as age, gender and ethnicity affect observation processes e.g WRIGHT 1992 found her African Caribbean ethnicity produced antagonistic reactions from white teachers however black students would ask her fro support
- limited by restrictions of the school timetable, holidays, health & safety legislation etc
- schools are busy places so observer may find it difficult to find privacy to record observations - HAMMERSLY had to covertly observe staffroom conversations in a hurry
- schools are time consuming to observe due to complexity
ETHICAL ISSUES:
- young peoples greater vulnerability and limited ability to give informed consent means observations usually have to be overt-
- most observers hear and see things that could get pupils in trouble
- 'guilty knowledge' is an ethical problem- it may be argued the researcher has to report it however this will break trust so pupils choose not to conform
VALIDITY:
- valid as it gives us an authentic understanding of world-views.- particularly important researching classroom interaction or labelling
- power difference between adults and pupils may undermine validity due to a possible false image they present being observed
- observation allows rapport to be gained
- teachers may be skilled in altering their behaviour when being observed, reducing validity
- language pupil has may be different from researcher- makes it difficult for researchers to be certain they understand
HAWTHRONE EFFECT:
- there are few cover roles a researcher can take on for covert observations in schools a they stand out by being older
- so most observations have to be overt which makes it difficult to avoid the Hawthorne effect
SECONDARY DATA
OFFICIAL STATISTICS
PRACTICAL ISSUES:
- saves time and money as they are readily published and accessable
- educational statistics allow sociologists to make comparisons between achievements of different social groups ( ethnicity, gender, class)
- educational statistics are regularly collected so comparisons can be made over time
- goverent gather statistics to monitor the effectiveness of their educational policies which are relevant to sociologist
- however governments collect them for their own purpose so it may nor match the researcherswhos may be e.g relationship between language, social class and achievemnt
- statistics may be incorrect e.g some students may not claim free school meals due to embarrassment.
REPRESENTITIVENESS :
- highly valid e.g as all state schools have to complete a school consensus 3 times a year
- this collects info on pupils attendance, ethnicity, gender etc
RELIABILITY:
- their reliability allows for testing re-testing hypothesis, which show cause and effect relationships
VALIDITY:
- interpretevists argue statistics are socially constructed
- schools may manipulate attendance figures by re-defining pupils poor attendances as study leave or work experience due to wanting to be printed in the best possible light and raise standards. this undermines the validity
DOCUMENTS
PRACTICAL ISSUES:
- public documents often easy to access due to schools making large amounts of info public to influence parental choice
- personal documents more difficult to access - HEY 1997 used notes girls passed to each other to understand friendship patterns however these notes weren't easy to obtain as they were experts at hiring them from teachers
ETHICAL ISSUES:
- permission for public documents not required
- private documents have issues with informed consent and invasion of privacy - HEY 1997 collected some of the notes from the teachers desk after lesson , so no informed consent
RELIABILITY:
- many public documents e.g registers, are produced in systematic format so easy to make direct comparisons
- accidental mistakes when filling in registers reduce validity
- however all documents are open to interpretation e.g we cannot be sure hat HEYS interpretations of the meanings of the girls notes were the same as the girls
VALIDITY: - Documents can provide important insights into meanings held by students and teachers, increasing validity
- HEY 1997 initially used observations and and interviews but then realised she was ignoring the girls feelings and actions which are useful
EXPERIMENTS
LAB EXPERIMENTS
ETHICAL ISSUES:
- young peoples vulnerability & limited ability to understand what is happening means there is greater problems of deception, informed consent and psychological damadge
- this is why lab experiments only play a limited role in. educational research
NARROW FOCUS: - only examine 1 specific aspect of teacher expectations eg body language - allows more thorough examination of 1 variable
PRACTICAL PROBLEMS: - impossible to identify and control all variables that influence teachers expectations
-
FIELD EXPERIMENTS
ETHICAL ISSUES: - work best when those involved are unaware, which means deception
RELIABILITY: - difference in school classes, pupils ages, teaching styles etc make replication hard