Claim check Møller Gregersen, A. F., & Holmegaard, H. T. (2022)

Claim check af Møller Gregersen, A. F., & Holmegaard, H. T. (2022)

Source: 

Møller Gregersen, A. F., & Holmegaard, H. T. (2022). The ideal philosophy student: A qualitative study of the transition into first year higher education. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 17(33). https://doi.org/10.7146/dut.v17i33.132715

The claim:

“However, challenges to diversity are often reduced to a problem of attracting students, rather than reforming programmes to allow more space for diversity: ‘the more privileged, elitist and hierarchical the arena, the more resistance to democratizing developments one might expect to find’ (Leicester 1993, as cited in: Morley, 1997). Differences, disagreements and diverse voices enhance and drive reforms and change (McArthur, 2010). However, without reforms and change, it is hard to enhance diversity. If philosophy and other programmes want to enhance diversity, the first step is not to implement new recruitment strategies, but to interrogate own norms, values and practices." p74

The problem:

Møller Gregersen, A. F., & Holmegaard, H. T. (2022) are discussing diversity in relation to a finding that some students during introduction to philosophy are not properly included. The issue is with the second claim where McArthur, 2010 is cited as a source. 

It seems intuitively true that “Differences, disagreements and diverse voices enhance and drive reforms and change.”. It is certainly true in many historical examples. The opposite is also true however. How many wars can we claim did not start due to “Differences, disagreements and diverse voices…”?

My further problem is that the claim is made in relation to diversity in terms of the students of an observed class. It seems out of place. 

There is certainly a logic to it: If there is a lack of diversity in any student body, changing that would require people who disagree with the state of things. That would be a pretty common factor of institutional change. However, can this be proven empirically? Why do the researchers reference an article to support this common sense claim?

Anyway i had a hard time figuring out how to do an experiment that would actually prove this for the second case, that is in terms of student body diversity. So i naturally went down the line of references to find evidence.

Cited article for claim:

McArthur, J. (2010). Achieving social justice within and through higher education: The challenge for critical pedagogy. Teaching in Higher Education, 15(5), 493–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2010.491906

The McArthur article is primarily theoretical and is about institutional change, more than local diversity. There are some similar claims however:

“The literature upon which I draw in this article is very different, exploring as it does critical or emancipatory social change and approaches that highlight the importance of conflict and difference to creative and successful change (e.g., Fullan 1999; Palmer 2000; Skelton

2005; Thrupp and Willmott 2003; Trowler 2005, 2008)” p494.

In other words McArthur is not writing that diversity in the way discussed is good in itself, but that difference and conflict is a good for creative and successful change (i know i shouldn’t have brought up history). However Møller Gregersen, A. F., & Holmegaard, H. T. could still associatively get away with it, since the claim is very general and fundamentally about people. If people are different, there might be a greater probability of change, even at student body level. Thus i looked up the references used by McArthur in the quote.

1) Fullan, Michael (1999) Change Forces: The Sequel. Philadelphia: Falmer

Press. HB: ISBN 0-75070-756-9. US$59.95, £42.00. PB: ISBN 0-75050-

755-0. US$19.95, £12.99.

It’s a book, but i got an academic review, which is more thorough than newspaper reviews.

Review: Caldwell, B. J. (2000). Journal of Educational Change, 1(2), 205–209. doi:10.1023/a:1010084411776 

The book does support the notion that difference is good for change, but moreso that change is needed of the american educational system. It also describes reforms to achieve said change, but does not provide evidence for these reforms. Caldwell notes that some examples used from the real world have not been all that effective nor easily achievable. Also he says the book is too short to be finished, noting that it is the second in what could be a trilogy.

It does not seem probable that this book contains evidence that: “Differences, disagreements and diverse voices enhance and drive reforms and change” (Møller Gregersen, A. F., & Holmegaard, H. T.). Especially not in the student body sense.

Again i would like to emphasize that i am not against the idea. I just don’t see the evidence for it and i think evidence should be provided for the claims in research articles. Beyond that there are many ideas that i hold to be true, that cannot be proven. 

2) Palmer, P. J. (1992). Divided No More. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 24(2), 10–17. doi:10.1080/00091383.1992.9937103

A debate article from 1992 with suggestions for change in education. Not references.

3) Skelton, A. 2005. Understanding teaching excellence in higher education. London and
New York: Routledge.

taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203412947/understanding-teaching-excellence-higher-education-alan-skelton 

In chapter seven of this book Skelton writes:

"International students are attractive to higher education institutions for a range of reasons. They can help to enrich the curriculum, broaden its knowledge base and enhance critical thinking through the exchange of perspectives. Their presence can lead to increased cultural sensitivity and international understanding. With the reduction of state funding for higher education, however, come further powerful motivations, namely cash and survival."

This fits more with Møller Gregersen, A. F., & Holmegaard, H. T. than with McArthur. It is just a claim however. There are no references to any evidence for the mentioned attractions, even if they seem pretty probable. 

4) Thrupp, M., and R. Willmott. 2003. Education management in managerialist times. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

 

This book is mostly about problems with school choice in Britain. Again no actual evidence for the original claim.

5) Trowler, Paul R. "A sociology of teaching, learning and enhancement: Improving practices in higher education." Papers: revista de sociologia (2005): 13-32.

This article is a critique of the departmental level of universities and the problems they cause for actual teaching and learning. As such it is an example of a wish for change in education, which is what characterizes most of these texts. Nothing about evidence for the claim, neither in the general or the local student body version.

6) Trowler, Paul. Cultures and change in higher education: Theories and practices. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2008.

This book is also about change in higher education as the title says. I could only get to this on google books, so my little inquiry is somewhat limited here. It seems mostly theoretical however and doesn’t seem to have references to any study providing evidence for the claim.