Generalizations #73 Møller Gregersen, A. F., & Holmegaard, H. T. (2022)

At the current stage this project is about finding statistical generalizations in qualitative, danish educational research. That is to check my assumption that there is a tendency to make statistical generalizations on the basis of observations which cannot support such generalizations.

I will be posting excerpts from all those studies which to me seem problematic. This post is part of that and this is a link to the first post in the line.

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

Reference:

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

Abstract:

This paper investigates students’ transition into a bachelor’s programme of philosophy. The aim is to explore the meeting of the norms and expectations of student performances within the study programme and students’ identity negotiations when presented with these norms and expectations. Drawing on ideas of identities as performative and recognition practices as central to students’ abilities to navigate the norms, the study analyses what is entailed in the constructions of the ‘ideal’ philosophy students. The analysis builds on data produced through qualitative methods, including interviews, fieldwork and video-diaries. The analysis shows that the ‘ideal’ philosophy student is expected to demonstrate dedication and an ability to immerse themself in the content matter, while refraining from becoming absorbed in career prospects. Ideal philosophy identities performed confidence and were able to argue indisputably when engaging in discussions both in and outside teaching. Consequently, insecurity and incompetence were produced as side-effects, with a clear gendered pattern. Implications for higher education are discussed.

Testable hypothesis?:

Nej: "Which  norms  and  values  are  conveyed  through  the  social  and  cultural  context  of  the  study  programme  of  philosophy, and what is recognised (and what is not) as an ‘ideal’ student? Which student positions are includedand excluded? What are the consequences for students’ identity negotiations, in particular related to gender?" s66

Method/materials:

"In order to gain insights into the practices and culture in the philosophy programme, participant observation was conducted in induction week, during teaching and in selected social and extracurricular activities (Spradley, 1980). The main period of observation ran from the first week of the semester to two months into it and counted around  forty  hours  in  total.  Through  observations  of  everyday  interactions  between  students,  teachers  andothers involved, we acquired insights into the programme’s specific practices and culture." s67

"Five students each agreed to make between three and four video diary recordings during the first eight months of  the  programme  (Danielsson  &  Berge,  2020).  After  the  last  video  was  viewed  by  the  researchers,  all  five  students  were  invited  to  in-depth  semi-structured  interviews  (Bryman,  2012),  and  three  were  interviewed  for  two hours each. The video diaries addressed the students’ experiences of the programme and their processes of becoming students. The video diaries also informed the interviews, in which some of the themes addressedin  the  videos  were  elaborated  further.  The  themes  in  the  interviews  covered  students’  experiences  of  the  programme, including its social and academic aspects. " s68

"During the process, additional questions were posed by the first author to stimulate further reflections. The outcome of the workshop was two maps and audio recordings of the discussions." s68

"A semi-structured group interview (Halkier, 2016) was conducted with the three senior students who were in charge of planning and holding the induction week for the first-year philosophy students." s68

Statistical generalizations:

1) "Other research shows that students from working-class backgrounds tend to be risk-averse and more focused on  job  security,  hence  value  applicability  over  abstraction  and  theory,  compared  to  students  from  more  privileged backgrounds (Thomsen et al., 2013). Hence, philosophy supports a rather privileged position when focusing  on  philosophy  for  ‘its  own  sake’  instead  of  its  applicability  and  job  prospects,  thereby  potentially  excluding some students." s74

2) "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." s47

Comments:

I have flagged this study for generalizations of type 3 (see typology).

In the first quote a reference is made to a study which is not generalizable (n=60) and which ignores the old marxist problem, noted by many, but most vividly Brecht, of the idea of knowledge of class identity as consequential for the holder of said knowledge. That is not how classes work. The reference is made to support the last sentence (type 3). I'm not saying that said sentence is false, but it is a generalization that cannot be supported with the means here applied. 

The study contains many claims regarding the subject of diversity. In the second quote a reference is made to support one of the claims (also present in the quote) the article in question is characterized mostly by its lack of reference to any emperical evidence supporting said claim (in present quote) (type 3).