首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Research & Method in Education >Grasping at methodological understanding: a cautionary tale from insider research
【24h】

Grasping at methodological understanding: a cautionary tale from insider research

机译:掌握方法论的理解:内部研究的警示故事

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This article offers an account of a doctoral insider research project that became problematic. The project was investigating mathematics teaching in a university in the UK, and by contrasting the research account with research diary entries pertaining to two interviewees, different interpretations of the interview data are evident. These differences offer illustrations of four aspects of the problematics of interviewing as follows: (1) personal relations and expectations position everyone in the interview; (2) the motivation for the research affects what the researcher learns; (3) the same material generates accounts that emphasize different things; and (4) things happen in people’s heads during the interviews that are not recorded. The argument developed by considering the examples is that authorial voice is constructed out of decisions regarding the data together with considerations regarding the researcher’s position. The validity of insider research requires reflexive consideration of the researcher’s position, and this is especially pertinent in the case of research undertaken by practitioner researchers on professional doctorates.View full textDownload full textKeywordsmethodology, insider research, reflexivity, professional doctorateRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17437271003597592
机译:本文介绍了一个有问题的博士内部研究项目。该项目正在调查英国一所大学的数学教学,并且通过将研究账目与涉及两名受访者的研究日记条目进行对比,可以明显看出受访者数据的不同解释。这些差异说明了访谈问题的四个方面,如下所示:(1)人际关系和期望将每个人置于访谈中; (2)研究动机影响研究人员的学习; (3)相同的材料会产生强调不同事物的账目; (4)采访中发生在人们头脑中的事情,没有记录下来。通过考虑示例得出的论点是,作者的声音是根据有关数据的决定以及有关研究人员位置的考虑而构造的。内幕研究的有效性需要反思性考虑研究者的位置,这在从业者研究者对专业博士学位进行研究的情况下尤为相关。查看全文下载全文关键字方法,内幕研究,反思性,专业博士学位相关变量var addthis_config = {ui_cobrand:“ Taylor&Francis Online”,servicescompact:“ citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,更多”,发布:“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17437271003597592

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号