methods in context

methods in context

1. EXPERIMENTS

   • experiments in lab rare = practical, ethical and theoretical issues
     • ethical - lack of informed consent, deception (milgram experiment) cannot mislead peep as to nature of experiment, may be harmful to participants (milgrams complained sweating, stress, seizures
     • theoretical - interpretivists vs positivists -- can sociology tested in lab? is it science (positive) or better observe social actors in natural setting (interpret)
   • Hawthorne effect - participants act diff if know being studied
   • Adv - controlled environment / observe variables (cause and effect) / removes bias / replicable so reliable / generalise
   • Disadv - lacks validity / ethical Qs / society cant fit inside lab (not true to life) / hawthorne effect
   • Comparative method
     • Durkheim Suicide Study - if intergrated into society = less chance of suicide
     • Adv - avoids artifically / can be used to study past events / poses no ethical probs such as harm to participants
       • BUT gives researcher less control over variables than field experiments so can be less certain if thought experiment really discovered cause of something
     • Problems - accused of focusing on one dataset / regional variations - eg suicide rates higher in german speaking protestant europe / family shame
   • positivists - quantative /
   • interpretivists not like coz fails achieve their main goal of validity

2. RESEARCH CHARACTERISTICS

   • Pupils problems
     • Pupils opportunity - ready made audience / variety of students to research - age gender ethnicity
     • power + status - hiearchy / teacher influence / less cooperation / limited understanding / hard gain informed consent / poor memory / anti-school subcultures lack interest / have to take into account diff classes, gender, ethnicity
     • vulnerability + ethical - pupils need aware of what they're being asked / child protection issues / gatekeeper restricts access / need to be DBS check / limitations of school timetable
   • Teacher problems - overworked / power / legal responsibility of kids / 'my classroom' / if pretending to be assitsstant less status + not treated equally / impression management 'puts on an act' / front stage behaviour / unable to see 'backstage' behaviour
   • Teacher opportunity - sympathetic about educ research / willing (used to being watched)
   • Classroom problems - closed + controlled / impression management / small confined / gatekeepers control / young peep insecure in small setting
   • Classroom opportunity - quite easy watch in small setting
   • Schools problems - large complex place to navigate / timetable restrictions / confidential material (downplays racism, bullying) / school stats manipulated / gatekeeper control as rep is at stake / school 'off limits' / hiearchy
   • School opportunity - lots of variable to compare (single sex, faith, grammar) / lots of knowledge about school / data rich / captive population
   • Parents problem - not easy to study (diff class gender ethnicity) / m/c more responsive / not give permission / impression management (lie about support at home) / hard observe parents at home /
   • Parents opportunity - alot of knowledge about their own kid
   • Researcher problems - taken for granted / successful peep + will be biased - not able understand full picture particularly about poor behaviour or anti-school subcultures

3. level 1 - method

4. level 2 - research characteristics

5. level 3 - issue

   • what want to know? "FOR EXAMPLE"
     • bullying / labelling / subject chosen / career choices / racism / parental impressions of school / setting + streaming / pupil subcultures / material or cultural dep / behaviour / learning difficulties / gender identities / pupil exclusion

6. intro / 3/4 paras / NO conc

   • intro
     • WHAT - definition
     • WHO - intrepretivists or positvists
     • WHY - because..... qualitative quantitative
     • EVALUATION - who not like it? why?

7. QUESTIONAIRES

   • positivists
   • closed ended
   • open ended
   • Advantages
     • practical - quick cheap / gather large data / no need recruit train interviewers - return themselves / data usually easy quantify - precoded , close ended used , quickly processed by computer
     • reliability - if repeated should get same results coz no interviewer to influence them / allows comparisons btw diff societies
     • hypothesis testing - cause and effect relationships / can make statements about possible causes of low achievment and predictions about which kids most likely underachieve
     • detachment + objectivity - positivists favour them coz its D + O method (sociologists personal involvment w respondents kept min)
     • representativeness - truly representative of wider pop / pay more attention need obtain representative sample - findings more like allow accurate generalisations about wider pop
   • Disadvantages
     • detachment - interpretivists argue data lacks validity + not true pic / argue only gain valid pic using methods get close - postal involve no direct contact btw researcher + respondent / lack of contact no way clarify if misunderstanding
     • ethical issues - may ask intrusive or sensitvive Qs
     • practical probs - data limited + superficial coz fairly brief - respondents unlikely complete long time consuming Q / offer incentives persuade complete form (entry into prize draw) / whether respondent acc received it / whether returned Q acc completed by person who addressed to
     • low response rate - not bother to complete if postal
     • inflexibilty - inflexible method - cannot explore more Qs come up during research
     • gives a snapshot - pic of social reality at one moment in time - when answered q - fail produce fully valid pic coz not capture way peep attitudes and behaviour change
     • lying , forgetting , 'right answerism' - depends on willingness / ability provide accurate answers / give respectable answers feel ought to give
     • imposing researchers meanings - interpretivists argue more likelt impose researchers own meanings - by choosing Qs to ask, already decided whats important / close ended - invalid

8. OFFICIAL STATS

   • positivists - scientific / reliable / generalisability / representativeness / social facts - true measure of real world
   • quantative gathered by gov
   • interpretism - lack validity / don't represent 'real things' 'social facts' / socially constructed
   • Disadv
     • secondary data
     • validity - 'soft' stats / risk of manipulation to meet external pressure

9. OBSERVATION

   • interpretivist qualitative
   • non-participant
   • participant
   • overt - tells being studied
   • covert - undercover
   • getting in
     • making contact - Ned Polsky gained entry world of poolroom hustler / James Patrick joined glasgow gang
     • acceptance - researcher win trust - Howard Griffin white man used medication and sun lamp treatments changed skin colour to 'pass' as black - experience impact of racism
     • HOWEVER - cant always stay quiet in group have to pick sides
   • staying in
     • need complete study once accepted - have to involved to understand fully + also detached so can remain objective + unbiased
       • over-involvement - danger
       • more time spent w group finds their ways less strange - observer becomes less observant
   • getting out
     • reenter normal world = hard /
   • overt
     • Adv
       • allows to ask naive but important Q
       • observer take notes openly
       • allows researcher use interviews methods check insights derived from observations
     • Disadv
       • group may refuse researcher permission
       • risk of hawthorne effect
   • covert
     • raises practical and ethical issues
       • practical - reduces risk of altering peep behaviour
       • ethical - moral issues / conflict w practical adv it brings of observing natural behavoir
   • participant
     • Adv
       • validity - what they say and what acc do may be diff - so can obtain rich qualitatuve data providing pic of how rlly live
       • insight - best way understand is to experience - understand 'verstehen'
       • flexability - allows openmindness / no fixed hypothesis
       • enables build rapport and gain trust
     • Disadv
       • time consuming
       • stressful and demanding
       • requires interpersonal skills and needs to be trained
       • ethical issues - deceiving peep to obtain info
       • usually small sample - selected haphazardly
       • reliabilty - depends on personal skills not reliable
       • lack objectivity
       • lack of concept of structure

10. INTERVIEWS

    • quantative + qualitative
    • Group
      • strengths
        • more comfy if w others - more likely open up
        • stimulate ideas in discussions - produces more rich and reflective data
        • useful for initial ideas - get more info later
      • weaknesses
        • may dominate discussions
        • peer pressure - not saying what really think
        • data more complex + difficult analyse
    • Structured
      • adv
        • training relative easy + inexpensive - just follow instructions
        • quick easy quantified coz close ended - suitable for hypothesis testing
        • response rate - representauve coz high - better basis for generalisations
        • reliable = get same results everytime - easy to standardise and control
      • Disadv
        • close ended - invalid - restrict interviewer asking follow up Q - cannot clarify misunderstandings
        • lie or exaggerate
        • inflexible - lack valid not align w interviewees concerns
        • snapshots in moment in time
    • Unstructured
      • Adv
        • develop a rapport (trust and understanding w interviewee) - more likely open up on sensistive topics
        • no fix Qs - fresh insight + valid data
        • can clarify any misunderstanding
        • flexible - explore whatever relevant - formulate new ideas + hypothesis
        • open minded
      • Disadv
        • smaller number - less representative - harder make generalisations
        • not reliable coz not standardised - each interview = unique - hard to replicate - so cannot compare
        • time consuming
        • more thorough training - adds to £
        • answers cant be pre-coded
        • less useful - cant establish cause and effect relationships

11. DOCUMENTS

    • interpretivists
    • qualititave
    • 2ndary sources
    • public (available for anyone ! from schools gov) eg Ofsted / Personal (letter diaries photos) / historical
    • Disadv
      • authentic? is it what claims to be?
      • missing pages?
      • credibiluty - believable?
      • may need special skills to understand - translate - words may change meaning over time
      • some may interpret differently
      • some may be mssing - not all there - schools "lose" some
    • Adv
      • sometimes only source of info if past
      • personal - get close to reality - liked by interpret
      • cheap source - someone else already got data - saves time

12. POLICY - headteacher may use material from research to help intro future policy making to make improvements (INCLUDE IN ESSAYS)