R. Murray Thomas. (1998) Conducting Educational Research: A Comparative
View. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey
400 pp.
$69.50 (Cloth) ISBN 0-89789-609-2
$24.95 (Paper) ISBN 0-89789-610-6
Reviewed by Steven I. Miller
Loyola University Chicago
This volume is an ambitious attempt to provide an educational research
guide for those conducting research in both local and cross cultural settings. In the
Preface, Thomas indicates that the book is designed for students planning research
projects and for staff members in ministries of education, international
organizations and the like. Curiously, he does not specifically recommend it as a
textbook for university or college instructors. This may be assumed, of course, but
the omission is telling in that it defines a more limited utility for the book. That is,
the book can be interpreted as a type of "guide" for those doing research rather
than a test to be used for the teaching of comparative analysis. From the contents
of the volume, one gets the impression that it may,
perhaps, be more usefully employed as a reference guide rather than an
actual textbook.
In attempting to characterize what type of book this is, Thomas (Preface)
focuses on the concept of "comparative" in two senses: as a strategy that is at the
heart of any research approach in the human sciences, and as a way of defining a
specific field of study. While both assertions are correct, the conflation of the two
does not, especially, provide a clear definition for comparative education as a field
or discipline. Additionally, Thomas (Preface) attempts to highlight the uniqueness
of his book by indicating that there have been no texts that focus precisely on the
process of conducting comparative educational research. Of course, this claim is
difficult to assess given the two possible definitions of "comparative." At least in
the comparative education-as-a-field sense, Thomas is not completely correct here
since there is George Z.F. Bereday's classic, Comparative Method In
Education, 1964, as well as Harold J. Noah and Max A. Eckstein's, Toward a Science of
Comparative Education, 1969, as two counterexamples. More importantly,
however, is Thomas's return to the definitional problem (p. 2) where he gives
definitions (of sorts) for the terms "comparison" and "contrast" but then indicates
his stipulation will be "comparison" as including both elements of "similarity"
and "contrast". Again, including both aspects makes the definition of
"comparative" all inclusive, with the price, however, of really not adding to the
clarity of either. Without belaboring the point, from my perspective this
is the crucial issue for trying to define comparative education as a field of inquiry.
That is, the real issue, epistemologically, is what constitutes a "legitimate"
comparison; and this is difficult to answer unless one delves into the philosophical
literature (e.g., Quine) dealing with topics such as "natural kinds" and category
formation. Although Thomas need not do this for the purposes of his book, not
having an awareness of these issues (or at least making a passing reference to them
if known) detracts from settling the question of what the book is really attempting
to do.
This having been said, Thomas does attempt a comprehensive overview of
what issues may be relevant for his intended audience. Chapter 1 outlines a
scheme of analysis, indicated as "stages," and includes the following categories:
Choosing what to study, Collecting Information - Methods and Instruments,
Organizing and Summarizing Information Interpreting the Results and Reporting
the Outcomes. These Stages are then used as organizers for chapter headings for
the remainder of the volume. For example, in Stage II: Collecting Information -
Methods and Instrument, there are four separate chapters on (1) Surveying the
professional literature, (2) Approaches to gathering data, (3) Data collection
techniques I: Content analysis, interviews and observations, and (4) Data collection
techniques II: Test and questionnaires. Thus, Thomas does a nice job of providing
a fairly representative and detailed summary of what it means, in general, to do
research in the human sciences. By way of illustration, Chapter 5, "Approaches to
Gathering Data," begins with a fairly detailed analysis of case studies. These are
defined, and good illustrative and sufficiently detailed examples from a wide array
of the literature are chosen to analyze various approaches.
Indeed, one of the strengths of the volume is the extensive use of examples
across various research approaches, including both domestic and cross-cultural
examples. Examples relating to specific studies are further categorized as "target
variables," "guiding questions," "sources of answers," and "methods of collecting
answers." This approach provides a useful template for a researcher to focus on
the important aspects of study under review or to have relevant questions-at-hand
to begin a study. Additionally, each chapter concludes with a Research Project
Checklist, consisting of a quick review of relevant concepts and procedures. With
some minor modifications in format, this approach is followed throughout
providing an overall focus and consistency to the many research topics addressed.
The attempt at comprehensiveness may, however, be one of the drawbacks
of the book. That is, Thomas's zeal to cover everything leads, at times, to
overlooking some of the details needed for a complete understanding of a given
technique or methods. For example, there is (pp. 227-228) a brief description of
the quantitative research technique called "path analysis" and an accompanying
example from a research study. The example refers both to a correlation "r" and
what is known as a "beta weight." These concepts are needed to understand
the idea of a "path," but the calculation of the beta-weights involve a rather
complex procedure with several underlying statistical assumptions. Likewise, in
terms of qualitative analysis, the discussion (pp. 93-94) on ethnographic research
presents an acceptable, broad overview but, again, does not address the problems of
category formation and code interpretation in enough detail.
Thus, in its attempt at comprehensiveness, appropriateness of the volume for
a specific target audience becomes problematic. Although in the Preface, as
previously mentioned, Thomas indicates that the book is directed toward students
undertaking research projects or individuals working in a variety of settings
and organizations, how it should be used needs to be clarified. For
instance, for beginning research students, it can provide a useful beginning
guide for what it means to do research, but it may be enough for
carrying out an actual study. This also would be the case, I suspect, for those
working in ministries of education: if you only have this volume as your
background information, it may not be sufficient; if you have a more extensive
background in research methods it may not be necessary. This issue becomes
especially crucial for the field of Comparative Education, itself. As the field is
increasingly marginalized in many universities, how one teaches the
"appropriate" methods to those (increasingly) few students becomes crucial. Do
we give them an "overview" of methods, or more specialized methodological
training? I believe the Thomas volume would lend itself more fully to the first
issue.
Finally, as an approach to facilitating the second issue, Stage V: Reporting
the Outcomes, which includes two Chapters on "publishing" and one of
describing future trends on technology, could be eliminated. These three Chapters
could "free up" an additional fifty pages. These pages could be profitably used
in giving a few more detailed examples (perhaps by way of Appendices) of
quantitative, qualitative and historical approaches. For example, on the
quantitative side, the very useful statistic chi-square is not mentioned. Showing
students how to compute and interpret the statistic could also bring together such
ideas as variables, levels of measurement, and hypothesis testing. A more detailed
analysis of Grounded Theory, especially on formulating Acore categories, might
clarify the qualitative approach. How to analyze primary sources on the issue of
"authenticity" would clarify the intent of historical analysis. Having said this,
the overall contribution of the volume is a good one. It is clearly written with an
easily comprehended logic. It does make the valuable contribution, in my view, of
illustrating the importance of Comparative International Education as a field of
study in an increasingly shrinking and volatile world.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment