.
.
)‫مناهج البحث التربوي ( المدخل الفينومينوجرافي )( البحث الكيفي‬
2008 ,‫ يونيو‬13 ,‫الجمعة‬
‫يعد المدخل الفينومينوجرافي من أهم مداخل البحث في التربية وعلم النفس وقد استخدمته في رسالة الماجستير كمنهج بحث لقياس‬
‫مداخل الطالب في التعلم ومخرجاته واليكم ذلك المقال المميز في المدخل الفينومينوجرافي‬
Introduction
in Sweden Commencing in .Phenomenography is a relatively new research approach
the mid-70s, with the work of Ference Marton, Lennart Svennson, Roger Saljo, and
Lars-Owe Dahlgren, the term 'phenomenography' only appeared in the mainstream
literature in 1981, when Marton proposed that the study of variation in conceptions of
It is only .)phenomena be a research specialisation in its own right (Marton, 1981
within the last decade that there has been active debate about appropriate
Indeed, .methodological procedures for conducting phenomenographic research
discussion of methodology is still very limited within the phenomenographic
.literature
Phenomenography, as a research approach, emerged from a strongly empirical rather
It is only recently that epistemological and .than theoretical or philosophical basis
ontological assumptions, a theoretical basis and specification of methodological
Bowden ( requirements underlying the approach have been more clearly developed
and Walsh, 1994; 2000; Dall'Alba and Hasselgren, 1996; Marton and Booth, 1997;
Similarly, apart from the early papers introducing .)Bowden and Marton, 1998
phenomenography (Marton, 1981; 1986), there was no widely published literature
addressing the principles and practices of the approach until recently -- notably an
edited collection of papers in 1994 addressing methodological issues (Bowden and
Walsh, 1994), subsequently revised as Bowden and Walsh, 2000; a series of papers in
the early 90s in the journal, Nordisk Pedagogic, subsequently published as a book
(Dall'Alba and Hasselgren, 1996); a special issue of the journal, Higher Education
Research and Development (HERD) in 1997, edited by Bruce and Gerber; and a book
in 1997 further developing the philosophical and theoretical basis of the approach
.)(Marton and Booth, 1997
Traditionally, phenomenographic research has been defined in terms of the object of
study (Marton, 1981), commonly described as variation in human meaning,
understanding, conceptions or, more recently, awareness or ways of experiencing a
Most phenomenographic research .)particular phenomenon (Marton and Booth, 1997
has focused on mapping variation in experience, in terms of the range of qualitatively
different ways of experiencing particular phenomena and the inclusive relationships
However, with the articulation of a .between the different ways of experiencing
stronger theoretical base underlying the research approach, there has been a growing
emphasis on identifying the structure of awareness underlying the varying experience
of phenomena, in terms of key dimensions of variation in experience and aspects of
the phenomenon that are more or less figural in awareness (Marton, 1994; Marton and
.)Ming Fai, 1997; Marton and Booth, 1997
This paper provides a comprehensive review of methodological approaches to
phenomenographic research, with a focus on the views expressed in recent discussions
and literature from the mid-90s onward -- in particular, Marton and Booth (1997); the
1997 HERD special issue; Dall'Alba and Hasselgren (1995); and Bowden and Walsh
(1994; 2000), plus the international workshops on phenomenography held in
In this review, both commonalities and .Gothenburg in 1997 and Hong Kong in 2000
variation in methods amongst phenomenographic researchers are presented, with a
.particular emphasis on the data analysis stage of phenomenographic research
The outcomes of phenomenographic research
The outcomes of phenomenographic research are presented as a hypothetical 'outcome
space', developed from the researcher(s) analysis and interpretations of the collective
This is .)experience amongst a sample group (typically based on interview data
regarded as a 'space of variation', ideally representing the full range of possible ways
of experiencing the phenomenon in question, at this particular point in time, for the
It constitutes a description of the .population represented by the sample group
.phenomenon, as experienced
The outcome space is represented analytically as a limited number of qualitatively
the phenomenon (called 'categories of description' to ways of experiencing different
distinguish the empirically interpreted category from the hypothetical experience that
between these different ways of structural relationships including the ,)]1[it represents
This structuring of the outcome space involves highlighting key aspects .experiencing
or 'dimensions of variation' that have been found, both logically and empirically, to
link and separate the different ways of experiencing the phenomenon constituted in the
.outcome space
Phenomenographic data analysis
Marton and Booth (1997) present three primary criteria for judging the quality of a
:phenomenographic outcome space
that each category in the outcome space reveals something distinctive about a way
;of understanding the phenomenon
that the categories are logically related, typically as a hierarchy of inclusive
;relationships
that the outcomes are parsimonious, i.e., that the critical variation in experience
.observed in the data be represented by a set of as few categories as possible
Phenomenographic interviews are typically tape recorded and transcribed verbatim,
Phenomenographic analysis is often .making the transcripts the focus of the analysis
described as a process of 'discovery' (Hasselgren and Beach, 1997), in the sense that
the set of categories or meanings that result from the analysis cannot be known in
It is .from the data, in relationship with the researcher emerge advance but must
However, there are .claimed that there can be no algorithms for a process of discovery
clear guiding principles, and these lead to a certain commonality in approach that I
.will attempt to capture below
Commonalities in practice
Paramount is the importance of attempting, as far as possible, to maintain an open
mind during the analysis, minimising any predetermined views or too rapid
foreclosure in views about the nature of the categories of description, and being
willing to constantly adjust one's thinking in the light of reflection, discussion and new
Maintaining a focus on the transcripts and the categories of .perspectives
rather than on individual transcripts and individual categories of ,as a set description
That is, reading of individual transcripts and defining of .description is also essential
individual categories should occur within the context of identifying similarities and
.as a group ,differences amongst transcripts and relationships between categories
The analysis usually starts with a search for meaning, or variation in meaning, across
interview transcripts, and is then supplemented by a search for structural relationships
Although all researchers agree that the constitution of meaning .between meanings
prioritising the not and structure is a combined one, some emphasise the importance of
search for structure too early in the process, as this may lead to not fully appreciating
In the .)aspects of the meaning to be found in the data (Ashworth and Lucas, 2000
early stages, reading through transcripts is characterised by a high degree of openness
to possible meanings, subsequent readings becoming more focused on particular
aspects or criteria, but still within a framework of openness to new interpretations, and
the ultimate aim of illuminating the whole by focusing on different perspectives at
.different times
The whole process is a strongly iterative and comparative one, involving the continual
sorting and resorting of data, plus ongoing comparisons between the data and the
A .developing categories of description, as well as between the categories themselves
primary feature of the constitution of categories of description is the search for key
In practical .qualitative similarities within and differences between the categories
terms, transcripts or selected quotes are grouped and regrouped according to perceived
At times the groupings precede .similarities and differences along varying criteria
explicit description of the similarities and differences, at other times the groupings are
made according to tentative descriptions for categories, as a checking and validation
procedure -- "categories are tested against the data, adjusted, retested, and adjusted
There is, however, a decreasing rate of change and eventually the whole system .again
.)of meanings is stabilized." (Marton, 1986, p. 42
Concrete descriptions of practice
So far, the description provided of phenomenographic analysis has been at the level of
However, this .general principles on which most phenomenographers would agree
level of detail does not provide a concrete description of what phenomenographic
It also does not illuminate the inevitable variation in practice .researchers actually do
Indeed, there is a dearth of such concrete descriptions of .amongst researchers
practice in the phenomenographic literature, with only occasional exceptions (notably,
Bowden and Walsh, 1994; 2000) -- a point on which phenomenography has been
Consequently, a series of accounts from the literature are presented below, .criticised
to give a more concrete indication of what the process, and variation in the process, of
:phenomenographic analysis can look like in practice
The first phase of the analysis is a kind of selection procedure " :)Marton (1986
Utterances found to be of interest for the .based on criteria of relevance
The meaning of .question being investigated... are selected and marked
an utterance occasionally lies in the utterance itself, but in general the
interpretation must be made in relation to the context from which the
Svennson and Theman (1993) have shown that the .utterance was taken
very same utterance takes on different meanings when it appears in
The phenomenon in question is narrowed down to and .different contexts
Of course, .interpreted in terms of selected quotes from all the interviews
the quotes themselves are interpreted and classified in terms of the
.contexts from which they are taken
The selected quotes make up the data pool which forms the basis for the
The researcher's attention has now .next and crucial step in the analysis
shifted from the individual subjects (i.e., from the interviews from which
the quotes were abstracted) to the meaning embedded in the quotes
The boundaries separating individuals are abandoned and .themselves
Thus, .interest is focused on the 'pool of meanings' discovered in the data
each quote has two contexts in relation to which it has been interpreted:
first, the interview from which it was taken, and second, the 'pool of
The interpretation is an interactive .meanings' to which it belongs
A step-by- .procedure which reverberates between these two contexts
As a result of .step differentiation is made within the pool of meanings
the interpretive work, utterances are brought together into categories on
Categories are differentiated from one .the basis of their similarities
In concrete terms, the process .another in terms of their differences
looks like this: quotes are sorted into piles, borderline cases are
examined, and eventually the criterion attributes for each group are
In this way, the groups of quotes are arranged and .made explicit
rearranged, are narrowed into categories, and finally are defined in
terms of core meanings, on the one hand, and borderline cases on the
.)p. 42-43( ".Each category is illustrated by quotes from the data .other
Ference and I independently assigned the transcripts to " :)Dall'Alba (1994
In discussing the categorisation of those ...particular draft categories
transcripts, our focus was on determining the qualitatively different ways
in which these students understood learning [the phenomenon under
First, we .This process occurred at two levels of analysis .]investigation
attempted to identify the conception of learning that was evident in each
transcript and second, we sought to clarify the features of each
conception by comparing and contrasting it with the other conceptions
When we had agreed on the categorisation of ...that were emerging
many of the transcripts, we attempted to describe the most characteristic
...features of each conception, with constant reference to the transcripts
At each stage of our discussions about what characterized each
conception we read the transcripts again, each time from a slightly
different perspective as our initial understanding of them developed, but
always with a focus on the conceptions of learning represented in the
We sought to formulate progressively more complete and .transcripts
As we did this, we .refined descriptions of the six conceptions
continually sought evidence within the transcripts that either was
This .consistent with our draft categories or conflicted with them
procedure was carried out within each transcript so that we always
In addition, we looked for .considered the transcript as a whole
commonality from one transcript to another within the same
Through this process we jointly drafted categories of .category
In refining those .description based on the evidence in the transcripts
categories we engaged in a process of discussion that involved
formulating or justifying each aspect of a category, referring back to the
.relevant transcripts as we did so
In the later versions of the categories of description we took the analysis
further by exploring 'what' and 'how' aspects, structural and referential
aspects of the what and how, and internal and external horizons of the
We independently classified 16 remaining interview .conceptions
transcripts that we had not discussed in order to carry out a reliability
.)p. 79-80( .check
She [the research assistant] was asked to read through the " :)Prosser (1994
whole set of transcripts for the first task several times until she felt she
She was then to try to construct a set .was reasonably familiar with them
of categories which she felt encompassed her perceptions of what the
She then went back over the transcripts, .students were trying to say
adjusted the categories, and cycled between the categories and the
transcripts until she felt she had a reasonably stable set of
When she had completed this task, we met to discuss the .categories
My task at this stage was to read through the transcripts, decide ...set
whether I felt they reasonably represented the conceptions reflected in
the transcripts, and to adjust the categories in a way to construct a more
This was done by analysing the categories in terms .logically related set
After some detailed .of their structural and referential aspects
The .discussions we agreed on a set of more logically related categories
research assistant took this set, again cycled between the categories and
We .the transcripts, adjusted the categories and produced a third set
then cycled through the whole process, until we felt we had developed a
...reasonably stable set of categories
The next stage was to return to the individual transcripts and analyse
We did this .them in terms of the categories we constructed
independently ... we examined the categorisations, and where there
seemed to be mismatches, we returned to the transcripts, and either
adjusted our categories, adjusted our categorisations or left the
mismatch remaining, depending on our interpretation of the
This we repeated several times over a number of .transcripts
Finally, we agreed on sets of categories of description..., .meetings
p. ( "...logically related in terms of their structural and referential aspects
.)34
This involved one member of the research team taking the " :)Bowden (1994b
responsibility for reading all transcripts related to a given question and
devising a draft set of categories of description that were drawn from the
That researcher then re-read the transcripts and made .transcripts
The .tentative allocations of each transcript to one of the draft categories
The .other researchers carried out the latter task independently
Where there .allocations of transcripts to categories were compared
were disagreements about category descriptions or allocation of
transcripts, they were resolved with reference to the transcripts as the
only evidence of students' understandings rather than on the occurrence
of particular statements corresponding to a specific category of
An iterative process was used to produce final descriptions .description
of categories that reflected the similarity in understanding among the
transcripts allocated to each category and the differences between the
.)categories." (p. 47
As you read the transcript there .The matter of focus is all important"
In all of the analyses we have done, I have .must be, to my mind, a focus
read all the transcripts many times -- at least six and sometimes a dozen
On each occasion, some new perspective is being sought in order .times
On each occasion, the reading of the .to clarify what the student means
To read the transcripts in order to query .transcript is a new experience
the similarities and differences represented in say, version 3 of the
categories of description, is a different experience from reading them all
The multiple readings are .again in order to illuminate version 10
necessary in order to explore all possible perspectives and because
whenever an aspect is being queried it must always, I believe, be
explored with reference to the whole transcript rather than one small
What I am looking for are the key elements of the .section of it
phenomenon as seen by the interviewees and the way they see those
elements related to each other and to their underlying meaning of
.)p. 48( .]terminal velocity [the phenomenon under study
All the time I am reading a transcript, I have in the back of my mind the "
question 'What does this tell me about the way the student understands
In other words, what must terminal velocity mean to '?terminal velocity
Students often say ... ?the student if he or she is saying this or that
Students also ...similar things but their underlying meaning is different
These similarities and .express similar ideas in quite different terms
differences can only be discovered by holding all the ideas in mind at one
time and trying to draw a picture that explains the underlying meaning of
If the student understands terminal .virtually the whole transcript
velocity in this way, then it may be no surprise that he or she has
But why has the .described an aspect of the motion in a particular way
student discussed another aspect of the motion in another way if the way
.And so on ?of seeing terminal velocity is as we thought
Again, when comparing transcripts I am asking whether these two or
Are any differences .more students see terminal velocity in a similar way
between them significant in the sense that they relate to a fundamentally
Why do I think they are ?different understanding of terminal velocity
To get the answer I must ?Why do I think they are different ?similar
This is where the group ... .always go back to the whole transcript
".discussion among researchers becomes of paramount importance
.)p. 50-51(
All of the material that has been collected forms a " )Marton and Booth (1997
It contains all that the researcher can hope to find, and .pool of meaning
This is achieved by applying the .the researcher's task is simply to find it
principle of focusing on one aspect of the object and seeking its
The pool .dimensions of variation while holding other aspects frozen
contains two sorts of material: that pertaining to individuals and that
It is the same stuff, of course, but it can be .pertaining to the collective
viewed from two different perspectives to provide different contexts for
isolated statements and expressions relevant to the object of
The researcher has to establish a perspective with boundaries .research
within which she is maximally open to variation, boundaries derived
from her most generous understanding of what might turn out to be
The .relevant to depicting differences in the structure of the pool
analysis starts by searching for extracts from the data that might be
pertinent to the perspective, and inspecting them against the two
contexts: now in the context of other extracts drawn from all interviews
that touch upon the same and related themes; now in the context of the
.individual interview
One particular aspect of the phenomenon can be selected and inspected
across all of the subjects, and then another aspect, that to be followed,
maybe, by the study of whole interviews to see where these two aspects
In a .lie in the pool relative to the other aspects and the background
study that involves a number of problems for solution, for instance, the
analysis might start by considering just one of the problems as tackled
and discussed by all the subjects, and then a selection of whole
transcripts that include particularly interesting ways of handling the
This process repeated will lead to vaguely spied structure .problem
through and across the data that our researcher/learner can develop,
sharpen, and return to again and again from first one perspective and
.)p. 133( ".then another until there is clarity
Variation in practice
Examining these descriptions of practice as a set provides a rare insight into what
in variation ,At the same time .phenomenographic research involves in concrete terms
Two obvious areas of variation in .practice amongst researchers is also highlighted
:these descriptions of approaches to phenomenographic analysis are
how much of each transcript is considered at one time; and
the emphasis placed on collaboration with other researchers during the analysis
.process
Variation in the amount of each transcript considered
In terms of the amount of each transcript considered at one time, practice varies from
considering the whole transcript (Bowden, 1994a; 1994b), or at least large chunks of
each transcript related to a particular issue (Prosser, 1994), to the selection of smaller
excerpts or quotes seen as representing particular meanings (though these are
interpreted within the larger interview context -- Marton, 1986; Svennson and
In the latter approach, the smaller chunks are separated from the .)Theman, 1983
transcript and combined for analysis in one decontextualised 'pool of meanings'
.)(Marton, 1986
Although there is little published argument for and against the two approaches (though
see Bowden 1994a; 1994b), the underlying argument in favour of the first approach
appears to be that the whole transcript should be seen and treated as a set of
From .interrelated meanings, which can best be understood in relation to each other
this perspective, the second approach carries the danger of reducing appropriate
.consideration of the context within which the selected quotes are made
While proponents of the second approach also agree on the importance of considering
the larger context when interpreting and selecting excerpts from the transcripts,
working solely with whole transcripts is seen as having the danger of encouraging an
Another possible .individual rather than collective focus in analysing the data
argument in favour of the second approach is that taking a whole transcript approach
to analysis may reduce the clarity of the key aspects of meaning that researchers
search for, because the meaning a phenomenon holds for an individual may vary
Furthermore, from a practical point of view, it is .during the course of an interview
obvious that some statements within a transcript seem to address the research theme
Selecting excerpts that seem to exemplify meanings present .more directly than others
in the larger interview, while removing perceived irrelevant or redundant components
Svennson and ( of the interview, should assist in making the data more manageable
.)Theman, 1983
Variation in emphasis placed on collaboration
Another key variation highlighted by the descriptions of practice above lies in the
Most .emphasis placed on collaboration during the constitution of an outcome space
However, .phenomenographic researchers work in isolation during their data analysis
some authors argue for the importance of bringing in additional researchers during the
analysis to encourage greater open-mindedness and awareness of alternative
perspectives, as a way of improving the final outcome space (Bowden, 1994b; Walsh,
.)1994; Trigwell, 2000
The large number of existing phenomenographic doctoral theses indicates that high
quality phenomenographic research can be accomplished as an individual researcher
working on one's own, though this does not preclude the possibility that group
It is also relevant to acknowledge here .research work may produce a better outcome
that any outcome space is inevitably partial, with respect to the hypothetically
So, what we are considering .complete range of ways of experiencing a phenomenon
outcome complete when we talk about better or worse outcomes is more or less
Thus, an individual researcher can, at the .spaces, not right or wrong outcome spaces
least, make a substantial contribution to our understanding of a phenomenon, even if
.group research might have taken that understanding further
Variation in ways of managing the data
An obvious consideration during the analysis is finding appropriate ways of managing
Many researchers acknowledge the effortful and .the large amount of data involved
The aim is to consider the interview dataas a .time consuming nature of the process
Yet, it is an obvious impossibility to hold all possible aspects of 20 or more .set
The need to handle the data set .interviews in one's mind in an open way at one time
in manageable components, without reducing its integrity, is obvious and has been
The emphasis on an iterative .approached in different ways by different researchers
process involving looking at the data from different perspectives or foci at different
.times is the most common method
Based on the numerous descriptions provided in Bowden and Walsh (1994; 2000) of
different researchers' approaches to phenomenographic analysis, various foci that have
:been taken in reading transcripts or reviewing categories of description include
Focusing on the referential or structural components of the categories of
;description
;Focusing on the 'how' or 'what' aspects of the phenomenon
Focusing on similarities and differences within and between categories and
;transcripts associated with particular categories
Attempting to resolve or understand mismatches or inconsistencies between the
;interpretations of different researchers involved in the project
Focusing on borderline transcripts and those transcripts in which there are aspects
that do not fit the proposed categories of description; and
of the categories of description of a change in all Looking for the implications for
.category anyone
The obvious aim underlying each foci is to help illuminate some aspect of the
.categories of description, leading to further clarification of the whole
Some researchers also start the analysis using a preliminary sample of 5-10
transcriptions before bringing in the full set of transcriptions (Prosser, 1994; Trigwell,
The preliminary analysis is then reconsidered in the .)1994; 2000; Dahlgren, 1995
Selecting excerpts that seem to exemplify meanings .light of the additional transcripts
present in the larger interview transcript, while removing perceived irrelevant,
redundant or unhelpful components of the transcript, is another approach that has been
used to help make the data more manageable (Svennson and Theman,
Reasonable restrictions on the number of interviews is also recommended as a .)1983
.)data management strategy (Trigwell, 1994; 2000
The interpretive role of the researcher
In line with the principles of awareness underlying phenomenographic research, the
outcome space constituted by the researcher is seen as inevitably representing a
the as experienced by relationship between the researcher and the data, i.e., the data
researcher (Svennson and Theman, 1983; Bowden, 1996; Sandberg, 1996; 1997;
Consequently, it is acknowledged that the final outcome .)Marton and Booth, 1997
It is an outcome .possible outcome from the data only space produced need not be the
that can be argued for, not empirically proven, and inevitably represents a partial
.understanding of the phenomenon
Within the researcher-data relationship, however, the researcher has certain foci and
On this basis, the .Phenomenography is an empirical research approach .priorities
results of the research should be grounded in the data, requiring the researcher to put
aside their preexisting experiences and assumptions about the phenomenon in question
as much as possible, in order to stay as open as possible to the range of meanings and
.the structure of meaning represented in the data
At the same time, the assumption of structural relationships between different ways of
experiencing is one of the epistemological assumptions underlying phenomenographic
The researcher aims to constitute not just a set of different meanings, but a .research
On this basis, it is possible in .logical structure relating the different meanings
principle for the researcher to make a professional judgment about the optimal
structure of the outcome space that may go beyond what is present in the data (as long
This is something, however, about which views .)as it is not inconsistent with the data
vary within phenomenography and that would need to be justified and acknowledged
.when reporting the research outcomes, as with all aspects of the interpretive process
This issue has been explored further by Walsh (1994; 2000), who discusses variation
:in views amongst phenomenographic researchers as to
the degree to which the logical structure of the outcome space needs to emerge as
and ;data directly as possible from the
the degree to which it may more explicitly reflect the professional judgment of
.theresearcher
This is a question of degree only, as the final outcome always reflects both the data
However, the issue has led to .and researchers' judgments in interpreting the data
some criticism of phenomenographic research, with the suggestion that the structure of
the outcome space may potentially be imposed upon the data by the researcher, rather
.)than emerging from the data (Bowden, 1996; Ashworth and Lucas, 2000
I would argue, however, that this emphasis on constituting structural relationships
require potentially ignoring aspects of the not between ways of understanding does
Where data is perceived as .)data, as claimed by some researchers (Walsh, 1994
indicating variation that does not appear to form part of a logical relationship between
One option .categories, there are a range of possibilities for presenting such findings
critical variation within one or more ways of -non is to describe them as representing
experiencing; another is to describe them as representing sub-categories of a primary
,For example .category of description
The social scientists surveyed in this study described academic freedom [the ..."
phenomenon being investigated] as applying to one or more of the following
areas of activity: research, teaching, freedom of speech and expression, and/or
the pursuit of knowledge and truth to inform social debate and social good. This
was in addition to the view that academic freedom applied to any activity of an
.academic
based on the analysis reported in this paper, the type of activity to which ...
academic freedom is seen as relevant is not a critical aspect of the meaning of
academic freedom, as the range of possible activities was found equally in each
Another way of thinking about .category and did not distinguish between them
it is to regard them as independent sub-categories of each way of understanding
).academic freedom." (Åkerlind and Kayrooz, forthcoming
In the case where perceived variation does seem critical in nature but still does not
seem to fit into an integrated logical structure to ways of experiencing a phenomenon,
In this situation, .one interpretation is that this may be due to limitations in the data
the research outcomes may be represented as an incompletely structured outcome
space, accompanied by speculation as to what a coherently structured outcome space
Conversely, the researcher could choose to .might look like with more complete data
present the most plausibly structured outcome space, while explicitly indicating where
Either way, ignoring .there is and is not active empirical support for the outcomes
.aspects of the data to ensure a logically structured outcome space is not necessary
The interpretive role of the researcher also has implications for the question of how
much background knowledge of the phenomenon under study she/he should
Some people suggest that little knowledge would encourage fewer .have
presuppositions and thus greater faithfulness to the data, but the more common view is
that the greater the researcher's knowledge and varied experience of the phenomenon,
the better their ability to constitute a logical and meaningful structure to the outcome
.)space (Booth, 1992; Trigwell, 1994; 2000; Uljens, 1996; Marton and Booth, 1997
Validity, reliability and generalisability
Qualitative researchers are still traditionally expected to address issues of validity,
reliability and generalisability of their research, even though these notions derive from
a positivist approach to research, which attempts to study an objective reality, rather
than the more intersubjective 'reality' that most interview-based qualitative research is
Consequently, these notions need to .)attempting to study (Guba, 1981; Kvale, 1996
be reframed within the context of the ontological and epistemological assumptions of
Phenomenography has much in common with the .the research approach being used
assumptions underlying other qualitative research traditions, and thus draws on their
practices, as well as having differences that necessitate its own set of
Variation in phenomenographic practice with respect to ensuring .practices
generalisability, validity and reliability of phenomenographic research outcomes is
.described below
Generalisability
Within a qualitative research paradigm, generalisability may be regarded as the extent
to which the research findings indicate what we may expect to find in situations other
than the research one, based on an analysis of the similarities and differences between
As the aim of .)the research situation and other situations (Guba, 1981; Kvale, 1996
phenomenographic research is to investigate variation in experience, the sample
in terms of representativeness rather than for ,heterogeneity should be chosen for
Consequently, phenomenographic .distribution along demographic and other lines
enabling generalisation from the sample not research outcomes have been described as
group to the population represented by the group, because the sample is not
.representative of the population in the usual sense of the term
within the sample reflects variation However, to the extent that the
of meanings range within the desired population, it is expected that the variation the
of meanings within the range within the sample will be representative of the
In .)population (Booth, 1992; Marton and Booth, 1997; Francis, 1996; Booth, 1992
this sense, the results of a phenomenographic study should be generalisable to other
of ways of experiencing range groups of people from a similar population, in that the
constituted in relation to a particular group should be common to other groups with a
Even with .)similar spread of characteristics (and presumably ways of experiencing
less similar groups of people, the meanings and dimensions of variation that emerge
from the sample group should still be relevant, but are likely to constitute a less
.complete representation of the range
meant to imply that one group would be representative of another group not This is
distribution of particular ways of experiencing frequency quantitatively, in terms of the
of ways of experiencing should be representative. range within the group, only that the
Consequently, it is important to describe the background characteristics of the
interview sample in enough detail for a reader to judge the extent to which they are
similar in collective character (and presumably thus in collective variation in
.experience) to the population that the reader is interested in
Validity
Validity is widely regarded as the extent to which a study is seen as investigating what
it aimed to investigate, or the degree to which the research findings actually reflect the
However, a phenomenographic researcher asks not how .phenomenon being studied
well their research outcomes correspond to the phenomenon as it exists in 'reality', but
how well they correspond to human experience of the phenomenon (Uljens,
With the widespread understanding that an interpretive process can never be .)1996
objective, but is always intersubjective (Guba, 1981; Kvale, 1996) or, in
the researcher as experienced by phenomenographic terms, represents the data
(Marton and Booth, 1997), the focus of research quality shifts to ensuring that the
research aims are appropriately reflected in the research methods (Ashworth and
.)Lucas, 2000; Francis, 1996; Bowden, 1994b
This includes the appropriate selection of interviewees, the use of appropriate
questioning during the interview and the maintenance of a non-judgmental, respectful
and empathic attitude towards the interviewees, following appropriate guidelines for
transcription of interviews, and using appropriate questions to 'interrogate' the
.)transcript data (Sandberg, 1994; Kvale, 1996; Ashworth and Lucas, 2000
communicative and pragmatic validity (Kvale, 1996), ,Two types of validity checks
are practiced within phenomenographic research studies, though the extent to which
.they are utilised varies
Communicative validity checks
In a context where the concept of multiple interpretations of the same data has been
legitimated, a strong emphasis must be placed on a researcher's ability to argue
There is no longer a .persuasively for the interpretation that they have proposed
search for the 'right' interpretation, but for an interpretation that is defensible, in a
context where the researcher is selecting from a range of possible interpretations
(Marton and Booth, 1997; Kvale, 1996; Sandberg, 1994; 1996; 1997; Booth, 1992;
On this basis, both the research methods and final interpretation need to .)Guba, 1981
The prevalence of .be regarded as appropriate by the relevant research community
research seminars, conference presentations and peer reviewed journals provides an
obvious source of such feedback and acceptance for phenomenographic, as with other
.forms of qualitative research
However, the research community is not the only community that may be regarded as
Within the qualitative research paradigm, other .a source of communicative validity
sources of feedback may include the individuals interviewed, other members of the
population represented by the interview sample, and the intended audience for the
findings, if different to the above groups (Uljens, 1996; Kvale, 1996; Guba,
Phenomenographic researchers commonly seek feedback from the last two .)1981
groups, however, checking one's categorisation of an interview with the original
.normal practice with this research approach interviewee isnot
Phenomenographic research has been criticised for not employing this method (e.g.,
However, it is generally not regarded as an appropriate validity check .)Francis, 1996
First, the researchers' .within this particular research approach for a number of reasons
The aim is .interpretations are made on a collective, not an individual interview basis
not to capture any particular individual's understanding, but to capture the range of
The interpretation is, thus, based on the .understandings within a particular group
as a series not ,interviews (more precisely, the interview transcripts) as a holistic group
This means that the interpretation or categorisation of an .of individual interviews
individual interview cannot be fully understood without a sense of the group of
.interviews as a whole
Furthermore, the researcher's interpretation may go beyond the individual's explicit
understanding at the time of the interview, due to the researcher's search for
In addition, the ontological assumptions .underlying, often implicit meaning
underlying the phenomenographic approach indicate that an individual's experience of
a phenomenon is context sensitive, and so can change with changes in time and
Thus, there is no expectation that interviewees would necessarily be .situation
experiencing the same understanding of the phenomenon at the time they are consulted
.over an interpretation as they were during the interview
Pragmatic validity checks
Another aspect of qualitative research validity includes the extent to which the
research outcomes are seen as useful (Kvale, 1996; Sandberg, 1994) and the extent to
The research .)which they are meaningful to their intended audience (Uljens, 1996
aim becomes to provide useful 'knowledge', where knowledge is defined as the ability
Research outcomes may then be judged in .)to perform effective actions (Kvale, 1996
terms of the insight they provide into more effective ways of operating in the world
.)(Marton and Booth, 1997; Entwistle, 1997; Marton, 1996
This is a particularly pertinent validity check for phenomenographic research, in that
much of phenomenographic research has aimed to provide useful insights into
Originating in the Department of Education and Educational .teaching and learning
phenomenography has developed as ,Gothenburg of University Research at the
In this sense, phenomenography has .primarily an educational research approach
:developed two purposes
as a research tool to explicate the nature of human experience, and
.as an educational tool to improve teaching and learning
Some researchers argue that it is in terms of this second purpose that the research
approach should be judged: "For researchers in higher education, however, the test is
generally not its theoretical purity, but its value in producing useful insights into
.)teaching and learning." (Entwistle, 1997, p. 129
Reliability
From a qualitative research perspective, reliability may be seen as reflecting the use of
appropriate methodological procedures for ensuring quality and consistency in data
.)interpretations (Kvale, 1996; Guba, 1981
Two primary forms of reliability checks on the influence of the researcher's
perspective on the research outcomes are commonly used with qualitative, interviewBoth involve the use of several researchers for .)based research (Kvale, 1996
evaluating or off-setting the potential impact of having only one researcher's
:perspective on the data
where two researchers independently code all or a sample -- Coder reliability check
A high level of agreement .of interview transcripts and compare categorisations
between coders is seen as indicating that other researchers using the same coding
.information would commonly arrive at the same categorisations of transcripts
where agreement between researchers is reached -- Dialogic reliability check
through discussion and mutual critique of the data and of each researcher's
This provides a way of balancing the perspective of a .interpretive hypotheses
single researcher, providing a check on the possibility of prejudiced subjectivity,
.and should enrich the analysis
Both checks are used within phenomenographic research to varying degrees of
Indeed, there is substantial variability amongst .popularity; neither is uniformly used
researchers in views as to the appropriateness of each of these reliability checks for
.phenomenographic research
The principle of dialogic reliability checks has been argued for strongly by Bowden
(1994b; 1996) and illustrated by Prosser (1994), though it is not common in
Similarly, while some phenomenographic .phenomenographic research at this stage
researchers argue for the value of employing a coder reliability check (Prosser, 1994;
Marton, 1996), others regard this as inappropriate for phenomenographic research
It is also possible for coder reliability checks to be ( .)(Sandberg, 1994; 1996; 1997
used to inform revisions to the proposed outcome space, making this check more
).dialogic in nature
employing a check of coder reliability reflect elements of the not Arguments for
arguments presented above for not checking the categorisation of interviews with the
That is, the set of categories of description are based on an .original interviewees
analysis of the set of interview transcripts as a group, not an individual transcript basis.
This means that a single transcript may represent more or fewer aspects of the
phenomenon being investigated than does a single category of description, making
one-to-one matching of transcripts and categories of description
Furthermore, Sandberg (1994; 1996; 1997) argues that a focus on coder .difficult
reliability directs attention away from more fundamental checks of research reliability,
.such as the researcher's procedures for achieving faithful descriptions of the data
A common alternative to these particular forms of reliability checks is for the
researcher to make their interpretive steps clear to readers by fully detailing the steps
and presenting examples that illustrate them (Sandberg, 1994; 1996; 1997; Kvale,
This involves documenting how the researcher has adopted a .)1996; Guba, 1981
critical attitude towards their own interpretations, that is, how they have analysed their
own presuppositions and the checks and balances that they have employed to help
counteract the impact of the researcher's particular perspective on the outcomes of the
.analysis
References
Understanding academic freedom: the )Åkerlind, G. and Kayrooz, C. (forthcoming
in submission to Higher Education Research and ,views of social scientists
.Development
Acta .Learning to Program: a Phenomenographic Perspective )Booth, S. (1992
.)Doctoral Thesis( .Universitatis Gothoburgensis 89: 1992
Bowden, J. (1994a) The Nature of Phenomenographic Research, in J. Bowden and E.
Understanding Phenomenographic Research: The Warburton )Walsh (Eds
.Melbourne, RMIT: EQARD, pp. 1-16 .Symposium
Bowden, J. (1994b) Experience of Phenomenographic Research: A Personal Account,
Understanding Phenomenographic )in J. Bowden and E. Walsh (Eds
Melbourne, RMIT: EQARD, pp. 44- .Research: The Warburton Symposium
)Subsequently republished in Bowden and Walsh, 2000( .55
Press: University RMIT ,Phenomenography )Bowden, J. and Walsh, E. (1994) (Eds
)Melbourne. (Subsequently revised as Bowden and Walsh, 2000
Press: University RMIT ,Phenomenography )Bowden, J. and Walsh, E. (2000) (Eds
.Melbourne
.London :Kogan Page .Learning of University The )Bowden, J. and Marton, F. (1998
Bruce, C. and Gerber, R. (1997) Editorial -- Special issue: Phenomenograpy in higher
.p125-6 ,)Higher Education Research and Development, Vol. 16 (2 .education
Dahlgren, L. (1995) Lars Dahlgren on Phenomenography, in R. Gerber and C. Bruce
(Eds) Phenomenography -- Qualitatively Research: Theory and Applications,
.of Technology University Queensland,Video 2
Dall'Alba, G. (1994) Reflections on Some Faces of Phenomenography, in J. Bowden
Understanding Phenomenographic Research: The )and E. Walsh (Eds
Melbourne, RMIT: EQARD, pp. 73- .Warburton Symposium
)Subsequently republished in Bowden and Walsh, 2000( .88
Reflections on Phenomenography: )Dall'Alba, G. and Hasselgren, B. (1996) (Eds
Studies in Educational Sciences 109. Acta Goteborg ?Toward a Methodology
.Sweden ,Gothenburg :Universitatis Gothoburgensis
Higher .Entwistle, N. (1997) Introduction: Phenomenography in higher education
.pp.125-6 ,)Education Research and Development, Vol. 16 (2
Advancing Phenomenography -- Questions of Method, in G. )1996( .Francis, H
Reflections on Phenomenography: Toward )Dall'Alba and B. Hasselgren (Eds
Studies in Educational Sciences 109. Acta Goteborg ?a Methodology
.Sweden ,Gothenburg :Universitatis Gothoburgensis
Guba, E. (1981) Criteria for Assessing the Trustworthiness of Naturalistic
,)2( Educational Communication and Technology Journal, Vol. 29,Inquiries
.pp. 75-91
Hasselgren, B. and Beach, D. (1997) Phenomenography -- A "good-for-nothingHigher Education Research and Development, ?brother" of phenomenology
.pp. 191-202,Vol. 16
,InterViews: an Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing )Kvale, S. (1996
.California ,Thousand Oaks :SAGE Publications
Marton, F. (1981) Phenomenograpy -- Describing Conceptions of the World Around
.pp. 177-200 ,Instructional Science, Vol. 10 .Us
Marton, F. (1986) Phenomenograpy -- A Research Approach to Investigating Different
.pp. 28-49 ,Journal of Thought, Vol. 21 ,Understandings of Reality
Marton, F. (1994) On the Structure of Awareness, in J. Bowden and E. Walsh
Understanding Phenomenographic Research: The Warburton )(Eds
Subsequently ( .Melbourne, RMIT: EQARD, pp. 89-100 .Symposium
)republished in Bowden and Walsh, 2000
Marton, F. (1996) Cognosco Ergo Sum: Reflections on Reflections, in G. Dall'Alba
Reflections on Phenomenography: Toward a )and B. Hasselgren (Eds
Studies in Educational Sciences 109. Acta Goteborg ?Methodology
.Sweden ,Gothenburg :Universitatis Gothoburgensis
Erlbaum Lawrence ,Learning and Awareness )Marton, F. and Booth, S. (1997
.NJ ,Hillsdale:.Ass
Paper presentation at the ,Two Faces of Variation )1997( .Marton, F. and Ming Fai, P
8th conference of the European Association for Research in Learning and
.Greece ,Athens ,Instruction
Higher Education ,Marton, F. and Trigwell, K. (2000) Variato est mater studorum
.pp. 381-395 ,Vol. 19 ,Research and Development
Prosser, M. (1994) Some Experiences of Using Phenomenographic Research
Methodology in the Context of Research in Teaching and Learning, in J.
Understanding Phenomenographic Research: The )Bowden and E. Walsh (Eds
Melbourne, RMIT: EQARD, pp. 31- .Warburton Symposium
)Subsequently republished in Bowden and Walsh, 2000( .43
Doctoral ( Sweden printed in ,Human Competence at Work )Sandberg, J. (1994
.)Thesis
Sandberg, J. (1996) Are Phenomenographic Results Reliable?, in G. Dall'Alba and B.
Reflections on Phenomenography: Toward a )Hasselgren (Eds
Studies in Educational Sciences 109. Acta Goteborg ?Methodology
Subsequently ( .Sweden ,Gothenburg :Universitatis Gothoburgensis
)republished as Sandberg, 1997
Higher Education ?Sandberg, J. (1997) Are Phenomenographic Results Reliable
.pp. 203-212 ,Research and Development, Vol. 16
Higher Education ,Svennson, L. (1997) Theoretical Foundations of Phenomenography
.pp. 159-172 ,Research and Development, Vol. 16
The Relation between Categories of Description )Svennson, L. and Theman, J. (1983
Research ,and an Interview Protocol in a Case of Phenomenographic Research
.Report 1983:02, Department of Education, University of Goteborg
Trigwell, K. (1994) The First Stage of a Phenomenographic Study of
Understanding )Phenomenography, in J. Bowden and E. Walsh (Eds
Melbourne, RMIT: .Phenomenographic Research: The Warburton Symposium
)EQARD, pp. 56-72. (Subsequently revised as Trigwell, 2000
Trigwell, K. (2000) A phenomenographic interview on phenomenography, in
RMIT University Press: ,Phenomenography )J. Bowden and E. Walsh (Eds
.82-62 .Melbourne, pp
Uljens, M. (1996) On the Philosophical Foundations of Phenomenography, in G.
Reflections on Phenomenography: Toward )Dall'Alba and B. Hasselgren (Eds
Studies in Educational Sciences 109. Acta Goteborg ?a Methodology
.Sweden ,Gothenburg :Universitatis Gothoburgensis
Walsh, E. (1994) Phenomenographic analysis of interview transcripts, in J. Bowden
Understanding Phenomenographic Research: The )and E. Walsh (Eds
pp. 17-30. (Subsequently ,Melbourne :EQARD, RMIT ,Warburton Symposium
)republished in Bowden and Walsh, 2000
It is important to distinguish between categories of description and the ways of experiencing that they ]1[
represent, where the categories are descriptive characterisations of key aspects of an experience, not a
This is a distinction which is sometimes confused in the research .description of the experience itself
.literature
‫ م‬07:11 @ ‫أضافها محمد ابراهيم محمد في مناهج بحث‬
:‫خبّر عن هذا المقال‬
‫) تعليقات‬0(
Add a Comment
Add a Comment
Home<<
.
.