Find someone to write my college paper
The interviewer must, however, avoid giving any clues about the desired direction which the process should lead. The tape recordings are then typed up and the resulting protocols — once they have been checked by the researcher — constitute the data on which analysis is carried out. The aim of the analysis is to yield descriptive categories of the qualitative variation found in the empirical data. The process involves the reduction of unimportant dissimilarities e. Some examples of this kind of analysis will be presented below. Thus in one investigation (Marton, 1975b: Marton et al. The article (which was written by Urban Dahllof, a Swedish professor of education) was a contribution to a debate about a reform in the Swedish system of higher education. By reanalysing the empirical data used in an investigation initiated by the National Board of Universities and Colleges, Dahllof arrives at a conclusion which differs from that drawn in the original study. In that study the pass rate of students was found to be very low in the faculties of liberal arts and social science. The pass rate was however considerably higher in more vocationally oriented fields such as medicine, civil engineering, etc. In his re-analysis, of the data, Dahllof makes the assumption that many students who enter the system of higher education do so without the intention of graduating, but only to study a particular subject over a number of terms. Dahllof excludes from the empirical material students older than twenty-five on the assumption that, at that age, they have probably already gone through some kind of post-secondary education and want to complete that education with a few terms of university studies. Although this group of students are officially defined as drop-outs, that definition does not match their own intentions. Further- more, Dahllof splits the data into sub-groups according to university, sex, subject area, and grade point average from upper secondary school. He thus finds that there are large differences between the different sub-groups. Some have a very low pass rate and some have a pass rate which is similar to that found in the medical or engineering faculties. Dahllof draws the conclusion that if the purpose of the reform is to raise the pass rate in the faculties of humanities and social science, selective rather than general measures should be taken. The grounds on which he therefore challenges the wisdom of the reform are that a closer look at the empirical data shows that the situation is satisfactory as far as many groups of students are concerned, and very problematic in the case of others. In the learning experiment students were invited, individually, to read Dahllof s article carefully at their own pace. They were asked to read it in their usual way, but they were told that they would be asked questions about it afterwards. Here find someone to write my college paper we are concerned only with the analysis of the extent to which the main point of the article could be recounted.
This means that the protocols have to be studied with the intention of understanding what the students are expressing, THE EXPERIENCE OF LEARNING irrespective of what words or examples they may use, which may show a considerable variation even between answers belonging to the same category. Starting with a comparatively large number of categories the researcher will gradually refine these, arriving at a smaller set of categor- ies that may finally be difficult or impossible to collapse further. There are differences between different groups of students. What then differentiates these categories one from another? Clearly there is a hierarchical relationship between A, B and C with regard to their degree of specificity, in that selective measures (A) are a special case of differential measures (B) while the same relation is applicable also for B in relation to C.
Category D, on the other hand deviates from the others by expressing only an aspect of the empirical data.
Categories A and B both involve the use of evidence in support of conclusions , while categories C and D represent descriptions.
Instead, there is a reliance merely on mentioning elements remembered from the text.
The outcome space provides a kind of analytic map of variations in what has been learned from a find someone to write my college paper given learning task. It is therefore an empirical concept which is not the product of logical or deductive analysis, but instead results from intensive examination of empirical data. Equally important, as used here, the outcome space is content-specific: the set of descriptive categories arrived at has not been determined a priori, but depends on the specific content of the learning material. Structural Aspects of Outcomes of Learning j This does not mean that differences in outcome are wholly content-based.
Although the categories which summarize each level of outcome may also preserve (as in the case of the Dahllof article) a description of the- content, more general structural differences can frequently be identified. For example, as we have just seen, outcomes can be categorized as conclusion oriented, descriptive or mentioning, and such differences can OUTCOMES OF LEARNING 27 also be said to represent distinct levels of outcome. Similarly sets of outcome categories can sometimes be shown to represent hierarchies, where outcomes are related one to another in terms of their degree of specificity, inclusiveness or completeness. Our next two examples are buy dissertation paper both to varying extents concerned with the structural properties of differences in outcome. Like many of the Gothenburg studies, it is a text-related analysis of the content of learning. The texts vary in length from two to six pages, but in each case, the account of the example takes up a substantial proportion of the passage. Four categories of answers to this question were identified: A. The main point of the text (the testing of hypothesis by comparing two conditions where only one factor, the assumed cause, differs) find someone to write my college paper and its relation to the example (the work of Dr. Semmelweis and the mode of action in his investigations) has been understood. The main point of the text has been understood but not its relation to the example. The main point of the text has not been understood but some other main point has been described in a rather general way (e. The focus is on one or more of the concrete examples (e. It exemplifies a tendency which we have termed horizontalization. In texts such as these, the intention is to convey a principle. Examples have a subordinate function, which is to illustrate the principle outlined. Teachers undoubtedly both hope and believe that the examples or metaphors they use to illuminate a given principle will prove less enduring than the principle itself, but how often this actually occurs is open to doubt. The striking concrete example may turn out to be more memorable than the imperfectly understood abstract principle it was meant to illustrate. Yet though horizontalization seems to reflect a structural difference of a given kind in the quality of learning outcomes, it should be stressed once again that such differences have to be looked for in relation to specific content and depend, moreover, on empirical analyses of outcomes. They do not derive from studies of the different outcomes arrived at for a given subject-matter. In this respect, a recent Australian study by Biggs and Collis (1982) is an evident exception.