Write my research papers
If the outcome of learning differs between individuals, then the very process of learning which leads to different outcomes must also have differed between individuals. This is a fundamental assumption under- lying the line of reasoning pursued in these studies. The most obvious explanation of the differences in outcome should derive from a description of the differences in the process that led to the different outcomes. After having reached such a position, we still face a highly important question concerning the strategy of research: What does it take the help essay on racism to describe differences in the learning process? Of course, we could have had a theory or a model of processes involved in learning by reading a text. We could have attempted to test that theory or model by ceteris paribus varying one factor at a time between one or several experimental and control groups.
In fact we did not have any such theory or model to test in an experimental setting.
On the contrary, we started from the assumption that the functional background of differences in the outcome of learning in natural study situations was still largely unknown. In consequence we write my research papers had to try to find out in what way students function differently in such situations. But what sources of information could we find in order to be able to answer this question? Observing students engaged in studying is really not a very rewarding research method. We can measure the time spent on reading the text, we can examine the underlinings and notes made, but such data do not provide useful information. External data of this type do not form a pattern systematically related to the outcome of learning (see Svensson, 1976).
And, indeed, there are no good reasons why they should. This was one of the methods used by Svensson (1976, 1977) which led him to the conclusions discussed in the next chapter. Here we shall consider results derived from the alternative strategy (Marton, 1974). Students were asked to recount how they had been handling the learning task and write my research papers how it appeared to them. To ask the students to describe how they had been handling the learning task is to 38 THE EXPERIENCE OF LEARNING some extent tantamount to asking them how the learning task and the learning situation appeared to them, because it is the only language in which questions about what we do when we try to learn by reading a text can be answered. What we can do instead is to say how the world appears to us and this was exactly what the students did in our experiments. The basic methodology was introduced in the previous chapter. Students were asked to read the article, knowing they would be asked questions on it afterwards. Besides the questions about what they remembered of its content, students were also asked questions designed to discover how they write my research papers had tackled this task. They were asked, for example: Could you describe how you went about reading the text? While reading, was there anything that struck you as particularly important?
Each student participated in an individually run session and all the conversation between him or her and the experimenter was recorded and transcribed write my research papers verbatim subsequently.
Svensson and Theman (1983) offer an illuminating example of the way in which the same utterance may take on different meanings in different contexts. In this way, each quote had two contexts in relation to which it had to be interpreted. The interpretation was thus an iterative procedure which went back and forth between the two contexts for each unit of analysis. The first phase of the analysis was thus a selection procedure carried out within each interview (though taking the other interviews into consideration as a background). Then came a third phase which involved a decision about the specific level at which the quotes should be seen in relation to each other. There was a good deal of overlap as the iterative procedure progressed.
There are obviously differences at different levels. There are differences in the way people express themselves and there may be differences in their general orientation, but our interest did not focus on either of these two levels. Differences in outcome had been described in terms of the different ways in which the message of the text read had been understood. We were now searching for differences in the process of learning leading to these differences in outcome.
We thus had to look for the different ways in which the process leading to these outcomes had been experienced. It is a discovery procedure which can be justified in terms of results, but not in terms of method. Levels of Processing In the specific case we are dealing with here, all our efforts, all our readings and rereadings, our iterations and reiterations, our comparisons and groupings finally turned into an astonishingly simple picture. We had been looking for an answer to the question of why the students had arrived at those qualitatively different ways of understanding the text as a whole. Their focal point of attention was on the pages in the first case and beyond them in the second.
In the second case, the students tried to understand the message by looking for relations within the text or by looking for relations between the text and phenomena of the real world, or by looking for relations between the text and its underlying write my research papers structure. These learners seemed to have seen themselves as creators of knowledge who have to use their capabilities to make critical judgements, logical conclusions and come up with their own ideas. Some quotes will serve to illustrate the first way of experiencing the learning situation:. Well I only concentrate on trying to remember as much as possible... In a later study carried out at Lancaster similar extracts were used to describe similar experiences (see Entwistle, 1981). Their awareness skated along the surface of the text.