Your CIOS file request: Q-METHOD/06289174.846 hotline item

-
Received:  by CIOS Mailer; Sunday 28 Jun 2009 17:48:46
Date:         Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:48:04 +0100
From:         praminthra chitsabesan 
Subject: Re: Learning strategies
To:           Q-METHOD@LISTSERV.KENT.EDU
List-Help: ,              
List-Unsubscribe: 
List-Subscribe: 
List-Owner: 
List-Archive: 

--_eb78733b-e1d4-48c2-a5d7-31782103e561_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Dear Michael=2C

=20

I have just received my PhD on learning/teaching within a clinical environm=
ent (Exploring ward-based clinical teaching behaviour and characteristics  =
   Praminthra Chitsabesan).  I asked partipants to rank a Q-set of observab=
le low infernce behavious of clinical teachers in one Q study and then teac=
hers subjective characteristics afterwards in another....this identified vi=
ews of preferred teaching styles rather than how they learn per se.  I iden=
tified 4 factors of low-inference behavioural teaching styles and 5 of high=
 inference.....

=20

These could be interpreted and understoood in relation to a number of learn=
ing theories including those mentioned below and were also comparable to ko=
lb's and honey and mumford's learning style categories (though as the natio=
nal study on learning styles by Coffield et al showed that these two may no=
t be the ideal comparitors).

=20

I found that it was a good way to find out participants' subjective prefere=
nces of teaching performance=2C either in terms of behaviour or characteris=
tics.  This is likely to be influenced by how one feels they ideally learn =
in that situation and takes into account thier feelings about it/assumption=
s/memories of similar situations.....but does not necessarily mean that thi=
s is their most appropriate learning style for that given situation....

=20

The other thing is the subjective view can also be an important 'objective'=
 outcome....when I say this I mean if someone says they feel crap after bei=
ng shouted at by a teacher then this is a definite outcome of that teaching=
 from their point of view and just as important as looking at test scores (=
especially if you feel Roger's work is important).  Q could also be used to=
 examine this area.

=20

Sorry if this is a bit garbled..just coming off a week of night-on-calls.

=20

Hope that helps and if it just confuses the issue let me know.

=20

regards

=20

chitz  =20
=20


Date: Fri=2C 19 Jun 2009 12:37:08 -0400
From: rhurd  at KENT.EDU
Subject: Re: Learning strategies
To: Q-METHOD@LISTSERV.KENT.EDU

In keeping with my professional and personal devotion to procrastination (s=
ee Dan's note below)=2C I am gradually completing a paper on my experiences=
 using Q to help teacher education students identify their strengths for le=
arning as a model for their helping their future high school students do th=
e same thing.  In light of their self-identified strengths=2C teaching/lear=
ning strategies in the class were adapted to fit student needs and goals.  =
 Russ Hurd


=20
=20
On Thu=2C Jun 18=2C 2009 at 1:55 PM=2C Dani B. Thomas  wrote:

Michael et al.=2C   the following pieces would fall into the second traditi=
on cited by Roland Artery:  Since education is pretty much what we make of =
it -- whether formal or otherwise -- these studies sought to gain better un=
derstanding=2C first=2C of how undergraduates at a liberal arts college und=
erstand (and act on=2C or not) their subjective understandings of the liber=
al arts=3B and in the second case=2C following George Kuh's work on the so-=
called "invisible tapestry" of learning cultures at different colleges=2C a=
 study is reported which uses Q to make learning culture subjectivity opera=
nt via Q sorts by faculty=2C student-life administrators and students on th=
e nature and purpose (i.e.=2C "the point") of a college education.

Dan Thomas=2C "Taking Subjectivity Seriously in Educational Outcomes Assess=
ment: Undergraduate Understandings of

         the Liberal Arts."  Operant Subjectivity=2C 1999=2C 21=2C 120-145.



Dan Thomas and Fred Ribich=2C "In Search of the 'Invisible Tapestry:'  Subj=
ective Understandings of the Nature and

         Purpose of College."  Journal of Human Subjectivity=2C 5(1)=2C 200=
7=2C 5-22.



Several Q studies by Diane Montgomery and her students over the years -- so=
me published in OS -- deal with subjectivity

and learning in this manner.  Among their virtues is the focus on "where st=
udents are at" in the educational enterprise.  Often=2C the R-methodologica=
l work that dominates this area=2C particularly in so-called assessment res=
earch=2C incorporates (on perfectly understandable grounds) the perspective=
s of the teachers=2C administrators=2C state certifying or NCLB authorities=
. But as many of us who were students ourselves at one point in life can re=
call -- though that was for me in the era that was not so excessively conce=
rned with "accountability" -- students bring their own understandings to th=
e teaching-learning process.  Frequently=2C as those of us who are faculty =
members now can certainly appreciate=2C  those understandings are often str=
ikingly different from our own.  It seems odd to me that in this age of pro=
claimed accountability that more attention is not given to the subjective i=
mpediments or precursors of quality learning.  (On the impediments side=2C =
Russ Hurd has a really cool piece in a recent issue of OS on "academic proc=
rastination by college students=2C" a phenomenon that gets scant attention =
from the scale-driven assessment crowd despite its self-evident importance =
to the teaching-learning process.)



Best regards=2C



Dan



************************************
Dan B. Thomas
Professor of Political Science
Wartburg College
Waverly=2C IA 50677
Voice:319-352-8384
Fax:319-352-8582
************************************

________________________________

From: Q Methodology Network on behalf of Roland Arter  at 
Sent: Thu 6/18/2009 11:17 AM

To: Q-METHOD@LISTSERV.KENT.EDU
Subject: Re: Learning strategies





Michael=2C

From what I've been able to gather most literature about learning processes=
 seems to fall into two major areas.  Dewey=2C Piaget and Vygotsky=2C to na=
me a famous few=2C address learning processes and how they develop=2C mostl=
y during childhood development.  The other area seems to address learner su=
bjectivity - the way learners' perceptions=2C attitudes=2C beliefs=2C desir=
es=2C culture=2C religion=2C etc.=2C affect how they learn.  Schommer=2C Mu=
is and Dweck are a few researchers that address these issues.

The second area lends itself to Q-methodology.  (Ramlo is currently working=
 in this area and actually uses Q-methodology to evaluate learning.)  So fa=
r I haven't found many Q studies that deal directly with learner subjectivi=
ty and how it impacts learning.  Not learning development.  Learning subjec=
tivity.  Not what learners can do.  What do learners want to do to=2C and w=
hy do they want to do it from their standpoint of view.  Learning doesn't b=
egin until the learner decides it does=2C not the teacher.

First=2C I hope this sheds some light on your comments.  Second=2C if anyon=
e has any information about Q studies=2C or any studies that focus on learn=
er (student) subjectivity=2C please forward this information to me at arter=
@uakron.edu.  I am developing my dissertation.

Roland



Michael Abrams wrote:

       How much educational research focuses on how people=2C themselves=2C=
 say they
       "learn?" I see a lot of research on teaching strategies=2C some inte=
resting
       work on "learning styles."  With all of the observation and measurem=
ent
       going on=2C I wonder how much attention subjectivity gets in these a=
reas.


       -----------------
       See the wildflowers of Florida at http://www.flwildflowers.com 





--=20
----------------------------
Russ Hurd=2C Ph.D.
414 Kings Ct.
Copley=2C OH  44321
330-664-0727
rhurd@kent.edu
---------------------------

_________________________________________________________________
With Windows Live=2C you can organise=2C edit=2C and share your photos.
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665338/direct/01/=

--_eb78733b-e1d4-48c2-a5d7-31782103e561_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable






Dear Michael=2C

 =3B

I have just received my PhD on learning/teaching within a clinical environm=
ent (Exploring ward-based clinical teaching behaviour =
and characteristics =3B =3B =3B =3B Praminthra Chitsabesan). =
=3B I asked partipants to rank a Q-set of observable low infernce behavious=
 of clinical teachers in one Q study and then teachers subjective character=
istics afterwards in another....this identified views of preferred teaching=
 styles rather than how they learn per se. =3B I identified 4 factors o=
f low-inference behavioural teaching =3Bstyles and 5 of high inference.=
....

 =3B

These =3Bcould be interpreted and understoood =3Bin relation to a n=
umber of learning theories including those mentioned below and were also co=
mparable to kolb's and honey and mumford's learning style categories (thoug=
h as the national study on learning styles by =3BCoffield et al =3B=
showed that these two may not be the =3Bideal comparitors).

 =3B

I found that it was a =3Bgood way to find out participants' subjective =
preferences of teaching performance=2C either in terms of behaviour or char=
acteristics. =3B This is likely to be =3Binfluenced by how one =
=3Bfeels they =3Bideally learn in that situation and takes into account=
 thier feelings about it/assumptions/memories of similar situations.....but=
 =3Bdoes not necessarily mean that this is their most appropriate learn=
ing style for that given situation....

 =3B

The other thing is the subjective view can =3Balso be an important 'obj=
ective' outcome....when I say this I mean if someone says they feel crap af=
ter being shouted at by a teacher then this is a definite outcome of that t=
eaching from their point of view and just as important as looking at test s=
cores (especially if you feel Roger's work is important). =3B Q could a=
lso be used to examine this area.

 =3B

Sorry if this is a bit garbled..just coming off a week of night-on-calls.
 =3B

Hope that helps and if it just confuses the issue let me know.

 =3B

regards

 =3B

chitz =3B =3B =3B
 =3B


Date: Fri=2C 19 Jun 2009 12:37:08 -0400
From: rhurd  at KENT.EDU
Subject:=
 Re: Learning strategies
To: Q-METHOD@LISTSERV.KENT.EDU

In keepin=
g with =3Bmy professional and personal devotion to =3Bprocrastinati=
on (see Dan's note below)=2C I am gradually completing a =3Bpaper on my=
 experiences using Q to help teacher education students identify their =
=3Bstrengths for learning as a model for their helping their future high sc=
hool students do the same thing. =3B In =3Blight of their self-iden=
tified strengths=2C =3Bteaching/learning strategies in the class were a=
dapted to fit student needs and goals. =3B =3B =3BRuss Hurd
=


 =3B
 =3B
On Thu=2C Jun 18=2C 2009 at 1:55 PM=2C Dani B. =
Thomas <=3Bda=
ni.thomas@wartburg.edu>=3B wrote:

Michael et al.=2C  =3B the following pieces would fa=
ll into the second tradition cited by Roland Artery:  =3BSince educatio=
n is pretty much what we make of it -- whether formal or otherwise -- these=
 studies sought to gain better understanding=2C first=2C of how undergradua=
tes at a liberal arts college understand (and act on=2C or not) their subje=
ctive understandings of the liberal arts=3B and in the second case=2C follo=
wing George Kuh's work on the so-called "invisible tapestry" of learning cu=
ltures at different colleges=2C a study is reported which uses Q to make le=
arning culture subjectivity operant via Q sorts by faculty=2C student-life =
administrators and students on the nature and purpose (i.e.=2C "the point")=
 of a college education.

Dan Thomas=2C "Taking Subjectivity Seriousl=
y in Educational Outcomes Assessment: Undergraduate Understandings of
 =3B  =3B  =3B  =3B  =3Bthe Liberal Arts."  =3BOp=
erant Subjectivity=2C 1999=2C 21=2C 120-145.



Dan Thomas and =
Fred Ribich=2C "In Search of the 'Invisible Tapestry:'  =3BSubjective U=
nderstandings of the Nature and

 =3B  =3B  =3B  =3B =
 =3BPurpose of College."  =3BJournal of Human Subjectivity=2C 5(1)=
=2C 2007=2C 5-22.



Several Q studies by Diane Montgomery and =
her students over the years -- some published in OS -- deal with subjectivi=
ty

and learning in this manner.  =3BAmong their virtues is the f=
ocus on "where students are at" in the educational enterprise.  =3BOfte=
n=2C the R-methodological work that dominates this area=2C particularly in =
so-called assessment research=2C incorporates (on perfectly understandable =
grounds) the perspectives of the teachers=2C administrators=2C state certif=
ying or NCLB authorities. But as many of us who were students ourselves at =
one point in life can recall -- though that was for me in the era that was =
not so excessively concerned with "accountability" -- students bring their =
own understandings to the teaching-learning process.  =3BFrequently=2C =
as those of us who are faculty members now can certainly appreciate=2C &nbs=
p=3Bthose understandings are often strikingly different from our own.  =
=3BIt seems odd to me that in this age of proclaimed accountability that mo=
re attention is not given to the subjective impediments or precursors of qu=
ality learning.  =3B(On the impediments side=2C Russ Hurd has a really =
cool piece in a recent issue of OS on "academic procrastination by college =
students=2C" a phenomenon that gets scant attention from the scale-driven a=
ssessment crowd despite its self-evident importance to the teaching-learnin=
g process.)



Best regards=2C



Dan


************************************
Dan B. Thomas
Professor of Pol=
itical Science
Wartburg College
Waverly=2C IA 50677
Voice:319-352-=
8384
Fax:319-352-8582
************************************

___=
_____________________________

From: Q Methodology Network on behalf =  at 
of Roland Arter
Sent: Thu 6/18/2009 11:17 AM

To: Q-METH=
OD@LISTSERV.KENT.EDU
Subject: Re: Learning strategies





Michael=2C

From what I've been able to gathe=
r most literature about learning processes seems to fall into two major are=
as.  =3BDewey=2C Piaget and Vygotsky=2C to name a famous few=2C address=
 learning processes and how they develop=2C mostly during childhood develop=
ment.  =3BThe other area seems to address learner subjectivity - the wa=
y learners' perceptions=2C attitudes=2C beliefs=2C desires=2C culture=2C re=
ligion=2C etc.=2C affect how they learn.  =3BSchommer=2C Muis and Dweck=
 are a few researchers that address these issues.

The second area le=
nds itself to Q-methodology.  =3B(Ramlo is currently working in this ar=
ea and actually uses Q-methodology to evaluate learning.)  =3BSo far I =
haven't found many Q studies that deal directly with learner subjectivity a=
nd how it impacts learning.  =3BNot learning development.  =3BLearn=
ing subjectivity.  =3BNot what learners can do.  =3BWhat do learner=
s want to do to=2C and why do they want to do it from their standpoint of v=
iew.  =3BLearning doesn't begin until the learner decides it does=2C no=
t the teacher.

First=2C I hope this sheds some light on your comment=
s.  =3BSecond=2C if anyone has any information about Q studies=2C or an=
y studies that focus on learner (student) subjectivity=2C please forward th=
is information to me at arter@uakron.ed=
u.  =3BI am developing my dissertation.

Roland


Michael Abrams wrote:

 =3B  =3B  =3B  =3BHow much =
educational research focuses on how people=2C themselves=2C say they
&nb=
sp=3B  =3B  =3B  =3B"learn?" I see a lot of research on teachin=
g strategies=2C some interesting
 =3B  =3B  =3B  =3Bwork=
 on "learning styles."  =3BWith all of the observation and measurement<=
BR> =3B  =3B  =3B  =3Bgoing on=2C I wonder how much attenti=
on subjectivity gets in these areas.


 =3B  =3B  =3B =
 =3B-----------------
 =3B  =3B  =3B  =
=3BSee the wildflowers of Florida at http://www.flwildflowers.com <=3Bhttp://www.flwildflowers.com/>=3B


<=
/DIV>



-- 
----------------------------
Russ Hurd=2C Ph.D.414 Kings Ct.
Copley=2C OH  =3B44321
330-664-0727
rhurd@kent.edu
---------------------------
Beyond Hotmail - see what else you can do with Windows Live. <=
a href=3D'http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/134665375/direct/01/' target=3D'_new'=
>Find out more.
=

--_eb78733b-e1d4-48c2-a5d7-31782103e561_--