Higher Education Research & DevelopmentISSN: 0729-4360 (Print) 1469-8366 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cher20 Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods Gerlese S. Åkerlind To cite this article: Gerlese S. Åkerlind (2012) Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods, Higher Education Research & Development, 31:1, 115-127, DOI: 10.1080/07294360.2011.642845 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.642845 Published online: 23 Jan 2012. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 1770 View related articles Citing articles: 10 View citing articles Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=cher20 Download by: [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] Date: 06 April 2016, At: 02:45 1986). 1998.au ISSN 0729-4360 print/ISSN 1469-8366 online # 2012 HERDSA http://dx. and ∗ Email: gerlese. 1997). 2004). 31. it has reached a surprising degree of popularity over the subsequent 25 years. these developments have led to the proposal of a Variation Theory of learning and awareness. Marton & Booth.akerlind@anu. Australia and Hong Kong. Canberra. 1997.Higher Education Research & Development Vol. 1996. its point of origin (Bruce and Gerber. 1. Francis. 1981. This work was inspired by the ongoing efforts of John Bowden to clarify the nature and rigour of phenomenographic research methods. and can lead to confusion about the nature of the approach. Bowden & Marton. February 2012. The analysis stage of phenomenographic research is often not well understood. Dall’Alba & Hasselgren. as well as in Sweden. 2005). phenomenography initially emerged from a strongly empirical rather than theoretical or philosophical basis. 115– 127 Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 ˚ kerlind∗ Gerlese S.doi. elucidating what is involved in terms of both commonality and variation in accepted practice. particularly in the UK. However.2011. it is only recently that epistemological and ontological assumptions. this has led to a situation in which critiques of the research approach may be founded on misunderstandings of the nature of phenomenography (e. This paper helps to clarify the process. Most recently. commencing in particular with Bowden and Walsh’s volume in 1994. No. While methodological debates and critiques of phenomenography have become more common over the past decade. with associated implications for approaches to learning and teaching (Marton & Tsui. Aggravated by the relative lack of published discussion of phenomenographic methodology. This encourages a lack of awareness of this variation among all but the most active phenomenographic researchers. Indeed.642845 http://www. As a research approach. Webb. 1994.com . a theoretical basis and specification of methodological requirements underlying the approach have been more clearly developed (Bowden & Walsh. initially by collecting together in one location the more concrete of the existing descriptions of phenomenographic analysis.tandfonline. with the first publications describing the approach appearing in the early 1980s (Marton. based on the principles underlying that practice. these debates typically neglect to address the issue of accepted variation in phenomenographic practice. 2000. 1996. The analytic process is then further elucidated by a unique analysis of variation in practice. A Centre for Educational Development and Academic Methods.org/10.edu.1080/07294360. Bowden & Green.g. 1997). The Australian National University. Introduction Phenomenography is a relatively new approach to educational research. Australia This paper focuses on the data analysis stage of phenomenographic research. understanding. more recently. leads to the expectation that different ways of experiencing will be logically related through the common phenomenon being experienced. Aims and outcomes of phenomenographic research Traditionally. Consequently. 1997. . this paper provides a comprehensive review of methodological approaches to phenomenographic research. The data collection stage has been more thoroughly addressed elsewhere (e. Phenomenography espouses a non-dualistic ontology: There is not a real world ‘out there’ and a subjective world ‘in here’. The assumption of structural relationships between different ways of experiencing is one of the epistemological assumptions underlying the approach (Marton and Booth. 1981) or. typically by way of hierarchically inclusive relationships (Marton & Booth. both commonalities and variation in methods among phenomenographic researchers are presented.g. 1997). 13) The phenomenographic proposition. a core premise of phenomenography is the assumption that different categories of description or ways of experiencing a phenomenon are logically related to one another. Sandberg. that ways of experiencing represent a relationship between the experiencer and the phenomenon being experienced. In this review. at this particular point in time. The structure of the outcome space represents one of the least understood aspects of phenomenography. the researcher aims to constitute not just a set of different meanings. The categories of description constituted by the researcher to represent different ways of experiencing a phenomenon are thus seen as representing a structured set. To help address these issues. 1994. awareness or ways of experiencing a particular phenomenon (Marton & Booth. the object of study of phenomenographic research has been described as variation in human meaning. with a particular emphasis on the data analysis stage of phenomenographic research. but also including the structural relationships linking these different ways of experiencing. This provides a way of looking at collective human experience of phenomena holistically. but a logically inclusive structure relating the different meanings. in terms of providing an elucidation of relations between different ways of experiencing the one phenomenon. conceptions (Marton. Outcomes are represented analytically as a number of qualitatively different meanings or ways of experiencing the phenomenon (called ‘categories of description’ to distinguish the empirically interpreted category from the hypothetical experience that it represents). nor is it imposed upon her. the ‘outcome space’. p.S. despite the fact that the same phenomena may be perceived differently by different people and under different circumstances. Ideally. The world [as experienced] is not constructed by the learner. with a focus on the views expressed in discussions and literature from the mid-1990s onward. 1997). 1997). 2000. the outcomes represent the full range of possible ways of experiencing the phenomenon in question. 2005). it is constituted as an internal relation between them. for the population represented by the sample group collectively. (Marton & Booth. These relationships represent the structure of the ‘outcome space’. Thus.Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 116 G. A˚ kerlind phenomenographic contributions to the research literature are often assessed by journal reviewers without a clear awareness of the unique methodological requirements of the approach. Bowden & Green. Ashworth & Lucas. Phenomenographic research aims to explore the range of meanings within a sample group. 2005a). is interpreted within the context of the group of transcripts or meanings as a whole. making the transcripts the focus of the analysis. some emphasize the importance of not prioritizing the search for structure too early in the process. Phenomenographic interviews are typically audio taped and transcribed verbatim. My focus. as a group. reading of individual transcripts and defining of individual categories should occur within the context of identifying similarities and differences among transcripts and relationships between categories. Every transcript. in relationship with the researcher. others highlight the danger of not considering structure until too late in the process. in this paper. typically as a hierarchy of structurally inclusive relationships. other transcripts or meanings (A Marton and Booth (1997) present three primary criteria for judging the quality of a phenomenographic outcome space: 1.. The researcher needs to be willing to constantly adjust her/his thinking in the light of reflection. is on variation and commonalities in this analytic process of ‘emergence’. 2. The set of categories or meanings that result from the analysis are not determined in advance. that the outcomes are parsimonious – i. is also essential in order to maintain focus on the collective experience. that each category in the outcome space reveals something distinctive about a way of understanding the phenomenon. and 3.e. as far as possible. That is. and is then supplemented by a search for structural relationships between meanings. discussion and new perspectives. This means that no one interview transcript (interviews represent the most common data source for phenomenograpic analysis). subsequent readings becoming more focused on .Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 Higher Education Research & Development 117 The phenomenographic focus on collective rather than individual experience is also commonly misunderstood. Conversely. and so worth clarifying here. but ‘emerge’ from the data. Bowden. given that structure and meaning are supposed to be co-constituted in phenomenographic analysis ˚ kerlind. in terms of similarities to and differences from ˚ kerlind et al. can be understood in isolation from the others. that the critical variation in experience observed in the data be represented by a set of as few categories as possible. reading through transcripts is characterized by a high degree of openness to possible meanings. for example. or variation in meaning. Although phenomenographic researchers would generally agree that the constitution of meaning and structure is a combined one. 2000. as a group. Commonalities in practice Paramount is the importance of attempting. across interview transcripts. 2005). to maintain an open mind during the analysis. rather than on individual transcripts and categories. as this may lead to not fully appreciating aspects of the meaning to be found in the data (Ashworth & Lucas. (A In the early stages. minimizing any predetermined views or too rapid foreclosure in views about the nature of the categories of description. or expression of meaning. 2005). Maintaining a focus on the transcripts and the emerging categories of description as a set. The analysis usually starts with a search for meaning. that the categories are logically related. not the range of meanings for each individual within the group. . transcripts or selected quotes are grouped and regrouped according to perceived similarities and differences along varying criteria. Utterances found to be of interest for the question being investigated . The interpretation is an interactive procedure which reverberates between these two contexts . As a result of the interpretive work. a series of accounts from the literature are presented below. 2005). the groups of quotes are arranged and rearranged. utterances are brought together into categories on the basis of their similarities. . to give a more concrete indication of what the process. and eventually the criterion attributes for each group are made explicit. the ‘pool of meanings’ to which it belongs. adjusted. The whole process is a strongly iterative and comparative one. each quote has two contexts in relation to which it has been interpreted: first. retested. In this way. there is a dearth of such concrete descriptions of practice in the phenomenographic literature. . and finally are defined (Marton. plus ongoing comparisons between the data and the developing categories of description. and adjusted again. of phenomenographic analysis can look like in practice: The first phase of the analysis is a kind of selection procedure based on criteria of relevance. from the interviews from which the quotes were abstracted) to the meaning embedded in the quotes themselves. but still within a framework of openness to new interpretations. Categories are differentiated from one another in terms of their differences. with only occasional exceptions (notably. Bowden & Walsh. 2000. A˚ kerlind particular aspects or criteria. a point on which phenomenography has been criticized. . .S. the interview from which it was taken. Consequently. the description provided of phenomenographic analysis has been at the level of general principles on which most phenomenographers would agree.Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 118 G. 42 –43). The boundaries separating individuals are abandoned and interest is focused on the ‘pool of meanings’ discovered in the data. a decreasing rate of change and eventually the whole system of meanings is stabilized. but in general the interpretation must be made in relation to the context from which the utterance was taken . 1986. (Marton. The phenomenon in question is narrowed down to and interpreted in terms of selected quotes from all the interviews. 1986. as well as between the categories themselves. borderline cases are examined. however. as a checking and validation procedure: categories are tested against the data. Thus. In practical terms. are selected and marked. The researcher’s attention has now shifted from the individual subjects (i. The meaning of an utterance occasionally lies in the utterance itself. . However. In concrete terms. the process looks like this: quotes are sorted into piles. are narrowed into categories. this level of detail does not provide a concrete description of what phenomenographic researchers actually do. and variation in the process. and second.e. p. A primary feature of the constitution of categories of description is the search for key qualitative similarities within and differences between the categories. involving the continual sorting and resorting of data. and recently. At times the groupings precede explicit description of the similarities and differences. and the ultimate aim of illuminating the whole by focusing on different perspectives at different times. Indeed. . Bowden & Green. pp. at other times the groupings are made according to tentative descriptions for categories. 1994. The selected quotes make up the data pool which forms the basis for the next and crucial step in the analysis. 42) Concrete descriptions of practice So far. There is. In addition. She was then to try to construct a set of categories which she felt encompassed her perceptions of what the students were trying to say. some new perspective is being sought in order to clarify what the student means. This process occurred at two levels of analysis. we looked for commonality from one transcript to another within the same category. She [the research assistant] was asked to read through the whole set of transcripts . pp. We did this independently . is a different experience from reading them all again in order to illuminate . As you read the transcript there must be. . and to adjust the categories in a way to construct a more logically related set. I have read all the transcripts many times – at least six and sometimes a dozen times. . On each occasion. adjusted the categories and produced a third set. The matter of focus is all important. After some detailed discussions we agreed on a set of more logically related categories. We sought to formulate progressively more complete and refined descriptions of the six conceptions. . . We then cycled through the whole process. 79–80). we continually sought evidence within the transcripts that either was consistent with our draft categories or conflicted with them. our focus was on determining the qualitatively different ways in which these students understood learning [the phenomenon under investigation]. depending on our interpretation of the transcripts.Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 Higher Education Research & Development 119 [We] independently assigned the transcripts to particular draft categories . we attempted to identify the conception of learning that was evident in each transcript and second. . This we repeated several times over a number of meetings (Prosser. 34). She then went back over the transcripts. This procedure was carried out within each transcript so that we always considered the transcript as a whole. . At each stage of our discussions about what characterized each conception we read the transcripts again. Through this process we jointly drafted categories of description based on the evidence in the transcripts. When she had completed this task. . until we felt we had developed a reasonably stable set of categories . . . and either adjusted our categories. decide whether I felt they reasonably represented the conceptions reflected in the transcripts. . In refining those categories we engaged in a process of discussion that involved formulating or justifying each aspect of a category. The research assistant took this set. again cycled between the categories and the transcripts. version 3 of the categories of description. we attempted to describe the most characteristic features of each conception. we met to discuss the set . My task at this stage was to read through the transcripts. and cycled between the categories and the transcripts until she felt she had a reasonably stable set of categories. a focus. In discussing the categorisation of those transcripts. to my mind. . adjusted our categorisations or left the mismatch remaining. we returned to the transcripts. In all of the analyses we have done. each time from a slightly different perspective as our initial understanding of them developed . . . The next stage was to return to the individual transcripts and analyse them in terms of the categories we constructed. referring back to the relevant transcripts as we did so (Dall’Alba. . adjusted the categories. and where there seemed to be mismatches. p. several times until she felt she was reasonably familiar with them. First. . 1994. the reading of the transcript is a new experience. As we did this. To read the transcripts in order to query the similarities and differences represented in say. When we had agreed on the categorisation of many of the transcripts. we examined the categorisations. with constant reference to the transcripts . This was done by analysing the categories in terms of their structural and referential aspects. On each occasion. we sought to clarify the features of each conception by comparing and contrasting it with the other conceptions that were emerging . 1994. . variation in practice amongst researchers is also highlighted. and inspecting them against the two contexts: now in the context of other extracts drawn from all interviews . All the time I am reading a transcript. maybe. of course. p. If the student understands terminal velocity in this way. practice varies from considering the whole transcript (or large sections of the whole) related to a particular . The multiple readings are necessary in order to explore all possible perspectives and because whenever an aspect is being queried it must always. and the researcher’s task is simply to find it. and return to again and again from first one perspective and then another until there is clarity (Marton & Booth. for instance. These similarities and 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 virtually the whole transcript. but it can be viewed from two different perspectives to provide different contexts for isolated statements and expressions relevant to the object of research . . what must terminal velocity mean to the student if he or she is saying this or that? . . . 1997. be explored with reference to the whole transcript rather than one small section of it (p. sharpen.S.Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 120 G. Students often say similar things but their underlying meaning is different . In a study that involves a number of problems for solution. 1994b. All of the material that has been collected forms a pool of meaning. that to be followed. . Variation in the amount of each transcript considered While all researchers would acknowledge the importance of the context provided by the larger transcript in interpreting any one segment of a transcript. 133). Students also express similar ideas in quite different terms. The pool contains two sorts of material: that pertaining to individuals and that pertaining to the collective. It contains all that the researcher can hope to find. the analysis might start by considering just one of the problems as tackled and discussed by all the subjects. It is the same stuff. then it may be no surprise that he or she has described an aspect of the motion in a particular way. now in the context of the individual interview. I have in the back of my mind the question ‘What does this tell me about the way the student understands terminal velocity [the phenomenon under study]?’ In other words. At the same time. pp. by the study of whole interviews to see where these two aspects lie in the pool relative to the other aspects and the background. and then another aspect. Variation in practice Examining these descriptions of practice as a set provides a rare insight into what phenomenographic research involves in concrete terms. . I believe. This process repeated will lead to vaguely spied structure through and across the data that our researcher/ learner can develop. 50–51). . But why has the student discussed another aspect of the motion in another way if the way of seeing terminal velocity is as we thought? And so on (Bowden. 48). . and then a selection of whole transcripts that include particularly interesting ways of handling the problem. The analysis starts by searching for extracts from the data that might be pertinent to the perspective. . One particular aspect of the phenomenon can be selected and inspected across all of the subjects. This is achieved by applying the principle of focusing on one aspect of the object and seeking its dimensions of variation while holding other aspects frozen. A˚ kerlind version 10. Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 Higher Education Research & Development 121 issue (Bowden. 1983. 1994a. as a way of improving the final outcome space (Bowden. Another possible argument in favour of the decontextualized approach is that taking a whole transcript approach to analysis may reduce the clarity of the key aspects of meaning that researchers search for. though this does not preclude the possibility that group research work may produce a better outcome. working with whole transcripts is seen as having the danger of encouraging an analytic focus on the individual interviewee. 1994b). Selecting excerpts that seem to exemplify meanings present in the larger interview. Walsh. Marton. some authors argue for the importance of bringing in additional researchers during the analysis to encourage greater open-mindedness and awareness of alternative perspectives. while proponents of the decontextualized approach also agree on the importance of considering the larger context when interpreting and selecting excerpts from the transcripts. should assist in making the data more manageable (Svensson & Theman. rather than the group of interviewees as a collective. . The large number of existing phenomenographic doctoral theses indicates that highquality phenomenographic research can be accomplished as an individual researcher working on one’s own. Most phenomenographic researchers work individually during their data analysis. though these segments are interpreted within the larger interview context (Marton. It is also relevant to acknowledge here that any outcome space is inevitably partial. because the meaning a phenomenon holds for an individual may vary during the course of an interview. Conversely. while removing perceived irrelevant or redundant components of the interview. The underlying argument in favour of the ‘contextualized within the transcript’ approach appears to be that the whole transcript should be seen and treated as a set of interrelated meanings. an individual researcher can. the ‘decontextualized from the transcript’ approach carries the danger of reducing appropriate consideration of the context within which the selected quotes are made. 1986). with respect to the hypothetically complete range of ways of experiencing a phenomenon. 1994b. 1994b. 1986). Bowden & Green. which might affect the perceived meaning (Bowden. 2000). Prosser. 2005). In the latter approach. Furthermore. it is obvious that some statements within a transcript seem to address the research theme more directly than others. So. Thus. make a substantial contribution to our understanding of a phenomenon. the smaller chunks are separated from the transcript and combined for analysis in one decontextualized ‘pool of meanings’. at the least. they continue to be considered ‘in situ’ (Bowden. 1983). which can best be understood in relation to each other. Variation in emphasis placed on collaboration Another key variation highlighted by the above descriptions of practice lies in the emphasis placed on collaboration during the constitution of an outcome space. what we are considering when we talk about better or worse outcomes is more or less complete outcome spaces. However. even if group research might have taken that understanding further. not right or wrong outcome spaces. From this perspective. 1994. In the former approach. 2005) to the selection of smaller excerpts or quotes seen as representing particular meanings (Svensson & Theman. 1994a. while certain sections of each transcript are inevitably seen as more pertinent to the research question than others. from a practical point of view. 1994. Trigwell. rather than emerging from the data (Bowden. it is an obvious impossibility to hold all possible aspects of 20 or more interview. while removing perceived irrelevant. The emphasis on an iterative process involving looking at the data from different perspectives at different times is the most common method. but a logical structure relating the different meanings. Dahlgren. 1994. 4. Variation in ways of managing the data An obvious consideration during the analysis is finding appropriate ways of managing the large amount of data involved. Yet. 2005b). focusing on the referential (meaning) or structural components of the categories of description. leading to further clarification of the whole. The need to handle the data set in manageable components. focusing on the ‘how’ or ‘what’ aspects of the phenomenon. and 6. transcripts in one’s mind in an open way at one time. Ashworth & . looking for the implications for all of the categories of description of a change in any one category. focusing on borderline transcripts and those transcripts in which there are aspects that do not fit the proposed categories of description. without reducing its integrity. This practice has led to some criticism of phenomenographic research. focusing on similarities and differences within and between categories and transcripts associated with particular categories. 2. ˚ kerlind. The preliminary analysis is then reconsidered in the light of the 2000. Variation in ways of constituting structure As described earlier. A˚ kerlind Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 The practice of group versus individual phenomenographic analysis is discussed and illustrated in detail in Bowden and Green (2005). The obvious aim underlying each of the foci is to help illuminate some aspect of the categories of description. various foci that have been taken in reading transcripts or reviewing categories of description include: 1. attempting to resolve or understand mismatches or inconsistencies between the interpretations of different researchers involved in the project. is another approach that has been used to help make the data more manageable (Svensson & Theman. a phenomenographic researcher aims to constitute not just a set of different meanings. redundant or unhelpful components of the transcript. 1983). 1995. Trigwell. with the suggestion that the structure of the outcome space may potentially be imposed upon the data by the researcher. Some researchers also start the analysis using a preliminary sample of transcripts before bringing in the full set of transcripts (Prosser. has been approached in different ways by different researchers. 3. 1996. 2005.122 G. Selecting excerpts that seem to exemplify meanings present in the larger interview transcript. 2000). The aim is to consider the interview data as a set. 5. Reasonable restrictions on the number of interviews is also recommended as a data management strategy (Trigwell. 2000) of different researchers’ approaches to phenomenographic analysis. Based on the numerous descriptions provided in Bowden and Walsh (1994. A additional transcripts.S. 1996. 1996. branching structures or hierarchies are also a possibility. 2000). in phenomenographic terms. Two types of validity checks. Kvale. sub-categories of a primary category of description (e. 1983. Ashworth & Lucas. these notions to study (Guba. This is a question of degree only. For instance. as the final outcome inevitably reflects both the data and researchers’ judgements in interpreting the data. where data are perceived as indicating variation that does not appear to form part of a logical relationship between categories. and 2. Bowden. 1996. A need to be reframed within the context of the ontological and epistemological assumptions of the research approach being used. the degree to which the logical structure of the outcome space needs to emerge as directly as possible from the data. rather than the more intersubjective ‘reality’ that most interview-based qualitative research is attempting ˚ kerlind. Marton & Booth. 1981. are commonly practised within phenomenographic research. the focus of research quality shifts to ensuring that the research aims are appropriately reflected in the research methods used (Bowden. 1997). represents the data as experienced by the researcher (Svensson & Theman. Validity and reliability: credibility and trustworthiness Qualitative researchers are still traditionally expected to address issues of the validity and reliability of their research. and thus draws on their practices. as well as having differences that necessitate its own set of practices. A pp.Higher Education Research & Development 123 Lucas. I would argue. 2005a). or the degree to which the research findings actually reflect the phenomenon being studied. or as ˚ kerlind & Kayrooz. 1994b. 1996. Validity Validity is widely regarded as the extent to which a study is seen as investigating what it aimed to investigate. 1996). However. Consequently. but how well they correspond to human experience of the phenomenon (Uljens. Phenomenography has much in common with the assumptions underlying other qualitative research traditions. With the widespread understanding that an interpretive process can never be objective and. a phenomenographic researcher asks not how well their research outcomes correspond to the phenomenon as it exists in ‘reality’. 2003. Furthermore. however. the degree to which it may more explicitly reflect the professional judgement of the researcher. though the extent to which each is utilized varies. Walsh (1994) discusses variation in views among phenomenographic researchers as to: Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 1. the structure of an outcome space need not always take the form of a linear hierarchy of inclusiveness. Walsh suggests that too strong an emphasis on constituting structural relationships may lead to potentially ignoring aspects of the data. these data may be reported as representing non-critical variation within one or more ways of experiencing.g. that the search for structural relationships does not necessarily involve ignoring data. Francis. 341–342). even though these notions derive from a positivist approach to research that attempts to study an objective reality. Sandberg. 2000). . termed communicative and pragmatic validity by Kvale (1996). Kvale. 1996. 1996). Marton & Booth. often implicit. Research outcomes may then be judged in terms of the insight they provide into more effective ways of operating in the world (Marton. .Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 124 G. Within the qualitative research paradigm other sources of feedback may include the individuals interviewed. In addition. however. other members of the population represented by the interview sample. thus. 1981. A˚ kerlind Communicative validity checks In a context of multiple legitimate interpretations of the same data.S. and the intended audience for the findings (Guba. The aim is not to capture any particular individual’s understanding. 1994. However. seeking feedback from interviewees is not regarded as an appropriate phenomenographic validity check for the following reasons. 1997). 129).g. and so can change with changes in time and situation. Some researchers argue that it is in terms of this second purpose that the research approach should be judged: ‘For researchers in higher education. but not from interviewees themselves. there is no expectation that interviewees would necessarily be experiencing the same understanding of the phenomenon at the time they are consulted over an interpretation as they were during the interview. 1997). While phenomenographic research has been criticized for not employing this method (e. meaning. Sandberg. but its value in producing useful insights into teaching and learning’ (Entwistle. Furthermore. the researchers’ interpretations are made on a collective. the researcher’s interpretation may go beyond the individual’s explicit understanding at the time of the interview. but for an interpretation that is defensible (Guba. Phenomenographic researchers commonly seek feedback from the last two groups. but to capture the range of understandings within a particular group. the ontological assumptions underlying the phenomenographic approach indicate that an individual’s experience of a phenomenon is context sensitive. not an individual interview. This means that the interpretation or categorization of an individual interview cannot be fully understood without a sense of the group of interviews as a whole. basis. p. 1996). 1996). There is no longer a search for the ‘right’ interpretation. where knowledge becomes defined as the ability to perform effective actions (Kvale. The prevalence of research seminars. 1996. Francis. Marton & Booth. The interpretation is. 1997. not as a series of individual interviews. the interview transcripts) as a holistic group. 1996. 1996. the test is generally not its [phenomenography’s] theoretical purity. 1996) and the extent to which they are meaningful to their intended audience (Uljens. Pragmatic validity checks Another aspect of qualitative research validity includes the extent to which the research outcomes are seen as useful (Sandberg. Kvale. 1997. conference presentations and peer-reviewed journals provides an obvious source of such validity checks. Entwistle. 1996). Kvale. First. 1981. Thus. Part of this defence involves ensuring that the research methods and final interpretation are regarded as appropriate by the relevant research community. based on the interviews (more precisely. due to the researcher’s search for underlying. a strong emphasis must be placed on a researcher’s ability to argue persuasively for the particular interpretation that they have proposed. the research community is not the only community that may be regarded as a source of communicative validity. The research aim becomes to provide useful ‘knowledge’. Uljens. 1994. Sandberg. Similarly.Higher Education Research & Development 125 Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 Reliability From a qualitative research perspective. and presenting examples that illustrate them (Guba. (It is also possible for coder reliability checks to be used to inform revisions to the proposed outcome space. making this check more dialogic in nature. including: . 2005b). ˚ kerlind. and 2. not an individual transcript basis. 1996). The principle of dialogic reliability checks has been argued for strongly by Bowden (1994b. though it is not common in phenomenographic research at this stage. the set of categories of description are based on an analysis of the set of interview transcripts as a group. 1996) and illustrated by Prosser (1994). 1996. Two primary forms of reliability checks on the influence of the researcher’s perspective on the research outcomes are commonly used with qualitative. that is how they have analysed their own presuppositions and the checks and balances that they have employed to help counteract the impact of their particular perspectives on the research outcomes. others regard this as inappropriate for phenomenographic research (Sandberg. 1996). Coder reliability check. 1996). 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. while some phenomenographic researchers argue for the value of employing a coder reliability check (Prosser. 1994. Kvale. Both involve the use of several researchers for evaluating or offsetting the potential impact of having only one researcher’s perspective on the data: 1. making one-to-one matching of transcripts and categories of description difficult. where agreement between researchers is reached through discussion and mutual critique of the data and of each researcher’s interpretive hypotheses. elucidating what is involved in terms of variation and commonality in accepted practice. This means that a single transcript may represent more or fewer aspects of the phenomenon being investigated than does a single category of description. Dialogic reliability check. 1994. Summary This paper has focused on the data analysis stage of phenomenographic research. 1981. Kvale. These checks involve documenting how researchers have adopted a critical attitude towards their own interpretations. Marton. Both checks are used within phenomenographic research to varying degrees of popularity. That is.) Arguments for not employing a check of coder reliability reflect elements of the arguments presented above for not checking the categorization of interviews with the original interviewees. Sandberg argues that a danger of 1996. 1996). reliability may be seen as reflecting the use of appropriate methodological procedures for ensuring quality and consistency in data interpretations (Guba. 1981. A employing coder reliability checks is that it directs attention away from these more fundamental checks of research reliability. neither is uniformly used. Indeed. 1994. where two researchers independently code all or a sample of interview transcripts and compare categorizations. interview-based research (Kvale. ). 25.. Melbourne: RMIT: EQARD. 109). Thank you. Bowden & P. (2005b). and 6. 63– 73). & Green. Bowden & E. Higher Education Research & Development. Learning to do phenomenography: A reflective A discussion. Bowden & P. (1994a). 4.).). Bowden & P. 16.). 125 –126.. In J. Melbourne: RMIT University Press. 295 –308. Doing developmental phenomenography (pp. Bowden.). R. John. Dall’Alba & B. London: Kogan Page. U.S. Bowden.S. Phenomenographic methods: A case study. (2005). & Gerber. Achieving empathy and engagement: A practical approach to the design. Bowden. Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Learning about phenomenography: Interviewing. C. 2002. (1994). data analysis and the A qualitative research paradigm. Green (Eds. Bowden. use of communicative and pragmatic validity checks. Higher Education Research & Development. J.). A˚ kerlind 126 how much of each transcript is considered at one time during the analysis. J. Bowden. (2005).).G. (2003). Phenomenography. Melbourne: RMIT University Press.). (2005). variation in ways of practically managing the large amount of data involved. fulfilling each role to perfection. 74 –100). P. (2005a). Reflections on phenomenography: Toward a methodology? (Gothenburg Studies in Educational Sciences No. & Walsh. In G. J. Editorial: Special issue: Phenomenograpy in higher education.. 5. (1996). The nature of phenomenographic research. use of coder and dialogic reliability checks. Doing developmental phenomenography. (1997). Bowden & E. 327 –344.). Walsh (Eds. Walsh (Eds. Hasselgren (Eds. colleague and mentor. Bowden. Green (Eds. J. & Walsh. E. G. In J. Ashworth. Bowden & P. An earlier version of this paper was included in the non-refereed electronic proceedings of the International Symposium on Current Issues in Phenomenography. Green (Eds. & Marton.). (1994b). Phenomenographic research: Variations in method (pp. E. Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Melbourne: RMIT University Press.S.S. Acknowledgements I first met John Bowden at a higher education conference in 1982.. Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Bowden. J.. & Kayrooz. ˚ kerlind. 44 –55). G. conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research. Phenomenographic research: Variations in method. & Lucas. 1– 16). In J.. by chance. J.. G. Doing developmental phenomenography.. J. Melbourne. . 22. (Eds. In J. C. Underpinnings of phenomenography: Theory and practice. References ˚ kerlind. Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 1. (1998). Over the subsequent 23 years. 103 – 127). we sat next to each other at the conference dinner. (Eds. ˚ kerlind. John has been a friend. the emphasis placed on analytic collaboration with other researchers. Doing developmental phenomenography (pp. Studies in Higher Education. 2. P. (2000).S. (Eds. Phenomenographic research: Variations in method (pp. Understanding academic freedom: The views of social A scientists. RMIT: EQARD. & Green.. Phenomenographic research: Some methodological issues. J. Bowden. Doing developmental phenomenography (pp. In J. Green A (Eds. G. ˚ kerlind. Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Experience of phenomenographic research: A personal account. Bowden. held in Canberra. J. Melbourne: RMIT University Press. In J. 3. F. (subsequently revised as Bowden & Walsh (2000)). The university of learning. Bruce. (2000). the degree to which the logical structure of the outcome space is seen as needing to emerge as directly as possible from the data versus more explicitly reflecting the professional judgement of the researcher. P. F. (1994). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Gerber & C. Reflections on phenomenography: Toward a methodology? (Gothenburg Studies in Educational Sciences No. In J. (1996). 29. & Hasselgren. Reflections on phenomenography: Toward a methodology? (Gothenburg Studies in Educational Sciences No. E. (1996). & Booth. The relation between categories of description and an interview protocol in a case of phenomenographic research (Research Report No. 177– 200. RMIT. Prosser. 21. Classroom discourse and the space of learning. F. In G. F. 125 – 126. 1983:02). Dall’Alba & B. G. In R. Uljens. Walsh. Dall’Alba & B. Svensson. Bruce (Eds. In J. Journal of Thought. 109). & Tsui. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Hillsdale... Some experiences of using phenomenographic research methodology in the context of research in teaching and learning. CA: Sage. Introduction: Phenomenography in higher education. Dall’Alba & B. Hasselgren (Eds.). Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.. Walsh (Eds. Video 2. Department of Education. Phenomenography: Describing conceptions of the world around us. 28 –49. 109). 109). In G. Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg. Lars Dahlgren on phenomenography. Melbourne: RMIT University Press.). Guba. 33. Reflections on phenomenography: Toward a methodology? (Gothenburg Studies in Educational Sciences No. Sandberg. (1981). Phenomenographic research: Variations in method (pp.). (2000). Cognosco ergo sum: Reflections on reflections. S. Learning and awareness. 195– 212. Educational Communication and Technology Journal. University of Gothenburg. Melbourne: RMIT: EQARD. In J. Walsh (Eds. (1983). Phenomenography (pp. Phenomenographic research: Variations in method (pp. Melbourne: RMIT: EQARD. F. Instructional Science. Are phenomenographic results reliable? In G. Bowden & E. Deconstructing deep and surface: Towards a critique of phenomenography. 16. Walsh (Eds. J. 203– 212.). (2004). Doctoral thesis. Phenomenography: Qualitative research: Theory and applications. (1997). Marton. B. InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Reflections on some faces of phenomenography. J. J. On the philosophical foundations of phenomenography. 10. N. H.). S. J. Dall’Alba. (Eds. Advancing phenomenography: Questions of method. (1997). 109).). Queensland University of Technology. Walsh (Eds. Are phenomenographic results reliable? Higher Education Research & Development. F. 109). (1986). Bowden & E. Webb. L. Reflections on phenomenography: Toward a methodology? (Gothenburg Studies in Educational Sciences No. (1996). Dall’Alba & B.. M. K. Phenomenograpy: A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Reflections on phenomenography: Toward a methodology? (Gothenburg Studies in Educational Sciences No. Sandberg. Human competence at work. Kvale. Hasselgren (Eds.). 73– 88). Hasselgren (Eds. Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Phenomenographic research: Variations in method (pp. (Subsequently republished as Sandberg. (1995). Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Thousand Oaks.). (1997). Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. Bowden & E. (1981). Dall’Alba.). A phenomenographic interview on phenomenography. A. Higher Education Research & Development. Marton. (1997). Phenomenographic analysis of interview transcripts. Marton. Higher Education. 75 –91. 17 –30). Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. (1994). Marton. In G. G. (1996). 16. Trigwell. In J. Francis. Melbourne: EQARD. L. Hasselgren (Eds. & Theman. Entwistle. 1997). (1994). M. (1994). 31 – 43). Hillsdale. E. G. 62 –82). Marton.Downloaded by [Cape Peninsula University of Technology] at 02:45 06 April 2016 Higher Education Research & Development 127 Dahlgren. .). Sandberg. Bowden & E. (1996). (1996).
Report "Variation and Commonality in Phenomenographic Research Methods (1)"