In one fell swoop: all of reading log #4

Reading Log #4 (Part 1)
Creswell, ch. 10

Summary:
Creswell explores issues of validity, reliability, and overall evaluation in chapter 10. As he does with most topics, the author dedicates a sizable portion of the chapter to exploration of the implications of these ideas within each of the approaches to research. Overall, however, he emphasizes the importance of conducting and writing qualitative studies in ways that accurately convey the data gathered throughout the course of the study, of establishing the reasonableness of the researcher’s interpretation of that data, and of evaluating both the quality and the usefulness of the study and its stated outcomes.

Reflection:
I feel like chapter 10 provides some helpful suggestions for examining my own study as I move further into it. While my interviews are nearly complete, I have yet to jump wholeheartedly into transcription and coding. Creswell’s description of tools like triangulation and member checking will be helpful to me as I consider how to most accurately convey the data I’ve collected. I am particularly looking forward to member checking as I gather my participants back together for another group conversation. The students were actively engaged in our first group discussion, and I anticipate their deep investment again when we discuss the ways I’ve interpreted or categorized the data.

Reading Log #4 (Part 2)
My Freshman Year, ch. 6-7; afterword

Summary, ch. 6:
In many ways, this chapter focuses on the pragmatism of students and on the ways that pragmatism is reinforced by the college setting. Given the many obligations to which most students are subject, including academics, work, and interpersonal commitments, Nathan concedes that some measure of “management” is necessary, simply for survival.

Nathan begins this chapter by discussing the historical precedents for the divide between students and professors. She also elaborates on the kind of divisions that exist among student groups, defining these differences by students’ membership in mainstream (average) student culture, “outsider” or “new outsider” cultures, or “rebel” culture (p. 108-109). While she provides some description of each of these groups, Nathan’s focus seems to be on supporting her assertion that the college environment includes both dominant and less powerful student groups and that this is a well-established phenomenon.

The remainder of chapter 6 is dedicated to the various aspects of college life that students must manage in order to function within their environment. These include the complexities of time management in a demanding setting, the creation and navigation of a workable semester schedule, the requirements and peculiarities of professors, the allotment of time and energy to course-related workload, and even basic class attendance. Nathan also discusses some of the motivations and justifications for cheating. The chapter concludes with a brief discussion of the changes students experience in these competing demands over the course of their college careers.

Reflection, ch. 6:
This is probably my favorite chapter of Nathan’s book. I think chapter 6 is the point at which she transitions from her “observe and report” role to her real student experiences… not so much what she saw happening in the lives of her fellow students, but a stronger emphasis on what she had come to see as the realities of her own freshman year. Accordingly, this section felt to me like a more authentic fulfillment of Nathan’s stated goals—even of her book’s title. More than anything else, I value this chapter for its general admission that student life is difficult, demanding, and (in some ways at least) pretty much impossible to shape in the ways most often touted by professors and institutions.

Summary, ch. 7:
Nathan uses this chapter to reflect on the entirety of her experience as a freshman at her own institution. She describes the wide chasm between student life or perspective and the lives and perspectives of faculty. She particularly highlights points of assumption or ignorance from each viewpoint. These include the frustration of faculty over student failure to read assigned material, student confusion over the “out of class” obligations of their professors, and the frequent failure of professors to grasp how highly scheduled and carefully compartmentalized the lives of their students truly are. At the heart of her reflection is that faculty need to learn compassion for their students and that students need to understand that their professors are real, live people with reasons for their actions.

Nathan devotes a few paragraphs to a discussion of “liminality” (p. 146), the transitional nature of the college experience. The essence of the liminal experience is that individuals enter an environment in which prior constraints are lifted, they experience personal transformation, and they re-enter larger society as changed people with a new status and (to some extent) a new identity. This discussion is followed by information on the transformation of higher education itself in terms of social prevalence, access by diverse learners, and increasing enrollment. Financial concerns are also discussed as influencing factors on the nature and quality of colleges and universities.

Nathan’s final section of the body of the book offers two incidents that depict apparent definitions of what college is and why it exists. She uses these incidents to underscore the inconsistency of the messages institutions send to their students about the role of higher education in the life of the individual and in society.

Reflection, ch. 7:
I appreciated Nathan’s exploration of the lessons students and faculty could teach one another. I think this chapter did a particularly good job of emphasizing that college is both difficult and transformative, and I sensed that she returned to her classroom with a very real awareness of the ways her previous thought patterns either supported or (potentially, at least) frustrated her students.

The discussion of liminality was very interesting to me. I think, especially for those of us who work at fairly small, residential institutions, this transitional undertaking is a prominent feature of our daily interaction with students. Of course, that sort of institution is also more likely to keep some of the strictures of the student’s prior environment intact; still, I think this is something we care very much about.

One last thought here—I’m not really sure why Nathan included the statistical walkthrough of the changing face of higher education over the last 50-75 years. While I suppose the information is relevant, it felt like an incongruous lit review in the middle of some very personal reflections.

Summary, afterword:
Nathan begins the afterword by describing the decisions she made at the project’s outset regarding anonymity and disclosure. She depicts her choice to lay aside the benefit of institutional or external funding and to forego her role as an “agent of the university” (p. 160) in order to retain the rights to protect her subjects to the greatest extent possible. Most of the afterword is dedicated to Nathan’s ongoing judgments about how directly to tie information to specific individuals, how extensively to use verbatim statements, and how best to write the results in ways that conveyed the information she considered important while preserving anonymity for her student colleagues. As a final means of supporting the privacy of those whose thoughts, actions, and lives she portrayed, Nathan elected to write under a pseudonym and to assign one to the institution.

Reflection, afterword:
This section of the book provides some enlightenment on Nathan’s thought process. I believe she deeply wanted to understand student life and that she intended to treat her research subjects (I hesitate to call them participants since nearly all of them “participated” involuntarily…) with the utmost respect. Still, even in cases where Nathan seems to be asking the right question (…the most important of which is “Was information shared with me done so on the assumption that I was a student, and only a student?”), I never feel confident that she came to what I would have considered the right answer.

In the case of this example I just highlighted, I think the answer is a firm and resounding YES—it’s the very reason she chose to go native. She chose to portray herself as a student specifically because she had noticed students tell their peers things they do not tell their professors. In other words, hiding her status as a professor was the central goal of this whole thing, and I don’t know that Nathan ever really talks about that in a way that satisfies me. Still, I find it gratifying that she does seem to legitimately struggle with the ethical issues inherent in her project—the struggle itself seems like a minor moral or ethical victory.

Nathan’s approach to research is defined for me by the conversation she had with a student who responded to Nathan’s admission of her “real” identity by saying that she felt “fooled.” As much as I enjoyed this book (and I enjoyed it immensely—I’ve been recommending it to people left and right), I have a hard time making peace with any research that leaves its participants feeling (rightfully so) that they’ve been tricked or lied to.