Hodkinson and Macleod argue that there are three important methods of research learning. These two authors divide research learning into four categories. These categories include the use of life history, the conduction of panel surveys, cross-sectional surveys, and the use of the mini-ethnography method. Both Hodkinson and Macleod agree that the learning processes involved in these research methodologies are different. For instance, history requires the theoretical construction of paradigms to shape up the research process. Surveys require the acquisition of ideas and creating a hypothesis to ascertain its correctness. Mini-ethnographies to a large extent require the active participation of the research in a given dynamic so as to prove a given hypothesis (Sweeney, 2012, p.43). It is evident that these research learning methodologies are shaped by the conceptualization of society about key paradigms within society. Therefore society plays a key role in shaping the decision of the research in terms of choosing a research learning method. Empirical research is used as the fundamental basis upon which the research learning methodologies are justified (Hodkinson & Macleod, 2010, p. 176). In addition, it is clear from Hodkinson and Macleod that researchers in some cases tend to combine two research learning methodologies during their theorizing and researching process. This paper intends to look at the strengths and weaknesses with reference to Hodkinson and Macleod’s article.
First of all, one of the strengths of this article is that both authors are keen to note that the different research learning methodologies require different approaches. For example, the authors explains that history require the construction of ideas and paradigms that shape up research. This element of distinguishing between the different research learning methodologies is strength because it increases the understanding of the reader regarding the distinctions that exists.
However, one of the weaknesses which are evident in this area, especially in the case of life history, is that, research and the theorizing process is based on a dominant paradigm. Dominant paradigm in this case refers to the dominant forces within society, which influence the process of knowledge formation. This means that the social constructs that are created by researchers within society are based on the dominant forces within society. These forces include facts like gender and political dominance. Therefore, life history as a research learning methodology is not reflective of reality (Fowler, 2009, p.23). This is because it does not take into account the marginalized forces within society. History does not acknowledge these marginalized forces as being part of the history making process. It is hence correct to say that life history as a research learning methodology is inadequate. Despite being proponents of life history as a research learning methodology, Hodkinson and Macleod do not acknowledge this weakness.
In addition, though Hodkinson and Macleod argue that all the four research learning methodologies are based on empirical data. One thing that is worth noting is that empirical data is subject to bias. Populations which are sampled during research have their own values, principles, and norms (Yanow, 2006, p.35). This means that the responses of these sample population are not value free. The responses are biased towards the values, principles, and opinions of the sample population regarding the topic under study. This means that the use of empirical data as the fundamental basis for research learning methodologies subjects the theorizing processes to bias. Despite these weakness, the content, clarity, and explanation of the research learning methodologies by Hodkinson and Macleod makes the article relevant and reliable for research purposes.
Reference List
Fowler, F. J. (2009). Survey research methods (4th ed.). Los Angeles (i.e. Thousand Oaks, Calif.): SAGE Publications.
Hodkinson, P., & Macleod, F. (2010). Contrasting concepts of learning and contrasting research methodologies: affinities and bias. British Educational Research Journal , 36(2), 173-189.
Sweeney, M. E., & Walker, B. (2012). Exploring people & cultures: authentic ethnographic research in the classroom. Waco, Tex.: Prufrock Press.
Yanow, D. (2006). Interpretation and method empirical research methods and the interpretive turn. Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe.
