What makes the difference? : An empirical comparison of critical aspects identified in phenomenographic and variation theory analyses

DSpace Repository

What makes the difference? : An empirical comparison of critical aspects identified in phenomenographic and variation theory analyses

Overview

Detailed record

dc.contributor.author Selin, Per sv
dc.contributor.author Holmqvist, Mona en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2019-08-16T11:23:09Z
dc.date.available 2019-08-16T11:23:09Z
dc.date.issued 2019 en_US
dc.identifier.issn 2055-1045 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/2043/29672
dc.description.abstract This study investigated differences and similarities in outcomes of analyses based on phenomenography and variation theory. We used the same data for both analyses to highlight the assumptions of each approach. Participants were 198 students (grades 7–9) who provided written answers to the question ‘What is learning?’. The phenomenographic analysis identified qualitatively different categories representing different ways participants’ conceptualised learning, separated by critical aspects that distinguished each category. This analysis found six categories, seeing learning as: extended skills, process, investment, feelings, object-knowledge, relationships, and feelings. The variation theory analysis identified aspects constituting the object of learning, with critical aspects being those not yet discerned by the learner. Aspects and features identified in this analysis were: learner (skills, abilities, pre-knowledge, attitudes), learning activities (brain, listen, repeat, practicing), learning source (teacher, school, learning materials, friends, Internet, places/persons outside school), content/ object of learning (facts, information, activity), and outcomes (job, enhanced future, development, performance, widening knowledge). Aspects and features not yet discerned are critical, and must be made discernable for the learner to enhance their understanding. This use of critical aspects differs from phenomenography, in which critical aspects identified qualitatively different ways of seeing learning (i.e., categories of collective experiences). In variation theory, aspects (dimensions) and features (values of the dimension) relate to individuals’ understanding in specific contexts (e.g., a school class). A major difference between phenomenography and variation theory is the perspective of collective- and individual-expressed discernments. In phenomenography, a person may belong to several categories, whereas in variation theory, the aspects an individual has discerned reflect the way that person understands the phenomenon. This means the outcome of variation theory can be used to design and test the outcome of instruction, whereas the outcome of phenomenography provides information about general assumptions of how a phenomenon can be discerned. en_US
dc.format.extent 8 en_US
dc.language.iso eng en_US
dc.publisher Springer Nature en_US
dc.subject.classification Humanities/Social Sciences en_US
dc.title What makes the difference? : An empirical comparison of critical aspects identified in phenomenographic and variation theory analyses en_US
dc.type Article, peer reviewed scientific en_US
dc.contributor.department Malmö University. Faculty of Education and Society
dc.contributor.department Malmö University. School development and Leadership (SOL)
dc.identifier.doi 10.1057/s41599-019-0284-z en_US
dc.subject.srsc Research Subject Categories::SOCIAL SCIENCES en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpublication Palgrave Communications;
dc.relation.ispartofpublicationvolume 5 en_US
dc.description.authorversion No en_US
dc.identifier.isiid 000476606700001
dcterms.identifier.OAurl https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0284-z en_US
dc.format.artNo 71 en_US
dc.format.ePage 8 en_US
dc.format.sPage 1 en_US
 Find Full text Files for download
Icon

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Overview

Search


Browse

My Account

Statistics