Meta-analysis – sample work and criticisms

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta Analyses relating to Achievement. London: Routledge.

It is a sample on using meta-analyses with remarks on problems or criticism of meta-analyses and discussion on attempts tried and major overall findings.

“A common criticism is that it combines “apples and oranges” and such combining of many seemingly disparate studies is fraught with difficulties … Glass argued that “The question of ‘sameness’ is not an priori question at all; apart from being a logical impossibility, it is an empirical question” (Glass, 2000, p.2) “No two studies are the same and the only question of interest is how they vary across the factors we conceived as important.”

Cronbach (1982) criticized the emphasis on “big facts” of meta-analysis and inability in explaining the complexity or inappropriateness in seeking moderators.

Meta-analysis was also criticized in its base on past studies or historical claims with which future is not so bound.

Eysenck (1984) criticized certain low quality studies as “garbage in – garbage out”.

Action Research

How is Action Research defined

Click to access How%20is%20Action%20Research%20Defined(1).pdf

Methodological Paradigms in Educational Research

http://www.tlrp.org/capacity/rm/wt/hammersley/

Hostile reaction towards educational research due to tensions between researchers and practitioners?

Morrison, M. (2002). What do we mean by educational research. Research methods in educational leadership and management, 3-27.

**********************

Morrison’s inquiry upon educational research took off from the recognition of “hostile reaction” received upon educationalists’ research outputs due to the awareness on issues such as political manipulation and concerns on the research methods, integrity and usefulness. The significance of educational research is strengthened with the research integrity is affirmed and when the research efforts and outputs can be further developed with educational practitioners and leaders engaged to share the ownership of research knowledge and practice.

The tension between educational researchers and practitioners may relate to the sense of superiority. Educational researchers tend to post arguments and testify assumptions, practices and even claims of outcomes in a more “vacuum” or test-tube like settings. Educational practitioners at different levels usually make decisions and take actions for desired educational goals and learning outcomes in a real world setting with a complicated and dynamic context and time frame. Some of them would usually embrace an attitude to not only stay reflective and critical but practical and effective and so they make adjustments or remedial actions to tackle any arising or unpredictable challenges in order to achieve the goals and outcomes. Which group of these educationalists may or can claim to be more superior?

As revised Bloom’s taxonomy (Krathwohl, 2002) states, creating is regarded as an intellectual thinking skill and outcomes higher than evaluation. Which group of the educationalists is doing a job at such a level?

Researchers’ creative outputs are usually knowledge in the form of literature while practitioners’ are experiences in the form of learning outcomes, practices and even policies etc. How to establish an effective dialogue and enable a constructive collaboration between them?

Reference

Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into practice, 41(4), 212-218.