4.6. The structure of the research process
The following figure illustrates the research process that I have gone through together with my colleagues. Importantly, the figure has emerged as a coherent diagram as a result of the overall research. (cf. Lindh 1997, Erickson 1986)
The contents and structures of the above figure are strategically placed throughout the thesis. For example, my research interests were influenced both by the breadth of the subject knowledge, as well as by my considerations of the theoretical issues in current learning concepts. The collected data corpus was analyzed from the viewpoint of the specified research problems. The results, together with my/our interpretations, are found in chapter 5. The discussion (chapter 6), together with the proposals and recommendations, concentrates on the issues arising from the whole research process. Thus, the discussion can be regarded as a main outcome of the research on which this thesis is based.
In all of the studies reported herein, the data was investigated through a context-dependent theory. This context-dependency means that technology was considered as a distinct subject matter for educational purposes. In this respect, the method was not entirely a data-based inquiry, because the analysis was also guided by certain assumptions and stated research problems. (Patton 1990, Syrjälä et al. 1994, cf. Glaser 1992)
The theoretical background and my research interests are identified as influential factors in the data interpretations, as epitomized by LeCompte & Preissle (1993, p. 267): “Interpretation of data varies according to the purpose of the study, its conceptual and theoretical frameworks, researcher experience and background, and the nature of the data collected and analyzed.”
I regard this model as a useful guiding tool, and it will also be pertinent when structuring similar research endeavors. Moreover, I regard it as an important outcome of the research process, because I think it provides a useful structure to carry out qualitative research through interpretative, data- based analysis techniques.
4.6.1. Specification of research questions
The focus of the inquiry varied in the four studies presented in this research thesis. However, due to the previous theoretical considerations similarities can be found in the questions. Thus, all the questions are shortly discussed from the perspective of the theoretical considerations presented in this thesis. In this way the reader can see how the previous considerations have influenced the specification of the research question.
The specific research questions of each study are presented as follows:
Study 1:
The study was directed by the following main questions:
to what extent do primary level students spontaneously generate problem solving situations and thereby create possibilities for the transfer of knowledge and skills within a group? and,
to what extent do primary level students learn technological content?
Secondary questions included:
to what extent and in what way does group work include the elements of science and mathematics? and,
what is the contribution of the teacher in group-oriented learning environments?
The key word in the above main question number 1 is “spontaneously”. Importantly, it indicates that teaching technology should not merely follow detailed instructions and prescribed solutions or answers to design problems, but that it should be characterized by a more open approach in the spirit of authentic and spontaneous technological inquiry.
“Transfer of knowledge and skills within a group” indicates the importance of social interactions in learning processes. The main question number 2 is concerned with the technological content to be learned by the children. The content in this case was automation technology, although “automation” was not yet mentioned. In spite of the value of openness in instruction, activities in technology lessons should not be aimless or without direction. Rather, children should be made aware of the technological ideas and subject matter to be learnt.
The secondary question, which refers to number 1, indicates the widely agreed notion that science and mathematics are important areas in a contemporary technology education and need to be taken into the consideration accordingly. The secondary question, number 2, explores the role of the teachers in a group-oriented learning environment. The question begs further questions concerning the role of the teacher: Are they needed and importantly, what is their role in children’s learning in technology?
Study 2:
What contents of automation technology spontaneously emerge in the children’s work while they work in groups, at solving problems from their own living environment?
How successfully do the children solve problems that involve automation technology?
Due to the progress in the research process, “automation” is now mentioned as a focused subject matter of the Study 2. Moreover, further theoretical considerations about the nature of technology have been influential in the formation of the latter part of the question number 1. The wording “…solving problems raising from their own living environment?” indicates the true need for authenticity in technology education. Due to the theoretical considerations of this thesis, it is also essential that the children experience technology as a response to the human needs, wants and purposes, rather than responding to technical, factual issues alone.
The second question of the Study 2 focused on successful problem solving outside the traditional notion of school evaluation. Successful learning is in the focus, especially in activities where the design solutions or product outcomes are not predetermined. The wording “How successfully…” refers to the functionality and appropriateness of the solutions in relation to the specific problems formulated by the children themselves. In both of the questions the content of automation technology was in the focus, as the purpose of the whole Case Study I was to familiarize the children with the world of automation.
Study 3:
What contents of mathematical-subject matter spontaneously emerged in the children’s work while they were working with automation technology?
How successfully the children solved problems which required mathematical thinking?
The formation of the research questions in the Study 3 resembles the questions in the Studies 1 and 2. However, mathematics was not ‘secondary’ (as it was in the Study 1) any more, but the main issue of interest in this particular study. This study focused especially on how children naturally and spontaneously used mathematics whilst dealing with automation technology.
Although it is not directly obvious in the first question, the children were (as they were in the Study 2), solving problems arising from their own living environment. In this regard the possible appearance of mathematics was not emphasized to the children. Rather, they were expected to encounter naturally some mathematical ideas during their (automation) technological problem solving. This expectation arises from the notion that technology and mathematics are in many ways connected and this should be taken into account in technology education as well.
The question number 2 was intended to reveal information about children’s successes in problem solving in situations containing mathematics. In this regard the success was not achieved by solving mathematical problems per se, but by applying mathematics to functional and appropriate solutions situated in the children’s own living environment.
Study 4:
How the socio-cultural context of pupil’s learning, which includes the effect of teaching, contributes to pupil’s personal D&T outcomes, with special regard to the meaning and value of open problem-solving in D&T learning?
This research question includes essential issues which were prevalent throughout the thesis. Firstly, the question points out to the meaning of the socio-cultural context, to which the school environment and teaching are also considered to belong, possibly contributing to the child’s personal outcomes in problem solving. Actually, the question was devised to illicit information about the processes involved in personally constructed knowledge, skills and experiences from the socio-cultural context in which they operate. In this regard the question refers to the essential role of constructivism as a background for pedagogical considerations in this thesis.
Secondly, the latter part of the research question: “…with special regard to the meaning and value of open problem solving in Design & Technology learning” reveals again how open problem solving had an essential role throughout the whole research process.