The Gender and the Nature of Enquiry - Essay Example

?The Nature of Research Methods: Comparison and Contrast through Education Research Whether in objective or ive social inquiry, the importanceof the method used by the researcher cannot be overstated. In qualitative social research, the method is usually at the center of establishing a theoretical understanding of the issue being investigated by the researcher. Qualitative research as opposed to the positivist quantitative approach appreciates that human thought and emotion cannot be objectified and that the researcher exerts influence in the study (Cohen, Manion and Morrison 2007, pp. 3-19). Hence, the approach of the researcher is important since he/she is involved in the research. In this study, two pieces of research into issues in education are used to compare and contrast the approaches used in terms of establishment of a theoretical basis. Backgrounds on the Studies The first study is by Philips (2002, pp. 409-414) who investigated the underrepresentation of women in the engineering profession in the UK. The study identifies the imagery and cultural stereotyping affecting the educational decisions and choices made by girls and young women as being responsible for the issue. The researcher embeds his study in the social construction of gender as her theoretical framework and argues that domination of engineering practice by men results in the field becoming masculine out of societal perceptions. Citing criticism of positivist approaches to social research, the researcher uses a qualitative approach, undertaking an interview-based methodology to achieve inter-objective understanding. The study sampled 15 participants drawn from female engineers already training and working in the UK. The second study is by Archer, Halsall and Hollingworth (2007, pp. 165-180) investigating the disengagement from education of inner-city, ethnically diverse working class girls due to their construction of hetero-femininities. The researchers are of the opinion that construction of identity and values based on heterosexual femininities by girls contributes to their disengagement from education and schooling, and address the paradoxes that arise when such hetero-feminist constructions spill over to oppressive power relations. The study itself was qualitative, involving in-depth interviews, focus groups and some photo diaries. It sampled young people across 6 urban London secondary schools aged between 14 and 16. The interviews were undertaken 3-4 times in two years and involved interviews with the staff. Theoretical Frameworks of the Studies Gerring (2001, pp. 8-9) discusses the absolute importance of basing social research on sound theoretical frameworks. Social research without these bases is inconceivable as they provide the guidelines used by scholars to define and refine their studies. They specify interconnected questions and hypotheses that then guide the researcher in establishing his/her study. Philips (2002, p. 410) selects social construction of gender over feminist theories such as standpoint perspective in explaining that the predominance of males in the engineering profession as a main contributory factor to under-representation of females in engineering education and practice. A self perpetuating stereotypical perception is created among people that engineering is a masculine field due to the prominence of men in the engineering practice. The masculine orientation of the field and thus education is maintained by these prevailing social and sexual stereotypes, and confirm the views that science and technology are an essential aspect of masculinity in the modern day. Basing on this theoretical context, the under-representation of women in the engineering education is explained by the perceptions of young women that engineering is a masculine field and thus they chose not to study it. It is thus important to break the perception if at all gender balance is to be achieved in the engineering education and practice. In contrast, Archer, Halsall and Hollingworth (2007, p. 167) underpin their study on two frameworks. The first of these is culturalist form of analysis of class in which social classes are understood to be developed from combining elements of social, cultural and economic practices and their relations to power. The second framework is the Bourdieuian concept in which social and educational inequalities are explained to be contextually produced through interactions between habits and certain forms of resources/capital. Using this framework, it is explained that young women draw on hetero-femininities for capital, with such capital then acting to disengage the young women from education and schooling. Literature Reviews The two studies both use literature reviews to not only provide backgrounds but also indicate what previous research efforts have established on the subject being investigated. Philips (2002, p. 409-410) consults the relevant literature to make her audience privy to the extent of the under-representation of females in the field of engineering in the UK. She observes that although the UK is a developed and democratic country with liberal doctrines on equal opportunities, the greatest discrepancy between males and females in the UK society is in the field of engineering. She cites the UCAS 1997 annual report on enrolment of students to science courses by gender. Here, it is appreciated that female constitute only 14% in engineering and technology courses, compared with 64% in biological sciences. Further insight into the issue is provided by LFS annual report on employment figures on the engineering domain. From this source, Philips indicates that women constitute only 5% of the engineers in practice within the UK. These reviews not only indicate that there is poor enrolment of girls into engineering education (14%) but also that they drop to 5% in practice and thus shifts from the career. At 95%, the engineering field is clearly male dominated. With this information, Philips effectively establishes a topic of study, and selects a theoretical framework relating predominance of practicing male engineers and avoidance of engineering domains by female students. Archer, Halsall and Hollingworth (2007, pp. 166-167) on the other hand use their literature review to demonstrate the invisibility of girls in underachievement and explain disaffective discourses. Through the literature review, the scholars observe that working class women continue to leave school earlier and with fewer qualifications than their middle-class counterparts. This effectively generates an issue for inquiry, with the researchers establish a theoretical framework guiding their study and explaining the relationship between hetero-femininity associated with the category of working class girls and their observed school disengagement. Further literature then is used to establish findings about the subcultures and resistance to education among girls and their performance of hyper-hetero-femininity, which sets the study firmly within the set framework. With this done, the research is then undertaken. Methodologies Kumar (2002, p. 7) explains that social science is concerned with studying human behaviour with the aim of uncovering unexplained social phenomena. The observation that humans cannot be objectified as any other variables in natural sciences means that positivist approaches have limitations when used in social research (Lee and Lings 2008, pp. 20-28), with alternative approaches such as interpretivism being put forward. Hence, the methodologies used are guided by this approach as is observable in the two studies being analysed. The two studies compare in their use of a qualitative approach to investigate the issues at hand. They also apply in-depth interviews to collect data for analysis. Philips (2002, p. 409) interviews 15 female engineering practitioners in the UK to collect their views on the reasons behind under-representation of women in engineering practice. She explains that her methodology places the researcher and participants on the same critical plane and achieves inter-subjectivity. This assures that a variety of views and experiences distinct from the researcher’s own theoretical construction exist in the study. Archer, Halsall and Hollingworth (2007, pp. 167-168) also utilise in-depth interviews of the participants including 53 young people and semi-structured interviews of the staff. The methodologies however differ in their extent and tools. Philips uses interviews only while Archer, Halsall and Hollingworth apply interviews, focus groups and photographic diaries. Philip also relies on 15 participants while the latter study collects data from a total of 89 young people and 19 members of staff. Archer, Halsall and Hollingworth’s study also takes into consideration the demographics of the population in terms of ethnicities and age. The implications of the sample size and range of data collection strategies is that while Archer, Halsall and Hollingworth’s study may be generalisable, Philip’s study may instead offer insight that is only valid in the context of this specific study, in a particular time/period or even limited to the particular geographical region that the study was undertaken. Results and Discussion Philips (2002, pp. 410-412) proceeds to discuss the results from the research. Her findings are that the image perpetrated about engineering and engineers is a major determinant of female under-representation in the engineering profession. A complex interrelationship is observed between the masculine image of engineering and the traditional notions about gender that accompany career choices and thus what is studied by individuals. One of the issues observed is the “dirty hands” metaphor about engineering, where society has the perception that engineering is associated with labouring. Stereotypical perceptions that such practical fields are not for female pursuit play an important part in influencing girls to avoid subjects in the engineering domain. It was also observed that an “old boys’ network” mentality was also responsible for the female shunning of the engineering field. With such predominance, society has the perception that engineering is a male-oriented course ingrained in them and thus young girls deem it non-traditional for females. The other observation made is on the contribution of the image of femininity to under-representation in engineering education and practice. Here, the predominance of men was observed to leave individuals wondering how a female engineer should be treated; as a man or as a woman. Besides this, the image of femininity may also influence perceptions that women may be incapable of performing certain engineering tasks, a view which permeates within society and discourages girls from pursuing the field. The results of this study are in tandem with the theory being established about the observed under-representation of females in the field of engineering and the associated under-enrolment of girls in engineering domain subjects. The researcher at the beginning set forth a gender construction framework which can be seen clearly in action here as the male predominance in the field influences societal perceptions that the field is masculine, hence discouraging girls from enrolling in engineering. Archer, Halsall and Hollingworth (2007, pp. 168-176) discuss their results basing on three precepts; girls investment in appearance, investment in heterosexual relationships and investment in other working class heterosexual femininities. On the first observation, working class girls invest in production of heterosexual, glamorous and desirable femininities which brings about peer status and approval. The girls interviewed as well as the members of staff indicated that the heterosexual femininities performed by girls were counteractive to education in some respects; it was antithetical to the traditional good pupil and acted as a distraction to education. Instead, the ideal female student is embodied by the desexualised middle class category. Achievement of heterosexual relationships as a form of capital was also counteractive to engagement in education. The relationships sought by these girls take most of their time and lowers their educational aspirations. Besides this, the relationships shifted their career aspirations from “masculine fields” such as business and Information Technology to those stereotypically associated with working class females; child care and beauty. Some girls did not conform to the traditional working class femininities, instead establishing their own. This includes developing masculine personas such as truancy, dressing in sports-wear and playing male sports. This also contributes to disengagement from education as some of the habits are in detrimental to pursuit of education. The results of Archer, Halsall and Hollingworth’s are also in sync with the Bourdieuian conceptualisation established for the study in which the educational challenges faced by the working class category can be traced to their pursuit of symbolic capital in terms of cultural, economic and social considerations. In contrast to middle class pupils, the actions of pursuing and practicing hyper hetero-femininity by working class girls is antithetic to education as confirmed by both the interviewee girls and staff members. An interesting point of note is the subjective influence of the study on the participants- as is characteristic of non-positivist inquiry (Rowlands 2005, pp. 81-92) - in which one of them known as Analisa came to the realisation that the working class hetero-femininity she was pursuing through her boyfriend was counteractive to her education. The Implications and Applications of the Studies Philips (2002, pp. 412-413) uses the theoretical framework to identify interventions that can be made or are already being made to promote the enrolment of girls to engineering courses. Having female engineering role models or being contact with such individuals can help influence girls to be interested in engineering. The females that are already present need to be highlighted so as to de-construct the society’s perception that engineering is a masculine field. This goes hand in hand with providing sufficient information early enough to girls so as to ensure they make informed career choices. Closely related to these is positive action advertising by the engineering firms and the government. All of these interventions are aimed at bringing down the stereotype that engineering is a masculine field and thus prevent the social construction of young girls that influences their decisions to avoid engineering education. Hence, the theoretical underpinning of Philips study pervades even in the avenues through which to address the issue in question. Archer, Halsall and Hollingworth (2007, pp. 176-178) in comparison also draw from their framework in understanding the underlying causes of educational problems among working class category girls in contrast to middle class ones. The study indicates that the issue is a result of complex interactions of factors, and thus policy interventions ought to take into consideration the emotional and psychosocial lives of such girls. Interventions in such issues thus can draw on social class considerations and involve firm initial teacher education and ongoing professional development. Conclusion Qualitative approaches have been used in the two studies based on different theoretical frameworks to investigate issues in education. Throughout both studies, it is discernible that the theoretical frameworks pervade, with the methodologies sharing similarities and differences. The subjectivity of interpretive qualitative approach to social inquiry is clearly evident in both studies. References Archer, L, Halsall, A & Hollingworth, S 2007, “Class, gender, (hetero)sexuality and schooling: paradoxes within working-class girls' engagement with education and post-16 aspirations”, British Journal of Sociology of Education, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 165 – 180. Cohen, L, Manion, L & Morrison, K 2007, Research methods in education, Routledge, London. Gerring, J 2001, Social science methodology: A criteria framework, Cambridge University Press, UK. Kumar, A 2002, Research methodology in social science, Sarup & Sons. Lee, N & Lings, I 2008, Doing business research, Sage Publications, UK. Philips, A 2002, “Engineering women: the `gendering' of professional identities”, International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 409 – 414. Rowlands, BH 2005, “Grounded in practice: using interpretive research to build theory”, Electronic Journal of Business Research Methodology, vol. 3, no. 1, pp 81-92. Read More