My Freshman Year: Chapters 6 & 7

Reflective Reading Log #4, part 2

In the sixth and seventh chapters of My Freshman Year (2005), Nathan details the cultural normalcies of the typical college student at AnyU, and leaves the reader with her most memorable lessons from the field as a freshman.

As I read the sixth chapter, “The Art of College Management,” I often found myself chuckling at the similarities I could draw from my own experience as an undergraduate. Though I attended a small, Christian school that was vastly different than a large, public, research university, I found much solidarity (maybe embarrassingly so) with the students whom Nathan interacted (except in regard to the cheating).

Nathan speaks of the programming that occurred during Welcome Week that promulgated the mantra necessary for college success: “Effort and good planning. If you plan your time well, you can have it all” (p. 111). She detailed the balancing act that students must engage in (classes, work, homework, commuting, social life, etc) and what they must do in order to manage it all. Building the perfect schedule was a part of that balancing act. As Nathan described, I remember penning an ideal schedule within the first week the class lists were released for the following term. No classes before 10:00am, no classes on Fridays, and time to eat lunch every day. I avoided the professors that my older peers had warned me against. By my junior year, each semester I attempted to integrate at least one “easier” class that would help lighten the load and allow me to focus on the more difficult, major classes. As one of Nathan’s interviewees said, “you have to have some easier courses so you don’t get burnt out” (p. 115). I would wake up at 6:00am on registration day in order to achieve said schedule, and was prepared to petition faculty members if I did not make it into a particular course. Here, here, Nathan—for seeking to understand (and almost defend) the undergraduate rationale to create a perfect schedule!

Nathan also speaks to the student reality of simultaneously managing a multitude of rules, expectations, and assignments from several professors. She also details the advice upper classmen give to new students on the importance of building relationships with professors. Interestingly, this advice lends itself to the opposite of professor as mentor or future-recommender-writer. Instead, the advice focuses on the unintentional (in most cases) ways to manipulate the professors. “Sit in the front so profs can see you.”  “Go to class and talk to your profs.” “Give them what they want and you’ll get what you want too.” (p. 117). “If they know you, they will be more likely to help you.” Students even admitted to taking a particular stance in a paper that mirrored the opinion of their professor instead of their own—in attempt to receive a better grade.

Cheating and class-ditching are also given their due diligence, as Nathan explored the college student normalcy of doing what is necessary to get by. During her year as a student, Nathan occasionally shared “solidarity” with her fellow peers by ditching the occasional class. Even in reference to cheating, Nathan’s heart almost softened as she grew aware of the grand spectrum between working on homework with someone else and utilizing someone’s words without proper citations. While she did not minimize the problem of cheating, Nathan notes the cultural relativism associated with the issue. Increases in cheating “reflect not only students’ personal ethics but also the shifting societal tides that church the waters through which students navigate” (p. 129).

Finally, in Nathan’s concluding chapter, she notes some of her most poignant lessons learned. She recognizes the hierarchical differences between students and professors: while students have no idea how long it takes professors to prepare for class or what goes into research, publication, and career advancement, neither do faculty understand (or remember) the complexities of the undergraduate experience. Nathan considers the ramifications her research will have/has had on her own teaching. In brief, she has resolved to be more compassionate toward her students.

Finally, Nathan ends with a question regarding “what is worth learning” (p. 156) if students really do forget the details of what they learned and the intricacies related to their major will be obsolete five years after graduation. Personally, I believe the learning that occurs in college—academically, socially, personally, and spiritually—is challenging, valuable, and wholly beneficial. And believe it or not, while I may have forgotten something for the time being, I am always surprised in the moments when I recall details from a class I had taken years before. 

Creswell Chapter 10: Standards of Validation and Evaluation

Reflective Reading Log #4

In Creswell’s tenth (and possibly most boring) chapter, he discusses the various standards of validation and evaluation in qualitative research. While he notes the varied and numerous viewpoints on validation and summarizes the key perspectives and terms used by various researchers, he details his own “stance” on validation. He considers “validation” as a “distinct strength of qualitative research in that the account made through extensive time spent in the field, the detailed thick description, and the closeness of the researcher to the participants in the study all add to the value or accuracy of the study” (p. 207). As such, he identifies several validation strategies that will assist researchers to assess the accuracy of their research.

It is essential for the researcher to spend “prolonged” and “persistent” involvement in and observation of the field of study. They must develop trust among their participants and enhance their understanding of the culture. Researchers must engage in triangulation, where multiple sources, methods, and theories (etc) are utilized as evidence to support the outcome. External checks (such as having a peer reviewer) must be in place to “keep the researcher honest [and] ask the hard questions about methods, meanings, and interpretations” (p. 208). The researcher must clarify their biases and assumptions that they have, as they will contribute to the way the researcher has approached and interpreted the study. In order to allow the participants the opportunity to assess the accuracy of the data, interpretations, and conclusions, member checking is an essential part of the process. Rich, thick descriptions must be utilized, as they provide insight into case transferability. Lastly, an external auditor that has no connection to the study should assess whether the connection between “the findings, the interpretations, and the conclusion is supported by the data” (p. 209). Creswell recommends that researchers engage in at least two of these strategies for validation.

Though Creswell acknowledges that it is difficult to break down how measures of validation can be broken down in each of the five methods of study, he defines several questions the researchers should ask and outlines the characteristics he would look for in each of the five types of studies.

One down, one to go!

One week from today, Chris will defend his dissertation!  This is quite a feat, and worthy of celebration. Over the past several years, he has spent a great deal of time, heart, and energy to write a massive work of 200+ pages. His "big paper," as I like to call it, is called "Higher Education and Knowledge for Nation-State Development: The Role of the World Bank and U.S. Universities in Poverty Reduction." 

To say the least, I am quite proud of him. It has been a pleasure to walk along side him as he has traveled, studied, interviewed, compiled, analyzed, written, and presented. In fact, I have edited every page of his dissertation! Many people say that the dissertation is composed of a lot of research and an even greater amount of blood, sweat, and tears.  I am thankful that this process was intensive and challenging, but certainly not miserable. It has helped me mentally define how I hope the process goes when I reach that point. I have no doubt that it will be more difficult for me, I am incredibly blessed to have such an understanding and helpful husband walk by my side.  

Alas, one PhD down, one to go!

A few things I have learned along the way...

While only halfway through, the journey has been quite fascinating and eventful. I have learned a great deal, both in reference to higher education and otherwise. I have learned to be patient with others (which is usually quite easy for me) and myself (which is not usually as simple). I have learned to budget my time, plan accordingly, and build in extra days for things like colds, surgeries, and unforeseen work tragedies. I have learned what happens when exercise is the thing that gets omitted from my routine. I have learned that good food is energizing to both my body and my mind. I have re-learned that television is a waste of time, and getting rid of it was one of the best decisions we could have made. I have learned that I am resilient, optimistic, and positive, and my various strengths will carry me far. I have learned that loved ones do not always understand why I have chosen to do this, and that is okay. I am learning to recognize and embrace the strengths of those around me. I have confirmed my love for and my commitment to the field of higher education. Most importantly, I am learning to value both the challenges and the gifts my sweet God has granted me.  I am blessed beyond measure to even be on this journey. While I am eager to see what is ahead, I am certainly enjoying the learning process.

Creswell Chapter 9: Writing a Qualitative Study

Reflective Reading Log #3 (part 2)

In Creswell’s chapter that details several different ways to write a qualitative study (even with the same type of data), it is clear that there are countless ways to do so.

In terms of responsible data representation, I love the questions that Creswell asks the reader to consider: “Has my writing connected the voices and stories of individuals back to the set of historic, structural, and economic relations in which they are situated? Have I backed into the passive voice and decoupled my responsibility from the writing” (p.180)? And particularly, “How far should I go in theorizing the words of participants? (p. 180)?  As the qualitative research seeks to use the voice of participants to learn about a situation, experience, or phenomenon, they walk a fine line as they serve as interpreters for different people with different voices, perceptions, and experiences, and presenters of cohesive and composite set of information. 

Creswell also recognizes that researchers must acknowledge different audiences in their writings. Sometimes, the same data can be presented in a multitude of formats to varying groups of people: practitioner workshops and conferences, academic journals, digestible books, etc. For example, I am confident that Rebekah Nathan, author of My Freshman Year, presented the data she garnered from her year as a student in a variety of formats. The book, meant for a more public, non-academic audience, was certainly less researchy (for lack of better words) than most “studies.” However, that in itself, does not make it any less academic or rigorous.

As Creswell outlines various ways to write up the data, as according to various research designs, I found myself to be a little overwhelmed. I felt (unprovoked) pressure to select a favorite way, a preferred model, or the best way to present quotes. Long quotes? Embedded quotes? How much analysis around each quote? To use vignettes or not? Then, I relaxed…and remembered that I don’t pick the format (in a sense), as the format picks me. The actual data (and research design for that matter) will help to dictate how the research is presented. It is akin to doctoral students that say, “oh I am doing a qualitative dissertation” before they have even identified a research problem and question. In fact, the type of question and the way that it is asked will dictate what type of dissertation a student will do.

According to Creswell, “How we write is a reflection of our own interpretation based on the cultural, social, gender, class, and personal politics that we bring to research” (p.178). In qualitative research, the researcher is expected to identify their background and biases, as these areas certainly contribute to the way the data was garnered and the way it is presented. This, in fact, is my favorite part of qualitative research. The author, admittedly, is a part of the research. We can pretend that quantitative research is more subjective and less biased, but the researcher still selects the topic, chooses the instrument, decides what statistics to run and what responses to delete (as they might bring down the “validity” of the results), and finally, writes the results. However, such research does not so rigorously require that the researcher report and record their biases. While I appreciate (and even like!) quantitative research, I truly value qualitative research as it can actually provide a tangible voice for the voiceless.

 

My Freshman Year: Chapters 4 & 5

Reflective Reading Log #3 

In the fourth and fifth chapters of My Freshman Year (2005), Nathan details her construction of an American college experience, as seen from the outside perspective (i.e. International students), and the fanfare (or lack thereof) that surrounds the academic portion of said experience. Not surprisingly, her stories are fascinating and her rich descriptions are compelling.

Nathan is quite clear about the kinship she experienced with several international students, as they simultaneously fit into the same category of student and outsider. As her relationships with those students flourished, she had the opportunity to engage in insightful conversations regarding their perceptions of the American college experience. Such interactions were particularly helpful, as “culture can be invisible to its natives—so taken for granted that it seems unworthy to comment” (p. 67).

According to the international students with whom Nathan spoke, the American college student could be characterized as very friendly. However, international students were struck by the lack of substance in their relationships with American students, and the lack of care such students seemed to have for the international student’s background, success in class, or social integration. According to Nathan, “International students learned quickly that being a student…dorm mate…classmate—none of it automatically qualifies you as a ‘member of the community’” (p. 69). According to one student, sharing a hobby was the key to building relationships with Americans. International students also noted that their American counterparts seemed very independent (especially from their family), always busy, preoccupied with getting drunk, disrespectful in the classroom (as evidenced by their casual dress and eating in class), ignorant about global politics and world issues, and ethnocentric.

While the international students were impressed with the level of attention and care they received from faculty members, they were surprised at the level of academic rigor. Many compared their first two years of coursework to their high school. Multiple choice tests, numerous quizzes, chapter outlines, and group work were unfamiliar territory.

In the next chapter, Nathan explores the American student’s response to the academic portion of their college experience. As a professor of anthropology and one who believes in the power of education, Nathan was surprised to learn “how little intellectual life seemed to matter in college” (p. 100). Overall, the students seemed to have an apathetic attitude, at best, about their coursework. In fact, classes seemed to get in the way of student’s active social lives—as, according to Nathan’s informal survey, the average student claimed 65% of their learning occurred outside of the classroom. In fact, only a small number of students claimed that classroom learning contributed to 50% or more of their education.

As it quickly became clear that students were not engaging in philosophical and intellectual discussion outside of class, Nathan explored what it is that students actually do talk about. Not surprisingly, topics of sex, relationships, body image, personal history, movies, and TV emerged.

As I read Nathan’s account of the comments made in class prior to the teacher’s lecture, I was immediately thrown back into college. I so vividly remember the exchanges: “Did you do the reading? I didn’t!” “I can’t believe it has been three weeks since that test and he hasn’t handed it back yet.” “What did you put for that second one? I had to b.s. my way through it.” “I had to pull another all-nighter to get this done!” Nathan believes that while students might care about their education (and several did note that they did care about it), it was clearly normal and socially acceptable to speak negatively about class. In my own experience as an undergraduate, I would definitely concur. While I was able to engage in discussion about what we were learning with my social group, I still heard (and was occasionally a contributor) to the comments noted above.

I found these two chapters to be particularly fascinating—especially in conjunction with one another. In fact, I felt that the international student’s opinion of their American counterparts was mostly substantiated in the following chapter.