Identification of positions in literature using thematic network analysis: the case of early childhood inquiry-based science education

IF 1.5 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH International Journal of Research & Method in Education Pub Date : 2022-02-07 DOI:10.1080/1743727X.2022.2035351
Stine Mariegaard, Lars Seidelin, J. Bruun
{"title":"Identification of positions in literature using thematic network analysis: the case of early childhood inquiry-based science education","authors":"Stine Mariegaard, Lars Seidelin, J. Bruun","doi":"10.1080/1743727X.2022.2035351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Reviews of literature often summarize research within a given field to provide succinct information about state of the art as well as gaps for future research to address. In educational research, such information includes different positions within a field; for example, theoretical positions underpinning empirical studies. Such theoretical positions may influence interpretations of research results and remain a challenge to map and present. Here, we show how to use thematic analysis and network analysis to construct maps, analyse and synthesize theoretical positions within educational research. We use early childhood inquiry-based science education (ECIBSE) literature as a case because of its historical roots in Dewey’s educational philosophy. This allows us to discuss findings in light of a well-known theoretical framework. Using our methodology, we analyse four theoretical positions for teaching and learning: (1) science should be learned through inquiry, (2) teaching should model scientific practices, (3) children should develop science-related competencies (4) child’s experience should take precedence. After discussing these positions, we turn to methodological possibilities and challenges of using thematic network analysis for literature reviews. R-code, data and instructions for reproducing our results are available at: https://github.com/jbruun/thematicDiscourseNetworkAnalysis/.","PeriodicalId":51655,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Research & Method in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Research & Method in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2022.2035351","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT Reviews of literature often summarize research within a given field to provide succinct information about state of the art as well as gaps for future research to address. In educational research, such information includes different positions within a field; for example, theoretical positions underpinning empirical studies. Such theoretical positions may influence interpretations of research results and remain a challenge to map and present. Here, we show how to use thematic analysis and network analysis to construct maps, analyse and synthesize theoretical positions within educational research. We use early childhood inquiry-based science education (ECIBSE) literature as a case because of its historical roots in Dewey’s educational philosophy. This allows us to discuss findings in light of a well-known theoretical framework. Using our methodology, we analyse four theoretical positions for teaching and learning: (1) science should be learned through inquiry, (2) teaching should model scientific practices, (3) children should develop science-related competencies (4) child’s experience should take precedence. After discussing these positions, we turn to methodological possibilities and challenges of using thematic network analysis for literature reviews. R-code, data and instructions for reproducing our results are available at: https://github.com/jbruun/thematicDiscourseNetworkAnalysis/.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
基于主题网络分析的文献定位——以幼儿探究式科学教育为例
摘要文献综述通常总结特定领域内的研究,以提供有关现有技术的简洁信息以及未来研究需要解决的空白。在教育研究中,这些信息包括一个领域内的不同位置;例如,支撑实证研究的理论立场。这种理论立场可能会影响对研究结果的解释,并且仍然是绘制和呈现的挑战。在这里,我们展示了如何使用主题分析和网络分析来构建地图,分析和综合教育研究中的理论立场。我们以幼儿探究式科学教育(ECIBSE)文献为例,因为它的历史根源在于杜威的教育哲学。这使我们能够根据一个众所周知的理论框架来讨论这些发现。使用我们的方法,我们分析了教学的四个理论立场:(1)科学应该通过探究来学习,(2)教学应该以科学实践为模型,(3)儿童应该发展与科学相关的能力(4)儿童的经验应该优先。在讨论了这些立场之后,我们转向使用主题网络分析进行文献综述的方法论可能性和挑战。R代码、数据和重现我们结果的说明可在以下网址获得:https://github.com/jbruun/thematicDiscourseNetworkAnalysis/.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
5.00%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Research & Method in Education is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal that draws contributions from a wide community of international researchers. Contributions are expected to develop and further international discourse in educational research with a particular focus on method and methodological issues. The journal welcomes papers engaging with methods from within a qualitative or quantitative framework, or from frameworks which cut across and or challenge this duality. Papers should not solely focus on the practice of education; there must be a contribution to methodology. International Journal of Research & Method in Education is committed to publishing scholarly research that discusses conceptual, theoretical and methodological issues, provides evidence, support for or informed critique of unusual or new methodologies within educational research and provides innovative, new perspectives and examinations of key research findings. The journal’s enthusiasm to foster debate is also recognised in a keenness to include engaged, thought-provoking response papers to previously published articles. The journal is also interested in papers that discuss issues in the teaching of research methods for educational researchers. Contributors to International Journal of Research & Method in Education should take care to communicate their findings or arguments in a succinct, accessible manner to an international readership of researchers, policy-makers and practitioners from a range of disciplines including but not limited to philosophy, sociology, economics, psychology, and history of education. The Co-Editors welcome suggested topics for future Special Issues. Initial ideas should be discussed by email with the Co-Editors before a formal proposal is submitted for consideration.
期刊最新文献
Creating effective research partnerships with rural communities: a community culture framework Socially desirable resources and activities – evaluation of a new scale for the separate measurement of economic and cultural capital in educational research Catalyzing teacher moves in small-group problem solving: a quantitative discourse analysis Qualitative research during the COVID19 pandemic: the impact of remote research on the collaborative production of methodological knowledge Teacher reflection as a research method: using phenomenology to reflect on classroom events
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1