Amedeo P. Giorgi*
I. INTRODUCTION
Ever since Ebbinghaus (1964/1885) "proved" that the "higher mental processes" were susceptible to the natural scientific method, investigations of learning have been almost exclusively quantitative. Ebbinghaus' ideal was pursued for almost one-hundred years before the field began to explore other research approaches to the phenomenon of learning. In recent decades, however, the necessity for qualitative approaches has been argued for and research strategies concentrating on the qualitative aspects have been developed (Giorgi 1967, Marton & Säljö 1976a, 1976b, Torbertson 1972). An analysis of Ebbinghaus' original research (Giorgi 1985a) shows that there were indeed, of necessity, some qualitative moments in his research, but he chose not to emphasize them, and moreover, that his commitment to the natural scientific method was an a priori one. However, it could also be that Ebbinghaus never intended that the quantitative approaches be the only way to study learning, or that few psychologists knew what else to do.
At any rate, primarily during the 1970's, independently of each other, qualitative research programs on learning were developing at the Psychology Department of Duquesne University in Pittsburgh and at the Department of Education of the University of Göteborg in Sweden. These alternatives were more or less motivated by the same goal - to seek a type of understanding of the learning process that purely quantitative procedures could not provide - but since the research programs were conceived independently of each other, they developed along slightly different lines, with different purposes, and in different contexts. Nevertheless, a strong convergence of the two procedures can also be detected. The purpose of this report is to describe the outcome of the phenomenological analysis of descriptions of the concept of learning provided by ten British subjects obtained from a phenomenographic perspective. Such an analysis might reveal some interesting difference between the phenomenographic and phenomenological perspectives.
Certain specific differences about the respective contexts can be enumerated. Marton's research program was directed toward understanding the differences between good and bad learning across various academic subject matters (mathematics, economics, geography, etc.). Consequently, he became interested in how students conceived of their subject matter, or at least the concepts contained within the various subject matters. Marton consequently focused on the learning of concepts and the questions put to subjects were guided by this interest. Säljö (1979), one of Marton's colleagues, did a systematic study of this problem, and we shall consult his findings later in this report.
My interests were somewhat different even though learning was the topic of study. I was interested in both clarifying the use of phenomenological method and in understanding the learning process better, in part as a test of the method. In trying to find a situation of learning, however, I realize that there was a kind of paradox involved. That is, one had to know what learning was in order to create a situation for learning to take place. However, I also wanted minimum assumptions about the process of learning. I decided to circumvent the paradox by having subjects describe situations in which learning took place for them. Of course, the same problem exists for the subjects, but since they are not theoretically involved with the issue, they can at least pick situations that show what learning is for them in an everyday, common sense way and this should at least provide the ground for a more refined sense of learning from a psychological perspective. That is, the subjects' selection and description of experienced learning situations could in no way be systematically theoretically slanted because there are multiple meanings of learning in everyday life. Even so preconceptions only pick the situations; they do not dictate the experiences undergone in those situations. Consequently, my approach, for the reasons just cited, as opposed to Marton's, systematically attempts to avoid seeking the subject's concept of or reflection upon learning, and tries to focus on the experience as lived. While I admit that there is a relationship between the two, my assumption is that the description of experiences outcomes, and may even be contrary to, the concepts. Thus, what mattered for me was the meaning of the situations selected by the subjects as learning situations: this is the control despite the great variety of factual differences. Thus, the key theme in my research is the situation experienced as a learning situation by a human person. In addition, in my research program, I was interested in remaining true to a continental sense of phenomenology. Specifically, the steps of my research procedures are justified in terms of the thought of Husserl and Merleau-Ponty (Giorgi 1985a) and unlike Marton, I do want to make the claim that these procedures are both phenomenological and scientific. Marton, on the other hand, uses the term "phenomenography" to describe his empirical descriptive approach and the type of qualitative analysis he employs. He does not rely on an explicit philosophical viewpoint.
Of course, the difference between concepts and experience need not be insurmountable nor inharmonious. It is conceivable that Marton, at some point in his research, may want to shift to the experience of a student in a classroom or that I may want to understand the role of thinking in learning and thus concentrate on the experience of conceiving, or finally, either one of us may want to make a direct study of the differences between experiencing or conceiving. In such cases, one may find that the demands of the research may require procedural modifications that may, in fact, bring the two viewpoints closer together. (Both of us are aware, at this early stage of development, of the fact that the specific form of qualitative method being employed may be as much dependent upon the nature of the phenomenon being investigated as upon intrinsic characteristics of qualitative logic).
At any rate, given the different initial situations, it is not surprising that procedural differences exist between phenomenography and phenomenology. Still, if they are getting at something true, there must be some kind of convergence between them and the divergences should in some sense be accountable. Consequently, this report is concerned with a limited test of these qualitative methods. An important limit for me is the fact that the data obtained were obtained on the basis of a phenomenographic perspective even though a phenomenological analysis was going to be performed according to the procedures and outlined elsewhere (Giorgi 1985b). The data were based upon interviews with British students within the context of a course they were taking and the researcher was interested in the persons' conceptions of learning. In principle, this is allowable because a given set of descriptive data can be analyzed a number of different ways, as long as the initial context and research situation are kept in mind and respected. A brief comparison with Säljö's study will also be made.
II. RESEARCH CONTEXT AND PROCEDURES
As mentioned above, the data were obtained from British Social science students as pat of a research course. Ten students were asked about their concepts or learning during a course at the Open University [for a description of the investigation see Taylor & Morgan (undated)]. They were asked in unstructured ways and while the forms of the questions varied, they were always focused on the same point: What is this student's concept of learning? The writer of this report knew neither the students nor the researcher. The answers to the questions were taped and transcribed and the writer of this report began with the transcribed data.
I analyzed the data according to a phenomenological psychological method. A more complete description and theoretical justification of this method has been written up elsewhere (Giorgi 1985b) so here we shall only mention the barest outline. Once a set of descriptions has been obtained:
1) The researcher reads the entire description of one subject in order to get a sense of the whole.
2) The researcher reads through the data a second time and marks those places in the description where a transition in meaning occurs from a psychological perspective. The meanings between transitions are called "meaning units".
3) The researcher returns to all of the meaning units and interrogates them for what they reveal about the phenomenon of interest, in this case, the concept of learning. Once the researcher grasps the relevance of the subject's own words for the phenomenon of learning, he expresses this relevance in as direct a manner as possible. This is called the transformation of the subject's lived experience into direct psychological expression.
4) Normally, following my procedure, a situated or general structure of the experience is presented as the final step. However since here it was the concepts of learning being sought as a research goal, an Individual Basic Description of the Situation in which concepts expressed by each subject unfolded was written, using the transformed psychological language as a basis. In addition, in the subjects' descriptions themselves the various concepts of learning that were expressed are clearly designated by a number. These different concepts were discriminated by the researcher based upon the meanings perceived in the descriptions as expressed by the subjects.
5) Next, a typology of concepts of learning as expressed by subjects was sought. This was done in the following manner. First I singled out each separate concept of learning as discriminated in the Individual Basic Descriptions. These are also listed in Table I under the Basic Descriptions. Then I tried to find the minimum essential types that could encompass all of them, although no minimum number was posited a priori. The number of types was itself an outcome of the research. This was done by systematically going through each concept as listed in Table II and relating it to its context (if necessary) and then determining the category to which it belonged with the help of free imaginative variation. At the beginning, separate categories came quickly, but as I went through all of the expressed concepts, due to overlap and to only slightly varied meanings of concepts expressed by the subjects, new categories came infrequently, if at all. It was discovered that five basic types of essential concepts could account for all of the 37 empirical variations given by the subjects. These are also presented at the bottom of Table I. The letters (a, b, etc.) after the description of each individual¹s contextualized Concept of Learning were retrospectively assigned in order to show how all of the empirical concepts were accounted for.
It should be appreciated that the determination of the essential categories and their ultimate expression are subject to constant scrutiny and revision until the whole process of analysis is through. To exemplify the procedure, let's go through the concepts of the first subject. (See pp. l0-11) Rote learning is explicitly stated as one concept of learning, but the subject is aware of other possibilities. The second one he gives is "word to be used in any kind of study". Since this is relatively specific, we would want a more general way of designating what he is saying here. The question for us is, what is the nuance of the concept of learning that this phrase captures that would be relevant to our analysis? I might put down initially that learning is conceived to be something general. However, over time and with continued analysis, I may find that "generality" in and of itself is not sufficient as a category and thus I describe the category as "Manner of Acquiring New Information or General Knowledge" as a "mini-max" between number of categories and fidelity to the concrete descriptions. The third concept in Subject I is expressed as "Personal Perspective". His own words are more concrete: "much more likely to give you, I don't know - perhaps a more solid idea of a view, a personal view of society perhaps ultimately - but ...". Thus, I may have first put down "Personal Perspective" as a general concept of learning, but as I went through the other variations, it seemed best perhaps to speak of "Perspective" merely, and "personal perspective" could become one variation under the more general heading. Finally, Subject I included "Knowing how to get along with people". This could be categorized as "generalizing knowledge" or perhaps "Applying what one Learns" and it finally came to be labeled "Application or Use of Principles". In all these cases, the category is tested against the concrete expression and vice versa. Also, the criterion is relevance to enlightening the psychological meaning of the phenomenon. (Obviously, what was just presented was a reconstruction of the analytic process and not a precise description).
Once the five types of concepts were obtained, they were examined to see if any interrelationship among them could be discerned. Here, phenomenological intuition shows that Rote Learning is clearly different from the other four and this is supported throughout in the concrete descriptions. The other four not only show an interrelation , but al so a temporal or logical structure, and that is why they were ordered the way they were. The other types of concepts of learning, it seems, only start manifesting themselves after the level of rote learning has been surpassed. The first two of the remaining four (b and c), "Getting an Approach or Perspective on Things" and "Manner of Acquiring New Information or General Knowledge" refer in some way to what is traditionally called the "acquisitional" aspect of learning. The fourth category (d), "Understanding or Insight Beyond the Obvious" is more or less the "Insight" or "Aha Experience" phase and the "Application or Use of Principles" category (e) refers to demonstration of what was acquired. Thus, the result is not only a "listing" of concepts of learning, but a "structure² which shows certain interrelationships among the concepts naively expressed by the subjects.
III. DATA AND RESULTS - 1
In descriptive research it is important that readers see the raw data as well as the ²Processed data" or results. Quite often the raw data is too voluminous to put into the body of a report, but we do not believe that this is the case this time. The subject's responses are relatively brief, so we will present them just as we received them.
Subject I
I. When you say learning - what do you mean by learning, what do you think of when you think about learning?
S. Don't know - Same way as Lisa does I suppose, by rote which has already become quite clear that I'm not going to be doing that at all with this sort of course - It's all very new, you know - I didn't know how ... its a word really that you use in connection with any sort of study, isn't it. Do you see what I mean? I'm not expecting it to be the way we were taught history, learn the names of the Kings and Queens of England and that sort of thing. Much more likely to give you I don't know - perhaps a more solid idea of a view, a personal view of society perhaps ultimately - but.
I. What about learning in general, what does learning mean in general? You say it doesn't really mean rote learning you don't think about it like that.
S. Not in connection with O.U., now I've started, but I suppose ...(pause)...it is a hard question to answer and I've got Lisa over there doing O-levels this year, so that's one sort of learning, I know exactly what sort of learning she's got to do, she's got to know it by rote almost, and not give too many opinions or anything, its almost the exact opposite - well - she's not got to present arguments where we have with the things we're doing its an entirely different sort of process, isn't it, but had, you had asked me this in November, before I'd looked at the course material, I would have probably assumed it would have been a similar sort of thing - I've never been to university, I've never come across this sort of way they work here, the way they study so I wouldn't really have known not ... that's what I would have thought learning was - I mean ... that's if I thought about it, which I don't - or haven't until you asked me the question - um - I would take it on a far larger scale and say learning can cover anything. Lets hope we are basically, how to live with people and that would be far more important to me than getting A-levels or doing O.U. you know.
Subiect II
I. Can I ask you what do you mean by learning? When you think of learning something what does it mean to you?
S. To gain some knowledge, I think is learning. We're learning all the time, not necessarily by sitting down and studying I think there are all kinds of ways. But to me learning is gaining knowledge.
I. Can you explain what you mean by gaining knowledge?
S. I suppose just picking up bits of information really. I think if you do it quite basically that's what it is. We do that every day in our way of life, perhaps to do it to a greater degree by doing a course. We obviously want to learn more. I obviously want more knowledge about things and I've got an interest in things and I want to know as much as possible about them.
I. So it is gaining bits and pieces of knowledge.
S. Yes, Yes.
Subject III
I. When you say learning, when you think about learning, what do you mean by learning?
S. Well I think that it means to me, to open my eyes to things that I haven't, or looking at things in ways I haven't looked at before, i.e., things like immigration, it had never sort of struck me that, um, people you know that people are invited to come to this country for instance you know I just thought they opened the gates and they all came I didn't really realize that there was a recruiting complex in Jamaica for instance to actually get people to come. And so that changes the perspective on things well I think that sort of asked them to come they might had a you know a hostel or something or a job for them when they got there and not just left them, I mean to actually invite people to come, they are not sort of in the same unit, you know, they a bit about um I've got off the beaten track now. But to sort of open, to put, you know to make me look at things in ways that I haven't thought of before, I would think that is learning, or I think at school you tend to sort of learn everything by rote and I think that that is what bothers me about the Open University and, but I was quite good at learning everything parrot fashion um I mean even A levels I know you arc supposed to go into you know reading on your own and all that but I managed to get through, I don't sort of ever remember of doing anything much outside the, what they told me to do and the text books and learning it up for exams and reproducing it so, I mean I think this will be a very different sort of learning to that sort of learning. Um, so I hope that it will make me see things a lot clearer. Um, just look at life differently - hopefully.
Subject IV
I. When you say learning, what do you think or mean about learning?
S. So the principles stick in my mind. So I can take the principles and you got to get something from it and relate those to other ideas or other principles that I picked up.
I. When you say principles, can you give me an example or explain.
S. We haven't got anywhere yet, have we? Well psychology is probably one that interests me: how people react. Um, to relate the ideas that are in he unit to situations and other parts of the same course. Where people don't always do what you want them to do and so on, which is crime and organization and so on.
Subject V
I. When you say learning, what exactly do you mean by learning?
S. Well I think that that's quite difficult to answer because I mean just reading something and understanding it I think is not the same thing as learning, but on the other hand just repeating facts is not learning either, I think it is the mixture of the two. But I want to be able to increase my perception really so if I see something on the television or if I see something in the newspaper or in a book, one tends to just look at the facts and accept it as a fact whereas I think if you are learning it is to look at the fact and to look around the subject.
Subject VI
I. When you say learning - what does learning mean to you?
S. Understanding, I think - Understanding - not just -- you know. You can read it that's okay, but unless you understand the reason that a thing - is what it is, it's not worth if you haven't learnt a thing. You've got to gain like - an experience from reading it and you know - totally experience it. I think you've got to understand it completely you know -assimilate it. And I hope gain something from it. Sometimes if you learn something you may actually lose something by reading it.
I. Can you explain what you mean by that?
S. Yeh, well - I have already you know lost some of my hidebound ideas that I've had in the past I lost them they¹ve changed. I think any type of learning is going to have to change you - if you really do learn. Especially in a subject like social sciences I find - more so than perhaps in Math or Technology when you actually just learn I think about a subject. But with social sciences you learn about people and the world about you and why things happen; it changes you - your attitude to everything. I don't think by just understanding why a submarine works say if you're doing technology - or why a plane flies it's going to change your attitudes to life but if you actually start to learn about the social sciences and the reasons why people migrate or people commit crimes - all about society in general - it must affect your everyday beliefs and that - it's got to.
Subject VII
I. What do you understand by learning?
S. That's a good one - I suppose as a bold statement rather more learning facts - um yes - I suppose learning facts, you know and learning a sort of .... I'm getting stuck for works now ... No, actually I don't know what learning means - It must mean lots of things - learning facts, learning to analyze, which is hardly getting any facts at all - learning to think for yourself - yes learning to think for yourself, learning to analyze and learning facts and I suppose D101. I would expect the first and not so much facts. Its not actually a factual subject as far as I can see - although it is full of tables, as far as I can see - facts is not the point of the exercise.
I. So you expect to learn more about how to analyze?
S. Yes - I think so - yes and how to. This 1st Unit on unemployment, it's on reasons why unemployment has risen by a certain %. Take that on its face value. The first thing I've done is learnt to look at figures, especially after reading that one. Learn to look at figures and see if there is more to them. As I said, I'm giving up smoking today, and on the packet of Wrigley's it said sugar-free gum dentists recommend it - 9 out of 10 recommended of those who responded to a Wrigley's survey - didn't say how many didn't respond. I wouldn't have noticed that before.
I. So it's learning to take an approach to things, to learn how to question things and analyze.
S. Yes, I think so - That's an easy example obviously; the more one gets into the more critical one can get.
Subject VIII
I. When you said learning, what exactly did you mean by learning?
S. I would say assimilation of common sense in relation to the course I was doing. Common sense which was related to sociology. - As opposed to sort of parrot fashion learning.
I. What do you mean by common sense? What would you do to learn about something.
S. Well, it seems to me that there are various theories which I found when I looked at the block in relation to unemployment, crime and things like that and there are various yard sticks, social laws and rules of thumb that can apply, statistics, and these are obviously the basic guidelines in relation to those problems and one needs to know how to apply them and what they are. I think that's what I was thinking.
Subject IX
I. When you say learning, what exactly do you mean by learning? Learning in general.
S. Um, I suppose understanding things really. I know that especially from accountancy. I could learn that parrot fashion but I still wouldn't understand it. And therefore if there is any variation in the problem I wouldn't be able to cope with it and that's something that .... And also I think how to use material. It is no good somebody giving you a reference to a book if you don't know what to do while you've got the book in your hands, or where to look at it, or even what programs on television to look at. I mean it's not necessarily, learning is not necessarily something to a specific course but I suppose the process of learning is different for each subject you do. I suppose specific courses are completely different because if you have got one aim, you, well, learning generally like, everything so complex you have to ... while with a specific course you've got to realize you're going to give up. I don't really think learning any accountancy - the only thing you could really learn in that was law, I think, because there you've got actual facts to base things on. Unless you're going to learn method and I can't see that that's really understandable parrot fashion.
Subject X
I. What about learning? What exactly do you mean by learning?
S. Well, I don't really know. I suppose knowing about things that I don't know about now, that are there that I don't know about. Um, when I do think about learning I'm still very much at school sort of thing and I know it's a very different sort of learning and often if I glance through some of the books that I only got last week - the set books - and still at the moment I'm still in the school sort of learning the facts and dates and names learning rather than context. And if I read something I'm so bothered about taking in what it says that I have read it and I think what have I just read I don't even know who wrote it or what it was about and I think at the moment I feel worried about not taking in what I am doing or what I am learning. I still feel very confused about it. I suppose panicky because it's about to start and I'll be glad once it's started and I've got into it I think. But I hope something, whatever it is is settled by the 14th or whatever. What happens on the day sort of thing. I mean it's my own fault. I ought to get all the .... out and find out what I suddenly start doing. I feel very apprehensive about it but I think only because it's a couple of weeks away but I didn't feel at all apprehensive about.
After reading through each description, the method described above was applied to it. Appendix A contains the analyses of all ten subjects. After the analysis, a "Basic Description" that was faithful to the specifics of each individual's experience was written. This Basic Description, however, also highlights and contextualizes the theme of the research, namely the subjects' conceptions of learning. We shall call these the Individual Basic Descriptions of the Conception of Learning. These Basic Descriptions for each subject are as follows:
Table I: Individual basic descriptions of the conceptions of learning expressed by subjects and their contexts. The five basic types of learning are also presented . [Numbers in text [1, 2, etc.] refer to the location of the concept of learning, and are listed separately below the text according to type. Small letters (a,b, etc.) refer to the types, of which five were discovered.]
[1] Rote learning (a)
[2] Word to be used in any kind of study (b)
[3] Personal perspective (c)
[4] Knowing how to get along with people (e)
Subject II
For S, learning means to [1] gain knowledge, and S affirms that we are learning all the time and that learning [2] can mean more than "school work"; indeed S states that there are many ways to learn, but picks "gaining knowledge" as its meaning. When pressed by the researcher concerning the meaning of "gaining knowledge", S gives a synonymous answer; "picking up bits of information", and he repeats it: S again expresses that learning is pervasive [3] in life, but allows it may be more apparent in a course. While S believes everyone wants to learn more, he refers to himself to help answer and says that he wants to know as much as possible about things that interest him.
[1] Gain knowledge (b)
[2] Means more than school work (e)
[3] Pervasive in life (b)
Subject III
For S, learning means to open [1] his eyes to things he hasn't seen before or else [2] look at same things in way he hasn't before. S then uses class material as example. He describes his assumptions about a social problem (immigration) and finds out that his assumption is wrong and once he knew the real facts, he was able to change perspectives on the problems and his attitude toward the problem has changed (Now he expects more of the Government). S then catches himself as drifting too far and reaffirms that learning is equal to looking at things in ways he did not think of before. S then contrasts this view with his experience at school where [3] rote learning seemed to dominate and rote seems to be true of O.U. as well and this bothers S even though he is aware that he could get by well doing rote work, although he was aware that he could have been more of a student. He never remembers doing more than he was told as a student, but has higher expectations for the course (i.e., different type of learning). S experiences hope that he will see things more clearly - especially in life.
[1] To open eyes to things not seen before (d)
[2] To look at same things in ways not done before (d)
[3] Rote (a)
Subject IV
For S, learning has to do with [1] retaining principles and what is important in learning is the application [2] or relation of principles to other ideas or principles he knows. When the researcher asks about meaning of principles, S refers to fact that course has not begun yet and then says that psychology is of interest to him and it is to deal with how people react. Then S says that learning would involve relating ideas [3] in the course to life generally and he especially would like to apply learning principles to situations where people do not behave according to social expectation.
[1] Retaining principles (e)
[2] Application of principles (e)
[3] Relating ideas of course to life (e)
Subject V
S begins with "via negative": learning is not just reading and understanding and it is not just repeating facts. S believes that learning is a mixture of the two. He also eliminates sheer acceptance of something because of "authority" - but learning [1] does mean somehow going beyond the sheer facts and trying to understand them - i.e., as opposed to his first negative characterization. Apparently there must be something problematic about the fact so that one is forced to probe deeper in order to understand it.
[1] Going beyond facts and understanding them (d)
Subject VI
S states that learning [1] means understanding. He differentiate learning from merely reading because one has to understand the [2] reason that something is what it is and hence S says that learning (or understanding) has to be a gain, [3] and one way S describes the gain is to call it, "total experience" and then S paraphrases his notion by saying that learning is "complete understanding or assimilation".[4] S then expresses the hope that total assimilation means gaining significance from the experience, which would imply that experience per se is not a guarantee of learning. S also states that learning can be measured by changes of ideas - lost or acquired - thus, S believes that any learning involves change [5] - or at least true learning does and then uses social science as an example, and this gives him the occasion to introduce a distinction between technological learning and social scientific learning; former does not involve personal [6] change, but only a learning of [7] content, but social science learning should imply personal change, because topics involve people, worlds and why things happen in life and attitude [8] change must follow. Genuine learning about [9] reasons for certain happenings will affect one's everyday beliefs.
[1] Understanding (d)
[2] Understanding reasons (d)
[3] A gain (b)
[4] Complete understanding or assimilation (d)
[5] Change (c)
[6] Personal change (c) (d)
[7] Acquiring content (b)
[8] Attitude change (c)
[9] Affects life (e)
Subject VII
S considers the question to be challenging, and begins by saying that learning is equivalent to learning [1] facts, and says he is stuck for words, and then says that learning must mean a lot of things, e.g., facts, analyzing,[2] and latter not equal to factual, then S goes further and adds that learning is equal to thinking for oneself, [3] and upon further reflection feels that "analyzing" captures the meaning better. Then S uses a specific course as a reference point and says facts were not the point and expresses view that he expects to learn even more about how to analyze and then uses a statement from the exercise to show how criticism (thinking for oneself?) can be brought to it. S states he has learned how to bring more to [4] figures and of how to be critical of words and then says that learning is equal to a way of [5] approaching things, a way of questioning and analyzing. He is aware that greater complexity would mean greater criticalness.
[1] Acquiring facts (b)
[2] Analysis (c)
[3] Thinking for oneself (c) (d)
[4] Bring more to things and be critical (d)
[5] Way of approaching (b)
Subject VIII
For S, learning equals assimilation of [1] common sense in relation to specific course which is relevant to sociology, and this is contrasted to rote [2] learning. S then elaborates the multiplicity of theories (from sociology and common sense?) with regard to presented social problems with their various rules, principles, statistics, etc., that would form the guidelines for the same problem. But the key for S is to know how to apply these rules. S says he thinks these are his thoughts.[3]
[1] Assimilation of common sense and course (e)
[2] Rote (a)
[3] Application (e)
Subject IX
Based on specific experience, learning for S equals understanding things, [1] S is aware he could perform activity in [2] ²parrot" way, but he could not then cope with a [3] variation of the problem. This implies for S that how to use things [4] equals learning. Sheer availability of things is not sufficient. S also says that learning is not tied to one course, and that it probably differs for each course according to subject. S also distinguishes learning in general and learning for specific course. S allows that learning a method can be parroted, otherwise rote is not recommended.
[1] Understanding (d)
[2] Rote (d)
[3] Understanding variations of problems (d)
[4] Application (e)
Subject X
S says he does not know what learning is, however, he supposes that learning means to know [1] things that he is unaware of now. Then S moves to his present situation and focuses on the fact that he is a beginner, and so much so that he is still learning merely [2] primitive facts about the books, rather than learning in some more idealized way, and this fact is also expressed by his awareness of being bothered by not grasping all that he reads and he feels very confused about learning and perhaps even panicky and he cannot wait until the course starts, but he hopes soon. He feels very apprehensive but admits that it is his own fault and that ideally, he could have done better (some sense of being better learner!).
[1] To know what he is unaware of now (b)
[2] Acquire facts (b)
Typology of Concepts of learning
Now I have labeled this section "Data and Results I" because that is precisely the way I analyzed and presented the findings in the seminar at the Department of Education at the University of Göteborg. However, I was under extreme time pressure at the time and could not do more than present the Basic Descriptions in the light of the direct theme of the research, namely; the conceptions of learning held by the subjects. Consequently, what I did was list each concept of learning as identified in the Basic Descriptions and then reduced them to essential types. That is , every single one of the 37 concepts factually expressed by the subjects can be subsumed under one of the five types since the final typology is based upon meaning discrimination and not frequency. These results are also presented in Table I.
Two other points are worth noting. The 37 concepts generated by the 10 subjects are not all unrelated. There are obviously similarities across subjects and there are repetitions within subjects. But there are also cognates within subjects. That is, the subjects generally develop their answers over time as they discover the limits of their first response or else discover ambiguities that require distinctions. Sometimes subjects use a negative route and say first what learning is not and then what it is, sometimes they begin with a general understanding and then deepen it with examples and finally sometimes they deepened their understanding by means of contrast. This process may happen in general, but it also reflects the fact that the subjects are answering the questions spontaneously and without preparation. It leads to the question of what the descriptions would look like if subjects were told that they would be asked to give their understanding of learning in a few days and that they could prepare for it. This last point is not a criticism of the study but merely the explicit acknowledgment of a limiting factor and the alternative that such a limit suggests.
The second point to be mentioned is that most subjects seemed to be aware of the complexity of the question and that answers other than the ones they were giving were possible. This fact is al so expressed by the multiple definitions of the concept of learning that most subjects gave.
IV. DATA AND RESULTS - 2
After having returned to Duquesne University from my sabbatical in Gothenburg, I had more time to return to the data and to see if more could be done with them. This further analysis is in no way negates what was done above. It is a supplementary effort.
A phenomenologist is always interested in the experiential context of a thematic concern and thus the question can be raised concerning the manner in which these "concepts of learning" were expressed. While the data were obtained with the set to seek the "concepts" of learning, a number of experiential comments are included in some of the descriptions to make at least an attempt at an analysis worthwhile. The question would then be whether or not this additional analysis could throw further light on our research. The responses of the subjects were analyzed in order to see if any consistent difference in manner of responding were present, and it was possible to categorize the ten subjects into three styles of expression: Groping Style (four subjects), Definition Style (four subjects), and Mixed Style (two subjects). The description of the types are given in Table II. By the way, these are described as styles of expression because that is what seems to be the proximate context of the subjects' descriptions as opposed to "styles of experiencing". It can be seen that two styles dominated, with four subjects in each. In the Groping Style, the subject allows him or herself to start with an understanding to which he or she is not fully committed and then the process of elaborating can go so far as to change the initial statement (e.g. S 7). In the Definition Style, the subject is committed to the first statement and the elaboration extends and embellishes the initial meaning, but it does not change it (e.g. S 3). As the name implies, in the Mixed Style, aspects of both processes can be seen.
The main implication of the stylistic differences for understanding concepts is that a researcher must allow the subject sufficient time to let his or her answer to develop and come to a "natural" conclusion. This is especially true for the Groping Style, otherwise the researcher may end up with an erroneous understanding of the subjects' concept.
Table III shows the relationship between styles of expression and types of concept. This comparison was made in order to see if there was a consistent relationship between style of expression and concept type. However, even though there is a difference in maximum frequency according to style of expression, the differences are small and the comparison can only be seen as suggestive because there is no true independence among all of the concepts the subjects expressed. There is a development of conceptual understanding expressed by some of the subjects that was not controlled. Nevertheless, the idea that subjects with a certain style of expression might correlate with concepts of learning is perhaps an idea worth pursuing at another time.
Table II: The description of styles of expression of concepts of learning and the subjects belonging to each style
Definition Style (Ss 2, 3, 4, 8)
In the definition style of expressing the concept of learning, S begins with a definition of learning and then exemplifies it, or possibly contrasts it with a poorer meaning of learning (e.g. note), but the initial definition does not change. The exemplification is drawn from the subject's personal experiences related to university life.
Mixed Styles (Ss 6, 9)
In the mixed style of expressing the concept of learning, S uses definitions and probings, but the initial definition is not so much changed as extended. Once again personal and university related experiences keep clarifying and exemplifying the concepts.
| Styles of expression | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Groping | Definition | Mixed | ||||
| Rote | (A) | 1 | (A) 2 | (A) 1 | ||
| Style of Acquiring | (B) | 5 | (B) 2 | (B) 2 | ||
| Perspective | (C) | 3 | (C) 0 | (C) 2 | ||
| Insight | (D) | 3 | (D) 2 | (D) 5 | ||
| Application | (E) | 1 | (E) 6 | (E) 2 | ||
However, if the five basic types of concepts are not truly independent, perhaps we can make manifest just how they are related to each other. Consequently, an analysis of the relationship among the five basic types of concepts expressed by each subject was performed. Table IV is basically a reorganization of the data of Table I and it shows the relationship among the various concepts of learning.
Table IV basically shows that of the 37 different concepts of learning, only one systematically resists being intrinsically integrated with all of the others, namely rote learning. It is also the only concept of learning that is consistently negatively evaluated by the subjects. All of the others indicate a close relationship. By the latter is meant that a systematically applied unfolding logic shows that a full understanding of learning could easily find a place for these differentiated concepts as phases of a single unfolding process. This can be demonstrated by showing how all of the essential concepts of learning, except rote, can be easily integrated.
| Subject | Expressed Concept | Essence of Concept | Relation of S's Essential Concept to Other of S's Concept | Implications | Value for S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | Rote | ------ | No Close Relation | Repetion without Insight Not Helpful For Personal Perspective | Negative |
| Word Used In Any Kind of Study | ------ | Implies Essential Concept Has Broad Area of Application | ---------- | Positive | |
| Get Personal Perspective | Get Perspective on Things | ---------- | Getting Personal Perspective and Applying Are Important For Total Comprehension of Learning | Positive | |
| Knowing How To Get Along With People | ------ | Important Area of Application for Essential Concept | ---------- | Positive | |
| II | Gain Knowledge | Get Knowledge | ---------- | Manners of Gaining Knowledge and Applying it in Life are important for Total Concept of Learning | Positive |
| Means More Than Schoolwork | ------ | Many ways of Gaining Knowledge Exist | ---------- | Positive | |
| Pervasive in Life | ------ | Gaining Knowledge has Extensive Application in Life | ---------- | Positive | |
| III | Open Eyes To Things Not Seen Before | Get Perspective On Things | To Open Eyes to Things Not Seen Before or to See Old Things Differently, Both Imply To Get a Better Perspective | To Get A Better Perspective on Old And New Things Is Important For Total Concept of Learning | Positive |
| To Look At Same Things In Ways Not Done Before | Get Perspective On Things | ---------- | ---------- | Positive | |
| Rote | ------ | No Close Relation | "Parrotting" Not Helpful For Getting Perspective | Negative | |
| IV | Retain Principles | Understanding | To Retain a Principle Correctly Immediately Implies Understanding | Knowing, Applying and Relating Principles Are Intrinsically Related | Positive |
| Applying Principles | ---------- | To Apply Principles Correctly and Relating them Correctly Implies Further Understanding | Activities Important for Total Concept of Learning | Positive | |
| Relate Principles To Other Ideas | ---------- | ---------- | --------- | Positive | |
| V | Going Beyond Fact and Understanding it | Understanding | ---------- | Understanding is a Manner of Getting Knowledge By Going Beyond Givenness | Positive |
| VI | Understanding | ---------- | Understanding Can Be Partial or complete | ---------- | Positive |
| Understanding Reasons | ---------- | Reasons Go Beyond Sheer Facts And Help Complete Understanding | Understanding Which Goes Beyong Simple Givenness Going Beyond is A Gain and the Maximum is Complete Assimilation | Positive | |
| A Gain | ---------- | To Get To A reason Is To Gain | Positive | ||
| Complete Understanding | Complete Understanding or Assimilation | Assimilation is a Form of Complete Understanding | Complete Assimilation Involves Personal and Attitude Change in Order to Affect Everyday Life. Technical Learning by Contrast, Is a Taking In of Information | Positive | |
| Change | ---------- | Assimilation Requires Change | Positive | ||
| Personal Change | ---------- | Especially Social Knowledge Requires Personal Change | ---------- | Positive | |
| Acquiring Content | ---------- | Technical Konwledge is Acquiring Content | ---------- | Positive | |
| Attitude Change | ---------- | Assimilated Understanding Requires Attitude Change | ---------- | Positive | |
| Affects Life | ---------- | Understanding in Social Realm Affects Life | A Total Comprehension of Learning implies All of the Above | Positive | |
| VII | Acquire Facts | ---------- | Negated Later as Relevant | ---------- | Neutral |
| Analysis | ---------- | Analysis Is Way of Getting Understanding Beyond Obvious | Getting a Personal Perspective on Things Through Analysis | Positive | |
| Thinking for Oneself | Get Perspective on Things | To think for Oneself is a way of Getting a Perspective | Analysis and Thinking Critically for Oneself Are all Important | Positive | |
| Bring More To Facts and Be Critical | Manner of Acquiring New Know | To Be Critical is Going Beyond Obvious Understanding | Total Understanding of Learning | Positive | |
| Way of Approaching Things | ---------- | Way of Approaching is Important for New Knowledge | ---------- | Positive | |
| VIII | Assimilating of Common Sense & Course | Understanding | Assimilation is way of Understanding What to Do | To Assimilate "course & common Sense" is Already to Apply Understanding to Life and Learning Implies This | Positive |
| Rote | ---------- | No Close Relation | ---------- | Negative | |
| Application | Application | Application flows from Understanding | Repetition Without Insight Not Helpful for Understanding | Positive | |
| IX | Understanding | ---------- | Understanding Implies Being Able to Deal with Varied Problems Not Clear Relation | ---------- | Positive |
| Rote | ---------- | ---------- | Understanding & Being able to Recognize Simple Problems Under Different Appearances and What To Do About them are all Part of Meaning of Learning | Negative | |
| Understanding Variations of Problem | Understand Beyond Obvious | Understand Variations Implies Knowing What to Do and Doing it. | ---------- | Positive | |
| Application | Application | How to Use Understanding is Equally important. | Repetion Without Insight Does not Help Understand. | Positive | |
| X | To Know What One Does Not Know Now | Acquiring Knowledge | Knowledge is Level Beyond Facts | To Get Know, one must learn Facts then grasp "content", both Imp. for learning | Positive |
| Acquire Facts | ---------- | To Acquire Facts is One Way Of Getting Knowledge | Positive |
It would seem that the key to the subjects¹ conception of learning is that understanding (d) be achieved. This clearly means that somehow one goes beyond the given otherwise everything would be immediately transparent. Now one way of going beyond the given or the obvious is to get an angle, or an approach or a perspective (c) so that a different context on things can emerge. The manner in which this is done, that is, the manner in which new information or knowledge (b) is gotten, helps to constitute the phenomenon of learning. Somehow, the protocols tell us, that the way of getting to the understanding is not immediately transparent, but one has to struggle for it, even if it does sometimes finally arrive in a flash.
Finally, to apply or use principles (e) or knowledge or understanding is the reverse of getting a perspective or approach. It, too, is a certain "manner" of doing something since not just any application or use will do and it often takes time or one has to "grow into" it rather than do it immediately. Thus, the four "different" types of learning can really blend into phases of aspects of a single process as follows: Learning is the achievement of assimilated or insightful understanding by going beyond a certain level of knowledge in such a manner that a correct perspective on things is attained and the ability to apply this same understanding in similar but varied situations. Thus learning relates not only to the goal (understanding) but also the manner of getting there and the manner of utilization. Indeed, what helps make learning a distinctive phenomenon is the fact that the manner of getting the understanding and/or utilizing it are either non-transparent or not easily accomplished and thus a "temporal unfolding" involving errors is necessary. Without this temporal involvement we would have either insight or competence. It should be clear, moreover, that the integration of the concepts articulated above describes learning more adequately then any of the four concepts used singly.
The above exposition makes clear, too, that there is no obvious place in this process for what is called "rote learning". The dictionary defines rote as "mechanical routine; unthinking repetition. " Since all of the other concepts of learning expressed by the subjects imply comprehension, it is not surprising that rote processes cannot be easily assimilated with the other four concepts.
Why then is rote even included among the concepts of learning at all? Because it is essentially a non-insightful way of getting, retaining and using knowledge or skills that can have some usefulness in the world. It may not be the most desirable in educational settings, as the students kept telling us, but it is valuable in that it helps to remind us that the insightful learning preferred by the students may be due to the fact that they were involved with educational tasks. Thus, however important insightful learning is, and it is, it does not exhaust the phenomenon of learning.
V. DISCUSSION
It seems to me that there are three major issues to be discussed: (1) the comparison between phenomenological and phenomenographic procedures and results to the extent possible; (2) the question of how the results were influenced because of phenomenological analysis of a set of data obtained according to phenomenographic principles, and (3) the question of the difference between concepts of learning and the experience of learning.
(1) The first issue is perhaps the easiest to resolve because of the independent study done by Säljö (1979). He used descriptions of the concepts of learning from different (Swedish) subjects and came up with five types of concepts that are precisely identical to our five even though worded differently. Säljö used 90 subjects and was able to reduce the conceptions expressed by the subjects to the following five: (1) Learning as the increase of knowledge, (2) Learning as memorizing, (3) Learning as the acquisition of facts, procedures, etc. which can be retained and/or utilized in practice, (4) Learning as the abstraction of meaning, and (5) Learning as an interpretive process aimed at the understanding of reality. The above listing is the way in which Säljö presented his findings. Table V, below, correlates Säljö's five concepts of learning with the five discovered in this study.
Table V: Comparision of outcomes of Säljö's and Giorgi's studies regarding types
| Types of Concepts of Learning Expressed By Subjects | ||
|---|---|---|
| TYPES OF CONCEPTS | SÄLJÖ'S STUDY | GIORGI'S STUDY |
| A | Learning as Memorizing | Rote Learning |
| B | Learning as Increase of Knowledge | Manner of Acquiring New Information |
| C | Learning as an Interpretive Process | Getting Perspective on Things |
| D | Learning as Abstraction of Meaning | Understanding |
| E | Learning as Acquisition of Facts, etc. To Be Utilized in Practice | Application |
Thus, while different wordings were used by different subjects and by the authors of the two reports, Table V nevertheless shows that the findings can be essentially matched; There seems to be strong evidence for the fact that these five types of concepts of learning can account for most of the empirical variations of learning in educational settings.
Even though the empirical aspects of Säljö's and my study are perfectly confirmatory, there are differences in interpretation between Säljö and myself. Säljö (1979) sees two fundamental differences underlying the five types of concepts of learning: first, the idea of knowledge as external which implies a "verbatim item-by-item transfer of knowledge" (p.l9) (e.g. rote learning) versus the idea that "knowledge is construed by individuals as a result of an active effort on the part of the learner" (p.l9) (e.g., learning as abstraction of meaning). The second difference for Säljö concerns assumptions regarding what is learned. Säljö's A and E types of learning (Table V) imply for him the assumption that "knowledge already exists 'out there' in books, lectures, etc." (p. 20) whereas concepts C and D (Table V) imply that "what is learned is the meaning which the learner manages to get out of the discourse" (p.20). Saljö (p.21) also relates this basic difference to some of his (and Marton's) earlier research where a distinction was made between surface-level and deep-level processing.
Now, I'm sure that the distinction between surface processing in learning and depth processing while learning is an adequate distinction and that the distinction between perceiving something to be learned as external or alien as opposed to belonging or familiar is also another empirically encountered distinction, but I do not think that they can account for the differences among the types of concepts of learning expressed by the subjects. I think that meanings or interpretive processes may involve either surface or depth processing as memorizing or acquisition may involve either. Similarly, I believe that it would be easy to demonstrate that meanings and interpretations could be as external as discrete items. I believe that surface and depth processes refer to the quality of learning and not to the type of content and that whether something appears as "external or alien" or "meaningful and familiar" depends upon the interest and/or personal history of the subject.
As explained in the Results II section above, I see the relationship of four of the five types of concepts to be in terms of the essential temporal structure of the learning process. While a bit simplified, let's say that from the perspective of consciousness, learning seeks understanding, and from the perspective of behavior it seeks competency. What is distinctive about learning is that the understanding or the competency must be achieved over time and be mediated as opposed to immediately given or performed (The latter would be and example of insight or what is already learned). Thus, what is required is an access to the understanding or a way of applying the understanding as well as the proper understanding itself. Thus, it terms of the categories of this research, the subjects identified learning (conceptually) with a proper understanding (D), with the means of making use of the understanding (E), and with the means of acquiring knowledge or getting a perspective (B and C) on the proper understanding. In other words, learning implies involvement with the proper understanding plus means of access to or means of applying the proper understanding. Because of the concern for the means as well as the "whatness" of a situation, temporality is necessary. Again, if concern with the means could be dropped, then one would merely have insight (e.g. one who knows a particular foreign language can read it immediately; one who is still learning it struggles) or competency (one who knows how to swim, steps in the water and swims; a learner goes in more cautiously and probes about the water environment, etc.).
Rote learning does not belong to the essential structure of learning but is rather a wholly different style of learning. It is a certain manner of getting access to or applying a certain level of understanding that is related to a subject's relationship to a situation that demands a certain kind of achievement. I cannot detail further all the special qualities of rote learning because no instance of it was provided by any of the subjects. They all used it as a contrasting style; as the opposite of what they really meant by learning. It was clearly perceived, by these subjects, as a low level of learning. The only point I want to make about it is that it is not essentially a part of the structure of learning but a term signifying a certain type of structure of learning.
It can be seen therefore that the latter interpretation is different from Säljö's, even though I would claim that it is not necessarily disharmonious. Differences in interpretation could be due to different interests, different levels of analysis, and finally, to the fact that I did try to be consistently phenomenological, but Säljö did not accept such a constraint. What this analysis implies, for me, is that descriptive researchers can work independently and replicate findings in the strongest possible sense. But it also implies, just as within traditional psychological research, that replicated findings are no guarantee of theoretical unity. Phenomenology and phenomenography, while close, nevertheless seem not to be identical.
(2) It is somewhat harder to see precisely how procedures compare because the descriptions of the "concepts of learning" followed in this research were based upon phenomenographic procedures and the analysis was done phenomenologically. Thus, this research was not entirely "pure". On the other hand, results that confirm each other despite different procedures are usually pretty solid.
There is an axiom in research that says that an analysis can not bring forth what the data do not show. Thus, once the descriptions are obtained, an analysis can only bring out what is there. In this sense, the phenomenological analysis may be somewhat limited, but only a comparative study could tell us for sure. But it does raise the question of what might be a better data base for a phenomenological analysis. It is hard to answer a priori, but perhaps more extensive descriptions would have helped because a phenomenological analysis would have been equally interested in how the subjects arrived at their conceptualizations. That is, even though the data above showed no relationship between style of expression and type of concept (in part because of lack of independence of the concepts), an analysis that tried to relate type of concept to personal experience might have shown an interesting relationship (but it was judged to be too impoverished as given). In other words, it is not only what concept subject's have, but the manner in which they arrive at the concept that is important. Säljö (1979 p. 22, for example, states that how people approach a learning task is related to what they get out of it. This is the same point we are making). However, it is still an unresolved issue, but perhaps a fruitful on to pursue.
(3) It would be important to clarify in a theoretically satisfying way the difference between a concept and an experience. We have seen this research that 10 students have come up with five types of concepts of learning and Säljö had the same result with 90 students. In reporting on learning research using non-students describing everyday life situations, I (Giorgi, 1985a) analyzed five descriptions of the experience of learning and four of the descriptions fit into one type labeled "Discovery of Discrepancy Between Subject's Assumptions and The Situation" and the remaining description was another type called "Skill Acquisition".
Now, it is not unimaginable that the findings from the non-educational settings can be integrated with those from the educational settings. For example, the type called "Discrepancy Between Assumptions and Situation" could easily be subsumed under the concept called "Getting Approach or Perspective on Things", and the type of learning experience called "Skill Acquisition" could fall under the learning concept labeled "Application or Use of Principles". Of course, more precise comparisons would have to be made of the actual structures of the experiences with the concrete data of the subjects describing the concepts in order to see how smooth the integration can be. However, in principle, a concept is meant to synthesize an experience and if it can comprehend the experience without residue, then it is an adequate concept. That accounts for the possibility of integration. But, still, to conceive of something is not to experience the same thing in the pregnant sense of the term. Thus, there also has to be difference between conceiving and experiencing and if one were to read the raw data of the two research reports (this one and Giorgi, 1985a), one would have to say that the difference is in the fullness that the descriptions of experienced situations contain that "concept descriptions" do not. Unfortunately, this fullness can sometimes be obscured by the researcher's desire for efficient communication and the tendency to reduce findings to abstract categories. Again, this, too, requires further research.
Finally, the motives for emphasizing concepts or experiences should not be over-looked. Marton is a pedagogist interested in understanding how students acquire concepts which is often important in understanding classroom learning. Giorgi is a psychologist trying to understand how learning is lived in everyday life and he finds that how people experience learning is critical. Thus, the respective focusing on concepts and experience may reflect disciplinary situational biases even though, in principle, both psychologists and pedagogists can deal with either concepts or experiences.
REFERENCES
Ebbinghaus, H. (1964/1885) Memory (H.A. Ruger and C.E. Bussentius, Trans.) N.Y., Dover Publications (original English version, 1913; German original 18B5)
Giorgi, A. (1967) A phenomenological approach to the problem of meaning and serial learning. Review of existential psychology and psychiatry, 7, 106-118.
Giorgi, A. (1985a) The phenomenological psychology of learning the verbal learning tradition, in Giorgi, A. (ed.), Phenomenology and psychological research, Pittsburgh, Pa., Duquesne Unversity Press, 1985.
Giorgi, A. (1985b) Sketch of a psychological phenomenological method in Giorgi, A. (Ed.) Phenomenology and psychological research, Pittsburgh, Pa., Duquesne University Press, 1985.
Marton, F. & Säljö, R. (1976a) On qualitative differences in learning: I. Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11.
Marton, F. & Säljö, R. (1976b) On qualitative differences in learning. II. Outcome as a function of the learner's conception of the task. British Journal of Educational Psychology 46, 115-127.
Säljö, R. (1979) Learning in the learner's perspective: I. Some commonsense conceptions. Reports from the Institute of Education of the University of Göteborg, no 76.
Taylor, E & Morgan, A. (undated) Students' Open University careers. Study Methods Group, report no 14, Institute of Educational Technology, The Open University.
Torbertson, W.R. (1972) Learning from experience. N.Y: Columbia University Press.
APPENDIX - Phenomenological analyses of descriptions of all ten subjects
Subject I
* Refers to the fact that the subject is responding to question by researcher.
| *(1) S doesn't know what he/she means by or thinks of when he/she thinks of learning. | (1) S is unclear about meaning or what he thinks of when he thinks about learning. |
| (2) S says same as Lisa he supposes, by rote which has already became quite clear that S is not going to be doing that with the course he's in. | (2) S makes unclear reference to Lisa with regard to learning by rote, but he also affirms that insofar as he's aware such a sense of learning will not be operating for him in the course. |
| (3) S says it's all very new. | (3) S states it is all new to him. |
| (4) S didn't know how ... learning is a word that one uses in connection with any sort of study - isn't it? Does R see what S means? | (4) S is still unsure and suggests that learning is a word used in connection with any kind of study - S appeals to R for understanding. |
| (5) S is not expecting the course to be the way he was taught history - like learn the names of the Kings and Queens of England and that sort of thing. | (5) S was not expecting the course to be like some he had in the past which merely required rote memorizing in learning. |
| (6) [It's] much more likely to give one - don't know - perhaps a more solid idea of a view, a personal view of society, perhaps ultimately - but ... | (6) S expects that the course [or learning] is more likely to give one a more solid idea of a perspective - a personal of society ... perhaps, but |
| *(7) S says that learning in general, learning's meaning in general, isn't like rote learning, at least not in connection with O.U. | (7) S reaffirms that learning is not like rote, at least not in connection with O.U. |
| (8) But now S has started, but he supposes ... it is a hard question to answer. | (8) S admits it's a hard question to answer. |
| (9) And S has Lisa over there doing O-levels this year - and that's one sort of learning. | (9) S affirms that Lisa is doing O-levels is one sort of learning. |
| (10) S knows exactly what sort of learning Lisa has to do, she's got to know it by rote about, and not give too many opinions an anything, it's almost the exact opposite. | (10) At S also says that what Lisa is doing is rote, and that she is not free to give opinions and so it is the exact opposite of what S is trying to say. |
| (11) Well, S says Lisa is not going to present arguments where we have ... (disagreements?) in the things we're doing. | (11) S implies that Lisa will not present arguments where there are possible disagreements in what we are doing. |
| (12) S says it's an entirely different sort of process - isn't it? | (12) S affirms that Lisa's doing a different sort of process! |
| (13) But, S says, had R asked him this in November, before he looked at the course material, S would have probably assumed it would it would have been a similar sort of thing. | (13) But, S agrees, that if R had asked him the same question earlier, before this awareness of the material of this course, he would have assumed similar to Lisa. |
| (14) S says he's never been to a university, and he has never came across this sort of way they work there, the way they study, so he really would not have known. | (14) Never having been to a university before, S says that he has never come across the way students work, and/or study - so he would not known. |
| (15) S says that's what he would have thought learning was, I mean, that's if I thought about it - | (15) S is about to state what he would have thought learning was - i.e. if he would have thought about it - |
| (16) Which S didn't - or hadn't until R asked him the question. | (16) Which S admits he didn't and wouldn't if R did not asked him. |
| (17) S would take it on a far larger scale and say learning can cover anything | (17) But say would put the issue on a far larger scale and say learning could cover anything [not just course?] |
| (18) S hopes we are basically ... how to live with people and that would be far more important to S then getting A-levels or doing O.U. - | (8) S believes that learning to live with people would be a significant meaning of learning - which, for him, would be more important than getting A-levels or doing O-U work [him?] |
Subject II
* Refers to the fact that the subject is responding to question by researcher.
| *(1) For S, learning means to gain some knowledge. S says we are learning all the time, not necessary by sitting down and studying. | (1) For S, learning means to gain knowledge; he affirms that we are learning all the time and emphasizes that learning can mean more than the obvious instance [studying]. |
| (2) S thinks that there are all kinds of ways. | (2) S reaffirms that there are many ways to learn. |
| (3) But to S, learning is gaining knowledge. | (3) But he essentially describes learning as gaining knowledge. |
| (4) S supposes that by gaining knowledge he means picking up bits of information. | (4) When pressed concerning meaning of gaining knowledge, S states basically a current synonym: picking up bits of information, |
| (5) S thinks that if you do it quite basically, that's what it is. | (5) S reaffirms essential understanding as "picking up bits of information". |
| (6) S believes that we do that everyday in our way of life, bur perhaps to a greater degree by doing a course. | (6) S reiterates that learning is pervasive and in every day life, although allows it may be more present in a course. |
| *(7) S thinks we obviously want to learn more. S obviously wants more knowledge about things and he as an interest in things and wants to know as much as possible about them. | (7) S believes all want to learn more. S affirms that he wants more knowledge about things and he wants to know as much as possible about things in which he has an interest. |
| (8) S reaffirms that learning is gaining bits and pieces of knowledge. | (8) S reaffirms learning equals gaining "bits and pieces of knowledge". |
Subject III
* Refers to the fact that the subject is responding to question by researcher.
| *(1) To S, learning means to open his eyes to things that he hasn't. | (1) To S, learning means to open his eyes to things he has not seen before, or. |
| (2) Or to look at things in ways he hasn't before, i.e. like immigration - it never struck S before that people were invited to come to his country. | (2) To look at some things in way he has not before. S uses immigration perhaps as an example - S was not aware that people were invited to come to his country. |
| (3) S just thought they opened the gates and they all came in. | (3) S had arrived that all simply came by a general open-door policy. |
| (4) S didn't realize that there was a recruiting complex in Jamaica, for instance, to actually get people to come | (4) S was unaware of actual recruitment policies to get people to come. |
| (5) So that changes perspectives on things. | (5) That knowledge changes perspective on things for S, for instance, his attitude toward the phenomenon is transformed. |
| (6) S thinks that asking people to come, [authorities] might have a hostel or something or a job for them when they got here and not just left them. | (6) S now thinks that people are asked to come, the authorities might be more responsible for seeing to it that they are cared for better. |
| (7) For S, to actually unite people to come, they are not sort of in the same unit, you know they a bit ... | (7) The circumstances are not what he assumed if people are actually united to come. |
| (8) S recognizes that he is off the beaten track. | (8) S becomes aware of straying away from theme of question. |
| (9) But, for S, learning is to sort of open, to make S look at things in ways S hadn't thought of before - S would think that, that is learning. | (9) S summarizes again that learning for him as to look at things in S hadn't thought of before. |
| (10) S thinks that at school, one tends to learn anything by rote. | (10) S contrasts his definition with his experiences at school where he believes he had to learn everything by rote. |
| (11) That's what bothers S about O.U. | (11) It also bothers S about his current situation at O.U. |
| (12) S was quite good at learning everything parrot fashion - even A-levels, and S knows one is supposed to go into reading in one's own and all that, but S managed to get through. | (12) S says this even though he is aware that he has been able to get by doing less and eventhough some sense of more completely being a student was available to him and he didn't do it. |
| (13) S does not remember ever doing anything much outside the ... what they told him to do and the text books and learning it up for exam and reproducing it. | (13) S does not even remember doing more than he was told in his student history. |
| (14) So, S thinks that this will be a different sort of learning to that sort of learning. | (14) However, S is looking forward to the course as an occasion for a different type of learning - one he prefers. |
| (15) So S hopes it will make me see things a lot clearer - just look at life differently - hopefully. | (15) Therefor, S is looking forward to seeing things differently in the sense of clearer. |
Subject IV
* Refers to the fact that the subject is responding to question by researcher.
| *(1) For S, learning means that the principles stick in his mind. | (1) For S, learning has to do with retaining principles. |
| (2) S says so that he can take principles and get something from it and relate those to other ideas or other principles that he picked up. | (2) For S, what is important with learning is the application or relation of principles to other ideas or principles he knows. |
| (3) S says he can't give an example of principle because they hadn't gotten anywhere in the course yet. | (3) S understanding question of example of principle to course other than generally and claims that course not started yet. |
| (4) Then S says that psychology as probably one that interests him - how people react. | (4) For S, psychology is of interest and it's understanding to deal in how people react. |
| (5) S then says to relate ideas that are in the unit to situation and other parts of the same course. | (5) Again S relates principle specifics to course rather than generally, but tries to extend course principles outside. |
| (6) S says that where people don't always do what one wants them to do and so in, which crime and organization and so on. | (6) S would like to apply learning principles to situations where people do not behave according to social experience - like crime. |
Subject V
* Refers to the fact that the subject is responding to question by researcher.
| *(1) S believes that it is difficult to answer about learning because just reading signifies and understanding it S thinks is not the same thing as learning. | (1) S begins with negative understandings - learning is not equal to just reading and understanding. |
| (2) But on the other hand S thinks that just repeating facts is not learning either. | (2) nor is learning just repeating facts. |
| (3) S thinks it is the mixture of the two. | (3) S believes that learning is equal to a mixture of the two. |
| (4) But S wants to be able to increase his perspective really so if S sees significance on TV or if he sees significance on the newspaper or in a book, one tend to just look at the facts and concepts, it as a fact whereas S thinks if one is learning, it is to look at the fact and to look around the subject. | (4) S believes that sheer acceptance of because authority says it is not learning, but learning somehow means going beyond the sheer fact and trying to understand it. |
Subject VI
* Refers to the fact that the subject is responding to question by researcher.
| *(1) S thinks that learning means understanding. | (1) S thinks learning means understanding. |
| (2) S states that one can read - that's OK, but unless one understands the reason that a thing is what it is, it's not worth it - one has not learned a thing. | (2) S distinguishes learning [or understanding] from merely reading by stating that one has to understand the reason that something is what it is, otherwise reading is not worthwhile. |
| (3) S states that one has to gain like - an experience from reading it and - totally experiencing it. | (3)S also interprets learning or understanding to be a gain which is also understanding to be a total experience for him. |
| (4) S thinks that one has to understand it completely - assimulate it. | (4) S paraphrases his idea by saying that learning equals complete understanding or simulation. |
| (5) And S hopes, gain something from it. Sometime if one learns something one may actually lose something by reading it. | (5) S expresses hope that total assimulation means gaining something from experience - I, experience per se is not a guarantee of learning. S also says that with real learning sometimes one may lose something. |
| *(6) S explains what he means by last statement by stating that he has lost some of his hidebound ideas that he has had in the past - he loses them - they¹ve changed. | (6) S states that he has lost some long held ideas because of learning and thus sometimes learning can be measured by change in such ideas. |
| (7) S thinks that any type of learning is going to have to change one - if one really does learn - especially a subject like Social Science. | (7) S believes that any type of learning invokes change - if one truly learns therefore change equals essential - especially subject like social science. |
| (8) S thinks more so than in Math or Technology when one actually just learns, S thinks, about that subject. | (8) S then distinguishes change between learning technology and social sciences - former does not motivate personal change - only learning of content; latter does. |
| (9) But in social sciences one learns about people and the world around one and why things happen - it changes one - ones attitude toward everything. | (9) S believes that in social sciences one learns about people and the world and why things happen and therefore attitude change must be involved. |
| (10) S doesn't think by just understanding why a subject works, say if one is doing technology - or why a plane flies, it's going to change one's attitude to life. | (10) S does not believe that understanding operation of machines will necessarily change one¹s attitude toward life - therefore personal change influences S's understanding of learning. |
| (11) S states that if one actually stars to learn about social science, and the reason why one knows people migrate or court crime - all about society in general - it must affect one's everyday beliefs - it's got to. | (11) S expresses view that genuine learning about reasons for certain social happenings will necessarily affect one's everyday belief. |
Subject VII
* Refers to the fact that the subject is responding to question by researcher.
| *(1) S says that what one understands by learning is a good one - as a bold statement. | (1) S considers question a bold statement. |
| (2) S states learning equal rather more learning facts - yes - he supposes learning facts and learning sort of ... S is getting stuck forwards. | (2) S first says learning equals learning facts, although he is aware of getting suck for words. |
| (3) S says learning must mean lots of things - learning facts, learning to analyze which is hardly getting any facts | (3) S then says learning must mean lots of things including facts, analyzing - which is not factual. |
| (4) S adds learning to think for yourself - yes - learning to think for yourself. | (4) S then adds learning - learning to think for oneself. |
| (5) S again says learning to analyze and learning facts and I suppose D. I would expect the first and no so much facts. | (5) S again repeats learning to analyze and learning facts, and leans towards forever. |
| (6) S states it is not actually a factual subject so far as he can see - facts is not the point of the exercise. | (6) In referring to specific course exercise, S says that facts were not the point. |
| *(7) S expects to learn more about how to analyze, | (7) S says he expects to learn even more about how to analyze. |
| (8) S says the 1st unit in unemployment - its one reason why unemployment has risen by a certain percent. Take that in face value. | (8) S becomes critical of a statement in the exercise. |
| (9) S says first thing he's done is learn to look at figures, especially after reading that. Learn to look at figures and see if there is more to them. | (9) Especially after above statement, S says he's learned how to look at figures - to see if there's more to them. |
| (10) As S said, he is giving up smoking today and on packet of Wrigley's it said "sugarfree" gum - dentists recommend it - 9 out of 10 of those who responded to Wrigley's survey - didn't say who did not respond - S would not have noticed that before. | (10) S also becomes aware of being more critical of ads. |
| *(11) So, it's learning to take an approach to things, to learn how to question and analyze. | (11) S says learning equals a way of applying things, a way of questioning and analyzing. |
| (12) S states above was easy example, and the more one gets into it the more critical one can get | (12) S is aware of greater complexity to pick and therefore greater critcalness. |
Subject VIII
* Refers to the fact that the subject is responding to question by researcher.
| *(1) For S, learning assimulation of common sense in relation to course. Common sense which was related to sociology. | (1) For S, learning equals assimulation of common sense in relation to course - which is related to sociology. |
| (2) As opposed to parrot learning. | (2) Above learning opposed to "parrot learning". |
| *(3) For S, it seems that there are various theories which he found when he looked at the blocks in relation to unemployment, crime and things like that and there are various yard sticks, social laws and roles of thumb that can apply and statistics. And for S these are obviously the basic guidelines in relation to those problems. | (3) S compared various theories [from social and common sense] with regard to presented social problems and was aware of various rules, etc. and they constitute the guidelines to those problems. |
| (4) And one needs to know how to apply them and what they are. | (4) S believes it is necessary to know how to apply them. |
| (5) S says he thinks that's what he was thinking. | (5) S believes that these were his thoughts. |
Subject IX
* Refers to the fact that the subject is responding to question by researcher.
| *(1) For S, learning in general equals understanding things - S knows from accountancy. | (1) Based on specific experiences, for S learning equals understanding things. |
| (2) S could learn that parrot fashion but he still would not understand it. Because of there was a variation in the problem, he wouldn't be able to cope with it and. | (2) S could [learn i.e. perform] "acting" in parrot way, but he would still not understand it because he would not be able to cope with a variation in the problem. |
| (3) S also thinks how to use the material. It is no good for someone to give a reference book if one doesn't know what to do while you have the book in your hands, or where to look at it, or even what programs on TV to look at. | (3) How to use material also equals learning for S. Sheer presence of correct item not sufficient with knowledge of use. |
| (4) S believes learning is not necessarily something to a specific course. | (4) S affirms learning not equal necessarily tied to one course. |
| (5) But S supposes that the process is different for each subject done. | (5) S also assumes learning process is different for each subject. |
| (6) S supposes specific courses are completely different because if one has one aim, and well learning, generally like everything complex - but with a specific course one has to realize one is learning or one doesn¹t get anywhere. | (6) S also has notion that learning for specific course can differ from learning in general. |
| (7) S states that if one does not have or did not have any experience, then one would give up. | (7) In a specific course, of S, if one did not have any experience, one would give up. |
| (8) S doesn't really think learning accountancy - all that one could learn was actual facts to base things on. | (8) ? |
| (9) Unless one is going to learn method, S can't see that it's really understanding parrot fashion. | (9) S allows that possible learning method can be done parrot fashion, otherwise not possible. |
Subject X
* Refers to the fact that the subject is responding to question by researcher.
| *(1) S doesn't really know what learning is. | (1) S says he does not know what learning is. |
| (2) S supposes learning equals knowing about things that he doesn't know about now that are there that he doesn't know about. | (2) S supposes learning equals to know but things that he is unaware of know. |
| (3) When S thinks about learning, he says he is still very much at school and he knows it's very different sort of learning and often if S glances through some books that S only got last week - the set books - and he is still in school learning the facts and dates and names learning other than context. | (3) S's thoughts about learning bring him realize that he is still a sort of beginner and that he is so much so that he is still learning primitive facts about the books. |
| (4) And if S does read something, he is so bothered about taking in what it says that S has read and S thinks "what have I just read" - S doesn't even know who wrote it or what it was about and S thinks at the moment S feels worried about what he is doing or what S is learning. | (4) And S's "beginningness" is also shown by fact that even when ready he is so bothered by taking all of it in that he does not know who wrote it or what he read and he is too worried to do better. |
| (5) S still feels very confused about it. | (5) S feels very confused about learning. |
| (6) S supposes "panicky" because it's about to start and S'll be glad once it's started and S has gotten into it - he thinks. | (6) S is even panicky about it and can't wait until it starts. |
| (7) But S hopes something, whatever it is, is settled by the 14th. | (7) But he hopes it will be settled soon. |
| (8) What happens on that day, S says, S claims it is his own fault. S out to get all the [?] out and find out what he suddenly should start doing. | (8) S admits to it being his fault and that he should assess his own situation. |
| (9) S feels very apprehensive about it but S thinks why because it's a couple of weeks away but S didn't feel apprehensive about. | (9) S now feels very apprehensive although he didn't recently. |