For Today:
Please open up this article and look it over using the tips that I gave you in lesson 4.
Here is the Google Form for today's review.
Please work in small breakout groups to answer the review questions. Please take turns trying to answer the questions. If you are unsure of the answer, it is okay to say "I am not sure about this one." Help each other.
For reference, here are the questions:
1. Is this a secondary source or primary source for sociological research? Why?
Different Sections in Research Articles (this lesson)
2. On page 287, find the beginning of the article which starts with "This article uses administrative data..."? What part of the article is that first section? What can you usually expect to find in that section?
3. On page 288 find the section that begins with "In The Adolescent in Society (1961)..." What is this section called? What can you usually expect to find in that section?
4. Is this research qualitative or quantitative? Why?
4b. What method of research do the authors use for this study?
5. Is this research longitudinal, cross-sectional or cross-cultural or neither? Why?
6. What are some conclusions that the authors make from their research?
7. Is this an example of macrosociological research or micro-sociological research and why?
8. What are important considerations for some of the statistics in the article?
9. Apply the following concepts to this article: groups (statuses and roles), ingroups and outgroups, categories and stereotypes.
10. Why did we read the Gang Leader for a Day article? What are important examples within the article?
11. If you happen to know a bunch of students from our high school who went to U of I, why can't you just rely on your own knowledge/common sense to make a conclusion about how they will be affected by attending U of I together?
1. Is this a secondary source or primary source for sociological research? Why?
Secondary sociology sources are when newspapers and other media summarize sociological studies. Instead, this is a primary source for sociology because this article was written by the researcher(s) who actually did the research/analyzed the data. Similar to historical sources who actually see the history, primary sources in sociology are the sources written by those who actually do the sociology - they examine the data and crunch the numbers. Additionally, because this is published in a research journal, that is a good clue that it is primary.
Students had trouble with this because they noted that the researchers were using data that was gathered from the U of Texas. However, they were using the existing data and examining it in their own unique way. So, even though they were not gathering the data themselves, they were examining it and tabulating it themselves. This makes it primary source. Remember that one type of research method is called "existing sources." This is when sociologists use sources of data that have already been collected (such as the census data or general social survey) and they examine that data to create their own analysis. See this post for more on types of research methods)
2. On page 287, find the beginning of the article which starts with "This article uses administrative data..."? What part of the article is that first section? What can you usually expect to find in that section?
Note: Recall or review how to read journal articles and the different sections that are usually included within sociological research journal articles. (See this post as a reminder of how to read research journals.)
For this question, notice how the text for this section is set off from the rest of the article. It is at the beginning and above the research. That is a clue that this is the abstract. The abstract is a short summary of the research. It is a really important summary for you to know what the article is about and whether the article is going to be useful for you.
3. On page 288 find the section that begins with "In The Adolescent in Society (1961)..." What is this section called? What can you usually expect to find in that section?
Usually, the first section of the article is the introduction which tells the reader why the researchers wanted to do this research. So, on page 287 that is what the authors are doing. They explain what research has been done already and what gaps in the research that they want to fill. This introduction continues through the first column on page 288. And notice that in the last paragraph of the column the authors even explain what the next sections of the article will be about.
Next comes the section that this question is asking about (pg 288). Note that the section is called "background". This is a slightly confusing title because it could refer to the background of why they wanted to do the research (which would be considered the introduction) or it could be the background of previous research that has already been done by other people (also called background literature review). It is in fact the latter. Notice how the section explains lots of other research - all of the names and dates in parentheses indicate that they are talking about other authors and the years that they have published their research. Even if you do not read any of the text in between, this should be a clue that this section is reviewing all the literature that the authors found prior to doing their own research.
Let me point out - students sometimes confuse this with the actual research because in high school you are often taught to write a research paper that is basically a background literature review of other people's research. Usually, the junior research paper is not original research that you conducted.
4. Is this research qualitative or quantitative? Why?
This research is quantitative. The authors explain that they use empirical data and a formula to estimate the extent to which there is a correlation that high school peers increase college GPA. (page 288) Even if you do not understand the stats, you can see quickly that the authors use mathematical formulas (data section page 292) and they tabulate data (pages 295-297).
4b. What method of research do the authors use for this study?
This was another tricky question. Students had trouble with this because they noted that the researchers were using data that was gathered from the U of Texas. However, they were using the existing data and examining it in their own unique way. So, even though they were not gathering the data themselves, they were examining it and tabulating it themselves. This makes it primary source. Remember that one type of research method is called "existing sources." This is when sociologists use sources of data that have already been collected (such as the census data or general social survey) and they examine that data to create their own analysis. See this post for more on types of research methods)
5. Is this research longitudinal, cross-sectional or cross-cultural or neither? Why?
This is cross-sectional because it is examining a group of Texas students at a particular moment in time. It does NOT examine how they change over the years (longitudinal) and it does NOT compare them to students from other cultures (cross-cultural). If this studied compared students from colleges in different countries or even students from different college experiences (such as comparing large public university students to small liberal arts students) then this would be cross cultural. Finally, if this studied examined a specific group of students over time then it would be longitudinal. For example, the researchers might examine data from the same students after freshman year, sophmore year and then junior year and they might examine how much influence their high school cohorts have on them over the years. That would be longitudinal.
This question for this article might be confusing because if you read on page 292 under the Data Section that this study used longitudinal data, you might assume that this study is longitudinal. The data is collected by UT every year, in other words, longitudinally. However, the researchers for this article took a cross section of that data and examined it. They were not studying the same subjects year after year.
6. What are some conclusions that the authors make from their research?
(page 307, but also see the abstract)
7. Is this an example of macrosociological research or microsociological research and why?
Macrosociology focuses on large groups like college students. Microsociology focuses on how people interact in face-to-face interaction. This is studying large groups of students and where they attend college, so it is macrosociology. If there was a follow-up study that analyzed how these students interacted with their high school peers at college, then, that would be microsociology.
8. What are important considerations for some of the statistics in the article?
The authors discuss numerous significant stats in their "results" sections on pages 302 and 307. Based on these stats or the conclusions, ask critical questions about them such as: would the data change at a smaller private school? How did the authors select the dataset to be analyzed? Was there something unique about the years the authors analyzed - has social media changed it?
9. Apply the following concepts to this article: groups (statuses and roles), ingroups and outgroups, categories and stereotypes. How can the research help us to be sociologically mindful about the groups being studied?
In this research the group the authors are studying is the freshmen cohort groups at the U of Texas. Specifically, the statuses that the author looks at is the high school alumni status for students as well as racial status. Since I am an SHS student considering going to U of I, this research would be an ingroup for me because I would be part of a large group of SHS alumni attending the same college. In this case, the stereotype might be that all SHS students go to U of I. The research studies the category of people who went from the same high school to the same college. The research reveals that there is only a slight benefit from attending the same college as your peers so we should be careful not to stereotype all students that attend college with their peers - they won't all do better because of their peers.
10. Why did we read the Gang Leader for a Day article? What are important examples within the article?
We read Gang Leader for a Day to show the different research methods that sociologists use and some of the advantages and disadvantages of each. Additionally, we concluded that it is best to use multiple research methods to truly understand a research question. The authors of this study explain that on page 310.
11. If you happen to know a bunch of students from our high school who went to U of I, why can't you just rely on your own knowledge/common sense to make a conclusion about how they will be affected by attending U of I together?
This question is trying to get you to recall the first lesson of this unit - there are numerous psychological reasons why we can't just rely on our perception or common sense for understanding sociology. We need data to help us see the truth. For example, common sense might tell you that if you go to a college where lots of your high school peers go, you might be more likely to party and so your GPA will be lower. That makes sense, but this research shows otherwise.
No comments:
Post a Comment