This article was downloaded by: [Monash University Library]On: 05 October 2014, At: 21:51Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Scandinavian Journal of EducationalResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/csje20

Conceptions of Research andMethodology LearningMari Murtonen Corresponding author a & Erno Lehtinen aa University of Turku , FinlandPublished online: 24 Jan 2007.

To cite this article: Mari Murtonen Corresponding author & Erno Lehtinen (2005) Conceptions ofResearch and Methodology Learning, Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 49:3, 217-224,DOI: 10.1080/00313830500109519

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00313830500109519

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

EDITORIAL

Conceptions of Research and

Methodology Learning

Mari Murtonen* and Erno LehtinenUniversity of Turku, Finland

Introduction

Technical development during the last decades has changed both the amount and

form of information. The amount of information based on research or other sources

is rapidly growing (see, for example, Greer, 2000). Because of the various collection

and analysis methods, the complexity of the information has also increased

substantially. Adequate use of the wealth of information requires that citizens of

the information society develop more advanced and complex knowledge handling

skills (see, for example, Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993). The ability to understand

and make use of research-based information is becoming one of the key

competencies of future expert practices. However, it is not only researchers directly

dealing with research who need these skills; experts in many other professions also

need them to understand and evaluate research-based information.

University students at all levels take several compulsory courses on research

methodology so as to be able to understand, consume, handle, and produce scientific

information. Research methodology is, however, found to be one of the most

difficult subjects in the curriculum for students of many disciplines. For example,

Finnish education and social science students were found to consider research

methods more difficult than their major subject studies (Murtonen & Lehtinen,

2003). Universities are investing huge resources in teaching students research skills,

but learning outcomes of methodology courses are not as good as expected, even

after several courses (Garfield & Ahlgren, 1988; Lehtinen & Rui, 1995).

The extract from Epstein illustrates well the situation in research courses in many

disciplines: ‘‘No other part of the social work curriculum has been so consistently

received by students with as much groaning, moaning, eye-rolling, hyperventilation,

and waiver strategizing as the research course’’ (Epstein, 1987, p. 71).

Teaching research skills is one of the basic tasks of a university, but it is also one of

the hardest tasks. The problems with university students’ research methodology

*Corresponding author. Department of Education, University of Turku, 20014 Turku, Finland.

Email: mari.murtonen@utu.fi

Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research

Vol. 49, No. 3, July 2005, pp. 217–224

ISSN 0031-3831 (print)/ISSN 1430-1170 (online)/05/030217-8

� 2005 Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research

DOI: 10.1080/00313830500109519

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mon

ash

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 2

1:51

05

Oct

ober

201

4

learning have been noted in many disciplines, for example in education (Lehtinen

& Rui, 1995; Murtonen & Lehtinen, 2003, Murtonen & Titterton, 2004),

psychology (Hauff & Fogarty, 1996; Pretorius & Norman, 1992; Thompson,

1994; Townsend, Moore, Tuck, & Wilton, 1998), sociology (Filinson & Niklas,

1992), social work (Forte, 1995; Rosenthal & Wilson, 1992), social science in

general (Zeidner, 1991), health education (Mintz & Ostbye, 1992), and biology

(Kelly, 1992).

Although research has become a crucial activity in society and the problems

students face on research courses are widely known, the learning of scientific

thinking and research skills in many higher education institutions has not been

sufficiently studied.

Varying Conceptions of Research Affecting Learning

Current research has shown that the different conceptions students have about the

nature of knowledge and learning, as well as of themselves as learners, have an

important influence on their study and learning processes (see, for example, Lonka &

Lindblom-Ylanne, 1996; Vermunt & van Rijswijk, 1988). From another perspective,

the conceptual change research tradition has shown that the initial or naıve domain-

specific preconception students bring to learning situations constrain their attempts

to understand new scientific concepts in fields like physics, biology, mathematics,

and history (see, for example, Chi, 1992; Limon & Carretero, 1999; Mereluoto &

Lehtinen, 2004; Mikkila-Erdmann, 2001; Vosniadou, 1994). Concepts can change

in various ways during learning, but the process of change is often very slow (see, for

example, Tynjala 1999; Tynjala, Merenluoto, & Murtonen, 2002).

Most studies dealing with conceptual learning processes in schools or universities

refer to situations in which the academic community shares a common belief, the

theories or concepts of which represent the state-of-the-art knowledge in the field. In

the field of research methodology teaching, however, the academic community itself

has no uniform conception of research. For example, a controversy between

quantitative and qualitative approaches has dominated methodological discussion

among social scientists over the past few decades. This discussion between these two

poles has often overshadowed the methodological development of the whole field.

Engagement to a methodological camp has often been more important than the

attempt to find the best possible method to answer the research question. Although

the different methodological approaches are based on well-elaborated epistemolo-

gical approaches, the research community as a whole has not been well prepared for

mutual discussion about the different methodological orientations. It has also

hampered students’ attempts to construct a coherent idea of research methodology

(see, for example, Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2003).

What makes the problems of research methodology learning especially interesting

within the field of education is the current critical discussion about the quality and

usefulness of research. For example, the recent American debate about the quality of

218 M. Murtonen and E. Lehtinen

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mon

ash

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 2

1:51

05

Oct

ober

201

4

educational research (see, for example, Cobb, Confrey, diSessa, Lehrer, & Schauble,

2003; Shavelson & Towne, 2002) and the controversial reactions among the

research community show that the questions of methodological competency and

orientation are important issues for the future development of educational research.

Critical evaluation of scientific research in education has stressed two main

arguments. First, in spite of the rather large volume of educational research, it has

resulted in very few convincing practical results. Second, an expert committee of the

US National Research Council has argued that due to problems in the research

methodology, there has been little systematic accumulation of scientific knowledge

in education. The degree to which knowledge has accumulated in the physical and

life sciences and even in the social sciences exceeds the accumulation in education

(Shavelson & Towne, 2002).

Studies of conceptual change have shown how students’ initial beliefs often result

in inadequate learning and misconceptions. Similar problems can also be found in

research methodology learning. For example, in everyday thinking scientific activity

is often mystified. Scientists can be seen as ‘‘a special class of people who are

particularly endowed with superior mental abilities, exceptional problem-solving

competence, and well-tuned scientific process skills that they use in an impartial

pursuit of truth’’ (McGinn & Roth, 1999). This view is strengthened by the

traditional research textbooks that give abstracted, cookbook-like descriptions of

research that do not provide students with an understanding of the process

of scientific inquiry. McGinn and Roth (1999) wrote that these mythical views of

science and scientists have been challenged over the past two decades by research

following the traditions of sociology, anthropology, and ethnomethodology. They

concluded that the ‘‘scientific method’’ is largely a myth and does not describe what

scientists actually do. Scientific research and its products are now recognized as

situationally contingent achievements involving scientists, technicians, granting

agencies, politicians, tools and instruments, local cultures, and so on. That is to say,

scientific knowledge emerges from a nexus of interacting people, agencies, materials,

instruments, individual and collective goals/interests, and the histories of all these

factors. Accordingly, science education needs to look to new educational aims that

reflect the situated, contingent, and contextual nature of science, while also

acknowledging the diverse range of communities and locations where science is

created and used.

Different conceptions of science are not only typical of students but can also be

found among professional researchers. According to Brew (2001), every conversa-

tion about research in universities, every research project, and every discussion in

research committees rests on the underlying ideas researchers have concerning what

research is and what researchers are doing when they carry it out. It is assumed that

researchers mostly agree about what research is, at least within specific disciplines.

Further, it is assumed that teachers of research courses know and agree about what

research is and know how to teach it. Research students are then assumed to learn

what research is without explication of the possible and varying conceptions of research.

Conceptions of Research and Methodology Learning 219

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mon

ash

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 2

1:51

05

Oct

ober

201

4

Brew (2001) found that there is variation in how research is experienced by

researchers. Australian researchers from many different academic fields were

interviewed and asked to describe their views on research. Brew identified four

categories of conceptions. In the domino conception research is viewed as separate

techniques and activities and the goal is to synthesize these separate elements to solve

a problem or answer or open up a question. In the layer conception hidden meanings

are sought and research is interpreted as a process of discovering, uncovering, or

creating underlying meanings. The trading conception emphasizes products, end-

points, publications, grants, and social networks. Research is thus understood as a

kind of social marketplace where the exchange of products takes place. In the journey

conception the researcher considers personal existential issues and dilemmas.

Research is thus interpreted as a personal journey of discovery, possibly leading to a

transformation. Academics may of course exhibit evidence of more than one

conception. Brew also found that researchers from any one discipline could be

represented in any or all categories. These categories are helpful for understanding

why, at times, researchers or politicians referring to research do not seem to be

discussing the same thing or are unable to communicate effectively. They may have

different conceptions of research. Brew also suggested that this would be an

important issue to discuss in the education of postgraduates and early career

researchers in order to help them understand the different ways in which research

can be conceptualized. From the above-mentioned descriptions of research, analysed

from the point of view of the sociology of science (see, for example, Latour, 1988),

we understand that many researchers may have rather limited and fragmented ideas

of the complex social features of their profession and of the characteristics of research

as collaborative practice.

This special issue aims at stimulating discussion from different perspectives about

students’ and teachers’ conceptions of research, as well as about the process of

learning research methodology and the factors affecting it. The aim is to encourage

both discussion on and further empirical studies of the issues related to research

teaching and learning and to introduce some pedagogical innovations that could be

addressed to promote the learning of research. The authors contributing to this

special issue are engaged in research on students’ and supervisors’ conceptions of

research and the question of research methodology learning.

Overview of the Present Volume

We have very little knowledge of how university students conceptualize research and

what kinds of beliefs they have about the different methodological approaches, since

almost no empirical research on students’ understanding and learning of research

at the university level has been done. Certain sub-domains of methodology, such

as statistics learning and teaching (see, for example, Becker, 1996) and inferring

(see, for example, Kahneman, Slovic & Tversky, 1982), have been more studied.

However, questions like ‘‘what do students think research is’’ and ‘‘do they have

220 M. Murtonen and E. Lehtinen

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mon

ash

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 2

1:51

05

Oct

ober

201

4

misconceptions about research’’ have not been studied to any great extent. The

article by Meyer, Shanahan, and Laugksch explores the views and conceptions that

students have about research with open-ended questions, for example: ‘‘how would

you explain to a stranger what ‘research’ is?’’ On the basis of the categories of the

students’ responses, the writers developed an inventory for analysing the concep-

tions. This kind of inventory could be used, for example, in identifying students

whose conceptions conflict with those of their supervisors or the academic institution

or to guide the design of research methodology courses.

Not only do students’ conceptions affect their learning, teachers’ conceptions of

teaching and learning have also been shown to be connected to their teaching

practices (see, for example, Trigwell & Prosser, 1996) and thus influence students’

learning. As shown, students probably face a varying range of conceptions of

research during their education. The question arises of what happens if the student’s

and the teacher’s conceptions conflict. As there has not been much research on

researchers’ conceptions of research, there is little knowledge of supervisors’

conceptions, but the article by Kiley and Mullins looks at the conceptions of

research held by postgraduate supervisors. Open-ended questions such as ‘‘what is

good research’’, ‘‘what is research in your own discipline’’, and ‘‘what constitutes a

successful researcher’’ were presented to supervisors in several countries. They were

also asked about the differences between their own and their students’ conceptions

of research.

In addition to students’ general conceptions of research, there may also be some

harmful conceptions or views concerning research that hinder learning. In a study by

Murtonen and Lehtinen (2003) some education, sociology, and social policy

students reported having negative attitudes to quantitative research methods. These

negative attitudes could have arisen for different reasons, such as weak prior

knowledge, conceptions of self as learner, and experienced difficulties in learning.

Conceptions of scientific paradigms and different methods may also be crucial. For

example, students’ views of quantitative and qualitative methods may affect how

ready they would be to use these methods themselves. This particular question is

raised in Murtonen’s paper, which explores social science masters students’ views of

quantitative research methods and their experienced difficulties in quantitative

methods learning. Their views are examined in relation to their views on qualitative

methods and to their views on empirical and theoretical research methods. Students

were also asked to rate how ready they would be to conduct a study of their own

using these methods. In the social sciences two ‘‘camps’’, quantitative and

qualitative, are often evident among researchers. The question arises of how

students view the situation, that is do they also ‘‘choose their side’’. Preferring a

certain method could be called a research orientation; quantitative or qualitative.

Concepts in general can be seen as the basis of our understanding that strongly

determine what other things we will learn in the future. An important question is

how the learning of research methodology takes place, that is how conceptions of

research change during the learning process. Conceptual change theories have

Conceptions of Research and Methodology Learning 221

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mon

ash

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 2

1:51

05

Oct

ober

201

4

shown that to change learners’ conceptions can be very difficult, at least when some

central concepts or crucial underlying theories must be changed (see, for example,

Chi, 1992; Vosniadou, 1994). Petersson introduces a developmental view of the

formation of conceptions of research and science. In addition to the exploration of

what kinds of conceptions and views students have about research, methodology,

and science, it is very important to also study the change process. Petersson followed

medical and nursing students for three years to see how they developed, or did not

develop, conceptions of science. She also asks if learning happens in a straightfor-

ward manner or do the conceptions change in some other way, for example become

more developed and elaborated. Here, the crucial question is whether learners’

preconceptions of the phenomenon or event determine factors for development. In

addition, Petersson discusses the learning methods, imitation, general assimilation,

and differentiation, and asks how important nursing and medical students see

research training.

The process of research methodology learning might be difficult because the

domain to be learnt is very complex. Research methodology includes many sub-

domains and thus research as a whole can be difficult to understand for a novice (see,

for example, Lehtinen, 2002; Lehtinen & Rui, 1995; Murtonen & Merenluoto,

2001). According to Lehtinen (2002) students should better face the structural

complexity of the task from the very beginning of their study career. This should help

them to develop flexible and complex knowledge structures’ on the job. Papers

discussing problems in the learning of research and statistics often call for the use of

real data in courses and connecting theory to practice (see, for example, Kelly, 1992;

Thompson, 1994; Winn, 1995; Zuber-Skerritt, 1987), although they can be time-

consuming and expensive to implement.

Computer-based environments offer several tools for presenting information in

multiple forms and providing assignments on many levels. Instead of teaching

sequences of isolated content units, computer-based learning environments can

provide students with complex problems while they are studying the sub-elements of

problems (Lehtinen & Rui, 1995). In the article by Lehti and Lehtinen a computer-

based learning environment for research methodology learning is introduced.

The computer supported learning environment ALEL (Artificial Laboratory for

Explanatory Learning) provides students with the complete complexity of experimental

research methodology from the very beginning (see also Lehtinen & Rui, 1995). One of

the aims of this application is to make it possible for students to start dealing with a

complex problem by facilitating their work in different ways. The environment includes

a content-related help system and tools that make the whole problem-solving path

visible to the collaborating students and to the teacher scaffolding the students’ work. A

comparison of three different learning modes (a statistics group, an article group, and

an ALEL group) is presented in the paper, questioning whether the ALEL group

outperformed the other groups in the course learning tasks.

The issue also includes commentaries on the articles presented by Shirley Booth

and Jan Vermunt.

222 M. Murtonen and E. Lehtinen

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mon

ash

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 2

1:51

05

Oct

ober

201

4

References

Becker, H. S. (1996). The epistemology of qualitative research. In R. Jessor, A. Colby, &

R. A. Shweder (Eds.), Ethnography and human development. Context and meaning in social

inquiry ( pp. 53–71). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves. An inquiry into the nature and

implications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court.

Brew, A. (2001). Conceptions of research: a phenomenographic study. Studies in Higher Education,

26, 271–285.

Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in

educational research. Educational Researcher, 32, 9–13.

Chi, M. T. H. (1992). Conceptual change within and across ontological categories: Examples from

learning and discovery in science. In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science. Minnesota

studies in the philosophy of science ( pp. 129–186). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota

Press.

Epstein, I. (1987). Pedagogy of the perturbed: Teaching research to the reluctants. Journal of

Teaching in Social Work, 1, 71–89.

Filinson, R., & Niklas, D. (1992). The research critique approach to educating sociology students.

Teaching Sociology, 20, 129–134.

Forte, J. (1995). Teaching statistics without sadistics. Journal of Social Work Education, 31,

204–308.

Garfield, J., & Ahlgren, A. (1988). Difficulties in learning basic concepts in probability and

statistics: Implications for research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19,

44–63.

Greer, B. (2000). Statistical thinking and learning. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2, 1–9.

Hauff, H. M., & Fogarty, G. J. (1996). Analysing problem solving behaviour of successful and

unsuccessful statistics students. Instructional Science, 24, 397–409.

Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and

biases. Cambridge, Uk: Cambridge University Press.

Kelly, M. (1992). Teaching statistics to biologists. Journal of Biological Education, 26, 200–203.

Latour, B. (1988). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge,

MA: Harvard University Press.

Lehtinen, E. (2002). Developing models for distributed problem-based learning: Theoretical and

methodological reflection. Distance Education, 23, 109–117.

Lehtinen, E., & Rui, E. (1995). Computer-supported complex learning: An environment for

learning experimental methods and statistical inference. Machine-Mediated Learning, 5,

149–175.

Limon, M., & Carretero, M. (1999). Conflicting data and conceptual change in history experts.

In W. Schnotz, S. Vosniadou, & M. Carretero (Eds.), New perspective on conceptual change

( pp. 137–160). Kidlington, Oxfordshire, England: Elsevier Science.

Lonka, K., & Lindblom-Ylanne, S. (1996). Epistemologies, conceptions of learning, and study

practices in medicine and psychology. Higher Education, 31, 5–24.

McGinn, M. K., & Roth, W.-M. (1999). Preparing students for competent scientific practice:

Implications of recent research in science and technology studies. Educational Researcher,

28(3), 14–24.

Merenluoto, K., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Number concept and conceptual change: Towards a

systemic model of the processes of change. Learning and Instruction, 14, 519–534.

Mikkila-Erdmann, M. (2001). Improving conceptual change concerning photosynthesis through

text design. Learning and Instruction, 11, 241–257.

Mintz, E., & Ostbye, T. (1992). Teaching statistics to health professionals: The legal analogy.

Medical Teacher, 14, 371–374.

Conceptions of Research and Methodology Learning 223

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mon

ash

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 2

1:51

05

Oct

ober

201

4

Murtonen, M., & Lehtinen, E. (2003). Difficulties experienced by education and sociology

students in quantitative methods courses. Studies in Higher Education, 28(2), 171–185.

Murtonen, M., & Merenluoto, K. (2001). Novices’ and experts’ knowledge on statistics and

research methodology. Proceedings of the 25th PME Conference, 3, 391–398.

Murtonen, M., & Titterton, N. (2004). Learning difficulties in quantitative methods courses in

relation to earlier mathematics achievement and study success in university. Nordic Studies in

Mathematics Education, 9(4), 3–13.

Obwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2003, April). Taking the ‘Q’ out of research: Teaching research

methodology courses without the divide between quantitative and qualitative paradigms. Paper

presented at the meeting of American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.

Pretorius, T. B., & Norman, A. M. (1992). Psychometric data on the statistics anxiety scale for a

sample of south african students. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 52, 933–937.

Rosenthal, B. C., & Wilson, W. C. (1992). Student factors affecting performance in an MSW

research and statistics course. Journal of Social Work Education, 28, 77–85.

Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (Eds.). (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC:

National Academy Press.

Thompson, B. W. (1994). Making data-analysis realistic: Incorporating research into statistics

courses. Teaching of Psychology, 21, 41–43.

Townsend, M. A. R., Moore, D. W., Tuck, B. F., & Wilton, K. M. (1998). Self-concept and

anxiety in university students studying social science statistics within a co-operative learning

structure. Educational Psychology, 18, 41–54.

Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (1996). Congruence between intention and strategy in university

science teachers’ approaches to teaching. Higher Education, 32, 77–87.

Tynjala, P. (1999). Towards expert knowledge? A comparison between a constructivist and

a traditional learning environment in the university. International Journal of Educational

Research, 31, 357–442.

Tynjala, P., Merenluoto, K., & Murtonen, M. (2002). What has been meant with a ‘concept’ and

‘change’ in conceptual change studies? In Proceedings of the Third European Symposium on

Conceptual Change, EARLI. Turku, Finland, 26–28 June. Retrieved May 2, 2005, from http://

www.edu.utu.fi/konf/.

Vermunt, J. D. H. M., & van Rijswijk, F. A. W. M. (1988). Analysis and development of students’

skill in selfregulated learning. Higher Education, 17, 647–682.

Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modelling the process of conceptual change. Learning and

Instruction, 4, 45–69.

Winn, S. (1995). Learning by doing: Teaching research methods through student participation in

a commissioned research project. Studies in Higher Education, 20, 203–214.

Zeidner, M. (1991). Statistics and mathematics anxiety in social science students: Some interesting

parallels. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 61, 319–328.

Zuber-Skerritt, O. (1987). Helping postgraduate research students learn. Higher Education, 16,

75–94.

224 M. Murtonen and E. Lehtinen

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Mon

ash

Uni

vers

ity L

ibra

ry]

at 2

1:51

05

Oct

ober

201

4