So in my EDEA 629 (Ed Stats) class this past Monday, we had a great class on multiple regression. The class got to talking about models and variables and that there really isn't a way to account for everything...human nature is just too complex. DrH said that we have to remember that research models are "a reduction of reality." --That stuck with me and has been marinating in my head the past few days.
This got me thinking about all the theories we've been studying in this class (EDEA 646 - The American College Student). No matter what, there is "fault" to find with every theory and that while it's important to be aware of the criticisms, one can argue that the simple fact that we are a particular construct under a microscope reduces the reality of the model. Again, not that they are not important, and not that there isn't much to gain from these theories (on the contrary, actually...) -But the idea that most of these theories are focusing on something specific, thereby reducing the reality of what you are actually studying.
I often find myself looking through readings and thinking of other variables that may be factors beyond what is examined by the research. -What about birth order? What about family dynamics? What about SES?
Given the fact that no research model can account for everything (or even all of the particular construct they're studying), I think the idea of eclecticism becomes increasingly important. When I was an undergraduate I started out assuming I was going ot be a psychology major, but I switched to sociology - for many reasons, one of which is that people seemed to cling so closely to their one area of study. Many psychologists specialize in one specific area of psychology (i.e. psychodynamics, cognitive behavior) not that there aren't people out there that have a more eclectic perspective, but many hold firm convictions about one specific area and that is something I found to be absurd! -Think about it: as a psychologist, you would be working with a variety of clients that will respond better to different styles of counseling. -While you may have your "speciality," you would hopefully have an awareness of other styles that might enable you to help clients when they don't respond well to the kind of therapy you traditionally provide.
I think the same goes for working with students in higher education - which is why having a broad understanding of many theories is important.
Books I read in April 2024
2 days ago
It's funny that you should mention that you think that people shouldn't limit themselves to their one specialty in their one field of study. I attended a Speech Communication conference this past November that focused on encouraging members to purposely bring guests that are from a different field besides Speech Communication. At first, I found this suggestion to be bizarre. However, as I read the reasoning behind it, my eyes was opened to a new way of thinking.
ReplyDeleteLike yourself, the organization, the National Communication Association, running the conference reasoned that we have so much to learn from other fields of study besides our own. In learning from experts in other fields, we may find explanations for the holes and/or results of our own field of study's theories or see from different points of view how our own field of study could further develop. We may even discover different methods for testing and supporting our present theories, as well as new ones that are arising.
The more I think about it, the more I agree with the NCA and you, Stacey. The greater the breadth of knowledge we gather from other fields of study and from other points of view, the deeper the depth of knowledge we may have about our own particular field of study or point of view.
Kiana (Sorry, didn't want to make a profile again.)
Hi Kiana! Thanks for continuing to read and interact with me! You help to provide me with more food for thought and will respond in a subsequent blog!
ReplyDelete