Search

This paper reports on a qualitative study of students' engagement with a Web-based inquiry environment aimed at prompting student reflection in processes of scientific inquiry. In order to demonstrate how prompts become structuring resources for students' scientific inquiry, detailed analyses of students' interaction processes are conducted. The students' written responses to the reflection prompts indicated a widespread use of a ‘copy and paste’ strategy. The analyses of student interaction deepen this finding and show that instead of participating in reflection activities, the students make use of these ‘copy and paste’ strategies in order to come up with ‘correct’ answers to the prompts. Further, the analyses indicate that the students' employment of these strategies can be seen as a response to what can be termed the institutional practices of schooling embedded within the design of the prompts. These findings are discussed and explored in accordance with findings from previous studies on prompting students' reflection in Web-based inquiry environments. The study demonstrates the value of a socio-cultural perspective for gaining a deeper understanding of students' engagement with Web-based learning environments. Such a perspective can give valuable insight into how to (re)design prompts, and how prompts can be productive parts of students' learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article is a commentary to Benjamin Singer's essay on the criterial crisis in academe. It highlights several issues about which young academics and their elders routinely kitbitz at campus watering holes. Singer's lament is fundamentally an embroidery on lunchroom complaints and coffeehouse chatter dressed up with headings and a fine bibliography. Cynics may conclude that his article a good example of the "proliferation of journals and redundant and useless papers." And others may wonder, in the interests of reflexivity, whether Singer's paper was submitted to other journals before it was accepted by Sociological Inquiry and whether the paper as published was exempt from the vagaries and vicissitudes of peer review that Singer deplores. Since Singer suggests that few published papers are ever read, he will no doubt be surprised that his was discovered among the hundreds of sociological journals in our university library and that my reading of his work prompted the following observations about sociological publishing and tenure decisions.

In a previous paper published in "British Journal of Sociology," the author made the claim that despite decades of intensive investigation, not a single researcher had ever shown that class difference in education was indeed unfair and unjust. It was a charge that was underwritten by a simple, if technical, argument, which drew attention to what, in logic, would have to be shown if such a difference was to be regarded as an inequality, rather than as just another difference in a differentiated society. In this case, it was suggested that, other things being equal, the researcher would have to meet one of two conditions. He would have to show that the different classes were similarly disposed to education or, alternatively, if there were evidence, as in Great Britain, of considerable working-class indifference to education, he would need to demonstrate that such indifference was itself the result of structural or cultural inequality. Only then, it was argued, could the researcher be said to have reasonably shown that class difference in education was unfair; for only then could the researcher be reasonably sure that such a difference was not, after all, just another difference.

Emile Durkheim has long been viewed as one of the founders of the so-called variables-oriented approach to sociological investigation. This view ignores his considerable achievements using the methodology of "case-based" historical analysis, most prominent among them, his lectures on the history of French education (The Evolution of Educational Thought). In this paper I first outline the intimate relationship that Durkheim envisioned between historical and sociological investigation. I then turn to his work on French education for substantive illustrations of his approach. Finally, I explore certain points of intersection between Durkheim's approach to history and present-day concerns, especially in regard to the role of culture in history and the opposition between prospective and retrospective ("teleological") strategies of historical analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]