Using Phenomenography: Reflections on Key Considerations for Making Methodological Decisions

Abstract

Emily Dringenberg is a PhD Candidate in Engineering Education at Purdue University. She holds a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering (Kansas State '08) and a Master of Science in Industrial Engineering (Purdue '14). Her current dissertation research focuses on using qualitative methods to explore the experiences of students engaging with engineering design problems. Additionally, her research interests include transfer of learning, personal epistemology, and design learning.John Alexander Mendoza-Garcia, Purdue University, West Lafayette / Pontificia Universidad Javeriana -Bogota, ColombiaJohn Mendoza-Garcia is a Colombian Systems Engineer (Bachelor's and Master's degree) that currently is a Ph.D candidate in Engineering Education at Purdue University. His advisors are Dr. Monica E. Cardella and Dr. William C. Oakes. He is interested in understanding the development of systems thinking to support its assessment and teaching. Currently, he works for the first year engineering program at Purdue where he has taught the engineering introductory courses in design and algorithmic thinking, and has also developed content for these courses. He has an appointment with the department of systems engineering at Pontificia Universidad Javeriana in Colombia since 2005 and is currently on a leave of absence. There he taught systems thinking and coordinated the professional internships, the social internships and the graduation project. He worked as Software Engineer in different companies for seven years before transitioning to academia. Reflections on each of these considerations are summarized and provided in full. Our analysis of the reflections revealed that the application of the phenomenographic methodology must respond to nuances in individual contexts. Thus, the primary contribution of this paper is the identification of five key considerations that can help guide a phenomenographic research approach, and transparency of how five emerging phenomenographic researchers have dealt with these considerations.

Investment case approach for equitable access to maternal neonatal and child health services: Stakeholders’ perspective in Nepal

“…Phenomenography is a qualitative research method, that takes into account, that researchers hold subjective assumptions regarding the interpretation of knowledge. Within this methodology the conception of phenomena is relational, and the world is constructed differently according to the subjective viewpoint and the context [20]. This research approach here is not to discern stakeholders' experiences of the phenomenon as such; rather it stresses identifying variations in the ways of experiencing the phenomenon presented in qualitatively different categories.…”

Foundations of Social and Ethical Responsibility Among Undergraduate Engineering Students: Overview of Results

“…Phenomenography is a qualitative and empirical research method that emerged from educational research [9,10]. Engineering education researchers have used phenomenography to explore complex engineering activities (phenomenon) such as human-centered design [11], crossdisciplinary teamwork [12], and innovation [13]. Consequently, in phase 2, the interview protocol was modified to include questions to explore the qualitatively different ways in which the students experienced engineering ethics.…”

Blended Phenomenography: An Alternative to Investigate Learning

“…Using each approach brings challenges. Researchers have expressed, for example, their difficulties in the first approach (Marton + Bowden) in data collection when trying to reach saturation or the "dichotomy between seeking to describe phenomenon totally and the inability to capture it completely" [28]. Marton's approach on the other hand, according to developmental researchers [5], [6], has a weakness when defining the hierarchy of the different levels of awareness of the critical aspects because it is based on judgment and not in empirical evidence as it is Bowden's approach.…”

“…Marton's approach on the other hand, according to developmental researchers [5], [6], has a weakness when defining the hierarchy of the different levels of awareness of the critical aspects because it is based on judgment and not in empirical evidence as it is Bowden's approach. These difficulties and others are presented in table 2: (1) Ensure that "all participants are commenting and reflecting on that particular phenomenon of interest," or participants voicing experiences of others because they thought were expected by the researcher [28] A similar or equivalent difficulty has not been reported in the literature Reaching saturation…”

“…(3) Perceive the similarities across the variation of experiences reported by the set of participants [28] Sometimes deciding if a script goes in one category or specific level of variation is challenging because one person could be describing "things" that are part of different ways of experiencing [6].…”