A critique of Langer's study on learning journals in adult education

¶ … Learning Journals in Higher and Continuing Education

The study by Langer (2002) exploring the use of learning journals in higher and continuing education presents new data that may challenge the existing paradigm in the area. This critique focuses on assessing the robustness of the study by examining the problem the author considers and the methodology employed to answer any questions raised. The literature that the author reviews becomes an important consideration since it provides a framework against which the work is examined. The results and findings of the author are discussed as they provide ample support for the conclusions the author posits. This examination will demonstrate that meaningful qualitative work can make a salient contribution to the development of knowledge in any discipline.

Research Question/Problem

In this study the author considers a novel problem which speaks to a central concern of adult learners. The substantive question that is answered by the study is how does the use of journals impact the learning process (Langer 2002, 337)? This question is very important because it infers that the existing paradigm used for encouraging learning behaviors in relation to adults may be inadequate. Adult learners may not have the same experiences with reflexivity as younger students. Consequently, the act of journaling may not be as useful as previously thought for these learners.

Methodology

The use of a qualitative methodology was effective and allowed the researcher to adequately answer the questions posed. The data were collected through an evaluation of learning journals and interviews with selected students (Langer 343). This approach to data collection allows the researcher to examine the conclusions of the assessment of the learning journals, through the in depth interviews. Using two sets of data provides greater understanding and explication of the problematic as constructed by the researcher.

Results or Findings

The valuable element of the results would be the qualitative descriptive components rather than the identified percentages. The author presented several percentages as an attempt to describe the sample behavior (Langer 344). These are not necessarily very useful since they cannot be generalized from. However the statements from the students relating to their experiences and opinions may be expanded to wider publics. The value of qualitative work is not necessarily statistical generalizability but adequate representativeness of the phenomenon.

Discussion or Implications and conclusion

The discussion and implications were bold and highly consistent with the data. The author identifies student perception and reception as key to understanding the usefulness of reflectiveness (Langer 349). The boldness is in the suggestion that established paradigms may need to be reexamined to create an improved learner experience (Langer 350). While it strikes against established protocols it is consistent with the findings of the study. It should be noted that the study did not test theory and the author could have been more reserved in his pronouncements.

Conclusion

The critique of this study was a useful experience since it entailed the employment of different cognitive skills. The article possessed excellent internal logical cohesion between the different components. Additionally, it was beneficial to observe a challenge to an established paradigm. This refreshing push into this direction suggests that new knowledge is being created. I would without hesitation recommend this article to anyone interested in the subject.