Lee Driscoll and Nelson: a comparative analysis

Lee, Driscoll, & Nelson

How they used "an inter-rater reliability tests," What do you think the point of that was?

Different writers promote different opinions. And for a tertiary individual to make sense of the available resources, he must deal with and understand even conflicting opinions. But despite the final conclusions of each piece of work, fact remains that the novice or the reader can form an opinion through the study of several works, dealing with the same or similar concepts, trends or features of adult education.

In their analysis of the field, Lee, Driscoll and Nelson used an inter-rater reliability test to asses the importance of each of the 383 articles studied. The model was based on six topics: design-related topics, development-related topics, management related topics, evaluation related topics, institutional and operational related topics and finally, theory and research related topics.

A thematic analysis method, which uses a volume of data in an attempt to identify core meanings from those data was also used to identify what specific research topics were addressed. From a thematic analysis, the most frequently used themes (i.e. detailed topics) by year can be identified as those given a greater consideration by researchers in the distance education field. These core meanings were found through selection of three major key words from each article in each journal, which were classified and cumulated by year" (Lee, Driscoll and Nelson). But since this did not ensure a clear relevance of the articles, the three authors implemented an interrater reliability test. Its aim was to increase the precision of the classification and "defined the extent to which different coders, each coding the same content, came to the same coding decisions" (Lee, Driscoll and Nelson)

2. Are you satisfied that it served the purpose?

The usage of the inter-rater reliability test increased the precision of the classification, but also increased the relevance of the findings. In this order of ideas, the implementation of the coding method unified the methods used by various researchers and made the results easier to interpret. Proof of this fact stand the actual results retrieved, which are reliable and complex. The complexity of the results was given by the need to classify them by research topics, specific topics, research methods and citation index.

The coding technique helped the three authors better relate to the previous works of other researchers. Foremost, they revealed the importance of each particular subfield of distance education to the overall topic. In addition, they also identified the most significant sources at the basis of the previously conducted research and retrieved results.

Coding for research method revealed that 20% of the 383 articles published in the four journals described theoretical inquiry, 12% were experimental research, 36% were case studies, 6% were evaluation research, 7% were developmental research, 13% were survey research and 6% were implemented with combined results" (Lee, Driscoll and Nelson). This finding was extremely relevant in the given context as it helped create a better image over the study of distance education. Otherwise put, the three authors were able to reveal the most important forces which impact the study of distance education. They found that whereas theory plays a vital role in the formation of opinions and the conducting of research, the most significant source is the actual practice and the largest parts of the results have been retrieved through empirical studies.

3. How valuable and how interesting did you find this research?

The research conducted by the authors of the Past, Present, and Future of Research in Distance Education: Results of a Content Analysis is interesting as it offers a historical approach over the topic at hand. The numerous references to previous studies and various other authors give it credibility and make it a relevant piece within the specialized literature on the field. The study is also valuable as it presents various standpoints in answering to a multitude of questions. Foremost, the value of the study is given by its ability to raise additional questions that could constitute the basis for future studies.

Another reason which makes the study a valuable one is its correctness and clarity. The findings are verified by specialists in the field and can easily be presented as foundations on the topic. Otherwise put, the findings of Lee, Driscoll, & Nelson can be regarded as base knowledge in the field of adult education and can be used by both practitioners and theoreticians.