Critique Analysis of Two Research Articles on Learning and Acculturation

Article 1: Meaningful Learning from Sustained Online Communication

The research problem identified by Abdallah and Albadri (2013) is how to promote active learning and critical thinking among adult learners, and whether this can be accomplished using online discussion boards. They situate their research within the understanding that "to motivate adult learners they need to be engaged in activities to make them think, reflect and express their experiences and views" (Abdallah & Albadri, 2013, p. 1). However, the problem is that "engaging students through online discussion boards does not automatically guarantee meaningful learning, warranting the need for suitable assessment tools to measure students' learning and performance" (Abdallah & Albadri, 2013, p. 2). Thus, the research question that Abdallah and Albadri (2013) pose is: "how to evaluate students' learning through the examination of the knowledge constructed by them to ensure that learning is occurring?" (p. 2).

The research problem is identified in the introduction of the study. It is essentially a problem of evaluation. The assumption of the authors is that online collaboration tools can provide a social constructivist mechanism for adult learners that will facilitate active learning and critical thinking. This assumption is supported by the literature reviewed in the study. The problem that arises from this review is the one that the researchers address in order to provide a better understanding of how teachers can be sure that online discussion boards facilitate active learning and critical thinking among adult learners. The researchers note that it is a problem of evaluation, and their study suggests that teachers wrongly evaluate these discussion boards in terms of quality of learning when what they should be doing is devising their own experiential measures of evaluation.

In their review of the literature, the researchers develop a table that compares and contrasts what previous researchers have concluded about the most common methods for measuring the success of online learning via discussion boards. However, the literature review is not extensive — it consists of eight studies that serve to make up the comparison table. The key takeaway from that table is that adult learners require a means of engagement that will facilitate deep and critical thinking. The authors then use a study by Henri (1992) to examine the difference between surface and in-depth processing. The literature review thus sets the stage for a discussion of the methodology applied in the research study.

What makes the article different from its predecessors is that it is an exploratory qualitative case study devised to determine "whether students are gaining merely surface learning or deep learning that can motivate them to become self-learners and critical thinkers" (Abdallah & Albadri, 2013, p. 3). Because the authors do not identify gaps in the literature that they want to address — but rather use the literature only as a framework for situating their own case study — there is no clear understanding presented of why the study was needed or what contribution it makes to existing literature, beyond the suggestion that methods of evaluating online discussion forums for adult learners may not be entirely appropriate.

The authors use Knowles' theory of andragogy as a framework for their research. This is clearly stated in the introduction, and the theory is described in sufficient detail so that the reader can see its relevance and understand why it applies to the present study. The theory of andragogy is characterized as one that shows "that adults learn differently from children because the learning process of adults is different as adults are more self-directed, autonomous — i.e., more responsible for their learning and take decisions more than children" (Abdallah & Albadri, 2013, p. 1). The way in which it is applied in the study is that it justifies the use of online discussion boards as a constructivist tool that adult learners can use to ask and answer questions among themselves, facilitating engagement and discussion. The supposition is that such a tool is more helpful for adult learners because they are inherently self-directed, as Knowles argues. The theoretical model applied is suitable because it explains the viewpoint of the authors in their approach to the subject matter. Without this viewpoint, the reader would be left wondering why the researchers held their supposition or thought the inquiry worth exploring. When it is shown that this is the model being used, it makes sense that they would focus on the discussion board as a potential way for adult learners to operate independently of an instructor.

The expected signs that the researchers look for by applying this theory are evidence that adult learners find online discussion boards helpful in their learning process. Because the research is exploratory, however, the researchers do not identify specific signs they are looking for; instead, they state that they will identify themes emerging from the analysis of discussion threads in which adult learners were tasked with asking one critical-thought question related to the course material and answering nine other questions posed by classmates.

Because the data collected is qualitative, it is open to interpretation and admits a degree of subjective analysis — which differs from what might have been obtained through statistical analysis of quantitative data. Given that the study is exploratory in nature, the researchers are more interested in observing what information is present and forming a hypothesis after the fact than in forming a hypothesis prior to the research and testing variables.

The problem of using this kind of data is not discussed in depth by the researchers. Instead, they focus on justifying their approach by citing sources that explain qualitative design. One problem that does arise is that the sample is very small, and the participants are not clearly described in terms of age, gender, race, or ethnicity, so there is no demographic background to inform or contextualize the conclusions drawn. This is not necessarily a flaw in the study's design, but it does represent a weakness in its execution, as different outcomes might be obtained through a similar study conducted with a different sample.

The researchers also do not discuss the limitations of their study, though they do note that their conclusions require further validation and development. They also acknowledge that they do not probe deeply enough into whether the participants actually learned anything from one another. In effect, all they achieved in their analysis was a demonstration that adult learners are capable of asking and answering questions, do provide insight, do engage in deliberation, and do appear to learn something or acquire new skills from engagement on online discussion forums — but the extent to which this learning is achieved remains unspecified.

The researchers describe their results sufficiently well, creating a diagram that reflects the four themes emerging from their analysis and how those themes interrelate. In Diagram 1, the four themes apparent in their interpretive analysis of the discussion threads are identified as Observation, Insights, Deliberation, and Learning from Others. Each theme is placed in its own circle, arranged in a diamond pattern, with arrows pointing between circles to show relationships. Observation leads to and from Insights, Deliberation, and Learning from Others; Insights leads to and from Deliberation, Learning from Others, and Observation; Learning from Others leads to and from Insights, Deliberation, and Observation; Deliberation leads to and from Observation, Insights, and Learning from Others. The researchers also define each of these categorizations for the reader.

Observation is defined as "Students are engaged in noticing or becoming aware of information"; Insight as "Deep perception on a certain issue"; Deliberation as "Use of analytical skills, thinking deeply and related information"; and Learning from Others as "Extract behavior, skills and lessons from others" (Abdallah & Albadri, 2013, p. 7).

The interpretation of the data rests on a couple of assumptions that may be problematic. For instance, the researchers assume that positive feedback from student to student is indicative of something positive having been obtained through the discussion, rather than being a mere empty formality meant to show appreciation and respect for classmates. The researchers view positive phrases — such as "I like your comments," "you are always a positive man," "I do respect everyone's replies and suggestions," "It is a good discussion and feedback," "I'd like to thank you for posting your comments and opinion," and "I agree with your idea" — as indicative of students having obtained something of value from the online discussion. This assumption could skew the interpretation of the data in a more positive direction than might be warranted were the same participants to be surveyed directly about whether they found the discussion forum valuable.

Another assumption the researchers make is that "sustained communication over a long period of time allows students an opportunity to extract various positive behaviors and lessons" (Abdallah & Albadri, 2013, p. 6). There is no clear rationale given for this assumption or for what it might mean for the interpretation of the data, and no supporting literature is cited for it. The researchers appear to be projecting a viewpoint onto the data that is not adequately corroborated.

The conclusions reached are that "online interaction depends on several interacting cognitive activities, which can be used by faculty to assess and to enhance the students' critical thinking using online discussion boards" (Abdallah & Albadri, 2013, p. 7). The researchers assert that teachers could use the four themes as a way to evaluate the quality of learning and how knowledge is constructed by students. They also state that their study contributes positively to understanding the "effectiveness of online knowledge construction and may be used as a guide for assessing its quality" (Abdallah & Albadri, 2013, p. 7). However, how it is actually supposed to accomplish this is not clearly explained.

The conclusions are not necessarily supported by the research. The researchers claim that their study contributes to a deeper understanding of online learning among adult students, but all it demonstrates is four themes interpreted from an analysis of discussion threads drawn from a small, underdescribed sample. The sample is too small and the implications of the findings too broadly drawn to render a verdict of validity and generalizability.

One of the main problems is that the research design is not thoroughly explicated. While it is admittedly exploratory in nature, the reporting feels somewhat rushed in its interpretations and conclusions. Some useful data has been extracted, but what it means and how it applies to the evaluation of online learning among adult students is never fully explained. Instead, the bulk of attention is given to the four themes that the researchers identified. Once this is accomplished, the researchers characterize their work as a contribution to a better understanding of the research problem. They do state in their conclusion that their model requires further development and validation, which is accurate. This research should serve as a foundational starting point for future inquiry, and for that reason it can be said to contribute positively — but only in the narrow sense that it opens a window into an area where future research could be conducted more thoroughly.

Article 2: The Dimensions of Expatriate Acculturation

Abdallah, S., & Albadri, F. (2013). Meaningful learning from sustained online communication: A reflection with a group of adults. In Information Systems Applications in the Arab Education Sector (pp. 208–216). IGI Global.

Henri, F. (1992). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The Najaden papers (pp. 115–136). Springer-Verlag.

The research problem identified by Mendenhall and Oddou (1985) is that personnel directors use methods for selecting employees that are too "rigid and simplistic" to enable them to appropriately select expatriate managers who will succeed in terms of expatriate acculturation (p. 39). The basis for the research is therefore situated in the problem of expatriate selection and training, with the aim of identifying dimensions that lead to successful acculturation. The researchers situate this problem within a substantial body of published literature to show that a gap in research needs to be filled. Based on their review, they surmise that the gap is this: personnel directors need a "clearer understanding of the key factors that constitute the expatriate acculturation process" in order to facilitate the design of selection instruments and training programs (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985, p. 40).

The researchers note that the purpose of their study is twofold: first, they aim to "review the extant literature on expatriate acculturation in order to pinpoint the key factors or dimensions involved in the cross-cultural adjustment process"; and second, they aim to "discuss the implications of the study's findings for the selection and training of expatriates in MNCs [multi-national corporations]" (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985, p. 40). Based on these stated aims, it is clear what the researchers are attempting to accomplish, and there is no confusion for the reader about the purpose of the study. It is clearly stated at the conclusion of the section headed "Problems in Expatriate Selection and Training," which follows the study's introduction.

Because the study is primarily a systematic literature review, it is filled with citations demonstrating that the researchers have looked deeply into the subject at hand. They begin by identifying four key dimensions that emerged from their review: the self-oriented dimension, the others-oriented dimension, the perceptual dimension, and the cultural-toughness dimension. Each dimension is given a separate heading and is discussed with reference to relevant literature. In this way, they support their analysis with a well-founded basis for assessment.

The article's main contribution to the literature is that it pools together the findings of several different studies on the four dimensions of successful acculturation selection and training, along with studies on factors that impact these processes — such as stress management, technical competence, relationship development, a willingness to communicate, and reinforcement substitution. Each of these factors is presented as a sub-heading within the section devoted to one of the four dimensions. The purpose of this arrangement is to show that the literature supports the conclusion that these four dimensions are what personnel administrators should use to develop their selection and training programs.

Overall, the researchers adopt a novel approach to the problem they are considering and present information drawn from existing literature in a way that is accessible and understandable. The information is organized to demonstrate that existing literature confirms or validates the importance of focusing on the four dimensions identified at the outset of the literature review.

No existing theoretical model or lens is explicitly identified or applied in the research study or its findings. Instead, the researchers focus on the dimensions they find in the existing literature and use these to develop their own recommendations for how personnel directors might better develop a model, program, or process for selecting and training new hires who can successfully acculturate. After using the literature to support the four dimensions, the researchers explain how personnel directors could apply these dimensions in practice. With the Self-Oriented Dimension, for instance, they suggest that personnel directors could focus on evaluating the technical expertise of potential hires, and also recommend the use of psychological tests and evaluations as well as in-house stress reduction programs.

Because no hypothesis is presented at the outset of the study, there are no expected signs or variables being tested. Instead, the researchers review existing literature and explain how the dimensions they discovered might be used to help personnel directors better select and train new hires for successful acculturation in MNCs.

The data is described clearly, with headings and sub-headings used throughout to divide the study into more easily readable sections. The data obtained through the literature review is relevant to the identified problem, and the researchers address both of the aims stated at the outset of the article. The main problem with the data is that there is no clear indication of how the systematic literature review was conducted. The researchers do not identify inclusion or exclusion criteria. Instead, they move directly into the literature review, leaving it unclear why these studies were selected, how they were selected, and why other studies were excluded. Whether this represents a weakness in the overall design or merely in the reporting is ambiguous — did the researchers have selection criteria and fail to acknowledge them, or were they never established? That information would help the reader better assess the validity of the findings.

The researchers also do not comment on weaknesses or limitations. There is no section in the study that addresses potential limitations or areas for improvement in future research. Instead, they adopt an authoritative tone and present their findings as though they are final and conclusive. The intention is clearly to help personnel directors apply concepts related to the four dimensions, but no support is given for why personnel directors should be inclined to accept these findings as valid in the first place. The reader may recognize this as a weakness, but the authors of the study do not appear to consider it important enough to mention.

The results of the study are organized around the four dimensions discussed at the outset — the self-oriented dimension, the others-oriented dimension, the perceptual dimension, and the cultural-toughness dimension. Support for these dimensions is drawn from numerous sources and the factors characterizing each dimension are provided, as noted above. The second half of the study proposes how personnel directors could use these dimensions to more successfully hire workers capable of acculturating. The recommendations are grounded in these findings; the researchers recommend, for instance, a training program that would specifically address "the subfactors of the dimensions of expatriate acculturation…crucial to the preparation of the expatriate" (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985, p. 44).

There is no clear indication that a significant problem of interpretation arose in the discussion of findings. Each claim made by the researchers is supported by existing research. The only interpretive problem that might be identified is that it is unclear whether the researchers omitted pertinent research, or whether they were too selective — or insufficiently selective — in generating their literature sample. They identify four dimensions that, if used by personnel directors, would promote successful acculturation — but there may be more, or the identified dimensions might be framed differently. Because the researchers do not explain how they determined their dimensions or what theoretical lens they applied, this remains unclear.

The researchers provide a lengthy list of recommendations that go so far as to call for institutional support within multinational corporations to enable personnel directors to create and implement the programs suggested. For instance, they argue that "the length of time budgeted for the selection and training processes must be increased" and that "in order for this to happen, the personnel director must have accurate forecasts of human resource needs in foreign subsidiaries" — but one admitted problem is that "too often expatriates are selected hurriedly because of an unforeseen staffing crisis in an overseas operation" (Mendenhall & Oddou, 1985, p. 45). The reader would naturally wish to know how personnel directors can begin to address this problem, but the researchers offer no solution or even a suggestion after acknowledging that this problem exists. Instead, they move on to the next recommendation: including the expatriate's spouse in the acculturation process — a thoughtful idea, but one that is hardly realistic given the time and resource constraints that most companies face.

The researchers provide conclusions by way of recommendations for personnel directors, but these recommendations are not necessarily grounded in the practical realities that personnel directors and MNCs face. The four dimensions identified and recommended as a guiding framework for selection and training are almost admittedly rendered irrelevant in the face of constraints such as time and budgetary pressures. If personnel directors cannot obtain more time and greater budgetary flexibility to implement the recommendations, the study comes across as a somewhat nebulous attempt at relevance. While it is helpful to identify flaws in a currently rigid system, the researchers spend more time on areas of focus that could be theoretically more helpful and not enough time on the actual constraints that personnel directors face — such as the fact that they are often pressed for time and lack the budget to implement such changes.

When a staffing crisis arises, there is little opportunity to psychologically evaluate candidates, provide training, or include an expatriate's spouse in a formal selection process. There is barely enough time to do this for the potential hire alone. The recommendation is understandable in the light of the researchers' four-dimension framework, but in practical terms it is not a realistic one. For this reason, the conclusions drawn from the data by the researchers appear misapplied. While the research does strongly support a reason to believe that the identified dimensions are important, it fails to explain how the literature review was conducted or what criteria were used to obtain studies for review. It also fails to show how the dimensions can be practically applied to the selection and training processes of personnel directors, although it does explain why they should be applied.

The study is certainly helpful in the sense that it provides a solid conceptual framework for future research, but it presents itself too authoritatively and with too little focus on validity to be taken seriously by a personnel director facing real-world time and budgetary constraints within an MNC.

Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1985). The dimensions of expatriate acculturation: A review. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 39–47.