Using a Repertory Grid to Review Compliance Reports on Literacy Provision in Vocational Training in the Tertiary Sector in Aotearoa

W. Greyling
{"title":"Using a Repertory Grid to Review Compliance Reports on Literacy Provision in Vocational Training in the Tertiary Sector in Aotearoa","authors":"W. Greyling","doi":"10.34074/proc.2205005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main aim of this article is to outline the findings of a grid-based review process (Caputi et al., 2012; Fransella et al., 2004) directed at literacy and numeracy (LN) practices documented by the literacy team in the institute’s evidence-based LN compliance reports for a four-year period (2017–2020). Outlined is the author-reviewer’s use of a repertory grid to address two research questions: How could a repertory grid be used to explore his constructs (as a reviewer) and show how these constructs were interconnected? How could the repertory grid findings raise his and his team’s awareness of hidden meanings in his construing? Hence, the focus of convenience of the grid was defined as follows: Reviewing LNembedding practices at a tertiary institute in Aotearoa from a business strategy perspective. The ten most recent institutional LN compliance reports and a selection of six schools of business strategy served as sources for identifying 12 elements to be used in constructs elicitation. The so-called difference method was applied in formulating 12 bipolar constructs for the review. The author then donned the reviewer’s hat, rating each element on a 7-point rating scale for the 12 constructs – this yielded a 12 x 12 matrix of data for analysis. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Version 27) (IBM Corp, 2020) was used to perform a principal components analysis (PCA). Five components, explaining 81.25% of the variance in the grid ratings, were identified. These components highlighted the underlying structure and connectedness of the constructs elicited for the review, uncovering five themes: deliberate innovative practices, solution-centred transformation, deliberate evidence-based tracking, contesting contentious LN practices, and flexibility and responsiveness to unintended events in the educational setting. The conclusion was that anyone performing a review or reflective activity could profitably use repertory grids to raise their awareness of hidden meanings in their construing.","PeriodicalId":103339,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings: 2021 ITP Research Symposium, 25 and 26 November","volume":"73 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings: 2021 ITP Research Symposium, 25 and 26 November","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34074/proc.2205005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The main aim of this article is to outline the findings of a grid-based review process (Caputi et al., 2012; Fransella et al., 2004) directed at literacy and numeracy (LN) practices documented by the literacy team in the institute’s evidence-based LN compliance reports for a four-year period (2017–2020). Outlined is the author-reviewer’s use of a repertory grid to address two research questions: How could a repertory grid be used to explore his constructs (as a reviewer) and show how these constructs were interconnected? How could the repertory grid findings raise his and his team’s awareness of hidden meanings in his construing? Hence, the focus of convenience of the grid was defined as follows: Reviewing LNembedding practices at a tertiary institute in Aotearoa from a business strategy perspective. The ten most recent institutional LN compliance reports and a selection of six schools of business strategy served as sources for identifying 12 elements to be used in constructs elicitation. The so-called difference method was applied in formulating 12 bipolar constructs for the review. The author then donned the reviewer’s hat, rating each element on a 7-point rating scale for the 12 constructs – this yielded a 12 x 12 matrix of data for analysis. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (Version 27) (IBM Corp, 2020) was used to perform a principal components analysis (PCA). Five components, explaining 81.25% of the variance in the grid ratings, were identified. These components highlighted the underlying structure and connectedness of the constructs elicited for the review, uncovering five themes: deliberate innovative practices, solution-centred transformation, deliberate evidence-based tracking, contesting contentious LN practices, and flexibility and responsiveness to unintended events in the educational setting. The conclusion was that anyone performing a review or reflective activity could profitably use repertory grids to raise their awareness of hidden meanings in their construing.
使用储备网格来审查奥特罗阿第三部门职业培训中提供扫盲的合规报告
本文的主要目的是概述基于网格的审查过程的发现(Caputi等人,2012;Fransella et al., 2004)针对识字和计算(LN)实践,该实践由识字团队在该研究所为期四年(2017-2020年)的基于证据的LN合规报告中记录。概述了作者-审稿人对剧目网格的使用,以解决两个研究问题:如何使用剧目网格来探索他的构念(作为审稿人),并显示这些构念是如何相互联系的?剧目网格的发现如何提高他和他的团队对他的解释中隐藏意义的认识?因此,网格便利性的重点定义如下:从商业战略的角度回顾Aotearoa一所高等学院的lnembed实践。10个最新的机构LN遵从性报告和6个商业战略学院的选择作为确定12个要素的来源,用于构建启发。所谓的差异方法被应用于制定12个双相结构的审查。然后作者戴上评论员的帽子,对12个构念的每个元素进行7分的评分——这产生了一个12 x 12的数据矩阵用于分析。社会科学统计软件包(第27版)(IBM公司,2020)被用来执行主成分分析(PCA)。确定了五个组成部分,解释了网格评级中81.25%的方差。这些组成部分突出了审查所引出的结构的潜在结构和连通性,揭示了五个主题:深思熟虑的创新实践,以解决方案为中心的转变,深思熟虑的循证跟踪,有争议的LN实践,以及对教育环境中意外事件的灵活性和响应性。结论是,任何进行回顾或反思活动的人都可以有效地使用库存网格来提高他们对其解释中隐藏含义的认识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信