有影响力的选择:解构基于调查的教育研究中的土著操作化,以秘鲁为例

Miriam Broeks, Ricardo Sabates Aysa
{"title":"有影响力的选择:解构基于调查的教育研究中的土著操作化,以秘鲁为例","authors":"Miriam Broeks, Ricardo Sabates Aysa","doi":"10.5204/ijcis.2193","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Indigeneity is a complex social construct that can be defined in multiple ways using diverse markerstraditionally based on the characteristics of individuals. Survey-based studies have used language,self-identification or location information to operationalise Indigeneity. Yet, as suggested by Walterand Andersen (2013), Gillborn et al. (2018) and others, few scholars reflect on how the Indigeneityvariable is specified and whether this operationalisation may impact results. This article examinesthis issue empirically using the case of Indigeneity in Peru. First, survey-based empirical studies areidentified to explore the ways in which Indigeneity has been operationalised. Then, using the YoungLives study, we present diverse operationalisations of Indigeneity and outline how these may lead to different educational outcomes for children. We show that quantitative researchers using surveybased data should engage more deeply with different operationalisations of Indigeneity as these can lead to different educational outcomes for children categorised as Indigenous.","PeriodicalId":303899,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influential choices: deconstructing operationalisations of Indigeneity in survey-based education research using an example from Peru\",\"authors\":\"Miriam Broeks, Ricardo Sabates Aysa\",\"doi\":\"10.5204/ijcis.2193\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Indigeneity is a complex social construct that can be defined in multiple ways using diverse markerstraditionally based on the characteristics of individuals. Survey-based studies have used language,self-identification or location information to operationalise Indigeneity. Yet, as suggested by Walterand Andersen (2013), Gillborn et al. (2018) and others, few scholars reflect on how the Indigeneityvariable is specified and whether this operationalisation may impact results. This article examinesthis issue empirically using the case of Indigeneity in Peru. First, survey-based empirical studies areidentified to explore the ways in which Indigeneity has been operationalised. Then, using the YoungLives study, we present diverse operationalisations of Indigeneity and outline how these may lead to different educational outcomes for children. We show that quantitative researchers using surveybased data should engage more deeply with different operationalisations of Indigeneity as these can lead to different educational outcomes for children categorised as Indigenous.\",\"PeriodicalId\":303899,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcis.2193\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcis.2193","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

土著是一种复杂的社会结构,可以使用不同的标记以多种方式定义,传统上基于个人的特征。基于调查的研究使用语言、自我认同或位置信息来操作土著。然而,正如Walterand Andersen(2013)、Gillborn et al.(2018)等人所建议的那样,很少有学者思考如何指定indigenityvariable,以及这种操作化是否会影响结果。本文以秘鲁土著为例,对这一问题进行了实证研究。首先,确定了基于调查的实证研究,以探索土著被操作化的方式。然后,使用YoungLives研究,我们展示了土著的不同操作方式,并概述了这些方式如何导致儿童的不同教育成果。我们表明,使用基于调查的数据的定量研究人员应该更深入地研究土著的不同操作方式,因为这些方法可能导致被归类为土著儿童的不同教育成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Influential choices: deconstructing operationalisations of Indigeneity in survey-based education research using an example from Peru
Indigeneity is a complex social construct that can be defined in multiple ways using diverse markerstraditionally based on the characteristics of individuals. Survey-based studies have used language,self-identification or location information to operationalise Indigeneity. Yet, as suggested by Walterand Andersen (2013), Gillborn et al. (2018) and others, few scholars reflect on how the Indigeneityvariable is specified and whether this operationalisation may impact results. This article examinesthis issue empirically using the case of Indigeneity in Peru. First, survey-based empirical studies areidentified to explore the ways in which Indigeneity has been operationalised. Then, using the YoungLives study, we present diverse operationalisations of Indigeneity and outline how these may lead to different educational outcomes for children. We show that quantitative researchers using surveybased data should engage more deeply with different operationalisations of Indigeneity as these can lead to different educational outcomes for children categorised as Indigenous.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
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