Koretz, D. (2009). Measuring Up: What Educational Testing Really Tells Us. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1503gxj

This excerpt from Daniel Koretz's Measuring Up explains the fundamental principles of educational achievement testing, using the analogy of a political poll to illustrate key concepts. The core idea is the "sampling principle," highlighting that tests measure only a small sample of a student's overall knowledge ("the domain"). The text discusses the importance of careful sampling, standardization, item difficulty ("discrimination"), and reliability in ensuring that test scores accurately reflect students' abilities. Finally, it addresses the issue of score inflation, caused by test preparation focusing on specific tested material rather than the broader domain.

keepSave to notecopy_alldocsAdd noteaudio_magic_eraserAudio OverviewschoolBriefing doc

Ho, A. D. (2024). Measurement Must Be Qualitative, then Quantitative, then Qualitative Again. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 43(4), 137–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12662

This article from Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice synthesizes twelve commentaries by past presidents of the National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME) on the past, present, and future of educational measurement. The author, Andrew Ho, frames the commentaries using a three-stage model of measurement—qualitative, quantitative, then qualitative again—highlighting the importance of both qualitative and quantitative competencies. Two recurring themes emerge: the need for personalized assessments and a heightened appreciation for the qualitative aspects of measurement, including its historical and political context. Ho uses this framework to categorize and discuss each commentary, offering his own perspectives and suggestions for future directions in the field. The overall goal is to use the commentaries to advance the NCME's mission of benefiting society through educational measurement.

keepSave to notecopy_alldocsAdd noteaudio_magic_eraserAudio OverviewschoolBriefing doc

Gerace, A., Day, A., Casey, S., & Mohr, P. (2013). An Exploratory Investigation of the Process of Perspective Taking in Interpersonal Situations. Journal of Relationships Research, 4, e6. https://doi.org/10.1017/jrr.2013.6

This 2013 article from the Journal of Relationships Research explores the process of perspective-taking in interpersonal situations. Researchers conducted interviews with twelve participants, prompting them to recall instances where they actively attempted to understand another person's viewpoint. The study identified strategies participants used, including drawing on personal information, self-reflection (imagining themselves in the other's position), past experiences, and general knowledge. Analysis revealed that perspective-taking often occurred in emotionally charged situations, and involved a dynamic shift between focusing on one's own perspective and that of the other. The findings contribute to existing models of empathy, highlighting the complexities and challenges of understanding others.

keepSave to notecopy_alldocsAdd noteaudio_magic_eraserAudio OverviewschoolBriefing doc

Todd, A. R., & Galinsky, A. D. (2014). Perspective‐Taking as a Strategy for Improving Intergroup Relations: Evidence, Mechanisms, and Qualifications. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8(7), 374–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12116

This 2014 article by Todd and Galinsky reviews research on perspective-taking – actively considering others' viewpoints – as a method for improving intergroup relations. The authors examine the evidence showing that perspective-taking leads to more positive evaluations of outgroups, both implicitly and explicitly, and influences behavioural changes, such as increased helping and approach-oriented actions. They explore underlying mechanisms, including empathy and shifts in attributional thinking, and discuss qualifications based on individual differences and contextual factors. Finally, the article suggests avenues for future research in this area.

keepSave to notecopy_alldocsAdd noteaudio_magic_eraserAudio OverviewschoolBriefing doc

Costello, T. H., Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2024). Durably reducing conspiracy beliefs through dialogues with AI. Science, 385(6714), eadq1814. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adq1814

This research explores the effectiveness of using AI-powered dialogues to reduce belief in conspiracy theories. Researchers engaged over 2000 participants in conversations with GPT-4, an AI model, designed to refute specific evidence cited for their chosen conspiracy theories. The results showed a significant and lasting reduction in conspiracy belief, even among those with strongly held convictions. This reduction generalized to unrelated conspiracies and impacted related behaviours. The study suggests that compelling evidence, delivered effectively, can significantly alter deeply rooted beliefs, challenging existing theories about the immutability of conspiratorial thinking and highlighting the potential benefits—and risks—of using AI for persuasion.

keepSave to notecopy_alldocsAdd noteaudio_magic_eraserAudio OverviewschoolBriefing doc

Aspers, P., & Corte, U. (2019). What is Qualitative in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Sociology, 42(2), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-019-9413-7

This 2019 article by Aspers and Corte examines the elusive definition of qualitative research. The authors systematically analyze existing literature, revealing a lack of a cohesive definition despite widespread practice. They propose a new definition emphasizing iterative processes, significant distinctions, closeness to the phenomenon, and improved understanding within the research community. This definition aims to improve research design, communication among researchers, and the overall standing of qualitative methods. The article utilizes Howard Becker's study of marijuana use as a key example.

Seidman, I. (2019). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences (Fifth edition). Teachers College Press.

Irving Seidman's Interviewing as Qualitative Research (2019, 5th edition) is a guide for researchers using qualitative methods, particularly in-depth interviewing, within education and social sciences. The book advocates for interviewing as a primary means of understanding individuals' lived experiences and the meanings they create, emphasizing the importance of language and narrative. Seidman contrasts this approach with quantitative research, highlighting the historical tensions and epistemological differences between these methodologies. The text also addresses ethical considerations, including potential power imbalances in the researcher-participant relationship and the implications of using qualitative research within a predominantly quantitative field. Ultimately, the book champions the value of qualitative interviewing for rich insights into social issues.

Lamont, M., & Swidler, A. (2014). Methodological Pluralism and the Possibilities and Limits of Interviewing. Qualitative Sociology, 37(2), 153–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-014-9274-z

This 2014 paper by Lamont and Swidler advocates for methodological pluralism in sociology, arguing against the limitations of methodological tribalism. The authors defend interviewing as a valuable research technique, acknowledging its weaknesses while highlighting its strengths in exploring meaning, representations, and cultural ideals. They emphasize the importance of matching methods to research questions, illustrating this with examples from their own work and others. Ultimately, the paper calls for greater methodological innovation to address contemporary challenges, such as incorporating historical and institutional dimensions into research designs.

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches (Fourth edition). SAGE.

This excerpt from Creswell and Poth's Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design outlines five qualitative research approaches: narrative research, focusing on individual life stories; phenomenological research, exploring the shared essence of experiences; grounded theory research, generating theories from data; ethnographic research, describing cultural patterns of groups; and case study research, providing in-depth analyses of specific cases. Each approach is defined, its origins explained, and key features, procedures, challenges, and emerging directions are discussed. The authors also offer guidance on choosing the most suitable approach based on research needs and provide a comparison across foundational considerations, data procedures, and reporting.

Brown-Saracino, J. (2021). Unsettling Definitions of Qualitative Research. Qualitative Sociology, 44(4), 591–597. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-021-09498-9

This review essay by Japonica Brown-Saracino critiques the pursuit of rigid definitions for qualitative research. Brown-Saracino argues that the intimate researcher-data relationship, crucial to qualitative inquiry, is often at odds with efforts to establish strict boundaries. She emphasizes the value of embracing ambiguity and exploring the overlaps between qualitative and quantitative approaches. Brown-Saracino supports her position by highlighting how close engagement with data yields unexpected insights and challenges existing assumptions about social phenomena. The essay ultimately advocates for a more fluid understanding of qualitative research, allowing for methodological innovation and the exploration of areas of common ground between different research traditions. Several studies are cited to illustrate the richness and unexpected discoveries arising from in-depth qualitative research.