Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Managing Endings in a Longitudinal Study: Respect for Persons

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper I describe and discuss the way that a book I had written on a five-year longitudinal study of school science teaching was received by the pupils and teachers it featured. By and large the pupils’ reception was positive. However, one group of teachers was deeply hurt by the book. I trace this mainly to my failure to consider adequately their fears of the consequences of the book’s publication and possibly to my failure to consider with them the psychological significance of my withdrawing from the school after five years of regular study. I hope that there are lessons not only for myself but also for others considering longitudinal and ethnographic research in science education and more broadly.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ball, S. J. (1984). Beachside reconsidered: Reflections on a methodological apprenticeship. In R. G. Burgess (Ed.), The research process in educational settings: Ten case studies (pp. 69–96). London: Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delamont, S. (2002). Fieldwork in educational settings: Methods, pitfalls and perspectives (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, J., Pring, R., & Lewis, A. (2003). Ethical guidelines for educational research: Draft for consultation among members. Research Intelligence, 82, 2–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murdin, L. (2000). How much is enough? Endings in psychotherapy and counselling. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Obholzer, A., & Roberts, V. Z. (Eds.). (1994). The unconscious at work: Individual and organizational stress in the human services. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N., & Hardy, C. (2002). Discourse analysis: Investigating processes of social construction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, M. J. (2000). Understanding science lessons: Five years of science teaching. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhedding-Jones, J. (1997). The writing on the wall: Doing a feminist post-structural doctorate. Gender and Education, 9, 193–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wetherell, M., Taylor, S., & Yates, S. J. (Eds). (2001). Discourse theory and practice: A reader. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittier, D. K., & Simon, W. (2001). The fuzzy matrix of ‘Ms Type’ in intrapsychic sexual scripting. Sexualities, 4, 139–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolcott, H. F. (1977). Teachers versus technocrats. Unpublished manuscript, Centre for Educational Policy and Management, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Education, University of London, 20 Bedford Way, London, WC1H 0AL, UK

    Michael J. Reiss

Authors
  1. Michael J. Reiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Reiss.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Reiss, M.J. Managing Endings in a Longitudinal Study: Respect for Persons. Res Sci Educ 35, 123–135 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-3436-z

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-3436-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation