RSCH Article Analysis two PDF

Preview

Summary

Complete essay for assignment two with proper formatting and outline....

Description

Running head: ARTICLE ANALYSIS 2

1

Article Analysis 2: Lasting Impact of Study Abroad Experiences: A Collaborative Autoethnography Name Liberty University

Running head: ARTICLE ANALYSIS 2

2

Article Analysis 2 This humanities research-based study focuses on using collaborative autoethnography to explore the lasting impact of studying abroad on participants. Two researchers discuss their separate experiences of learning French through a cultural immersion study abroad trip in France during their third years of undergraduate study. When the researchers reviewed the existing literature on the effects of studying abroad, little supplemental material already existed, so the two researchers attempted to fill the research gap with their collaborative review on how immersion programs affect French teachers in the long run (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). Neither researcher knew the other one prior to the study but chose to unpack their experiences years later through personal narratives and e-mail correspondence. The study qualitatively focused on the aspects of language/ culture, identity, academics, and the lasting impact the trip had on the researcher (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). Most of the analysis focused on the researchers' retelling of their experiences followed up with a methodology of comparison to see how studying abroad had affected them individually as learners and how this experience could be generalized to other language learners. Analysis Research Purpose and Overview Lasting Impact of Study Abroad Experiences: A Collaborative Autoethnography sought to discover how studying abroad affected the professional occupations of students that later went on to become language teachers themselves. The researchers came to the thesis that cultural immersion within the country of the chosen second language increased initial interest in the language of study as well as piqued the student's interest and ability to continue involvement with their second language (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). The researchers' thesis developed from

Running head: ARTICLE ANALYSIS 2

3

reviews of previous literature that explored the effects studying abroad had on students pursuing an education in a foreign language. Some studies suggested that constant requirements of formal and informal use of the second language improved the speaker's confidence and proficiency (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). Not only were students more conversationally fluent and quick with responses, they learned the natural conversational styles common with the language. Meanwhile, other studies suggested an evident amount of personal student maturity growth and increased abilities as an autonomous learner (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). These studies focused primarily on the short-term effects, so the researchers for this study took the short term theories and as a building block for their own study and sought to see if these positive effects extended into a professional career as a foreign language teacher. However, because this was an autoethnography humanity research study, the theory that helped shaped the analysis of the project came after the experiences occurred and assessed the situation in a retrospective manner (Hark, 2017). Methods and Research This study was carried out in a completely qualitative manner. The researchers implemented the research technique of autoethnography. Ethnography itself is defined as a study of culture, but autoethnography "is a type of ethnography in which you are an integral part of the culture you are studying" (Hark, 2017). This method was perfect for the researchers' study because they were recalling their personal experiences from being fully immersed in France's French culture. The main body of research for the study were the two researchers' personal narratives of their time in France. Their analysis was formed around the idea of social constructionism, a belief that suggests reality is understood through communication (Hark,2017). This idea was tied into the theory of autoethnography because the project itself is coming from

Running head: ARTICLE ANALYSIS 2

4

the experience of studying abroad in France, not a specific theory that started the whole event before the experience itself. The autoethnographic approach is almost retrospective in a way, because the researchers review their experience after the fact, and see where they can draw personal connections to the cultural aspects they experienced (Hark, 2017). These methods were highly evident in this specific study on French immersion and studying abroad because both researchers' reevaluated their experiences in France and assessed how they were introduced to the language locally, how they were graded academically, how the experience developed their cultural knowledge of France, and how it improved their metacultural awareness (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). This type of research uses scholars own personal narratives to make statements or interpretations of the culture they themselves experienced (Hark, 2017). Conclusions, Limitations, and Future Studies After the completion of the study, the researchers concluded that their experiences had positively shaped their future careers as French linguistic teachers. The researchers denoted the study abroad program had directly influenced them by accelerating their understanding of French, helping them develop a better way to teach the language, expanding their knowledge of French culture, and aiding them in personal growth as well (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). The research also showed how two separate people could experience different study abroad programs at different chronological times and still pursue very similar careers and have similar viewpoints on the program and how it shaped them as language teachers (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). Conclusively, the researchers highly recommend other aspiring teachers following a similar cultural immersion program. The study did address limitation to their research concerning the number of people that contributed to the project. Because this study was a collaborative autoethnography, the results are

Running head: ARTICLE ANALYSIS 2

5

restricted to only two people's personal narratives of their study abroad program in France. While their qualitative results were supported by a similar quantitative study assessing the relationship between studying abroad and maturity/career choice, the researchers from this study can only say their results based on two people's experiences (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). Therefore, the amount of study that can be generalized to the public becomes more difficult. Also, the study abroad experiences occurred in the years of 2000 and 2004. Because of the amount of time occurring between the published study and the actual experiences, more up to date study abroad programs should be evaluated as well (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). In terms of future research, the authors of the study suggested more occurrences of study abroad trips and collaborative autoethnography. The researchers hope to expand the current knowledge known about the effects of studying abroad by adding more people's personal experiences and more up-to-date experiences into the research discussion field (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). The researchers also suggested teachers that send their students abroad or host a child should write about the experiences. Autoethnography was found to be a highly effective research method for this project and people in charge of this project suggested the same methods for future studies (Garbati & Rothschild, 2016). Collectively they hope to expand the knowledge on the benefits or disadvantages of studying abroad using the collaborative autoethnography. Original Analysis When comparing the humanities article to the sciences article, the research operated from two very different perspectives. While the science article centered around a hypothesis, variables and a plan for how to test those variables, the humanities article lacked variables and plan to test their hypothesis. In the humanities, the research is usually opinion based and the research is more of an exploration of the experience after it has happened (Hark, 2017). Meanwhile, the sciences

Running head: ARTICLE ANALYSIS 2

6

have a hypothesis that researchers are seeking to prove or disprove, as seen in the science article from last week where the researchers assessed the variables of prayer and sanctification in marriage and formed a hypothesis on how they thought these variables would affect infidelity in a marriage (Kalantar & Reich, 2018). The humanities are exploring how experiences made the researchers feel and believe "bodily experiences are essential to understanding the culture under study" (Hark, 2017). This week's humanities article had no true hypothesis or variables and just looked to assess how the cultural experience of studying abroad affected them. Additionally, the humanities article incorporated a lot of personal feelings into the study, while the sciences strictly focused on the topic being studied and remained objective. The humanities use of autoethnography allows the researchers to write in a personal narrative form and offer personal critiques and assessments of the experience (Hark, 2017). The sciences article must present an objective study because this type of research only states what the data shows and what those results physically mean for the study. Another difference witnessed between the humanities and the sciences was the overall focus of the studies. The humanities seek to explore experience and interpret the culture through a social constructivist perspective (Hark, 2017). The sciences focus on detailing the aspects of the study and how the variables affected one another. The sciences look to explain a phenomenon that is occurring (Hark, 2017). The article conclusions are completely different between the sciences and the humanities. The humanities article concludes the study with strong opinions about how they felt about the research and the rewarding nature of their experiences as well as their collaboration. Due to the fact the studies of the humanities cannot be completely described as a success/failure or fully described through figures, the research lends itself towards a personal interpretative nature

Running head: ARTICLE ANALYSIS 2

7

(Hark, 2017). This approach is greatly different from a scientific approach that relies on the testing conducted. This difference is demonstrated by the sciences article directly concluding with how successful the study was and whether their hypothesis was rejected, confirmed, or required further testing.

Word Count: 1529

Running head: ARTICLE ANALYSIS 2

8

References Hark, K. J. (2017). Research across the disciplines: An introduction. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt. Garbati, J. F., & Rothschild, N. (2016). Lasting impact of study abroad experiences: A collaborative autoethnography. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 17(2) Retrieved from http://ezproxy.liberty.edu/login?url=https://search-proquestcom.ezproxy.liberty.edu/docview/1779359779?accountid=12085 Reich, N. & Kalantar, S.M. (2018) The role of praying for the spouse and sanctification of marriage in reducing infidelity, mental health, religion & culture. 21:1, 65-76, DOI: 10.1080/13674676.2018.1447555...