The repertory grid: a critical appraisal

George Kelly claims a scientific status for Personal Construct Theory, but I argue that it is more appropriately characterised among the interpretive human sciences. Examination of the theory from the point of view of the grid user discloses a number of weaknesses, the most directly relevant being Kelly's assumption of the dichotomous nature of constructs. Even when this assumption is weakened by allowing grading between oppositional poles, the grid matrix retains a positivism that appears at variance with the main thrust of Kelly's theorising. The central chapters appraise technical aspects of grid methodology, dealing sequentially with elements, constructs, bipolarity, the completion of a grid matrix, analysis, and the stability of grid data. Analysis of underlying assumptions, reflection upon the 'grid literature', and some empirical studies indicate that grid methodology is often flawed in both conceptualisation and practice. While some improvements may be made regarding technique, element X construct interactions radically undermine the grid as a research instrument, as does Kelly's later claim for the importance of events. I further argue that short verbal labels are inadequate to bear the load of meaning that respondents wish to convey, and that grid methodology excludes the richness of figurative language: developments based upon fuzzy set theory are unlikely to improve matters. If, as I suggest, communication of meaning is a prime requirement of construct theory research, then alternative approaches to the elicitation of constructs are necessary. I conclude by sketching a possible response to the criticisms that have been advanced, and argue for a 'personal construct hermeneutics' in which theory and method are brought into a closer alignment. Indications are given of how this might be operationalised in terms of 'accounts methodology' and of some of the implications for the conduct of research in the human sciences

Hit by a perfect storm? Art & Design in the National Student Survey

There has long been the suspicion amongst staff in Art & Design that the ratings given to their subject disciplines in the UK's National Student Survey are adversely affected by a combination of circumstances – a ‘perfect storm’. The ‘perfect storm’ proposition is tested by comparing ratings for Art & Design with those for a selection of other subjects chosen because they share some features that might lead to lower ratings on the survey. Data from a small-scale qualitative study are used to throw light on what might lie behind the sector-wide statistics. The comparisons suggest that there is some validity in the ‘perfect storm’ proposition. More broadly, the article points to the need for sophistication in interpreting findings from the survey, irrespective of the subject area

The repertory grid: a critical appraisal

George Kelly claims a scientific status for Personal Construct Theory, but I argue that it is more appropriately characterised among the interpretive human sciences. Examination of the theory from the point of view of the grid user discloses a number of weaknesses, the most directly relevant being Kelly's assumption of the dichotomous nature of constructs. Even when this assumption is weakened by allowing grading between oppositional poles, the grid matrix retains a positivism that appears at variance with the main thrust of Kelly's theorising. The central chapters appraise technical aspects of grid methodology, dealing sequentially with elements, constructs, bipolarity, the completion of a grid matrix, analysis, and the stability of grid data. Analysis of underlying assumptions, reflection upon the 'grid literature', and some empirical studies indicate that grid methodology is often flawed in both conceptualisation and practice. While some improvements may be made regarding technique, element X construct interactions radically undermine the grid as a research instrument, as does Kelly's later claim for the importance of events. I further argue that short verbal labels are inadequate to bear the load of meaning that respondents wish to convey, and that grid methodology excludes the richness of figurative language: developments based upon fuzzy set theory are unlikely to improve matters. If, as I suggest, communication of meaning is a prime requirement of construct theory research, then alternative approaches to the elicitation of constructs are necessary. I conclude by sketching a possible response to the criticisms that have been advanced, and argue for a 'personal construct hermeneutics' in which theory and method are brought into a closer alignment. Indications are given of how this might be operationalised in terms of 'accounts methodology' and of some of the implications for the conduct of research in the human sciences

Reviews

Mark Kerr, How to Promote your Web Site Effectively, London: Aslib/IMI, ISBN: 0–85142–424–4. Paperback, 87 pages, £13.99

Reviews

Apolog

How art and design students understand and interpret the National Student Survey

Since the introduction of the National Student Survey in 2005, it has been noted that the average satisfaction scores vary across different disciplines (see, for example, Vaughan and Yorke 2009, p.8). And for just as long, it has been noted that art and design graduates’ satisfaction is among the lowest scoring disciplines. As the influence and reach of the NSS has increased - most recently in its inclusion as a key component of the government’s Key Information Set initiative - the art and design community has become increasingly concerned to explain the satisfaction gap experienced by many students studying in this area. The community’s response is well articulated in the title of a study that explores this issue: “’I can’t believe it’s not better’: The Paradox of NSS scores for Art & Design” (Vaughan and Yorke 2009). This study was commissioned by GLAD to look at how art and design has experienced and responded to the NSS, especially in the two major areas of feedback and assessment and organisation and management. The report showed that institutions varied considerably in terms of the ratings students gave to NSS questions, implying that there had been differential success in addressing aspects of the student experience probed by the survey. What the report did not attempt to do was gain an understanding of the basis of the ratings given by students. It was therefore a logical extension to ask how art and design students understand and interpret the questions in the National Student Survey, and GLAD and HEA commissioned the authors to carry out a small research project which takes a snapshot of how a small group of art and design students interpreted the NSS questions in 2011. This report is an overview of this study, and it aims to help colleagues in art and design subjects to: • understand why art and design subjects receive the NSS ratings that they do; • illuminate and understand how art and design students interpret and understand this generic questionnaire; and • provide further information to assist staff and students to prepare for the NSS. The key aim of this study is not to explain the responses that students give in the NSS. Its focus is instead on seeking to understand the ways in which students understand the NSS questions. As a result this is a qualitative interview-based study. The NSS questionnaire comprises 22 questions, and before the interviews the researchers narrowed the focus of this study down to eight of these. The eight questions were selected because they were viewed as central to the survey (e.g. question 22), or because they were questions that are particularly interesting in relation to creative and studio-based pedagogy in art and design (e.g. question 1)

Academic Libraries and Learning Support in Collaboration. Library Based Guidance for Peer Assisted Learning Leaders at Bournemouth University: Theory and Practice.

This article begins with an overview of the University’s pioneering Peer Assisted Learning Scheme (PAL) and describes how in 2005/6, the Library became involved, collaborating with the PAL Coordinator to develop materials for use by PAL Leaders. PAL is intended to foster cross-year support between students on the same course. It encourages students to support each other and learn co-operatively under the guidance of trained students from the year above - called PAL Leaders. Two documents were produced to support and empower these leaders. The first, Using the Library for Your Research, provides leaders with key guidance information on the University Library, its resources and the services it provides. The second, Citing References Using the Harvard System, aims to explain and demystify the Harvard Referencing system and to encourage good referencing habits from an early stage of their course through a practical hands-on exercise. Feedback from PAL Leaders continues to inform the development of these guidance materials, in particular the referencing exercise which was reworked to better suit the needs of the leaders delivering it