Advertisement

Can We Make a Silk Purse from a Sow's Ear?

  • Daniel J. MundfromEmail author
Chapter

The Reverend Jonathan Swift (1801) is widely credited with coining the phrase “you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear” (p. 357), although Stephen Gosson appears to have made a similar statement centuries earlier in Ephemerides of Phialo in 1579: “seekinge … too make a silke purse of a Sowes eare” (Shapiro, 2006, pp. 619, #272). Regardless of origin, its general meaning implies that if something is not very good to begin with, you cannot do much of value with it. In the context here regarding statistical practices in educational research—and reshaping Swift's statement into a question: Can we make a silk purse from a sow's ear?—the implication is that research results that either come from poorly designed studies or use inappropriate techniques to analyze data, or both, have little hope of producing outcomes that will be effective in practice. Although this statement is applicable to research in virtually any context, the focus here is on educational research and its ability, or inability, to inform educational policy and practice in meaningful ways.

Educational research is not new. Educators, psychologists, evaluators, and other professionals have been studying the educational process for a century or more with the goal of improving the practice of education. The foremost international professional organization for promoting, studying, and disseminating research in education is the American Educational Research Association (AERA, n.d.); it was founded in 1916 with the goal of advancing educational research and promoting its application in practice. One would think that with all the educational research conducted year after year the quality of education seen in practice would be continuallyimproving. We would expect to see ever-increasing levels of student performance, higher test scores, better teachers, exemplary schools, and all the by-products and effects of an excellent educational system in society at large. However, one need not look very far or in much depth to conclude that such is not the case—not in the United States and not in most, if not all, other countries around the world. Recent US government legislation underscores this fact. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB, 2002) and the Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (ESRA, 2002) both speak to the need to generate better studies in education that can help to bridge the gap between educational research, policy, and practice.

Keywords

Educational Research Experimental Unit Random Assignment Student Performance Educational Policy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. American Educational Research Association. (n.d.). Homepage. Retrieved July 12, 2008, from http://www.aera.net/
  2. Barcikowski, R. S. (1981). Statistical power with group mean as the unit of analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6(3), 267–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blair, R. C., Higgins, J. J., Topping, M. E. H.,&Mortimer, A. L. (1983). An investigation of the robustness of the t test to unit of analysis violations. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 43(1), 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Callaert, H. (2000, March). Teaching introductory statistics and the use of common software packages. Paper presented at the 2nd biennial Western Statistics Teachers Conference, Greeley,CO.Google Scholar
  5. Donner, A.,&Klar, N. (2000). Design and analysis of cluster randomized trials in health research. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  6. Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002. Pub. L. No. 107–279, 116 Stat. 1940. (2002).Google Scholar
  7. Fisher, R. A. (1966). The design of experiments (8th edn.). Edinburgh, UK: Oliver&Boyd.Google Scholar
  8. Huberty, C. J.,&Morris, J. D. (1989). Multivariate analysis versus multiple univariate analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 105(2), 302–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Levin, J. R.,&Serlin, R. C. (1993, April). No way to treat a classroom: Alternative units-appropriate statistical strategies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  10. Lindquist, E. F. (1940). Statistical analysis in educational research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
  11. Murray, D. M. (1998). Design and analysis of group-randomized trials. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Pub. L. No. 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425. (2002).Google Scholar
  13. Peckham, P. D., Glass, G. V.,&Hopkins, K. D. (1969). The experimental unit in statistical analysis. Journal of Special Education, 3, 337–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schield, M. (2005, August). Statistical literacy and chance. Paper presented at the Joint Statistical Meetings, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  15. Shapiro, F. R. (Ed.). (2006). The Yale book of quotations. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Shelley II, M. C. (2005, August). Education research meets the gold standard: Statistics, education, and research methods after “No Child Left Behind”. Paper presented at the Joint Statistical Meetings, Minneapolis, MN.Google Scholar
  17. Slavin, R. E. (2008). Perspectives on evidence-based research in education—What works? Issues in synthesizing educational program evaluations. Educational Researcher, 37(1), 5–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Swift, J. (1801). The works of the Rev. Jonathan Swift, D.D., dean of St. Patrick's, Dublin. London: J. Johnson.Google Scholar
  19. Thompson, B. (1999, April). Common methodology mistakes in educational research, revisited, along with a primer on both effect sizes and the bootstrap. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Québec, Canada.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied Statistics & Research MethodsUniversity of Northern ColoradoGreeleyUSA

Personalised recommendations