RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

SOME EXAMPLES OF THE USE OF REPERTORY GRID IN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 443
a science. Great care must be taken not to impose
constructs. Above all, researchers must learn to
listen to their subjects.
A number of practical problems commonly
experienced in rating grids are identified by Yorke
(1978):
Variable perception of elements of low personal
relevance.
Varying the context in which the elements
are perceived during the administration of the
grid.
Halo effect intruding into the ratings where
the subject sees the grid matrix building up.
Accidental reversal of the rating scale
(mentally switching from 5 = high to 1 =
high, perhaps because ‘5 points’ and ‘first’ are
both ways of describing high quality). This can
happen both within and between constructs,
and is particularly likely where a negative or
implicitly negative property is ascribed to the
pair during triadic elicitation.
Failure to follow the rules of the rating
procedure. For example, where the pair has had
to be rated at the high end of a 5-point scale,
triads have been found in a single grid rated
as 5, 4, 4; 1, 1, 2; 1, 2, 4 which must call into
question the constructs and their relationship
with the elements.
More fundamental criticism of repertory grid,
however, argues that it exhibits a nomothetic
positivism that is discordant with the very theory
on which it is based. Whatever the method
of rating, ranking or dichotomous allocation
of elements on constructs, is there not an
implicit assumption, asks Yorke (1978), that the
construct is stable across all of the elements
being rated Similar to scales of measurement
in the physical sciences, elements are assigned
to positions on a fixed scale of meaning as
though the researcher were dealing with length
or weight. But meaning, Yorke (1978) reminds us,
is ‘anchored in the shifting sands of semantics’.
This he ably demonstrates by means of a
hypothetical problem of rating four people on
the construct ‘generous–mean’. Yorke shows that
it would require a finely wrought grid of enormous
proportions to do justice to the nuances of
meaning that could be elicited in respect of the
chosen construct. The charge that the rating
of elements on constructs and the subsequent
statistical analyses retain a positivistic core in what
purports to be a non-positivistic methodology is
difficult to refute.
Finally, increasing sophistication in computerbased
analyses of repertory grid forms leads
inevitably to a burgeoning number of concepts
by which to describe the complexity of what can
be found within matrices. It would be ironic,
would it not, Fransella and Bannister (1977) ask, if
repertory grid technique were to become absorbed
into the traditions of psychological testing and
employed in terms of the assumptions which
underpin such testing. From measures to traits
is but a short step, they warn.
Some examples of the use of repertory
grid in educational research
Three examples of the use of personal constructs in
education have to do with course evaluation, albeit
two less directly than the other. The first study
employs the triadic sorting procedure that Kelly
(1955) suggested in his original work; the second
illustrates the use of sophisticated interactive
software in the elicitation and analysis of personal
constructs; and the third concerns the changing
roles of primary headteachers. Kremer-Hayon’s
(1991) study sought to answer two questions:
first, ‘What are the personal constructs by which
headteachers relate to their staff’ and second, ‘To
what extent can those constructs be made more
‘‘professional’’’ The subjects of her research were
thirty junior school headteachers participating
in an in-service university programme about
school organization and management, educational
leadership and curriculum development. The
broad aim of the course was to improve
the professional functioning of its participants.
Headteachers’ personal constructs were elicited
through the triadic sorting procedure in the
following way:
1 Participants were provided with ten cards
which they numbered 1 to 10. On each card
Chapter 20