Analysis of Chapter IV, “Findings”
Article #4 of my analysis considers Chapter
III, “Methodology,” in which the author discusses her findings from the
interviews that she conducted with five African American women principals.
Note, though, that Sayles-Adams continues to
devote much space to citations and observations from other researchers while
limiting the space given to her own discoveries based on the interviews.
The following are my own analytically critical
comments.
Gary Davison Comments
Page 56
With regard
to the sentence, “The purpose of this phenomenological study is to examine the experiences and challenges of African
American women principals as they work to lead and improve academic outcomes
for students,” readers should be aware as they prepare to read Sayles-Adams’s
findings for the interviews that she conducted with five African American women
principals that there is no discussion as to the strategies utilized by the
principals either in seeking to improve or accomplishing the improvement of
academic outcomes for students.
Readers
should also be aware at how repetitive Sayles’-Adams already has been and will
get even more in the pages ahead as to matters pertinent to citations of
previous studies and topics covered in the studies; and how repetitive are her multiple
restatements of the Central Question and the two sub-questions.
A chapter on
“findings” should be focused overwhelmingly on what Sayles-Adams herself
discovers in the interviews of the five women principals.
Returning
again and again to matters already covered as to the literature and as to
methodology comes across as filler in the absence of findings that reveal
anything truly new or engaging.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 58
Note that
Sayles-Adams twice misspells in the interviewee given the pseudonym of
“Marcia,”
Rendering the
names as “Marica.”
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Pages 59-60
Note the
continuing use of citations from other research in what should be a
presentation of Sayles-Adams’s own findings.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 61
Note yet
another misspelling of an interviewee’s pseudonym, this time rendering what
should be “Gwendolyn” as “Gwendoly.”
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Pages 63-64
Note the
continuing use of citations from other research in what should be a
presentation of Sayles-Adams’s own findings.
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 66
For the third
time, Sayle-Adams renders the interviewee with pseudonym of “Marcia” as
“Marica.”
Note also the
continuing use of citations from other sources in a “Findings” chapter that
should be focused on material from Sayles-Adams’s own interviews.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 68
For the
fourth time, Sayle-Adams renders the interviewee with pseudonym of “Marcia” as
“Marica.”
Note also
that in following sentence, Sayles-Adams erroneously places an apostrophe after
the word, “principals’,” which in fact is used in plural, non-possessive form
and should be rendered as “principals.”
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 70
Observe the
continuing use of citations from other sources (as with [Burton, et al, 2020]
and Coles and Pasek [2020]} in a “Findings” chapter that should be focused on
material from Sayles-Adams’s own interviews.
Such use of
citations by this point in the dissertation has a decided appearance of
injecting filler material for findings that are rather slim and unsurprising,
with little in the way of scholarly discovery.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 72
Observe again
the continuing use of citations from other sources (Davis and Maldonado, 2015]
and Patricia Collins [1990]} in a “Findings” chapter that should be focused on
material from Sayles-Adams’s own interviews.
The
appearance of padding the dissertation by injecting filler material because
findings are rather slim and unsurprising, with little in the way of scholarly
discovery, grows with each page in these last sections of the dissertation.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 72
Consider the
views and emotions revealed in the following passage (given as immediately
above):
She [Beverly] described a
strong work ethic with the integrity to ensure all children have an opportunity
to gain experience and grow. Despite her attempts to interview for prime
leadership positions, she has only been selected to lead behind others that
have failed:
“My grandmother was a clean-up
woman in other people's homes, I am the Queen of clean-up women in education.
This really bothers me. I am tired of being hired to clean up schools and the
stuff other leaders leave behind. I have only been selected to lead as a
clean-up woman without the opportunity to grow and shine as a leader in other
areas.”
If Beverly desired an
opportunity “to ensure that all children have an opportunity,” wouldn’t she
welcome the chance to lead at a school with chronic challenges, where the most
children needing such an opportunity because of past neglect attend?
Readers please consider this
question as applicable to other interviewee statements as you read ahead.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 73
Observe again
the continuing use of citations from other sources (as with Newcomb and
Niemeyer 2015l] and Peters, et al [2021]} in a “Findings” chapter that should
be focused on material from Sayles-Adams’s own interviews.
Readers be
aware of the many such instances in the pages ahead, and consider that such use
of citations by this point in the dissertation has a decided appearance of
injecting filler material for findings that are rather slim and unsurprising,
with little in the way of scholarly discovery.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 75
Was the
decision to abandon a challenging assignment noble?
What student
futures were forsaken because of this decision?
What was
Marcia’s success in a district that she felt “wanted me for me,” as she stated?
These are
intriguing and important questions that Sayles-Adams does not address in her
“Discussion” chapter.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 75
A
colon is erroneously placed between the words, “need” and “and receiving it,”
in the sentence,:
Gwendolyn echoed the importance of being confident and
advocating for the support you need: and receiving it:
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Gary Marvin Davison Comments
Page 78
The following
sentence has a problem with punctuation:
“Upon
analysis, major themes were categorized as barriers that confirmed; different
expectations, double standards, questioning authority, acts of resistance and
aggression, and participants being treated as clean-up women.”
Either the
phrase, “as barriers that confirmed,” is parallel with those that follow and
should followed by a comma (rather than a semicolon), or the phrase is meant to
introduce the following phrases and should be followed by a colon (rather than
a semicolon).
Neither the
meaning of the sentence nor the intended role of the phrase, “as barriers that
confirmed,” is clear.
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………….
No comments:
Post a Comment