Data for: Learning dispositif and emotional attachment

Published: 07-06-2019| Version 1 | DOI: 10.17632/4ck4vp2x8y.1
Contributors:
Simon Huston,
Elena Huston,
Marek Kozlowski

Description

Methodology and data The research used mixed methods and sequential explanatory approach to investigate how learning dispositif (LD) influences emotional attachment (EA) and to identify the significant constituents of EA. The first research phase involved the development of the explanatory framework from the diverse strands of literature, as discussed. For the second phase, the research developed a survey instrument, geared around the learning framework and surveyed 150 international tertiary level students in Europe, Russia, Asia, the Middle East and China. Finally, for its third phase to enrich its insights into EA and learning the research conducted qualitative expert interviews. To identify survey respondents, the research used pragmatic, convenience sampling, distributing the instrument either online or in hard copy version to accessible university cohorts. As far as we are aware, there exists no other quantitative studies on EA and learning, so it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis to investigate effects size. The research generated three questions and associated hypotheses. The first question concerned the role of LD. The second involved the influence of EA on LS. The third queried the multi-faceted constituents of EA itself. Formally: 1. RQ1: Does LD influence LS? LD is insignificant (H-LD0) for LS vs. the alternative hypothesis that cohort LS varies (H-LD1) 2. RQ2: Does EAs significantly influence learning success? EA is insignificant for learning success (H-EA0) vs. the alternative that EA is significant (H-EA1) 3. RQ3: What are EA’s main constituents? The draft framework underpinned the questions for an online survey of learners and instructors. Likert scales assessed student and instructor perceptions or attitudes to various aspects of EA and learning but the survey also included some open-ended questions. Subsequently, expert interviews and discussions validated and enriched the refined framework. After ethical review, the research piloted interviews with a couple of experienced UK instructors to fine-tune the instrument. Although much of the data was ordinal, it was analysed using non-parametric and parametric statistics.