7 Historical research

Introduction (Hill and Kerber, 1967).

Ultimately, historical research is concerned
Mouly (1978) states that while historical
re- search cannot meet some of the tests of
the sci- entific method interpreted in the
specific sense of its use in the physical
sciences (it cannot de- pend, for instance, on
direct observation or ex- perimentation, but
must make use of reports that cannot be
repeated), it qualifies as a scientific
endeavour from the standpoint of its
subscrip- tion to the same principles and the
same general scholarship that characterize
all scientific re- search.1
Historical research has been defined as
the systematic and objective location,
evaluation and synthesis of evidence in order
to establish facts and draw conclusions
about past events (Borg (1963). It is an act of
reconstruction undertaken in a spirit of
critical inquiry designed to achieve a faithful
representation of a previous age. In seeking
data from the personal experiences and
observations of others, from documents
and records, researchers often have to
contend with inadequate information so that
their reconstruc- tions tend to be sketches
rather than portraits. Indeed, the difficulty of
obtaining adequate data makes historical
research one of the most tax- ing kinds of
inquiry to conduct satisfactorily.2
Reconstruction implies a holistic perspective
in that the method of inquiry
characterizing his- torical research attempts
to ‘encompass and then explain the whole
realm of man’s past in a per- spective that
greatly accents his social, cultural,
economic, and intellectual development’
with a broad view of the conditions
and not necessarily the specifics which
bring them about, although such a
synthesis is rarely achieved with- out
intense debate or controversy, especially
on matters of detail. The act of historical
research involves the identification and
limitation of a problem or an area of
study; sometimes the for- mulation of a
hypothesis (or set of questions); the
collection, organization, verification, vali-
dation, analysis and selection of data;
testing the hypothesis (or answering
the questions) where appropriate; and
writing a research re- port. This
sequence leads to a new understand- ing
of the past and its relevance to the
present and future.
The values of historical research
have been categorized by Hill and
Kerber as follows:

• it enables solutions to contemporary

prob- lems to be sought in the
past;
• it throws light on present and future
trends;
• it stresses the relative importance and
the ef- fects of the various
interactions that are to be found
within all cultures;
• it allows for the revaluation of data in
relation to selected hypotheses, theories
and generali- zations that are presently
held about the past.

As the writers point out, the ability of

history to employ the past to predict the
future, and to use the present to explain
the past, gives it a dual and unique
quality which makes it especially
useful for all sorts of scholarly study
and re- search.3
The particular value of historical
research in the field of education is
unquestioned. It can, for
 CHOICE OF SUBJECT 159

example, yield insights into some educational no matter whether the historian chooses
problems that could not be achieved by any to study the Jesuit order, religious
other means. Further, the historical study of C
teaching or- ders, the Counter-
an educa- tional idea or institution can do h
Reformation or Ignatius Loyola, each of
much to help us understand how our present a
the other elements appears as a prominent
educational system has come about; and this influence or result, and an indis- pensable pt
kind of understanding can in turn help to part of the narrative. For an example of er
establish a sound basis for further progress historical research see Thomas (1992) and
or change. Historical research in education Gaukroger and Schwartz (1997).
can also show how and why educa- tional
theories and practices developed. It ena- bles
educationalists to use former practices to Choice of subject
evaluate newer, emerging ones. Recurrent As with other methods we consider in
trends can be more easily identified and this book, historical research may be
assessed from a historical standpoint— structured by a flexible sequence of
witness, for example, the various guises in stages, beginning with the selection and
which progressivism in educa- tion have evaluation of a prob- lem or area of study.
appeared. And it can contribute to a fuller Then follows the defini- tion of the
understanding of the relationship between problem in more precise terms, the
politics and education, between school and selection of suitable sources of data,
soci- ety, between local and central collec- tion, classification and
government, and between teacher and processing of the data, and finally, the
pupil.4 evaluation and synthesis of the data into a
Historical research in education may balanced and objective ac- count of the
con- cern itself with an individual, a group, subject under investigation. There are,
a move- ment, an idea or an institution. As however, some important differ- ences
Best (1970) points out, however, not one of between the method of historical re-
these objects of historical interest and search and other research methods used
observation can be considered in isolation. in education. The principal difference has
No one person can be subjected to been highlighted by Borg:
historical investigation without some
consideration of his or her contribution to In historical research, it is especially
the ideas, movements or institutions of a important that the student carefully defines
particular time or place. These elements his problem and appraises its
are always interrelated. The focus merely appropriateness before com- mitting himself
deter- mines the point of emphasis too fully. Many problems are not adaptable
to historical research methods and cannot
towards which historical researchers direct
be adequately treated using this ap- proach.
their attention. Box 7.1 illustrates some of
Other problems have little or no chance of
these relationships from the history of producing significant results either because of
education. For example,

Box 7.1
Some historical interrelations between men, movements and institutions
Source Adapted from Best, 1970
 testable hypoth- esis (sometimes a sequence of
the lack of pertinent data or because the questions may be substituted.) As in empirical
prob- lem is a trivial one.
research, the hy-
(Borg,
1963)

One can see from Borg’s observations that

the choice of a problem can sometimes be a
daunt- ing business for the potential
researcher. Once a topic has been selected,
however, and its poten- tial and significance
for historical research evalu- ated, the next
stage is to define it more precisely, or,
perhaps more pertinently, delimit it so that a
more potent analysis will result. Too broad
or too vague a statement can result in the
final re- port lacking direction or impact. Best
expresses it like this: ‘The experienced
historian realizes that research must be a
penetrating analysis of a limited problem,
rather than the superficial examination of
a broad area. The weapon of research is the
rifle not the shotgun’ (Best, 1970). Various
prescriptions exist for helping to define
historical topics. Gottschalk (1951)
recommends that four questions should be
asked in identify- ing a topic:

• Where do the events take place?

• Who are the people involved?
• When do the events occur?
• What kinds of human activity are
involved?

As Travers (1969) suggests, the scope of a

topic can be modified by adjusting the
focus of any one of the four categories; the
geographical area involved can be increased
or decreased; more or fewer people can be
included in the topic; the time span
involved can be increased or de- creased;
and the human activity category can be
broadened or narrowed. It sometimes hap-
pens that a piece of historical research can
only begin with a rough idea of what the
topic in- volves; and that delimitation of it
can only take place after the pertinent
material has been as- sembled.
In hand with the careful specification of
the problem goes the need, where this is
appropri- ate, for an equally specific and
 Hockett (1955) expresses it thus:
pothesis gives direction and focus to
data col- lection and analysis. It History is not a science of direct observation,
imposes a selection, a structure on what like chemistry and physics. The historian like
would otherwise be an over- whelming the ge- ologist interprets past events by the
mass of information. As Borg (1963) traces they have left; he deals with the
observes: evidence of man’s past acts and thoughts. But
the historian, no less than
Without hypotheses, historical research
often be- comes little more than an
aimless gathering of facts. In searching
the materials that make up the sources of
historical research data, unless the stu-
dent’s attention is aimed at information
relating to specific questions or
concerned with specific hypotheses, he
[sic] has little chance of extracting a body
of data from the available documents that
can be synthesized to provide new
knowledge or new understanding of the
topic studied. Even af- ter specific
hypotheses have been established, the
student must exercise strict self-control in his
study of historical documents or he will
find himself collecting much information
that is interesting but is not related to his
area of inquiry. If the student’s hypotheses
are not sufficiently delimited or spe- cific,
it is an easy matter for him to become
dis- tracted and led astray by
information that is not really related to
his field of investigation.

Hill and Kerber (1967) have pointed out

that the evaluation and formulation of a
problem associ- ated with historical
research often involve the personality of
the researcher to a greater extent than do
other basic types of research. They sug-
gest that personal factors of the
investigator such as interest, motivation,
historical curiosity, and educational
background for the interpretation of
historical facts tend to influence the
selection of the problem to a great
extent.

Data collection
One of the principal differences between
histori- cal research and other forms of
research is that historical research must
deal with data that al- ready exist.
 DATA COLLECTION 161

the scientist, must utilize evidence resting on Documents considered as primary sources
reli- able observation. The difference in include manuscripts, charters, laws; archives of
procedure is due to the fact that the historian official minutes or records, files, letters,
usually does not make his own observations, memoranda, memoirs, biography, official
and that those upon whose observations he
must depend are, or were, often if not usually
untrained observers. Histori- cal method is,
strictly speaking, a process supple- mentary to
observations, a process by which the historian
attempts to test the truthfulness of the reports
of observations made by others. Like the
scientist, he [sic] examines his data and
formu- lates hypotheses, i.e. tentative
conclusions. These conjectures he must test by
seeking fresh evidence or re-examining the old,
and this process he must continue until, in the
light of all available evidence, the hypotheses
are abandoned as untenable or modified
until they are brought into conformity with
the available evidence.
(Hockett,
1955)

Sources of data in historical research may

be classified into two main groups: primary
sources, which are the life blood of
historical research; and secondary
sources, which may be used in the absence
of, or to supplement, primary data.
Primary sources of data have been
described as those items that are original
to the problem under study and may be
thought of as being in two categories,
thus:

1 The remains or relics of a given period.

Al- though such remains and artefacts as
skel- etons, fossils, weapons, tools, utensils,
build- ings, pictures, furniture, coins and
objets d’art were not meant to transmit
information to subsequent eras,
nevertheless they may be useful sources
providing sound evidence about the
past.
2 Those items that have had a direct
physical relationship with the events
being recon- structed. This category
would include not only the written and
oral testimony provided by actual
participants in, or witnesses of, an event,
but also the participants themselves.
 publications, wills, newspapers and enables them to con- tinue in a tradition,
maga- zines, maps, diagrams, to place their work in con- text, and to
catalogues, films, paintings, learn from earlier endeavours. The function
inscriptions, recordings, transcrip- of the review of the literature in his- torical
tions, log books and research research, however, is different in that it C
reports. All these are, intentionally or provides the data for research; the h
unintentionally, capable of researchers’
a
transmitting a first-hand account of
an event and are therefore pt
considered as sources of primary er
data. Historical research in education
draws chiefly on the kind of
sources identified in this second
category.

Secondary sources are those that do not

bear a direct physical relationship to
the event being studied. They are made
up of data that cannot be described as
original. A secondary source would thus
be one in which the person describ- ing
the event was not actually present but
who obtained descriptions from another
person or source. These may or may not
have been pri- mary sources. Other
instances of secondary sources used in
historical research include: quoted
material, textbooks, encyclopedias, other
reproductions of material or information,
prints of paintings or replicas of art
objects. Best (1970) points out that
secondary sources of data are usually
of limited worth because of the errors
that result when information is passed on
from one person to another.
Various commentators stress the
importance of using primary sources of
data where possible (Hill and Kerber,
1967). The value, too, of sec- ondary
sources should not be minimized. There
are numerous occasions where a
secondary source can contribute
significantly to more valid and reliable
historical research than would oth-
erwise be the case.
One further point: the review of the
litera- ture in other forms of
educational research is regarded as a
preparatory stage to gathering data and
serves to acquaint researchers with previ-
ous research on the topics they are
studying (Travers, 1969). It thus
 External criticism is concerned with establish-
acceptance or otherwise of their hypotheses ing the authenticity or genuineness of data. It
will depend on their selection of is therefore aimed at the document (or other
information from the review and the
interpretation they put on it. Borg (1963) has
identified other differences: one is that the
historical researcher will have to pe- ruse
longer documents than the empirical re-
searcher who normally studies articles very
much more succinct and precise. Further,
documents required in historical research
often date back much further than those in
empirical research. And one final point:
documents in education often consist of
unpublished material and are therefore less
accessible than reports of empiri- cal
studies in professional journals.
For a detailed consideration of the
specific problems of documentary research, the
reader is referred to the articles by Platt
(1981) where she considers authenticity,
availability of documents, sampling problems,
inference and interpretation.

Evaluation
Because workers in the field of historical
research gather much of their data and
information from records and documents,
these must be carefully evaluated so as to
attest their worth for the pur- poses of the
particular study. Evaluation of his- torical
data and information is often referred to as
historical criticism and the reliable data
yielded by the process are known as
historical evidence. Historical evidence has
thus been described as that body of
validated facts and information which can
be accepted as trustworthy, as a valid basis
for the testing and interpretation of hypoth-
eses. Historical criticism is usually undertaken
in two stages: first, the authenticity of the
source is appraised; and second, the
accuracy or worth of the data is evaluated.
The two processes are known as external
and internal criticism respec- tively, and
since they each present problems of
evaluation they merit further inspection.

External criticism
 words, how compe- tent were they? What
source) itself rather than the statements were their relationships to the events? To
it con- tains; with analytic forms of the what extent were they under pressure,
data rather than the interpretation or from fear or vanity, say, to distort or omit
meaning of them in relation to the facts? What were the intents of the writ-
study. It therefore sets out to uncover ers of the documents? To what extent were
frauds, forgeries, hoaxes, inventions or they
distortions. To this end, the tasks of
estab- lishing the age or authorship of
a document may involve tests of factors
such as signatures, handwriting, script,
type, style, spelling and place-names.
Further, was the knowledge it purports
to transmit available at the time and is
it consistent with what is known about
the author or period from another
source? In- creasingly sophisticated
analyses of physical factors can also
yield clues establishing au- thenticity
or otherwise: physical and chemical tests
of ink, paper, parchment, cloth and other
materials, for example. Investigations
in the field of educational history are
less likely to encounter deliberate
forgeries than in, say, po- litical or social
history, though it is possible to find
that official documents,
correspondence and autobiographies
have been ‘ghosted’, that is, prepared by
a person other than the alleged author
or signer.

Internal criticism
Having established the authenticity of the
docu- ment, the researcher’s next task
is to evaluate the accuracy and worth
of the data contained therein. While
they may be genuine, they may not
necessarily disclose the most faithful
pic- ture. In their concern to establish
the meaning and reliability of data,
investigators are con- fronted with a
more difficult problem than ex- ternal
criticism because they have to establish
the credibility of the author of the
documents. Travers (1969) has listed
those characteristics commonly
considered in making evaluations of
writers. Were they trained or untrained
observ- ers of the events? In other
 WRITING THE RESEARCH REPORT 163

experts at recording those particular Best (1970) has listed the kinds of problems
events? Were the habits of the authors occurring in the various types of historical re-
such that they might interfere with the search projects submitted by students. These
accuracy of recordings? Were they too include:
antagonistic or too sympathetic to give
true pictures? How long after the event did
they record their testimonies? And were
they able to remember accurately? Finally,
are they in agreement with other independent
wit- nesses?
Many documents in the history of
education tend to be neutral in character,
though it is pos- sible that some may be in
error because of these kinds of observer
characteristics. A particular problem arising
from the questions posed by Travers is
that of bias. This can be particularly acute
where life histories are being studied. The
chief concern here, as Plummer (1983)
reminds us, resides in examining possible
sources of bias which prevent researchers
from finding out what is wanted and using
techniques to minimize the possible sources
of bias.
Researchers generally recognize three
sources of bias: those arising from the subject
being in- terviewed, those arising from
themselves as re- searchers and those
arising from the subject-re- searcher
interaction (Travers, 1969).5

Writing the research report

Once the data have been gathered and
subjected to external criticism for
authenticity and to in- ternal criticism for
accuracy, the researcher is next confronted
with the task of piecing together an account
of the events embraced by the re- search
problem. This stage is known as the proc-
ess of synthesis. It is probably the most
difficult phase in the project and calls for
considerable imagination and
resourcefulness. The resulting pattern is
then applied to the testing of the hy-
pothesis.
The writing of the final report is equally
de- manding and calls for creativity and high
stand- ards of objective and systematic
analysis.
• Defining the problem too broadly. Borg and Gall (1979:400) suggest several Cha
• The tendency to use easy-to-find mis- takes that can be made in conducting
pt
secondary sources of data rather than historical research:
sufficient primary sources, which are er
harder to locate but usu- ally more 7
trustworthy.
• Inadequate historical criticism of data,
due to failure to establish authenticity
of sources and trustworthiness of
data. For example, there is often a
tendency to accept a state- ment as
necessarily true when several observ- ers
agree. It is possible that one may
have influenced the others, or that
all were influ- enced by the same
inaccurate source of infor- mation.
• Poor logical analysis resulting from:
• oversimplification—failure to
recognize the fact that causes of
events are more of- ten multiple and
complex than single and simple;
• overgeneralization on the basis of
insuffi- cient evidence, and false
reasoning by anal- ogy, basing
conclusions upon superficial
similarities of situations;
• failure to interpret words and
expression in the light of their
accepted meaning in an earlier
period;
• failure to distinguish between
significant facts in a situation and
those that are ir- relevant or
unimportant.
• Expression of personal bias, as
revealed by statements lifted out of
context for purposes of persuasion,
assuming too generous or un- critical
an attitude towards a person or idea
(or being too unfriendly or critical),
exces- sive admiration for the past
(sometimes known as the ‘old oaken
bucket’ delusion), or an equally
unrealistic admiration for the new or
contemporary, assuming that all
change represents progress.
• Poor reporting in a style that is dull
and col- ourless, too flowery or
flippant, too persua- sive or of the
‘soap-box’ type, or lacking in
proper usage.
 LIFE HISTORIES 16
he display adequate historical perspective?
• The selection of a topic for which Does he maintain his objectivity or does
histori- cal sources are slight, he allow
inaccessible or non- existent.
• Over-reliance on secondary sources.
• Failure to subject the historical sources
to internal or external validity/criticism
checks.
• Lack of reflexivity and the researcher’s
selec- tivity and bias in using sources.
• Importing concepts from other disciplines.
• Making illegitimate inferences of
causality and monocausality.
• Generalizing beyond acceptable limits
of the data.
• Listing facts without appropriate
thematization.

In addition to these, Sutherland (1969) has

bril- liantly illustrated two further common
errors among historians of education. These
are first, projecting current battles
backwards onto a his- torical background
which leads to distortion; and second,
‘description in a vacuum’ which fails to
illustrate the relationship of the educational
system to the structure of society. To
conclude on a more positive note Mouly
(1978) itemizes five basic criteria for
evaluating historical re- search:

• Problem Has the problem been clearly

de- fined? It is difficult enough to
conduct his- torical research adequately
without adding to the confusion by
starting out with a nebu- lous problem. Is
the problem capable of so- lution? Is it
within the competence of the in-
vestigator?
• Data Are data of a primary nature
available in sufficient completeness to
provide a solu- tion, or has there been an
overdependence on secondary or
unverifiable sources?
• Analysis Has the dependability of the
data been adequately established? Has
the rel- evance of the data been
adequately explored?
• Interpretation Does the author display
ad- equate mastery of his [sic] data and
insight into the relative significance? Does
 LIFE HISTORIES 16
analy- sis, both of which will reflect the
personal bias to distort the evidence? nature of the document being analysed and
Are his hypotheses plausible? Have the purpose of the research. Categories are
they been ad- equately tested? Does normally determined after initial inspection
he take a sufficiently broad view of of the document and will cover the main
the total situation? Does he see the areas of content.
relationship between his data and
other ‘historical facts’? We can readily • To describe trends
• Presentation Does the style of writing see how the in communication
attract as well as inform? Does the technique of con- content.
report make a contribution on the tent analysis may be • To relate known
basis of newly discovered data or new applied to selected characteristics of
interpretation, or is it simply ‘un- aspects of historical sources to
inspired hack-work’? Does it reflect research in messages they
scholar- liness? education. It could produce.
be used, for • To audit
instance, in the communication
The use of quantitative methods
analysis of content against
By far the greater part of research in educational docu- standards.
historical studies is qualitative in nature. ments. In addition • To analyse
This is so because the proper subject- to elucidating the techniques of
matter of historical research consists to a content of the persuasion.
great extent of verbal and other sym- bolic document, the • To analyse style.
material emanating from a society’s or method may throw • To relate known
a culture’s past. The basic skills required additional light on attributes of the
of the re- searcher to analyse this kind of the source of the audience to
qualitative or sym- bolic material involve communication, its messages
collecting, classifying, or- dering, au- thor, and on its produced for
synthesizing, evaluating and interpreting. At intended recipients, them.
the basis of all these acts lies sound those to whom the • To describe
personal judgement. In the comparatively message is directed. patterns of
recent past, how- ever, attempts have been Further, an analysis communication.
made to apply the quan- titative methods of this kind would
of the scientist to the solution of tell us more about Different examples of
historical problems (Travers, 1969). Of the social context the use of content
these methods, the one having greatest and the kinds of analysis in historical
relevance to historical research is that of factors stressed or contexts are
content analysis, the basic goal of which is ignored, and of the provided by Thomas
to take a verbal, non-quan- titative influence of political and Znaniecki (1918)7
document and transform it into quanti- factors, for instance. and Bradburn and
tative data (Bailey, 1978). It follows from this Berlew (1961). A
Content analysis itself has been that content analysis further example of
defined as ‘a multipurpose research may form the basis content analysis in
method developed spe- cifically for of comparative or historical settings is
investigating a broad spectrum of cross-cultural McClelland et al.’s
problems in which the content of studies. The (1953) study of the
communica- tion serves as a basis of purposes of content relationship between
inference’,6 from word counts (Travers, analysis have been the need to achieve
1969) to categorization. Ap- proaches to iden- tified by (n’ach, for short)
content analysis are careful to iden- tify Holsti (1968): among members of a
appropriate categories and units of society and the
 LIFE HISTORIES 16
economic growth with close troubles” and
of the particu- lar serves as an scrutiny of “public issues”, a
society in appropriate relevant task that lies at
question. Finally, introduction to documents such the very heart of
for a more de- this sec- tion, as letters, the sociological
tailed and for their diaries and enterprise’. Their
technical detailed photo- graphs. importance, he
consideration of account of the Essentially, the asserts, ‘is best
the use of life and times of life history is an confirmed by the
quantitative Wladek ‘interac- tive fact that teachers
methods in Wisniewski is and co-operative continually, most
historical commonly held technique often unsolicited, C
research, a study to be the first directly involv- import life h
which looks at the sociological life ing the history data into
history. a
classifying and researcher’ their accounts of pt
arrang- ing of The life (Plummer, classroom
history, er
historical data 1983). events’
and reviews basic according to Recent (Goodson,
descrip- tive Plummer (1983), accounts of the 1983).
statistics, we refer is frequently a perspectives and Miller (1999)
the reader to Floud full-length book in- terpretations demonstrates that
(1979). about one per- of people in a biographi- cal
son’s life in his variety of research is a
or her own educational distinctive way of
Life histories words. Often, settings are conceptual- izing
Thomas and Plummer both significant social activity. He
Znaniecki’s observes, it is and pertinent,8 provides outlines
monumental gathered over a for they provide of the three main
study, The Polish number of valuable approaches to
Peasant in years, the ‘insights into the analysis, that is to
Europe and researcher ways in which say:
America (1918), providing gentle educational
guidance to the personnel come • the realist
subject, to terms with which is
encouraging him the constraints focused upon
or her either to and conditions grounded-
write down in which they theory
episodes of life work’ (Goodson, techniques;
or to tape-record 1983). Life • the neo-
them. And often histories, positivist,
as not, these Goodson argues, employing more
materials will ‘have the structured
be backed up potential to interviews;
with intensive make a far- and
observations of reach- ing • the narrative
the subject’s contribution to with its
life, with the problem of emphasis on
interviews of the understand- ing using the
subject’s friends the links interplay
and ac- between between
quaintances and “personal
 LIFE HISTORIES 16
interviewer construct This involves the
and life researcher both in ‘What makes a
interviewee histories. selecting an good informant?’
to actively appropriate problem Plummer draws
and devising attention to key
Denzin (1999) particular research relevant re- search factors such as
suggests that project, and with techniques. accessi- bility of
there are several ever-present Questions to be place and
varieties of constraints of time, asked at this stage availability of
biographical facilities and are first, ‘Who is time, and the
research methods finance in mind, it to be the object of awareness of the
in- cluding: is useful to the study?’—the potential
biography, distinguish life great person, the informant of
autobiography, histories both by common person, the his/her particular
story, dis- course, type and mode of volunteer, the cultural milieu. A
narrative writing, presen- tation, selected, the good informant is
personal history, both factors coerced? Second, able and willing
oral history, case bearing directly to establish and
history, life upon the scope and maintain a close,
history, personal feasibility of the intimate
expe- rience, and research endeavour. relationship with
case study. This is Box 7.2 draws on the researcher. It
addressed further an outline by is axiomatic that
by Connelly and Hitchcock and common
Clandinin (1999) Hughes (1989). sympathies and
who indicate Readers may wish mutual respect
several to refer to the are prerequisites
approaches to descriptions of types for the suste-
narrative and modes of nance and
inquiry: presen- tation success of a life
contained in Box history project.
• oral history; 7.2 in assessing the Third, ‘What
• stories; dif- fering demands needs clarifying in
• annals and that are made on the early stages of
chronicles; intending re- the research?’
• photographs; searchers as they The motivations
• memory gather, analyse and of the researcher
boxes; present their data. need to be made
• interviews; Whether explicit to the
• journals; retrospective or intended sub-
• autobiography contempo- raneous, ject. So too, the
; a life history question of
• letters; involves five broad remuneration for
• conversations; re- search processes. the subject’s
• and These have been services should
documents. identified and be clarified from
described by the outset. The
In exploring the Plummer (1983). issue of
appropriateness of anonymity must
life history also be addressed,
Preparation
techniques to a for unlike other
 LIFE HISTORIES 16
research of life interviewing are to do with
histories and
methodolo- their modes strategy involves a representativeness,
gies, life of judicious mixture of reliability and
histories presentation participant validity (see also
reveal intimate Types observation (see Chapters 5, 9 and
details Retrospective life history Chapter 17) and 15).
(names, casualfeel- chatting,
a reconstruction of past events from the present Plummer draws
places, ings and interpretations of the individual supple-
concerned. mented by attention to a
events) and Contemporaneous life history note-taking. frequent criti- cism of
provide scant a description of an individual’s daily life in progress, life history research,
cover from here and now. namely that its cases
Data storage
prying eyes. Modes of Presentation are atypical rather
The earlier Naturalistic Typically, life than representative.
stages of the histories
a first-person life history in which the life story is largely generate To avoid this charge,
project also in the words of the individual subject, supported
enormous by a he urges intending
brief introduction, commentary and conclusion on the
provide part of the researcher. amounts of data. researchers to ‘work
opportunities Intending out and explicitly
for discussing Thematically-edited researchers must state the life
subject’s words are retained intact but are presented
with the make
by the researcher in terms of a series of themes, top- early history’s
research decisions
ics or headings, often in chapter-by-chapter format. about the
subject the use of tape-re-
Interpreted and edited
precise the researcher’s influence is most marked cordings,
in his/her the how,
nature of the what
version of a subject’s life story which the and when of
researcher
life their tran- scription
has sifted, distilled, edited and interpreted.
and editing, and
Source Adapted from
Box 7.2
Hitchcock and Hughes, the development of
A typology
1989 coding and filing
devices if they are
history study, the serve as general to avoid being
logistics of guides from the totally swamped by
interview outset of the study, the materials
situations and to informal, un- created. Readers are
modes of data structured referred to the
recording. interviews discussion in Chap-
reminiscent of non- ter 9 and to
direc- tive Fiedler’s (1978)
Data collection
counselling extensive account
Central to the approaches of methods
success of a life espoused by Carl appropriate to field
history is the re- Rogers (1945) and studies in natu- ral
searcher’s ability his followers. In settings.
to use a variety of the case of the
interview latter, Plummer
techniques (see (1983) draws Data analysis
also Chapter 15). attention to the Three central issues
As the occa- sion importance of underpin the
demands, these empathy and ‘non- quality of data
may range from possessive warmth’ generated by life
relatively on the part of the history
structured interviewer-re- methodology. They
interviews that searcher. A third
 LIFE HISTORIES 16
relationship present an Data presentation terpreting.
to a wider autocritique Editing (‘cutting’,
Plummer
population’ of it, having sequencing,
provides three
(Plummer, read the
points of
1983) by way entire
direction for
of appraising product.
the researcher
the subject on • A comparison
intent upon
a continuum may be made
writing a life
of with similar
his- tory. First,
representative writ- ten
have a clear
ness and non- sources by C
view of who
rep- way of
you are writing h
resentativene identifying
for and what a
ss. points of
you wish to pt
Reliability major
accomplish by er
in life history divergence
writing the
research or
account. Are
hinges upon similarity.
you aiming to
the • A
pro- duce a case
identification comparison
history or a case
of sources of may be
study? Case
bias and the made with
histo- ries ‘tell
ap- plication official
a good story
of techniques records by
for its own
to reduce way of
sake’
them. Bias imposing
(Plummer,
arises from the accuracy
1983). Case
informant, the checks on
studies, by
researcher, the life
contrast, use
and the history.
personal
interactional • A
documents for
encounter comparison
wider theoretical
itself may be made
pur- poses such
(Plummer, by
as the
1983), and interviewing
verification
these were other
and/or the gen-
presented in informants.
eration of
Box 5.1. Sev-
theory. Second,
eral validity Essentially, the
having
checks are validity of any
established the
available to life history lies
purpose of the
intending in its ability to
life history,
researchers. represent the
decide how far
Plummer informant’s
you should
identifies the subjec- tive
intrude upon
following: reality, that is
your assembled
to say, his or
data. Intrusion
• The subject her definition of
occurs both
of the life the situation.
through editing
history
and in-
may
disguising names, places etc.) is almost a sine qua non of any life history study.
Paraphrasing Plummet, editing involves getting your subject’s own words, grasping them
from the inside and turning them into a structured and coherent statement that uses
the subject’s words in places and your own, as researcher, in others, but retains their
authentic meaning at all times. Third, as far as the mechanics of writing a life history
are concerned, practise writing regularly. Writ- ing, Plummer observes, needs working at,
and daily drafting, revising and redrafting is neces- sary. For an example of life history
methodol- ogy and research see Evetts (1991).