The research questions this study seeks to answer are related to the nature of students’ interaction with faculty members outside the classroom. Researchers aim to find answers to such questions as “What key factors influence the interaction of students with faculty members, hindering or contributing to it?” and “What benefits do students derive from outside-of-class interaction with faculty members?” (Vianden, 2009). These are important research questions because establishing effective interaction between students and faculty members is one of the most important components of the pedagogical process at the university. Depending on how the interaction with professors is organized outside the audience, the success of the implemented pedagogical activity can be evaluated.
The qualitative methodology used in this study was based on interviews. Scientists used special questions to collect facts, opinions, or attitudes of students. The interview format was chosen from all types of surveys for this study. Individual conversations were conducted with students, during which detailed answers to questions were investigated (Vianden, 2009). The rationale is sufficient for using the chosen methodology. During the conversation, the students did not have much time to think, so their answers can be considered sincere and truthful. On the contrary, in a written survey, they could have written the answer that seems more socially acceptable, and this would distort the research data.
However, a written survey is another methodology that researchers could use that would have yielded important or missing data. This is because, during an oral survey, some people may get confused and answer not the way they wanted (Lai et al., 2018). Most often, these are introverts who find it difficult to quickly figure out and express themselves in detail. Therefore, for working with introverted students, the option of filling out pre-prepared questionnaire forms on a computer would be more suitable.
The article demonstrates concise and clear writing due to the logically coherent structure of the study. This scientific research is written using scientific terms, the meaning of which has been previously clarified by the authors, which makes it easy to understand the paper.
Anticipating Other Questions
The researchers should anticipate that other scholars might ask questions about the study or the results of the study. The first question may be based on the need to justify the objectivity and validity of the research (Ott & McTier, 2020). This is due to the lack of developed texts and plans for the study of the interaction between faculty members and students in psychological and sociological methods. The next question that other scientists may have concerns the interpretation of the results. Information perceived by ear is not always available (Aguilera-Hermida, 2020). Therefore, the researcher cannot always hear and correctly understand what the respondent said. The third question may be related to the peculiarities of the influence of internal psychological defensive reactions that can distort the data during an oral interview (Pavanelli, 2018). If there is an insufficient level of trust in the researcher, the respondent may give answers that, in their opinion, are more socially acceptable than they are. This may be due to students’ fear of disclosing the results of the study to the faculty members.
The findings of this research can contribute to further knowledge when re-conducting the experiment. Scientists need to take into account the questions in the course of the research expressed by other scientists to make research more objective. In this case, it will be possible to develop recommendations for building a certain line of behavior on the part of faculty members, which will have a beneficial effect on students.
These research questions might be investigated using other qualitative methods. For example, such a method as an anonymous written survey would allow us to get a more objective picture. A different study population could include working with two groups of teachers to identify the mutual influence of their behavior style in the classroom and beyond its redistribution on relationships with students. For example, it can be possible to conduct a comparative study with reputable and non-authoritative teachers (Wang & BrckaLorenz, 2018). Moreover, these research questions might be investigated using quantitative analysis. This would make it possible to create a wider sample and compare the results with the conclusions of other scientists (Karpouza & Emvalotis, 2019). Using this method would make it possible to deduce the standard error of the mean. This would allow scientists to determine the interval in which the true average should lie.
In my opinion, the analysis of the article completely determines the theoretical foundations on which the study was carried out. It made it possible to identify both the weaknesses and strengths of the study, as well as to identify the feasibility of the chosen methodology. The researchers differentiate the theoretical and real-world aspects of their study by introducing theoretical concepts (Vianden, 2009). Moreover, they indicate various potential weaknesses of the study related to the human factor. Due to the personality traits of both the researcher and the respondents, the results obtained may be slightly distorted, as the authors write.
Aguilera-Hermida, A. P. (2020). College students’ use and acceptance of emergency online learning due to COVID-19. International Journal of Educational Research Open, 36(4), 493-503.
Karpouza, E., & Emvalotis, A. (2019). Exploring the teacher-student relationship in graduate education: A constructivist grounded theory. Teaching in Higher Education, 24(2), 121-140.
Lai, H. M., Hsiao, Y. L., & Hsieh, P. J. (2018). The role of motivation, ability, and opportunity in university teachers’ continuance use intention for flipped teaching. Computers & Education, 124(17), 37-50.
Ott, M., & McTier, T. S. (2020). Faculty attitudes toward college students with criminal records. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 13(4), 297-308.
Pavanelli, R. (2018). The flipped classroom: A mixed methods study of academic performance and student perception in EAP writing context. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 5(2), 16-26.
Vianden, J. (2009). Exploring college men’s perceptions about interacting with faculty beyond the classroom. The College Student’s Affairs Journal, 27(2), 224-241.
Wang, R., & BrckaLorenz, A. (2018). International student engagement: An exploration of student and faculty perceptions. Journal of International Student, 8(2), 1002-1033.