Qualitative Research Genres

I must admit - my head is spinning after undertaking this reading. I want to post a comment now when what I have read is fresh in my mind, but perhaps I will have to return on Monday and offer further thoughts after I have taken time to digest!

Catherine Marshall and Gretchen B. Rossman take on the daunting challenge of providing an overview of the different 'theoretical and empirical strands' that 'inform conceptual framework.'  The aim of this chapter is to help the researcher situate herself in order understand how she is orientating towards her chosen research topic.  They provide an excellent summary of a complicated topic.  An important distinction for me in navigating the complicated language and conflicting theories was as below:

Traditional qualitative research assumes

a) knowledge is not objective Truth but is produced intersubjectively

b) the researcher learns from participants in order to understand the meaning of their lives but should maintain a certain stance of neutrality

c) society is reasonably structure and is orderly

Main assumptions of all critiques of traditional qualitative research:

a) Research fundamentally involves power

b) Research is authored by a raced, gendered, classed, and political orientated individual

c) race, class and gender are crucial for understanding of experience

d) historically, traditionally research has silenced members of oppressed and marginalized groups

Traditional qualitative research was broken down into three genres: Ethnographic approach; Phenomenological approach; Sociolinguistic approach 

Critiques of the traditional qualitative research theories include: Narrative Analysis; Action Research and Participatory Action Research; Cultural Studies; Internet/Virtual Ethnography; Critical Ethnography; Feminist Theories and Methodologies; Critical Race Theory; Queer Theory and Analysis. 

Postmodern, postcolonial and post-positivist criticism of qualitative research genres has forced the researcher to consider the relationship between the knowledge, the knower and the one disseminating knowledge.  How can this help us as research novices?  It helps us (in a daunting way!) to realize there is no ‘wrong’ way of approaching research (to an extent), however, in order for your research to be worthwhile you need to explore not only the different genres, theories and approaches available to you but also your own world-view, identity and sense of self.  I’m not sure how to end with a question this week…perhaps we may consider what is more daunting – exploring the different research methodologies in detail, or exploring our own sense of self?

Looking specifically from a historical perspective - truth can never be objective. It is subjective to the evidence that is looked at and the questions that are asked of the evidence.

Clear identification of the sources used, a willingness to have the account or narrative critiqued, corroboration of different sources and information about the author and the process would convince me of an objective historical process and the acceptance that the narrative created was a version or construct of the past - a version of truth.

In this sense - evidence is largely written. Relics, artefacts, buildings and objects can be evidence but the physical world, oral histories or the spoken word tend not to be.

Post-modernist critique of historical narratives reject this objective process and therefore reject narratives as historical truths, and instead claim that narratives are fictional or metaphorical.

'Accessing Science Courses in Rural BC: A Cultural Border-Crossing Metaphor'

If I am perfectly honest, I sat down to read Wendy Nielsen and Samson Madera Nashon's article 'Accessing Science Courses in Rural BC: A Cultural Border-Crossing Metaphor' with little enthusiasm as the focus was science and I felt there would be little of specific interest to me as a history teacher.  How wrong I was!

Nielsen and Nashoon's research was focusing on small, rural schools in remote locations in BC. Analysis of quantitative data helped them to see trends of poor student performance in science and select specific schools to participate in the study.  They then interviewed principals, teachers and students in 12 rural schools to try to understand the barriers to learning in science education.

I used Gorwin's Vee chart to make notes and try to breakdown the study and what struck me most was the lack of attention to specificities of science education and the focus on the cultural context of the school and local community.  Trying to mediate the cultural 'border-crossing' for students and teachers was proven, through the interview process, to be the most important factor that assisted students' learning in science education.  Much of this was to do with the need for teachers to embrace or familiarise themselves with the local community and local culture in order to gain students' trust and build meaningful relationships. Although the study was focused on science education in small, rural communities in Canada the similarities to my own teaching experience as a history teacher in a large, urban school in central London were uncanny.  Relationships, for me, are the linchpin of effective and rewarding teaching and building and sustaining these relationships is one of the most challenging parts of being a teacher.  Each new school is a new experience, however this study revealed to me that whilst each situation is unique, there is common ground embedded in the uniqueness. Can you remember a relationship with a teacher that encouraged you to go further or embrace a certain subject or direction in your education?

An additional striking element for me was the impact that global economic shifts have on individual student and teacher experiences.  The world view identified in the research was that shrinking rural populations owing to out-migration were a result of global economic forces (fewer jobs in logging, fishing, mining, and agriculture due to downsizing and mechanized labour meant people left for urban centres to find work). This is shaping local communities in terms of size and demographic. This has a tangible knock-on effect on classroom realities.  For me this was fascinating, the perspective was one of a 'mountain-top view' but the results and findings were 'up close and on the ground'.  What 'mountain top' forces can you identify that have affected your 'up close and on the ground' experience of teaching and learning?

My apologies for posting a little late - I got my times mixed up in terms of deadlines and the article was so fascinating it took me longer to read than I was anticipating!

What is educational research, and why do it?

What is Educational Research?

When I started my masters in September I considered educational research to be specifically (and exclusively) connected to educational experiences and educational institutions.  After my first term my understanding of educational research has changed and expanded. To understand specific education-related phenomena research needs to look beyond ‘education’ and take into account the ‘real-world’ influences that impact education as well.  In this way, an educational researcher must operate as Aoiki’s Miss O does, ‘in-dwelling’ – between two spaces.  The first space is that of educational experience (similar to the curriculum-as-planned) – a more static and tangible space.   The second space is the real world or ‘lived-experience’ (similar to the lived-curriculum), a somewhat more fluid and changeable space, but as illustrated in Aoiki’s analysis of Miss O’s in-dwelling, this ‘lived’ space is equally important to that of the ‘planned’ space. For this reason education research can be defined as any research that poses questions where the intended consequences shape or affect education. Educational research is importantly not always prescriptive; it does not always offer definitive answers and solutions.  As a teacher I have found that frustrating, but as a masters’ student I am learning to see the value in studies that reveal more questions than answers.

Why do we do it?

Alex Generous, in her TED talk of 2015 titled 'How I learned to communicate my inner life with Asperger's', finishes by stating that her dream is to remove the communication roadblocks that prevent some people from learning (in her case, she is specifically discussing those with Asperger’s’ syndrome or on the autism spectrum).  This attitude encapsulates why we ‘do’ educational research – we do it in order to remove the roadblocks that may prevent learning.  This can take on many different forms but the underlying quality or intention that binds the expanse of educational research together is the desire to clear the road and improve learning opportunities.  What ‘improvement’ looks like is subjective, but that does not undermine the underlying shared intention of educational research to make a change for the better.

Hello!
This is Katy Wallace's blog for EDUC 500.
Welcome!