Can Findings of Qualitative Research in Education be Generalized?

Can Findings of Qualitative Research in Education be Generalized? Most qualitative researchers do not recommend generalization from qualitative studies, as this research is not based on random samples and statistical controls. The objective of this study is to explore the degree to which in-service teachers understand the controversial aspects of generalization in both qualitative and quantitative educational research and as to how this can facilitate problems faced by the teachers in the classroom. The study is based on 83 participants who had registered for a 10-week course on ‘Methodology of Investigation in Education’ as part of their Master’s degree program. The course is based on 11 readings drawing on a philosophy of science perspective (positivism, constructivism, Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos). Course activities included written reports, class room discussions based on participants’ presentations, and written exams. Based on the results obtained it is concluded: (1) almost 91% of the teachers agreed that external generalization in a different social context is feasible; (2) almost 63% of the participants used a fairly inconsistent approach, that is in a theoretical context agreed that qualitative research cannot be generalized and still when asked with respect to the experience of two particular teachers, agreed that generalization was possible; (3) almost 28% of the participants used a consistent approach. Some of the reasons provided by the participants as to why generalization was feasible are discussed. An analogy is drawn with respect to Piaget’s methodology, viz., it was not based on random samples or statistical treatments and still his oeuvre has been generalized (criticisms not withstanding) in both the psychology and educational literature. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Quality & Quantity Springer Journals

Can Findings of Qualitative Research in Education be Generalized?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/can-findings-of-qualitative-research-in-education-be-generalized-cnqviwSVqB
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2006 by Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.
Subject
Social Sciences; Methodology of the Social Sciences; Social Sciences, general
ISSN
0033-5177
eISSN
1573-7845
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11135-006-9015-9
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Most qualitative researchers do not recommend generalization from qualitative studies, as this research is not based on random samples and statistical controls. The objective of this study is to explore the degree to which in-service teachers understand the controversial aspects of generalization in both qualitative and quantitative educational research and as to how this can facilitate problems faced by the teachers in the classroom. The study is based on 83 participants who had registered for a 10-week course on ‘Methodology of Investigation in Education’ as part of their Master’s degree program. The course is based on 11 readings drawing on a philosophy of science perspective (positivism, constructivism, Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos). Course activities included written reports, class room discussions based on participants’ presentations, and written exams. Based on the results obtained it is concluded: (1) almost 91% of the teachers agreed that external generalization in a different social context is feasible; (2) almost 63% of the participants used a fairly inconsistent approach, that is in a theoretical context agreed that qualitative research cannot be generalized and still when asked with respect to the experience of two particular teachers, agreed that generalization was possible; (3) almost 28% of the participants used a consistent approach. Some of the reasons provided by the participants as to why generalization was feasible are discussed. An analogy is drawn with respect to Piaget’s methodology, viz., it was not based on random samples or statistical treatments and still his oeuvre has been generalized (criticisms not withstanding) in both the psychology and educational literature.

Journal

Quality & QuantitySpringer Journals

Published: May 25, 2006

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off