Qualitative methodology and its pitfalls in educational research

Qualitative methodology and its pitfalls in educational research There is considerable controversy in educational research with respect to the use of qualitative and quantitative data and as to what constitutes scientific research. The objective of this study is to explore the degree to which in-service teachers understand the difference between qualitative/quantitative data and methods, validity/authenticity, generalization and how these can be used to solve problems faced by the teachers. The study is based on 84 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 history and 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: (a) Most participants understood that the problem to be investigated precedes the method and determines the methodology to be used; (b) As all observations are theory-laden, it is preferable that interpretations based on both qualitative and quantitative data be allowed to compete in order to provide validity to our research findings; (c) The difference between validity and authenticity was controversial and most participants considered the need for interpreting data and hence favored authenticity; (d) Discussions led to the idea of ‘degrees of validity’ as both validity in the quantitative sense and authenticity in the qualitative sense, ultimately depend on critical appraisals of the community; (e) Generalizability of results obtained from qualitative studies was a controversial topic and most participants agreed that it is not desirable to generalize; (f) Discussions suggested an alternative: In both qualitative and quantitative research generalizability is possible, provided we are willing to grant that our conceptions/theories are not entirely grounded in empirical evidence but rather on the degree to which the community can uphold such a consensus; (g) Most teachers considered the use of participant observation in qualitative research as non-controversial. Class discussions led to the understanding that emphasizing observations may lead us to the Aristotelian ideal of empirical science; (h) Formulation of hypotheses, manipulation of variables, and the quest for causal variables was considered by many teachers to be equivalent to the scientific method. Discussions facilitated the understanding that this led to idealization and thus helped to reduce the complexity of a problem. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Quality & Quantity Springer Journals

Qualitative methodology and its pitfalls in educational research

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/qualitative-methodology-and-its-pitfalls-in-educational-research-aqeB1e50jA
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 by Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
Subject
Social Sciences; Methodology of the Social Sciences; Social Sciences, general
ISSN
0033-5177
eISSN
1573-7845
D.O.I.
10.1007/s11135-007-9136-9
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

There is considerable controversy in educational research with respect to the use of qualitative and quantitative data and as to what constitutes scientific research. The objective of this study is to explore the degree to which in-service teachers understand the difference between qualitative/quantitative data and methods, validity/authenticity, generalization and how these can be used to solve problems faced by the teachers. The study is based on 84 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 history and 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: (a) Most participants understood that the problem to be investigated precedes the method and determines the methodology to be used; (b) As all observations are theory-laden, it is preferable that interpretations based on both qualitative and quantitative data be allowed to compete in order to provide validity to our research findings; (c) The difference between validity and authenticity was controversial and most participants considered the need for interpreting data and hence favored authenticity; (d) Discussions led to the idea of ‘degrees of validity’ as both validity in the quantitative sense and authenticity in the qualitative sense, ultimately depend on critical appraisals of the community; (e) Generalizability of results obtained from qualitative studies was a controversial topic and most participants agreed that it is not desirable to generalize; (f) Discussions suggested an alternative: In both qualitative and quantitative research generalizability is possible, provided we are willing to grant that our conceptions/theories are not entirely grounded in empirical evidence but rather on the degree to which the community can uphold such a consensus; (g) Most teachers considered the use of participant observation in qualitative research as non-controversial. Class discussions led to the understanding that emphasizing observations may lead us to the Aristotelian ideal of empirical science; (h) Formulation of hypotheses, manipulation of variables, and the quest for causal variables was considered by many teachers to be equivalent to the scientific method. Discussions facilitated the understanding that this led to idealization and thus helped to reduce the complexity of a problem.

Journal

Quality & QuantitySpringer Journals

Published: Jan 5, 2008

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 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

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