More on Qualitative Research

Role of the Researcher lecture notes:

In qualitative research, the key tool for data gathering and analysis is the researcher.  Qualitative researchers need to be: 

• tolerant of ambiguity.  

• This also means the researcher must "think on her feet," since there isn't a strict step-by-step method of doing things and the nature of qualitative research means even the methods might need to be flexible.  The researcher and participant work together to construct meaning, and there can be layers and even contradictory evidence.  
• Question:  What is the difference between theories arising from qualitative research and generalities.  Are the theories generated useful (to librarians, I guess, or other researchers?) or might they lead to ignoring those who fall outside the theories?

• sensitive to the information being collected 
• sensitive to the research participant, and 
• treat participant as a "co-researcher."
• do not make participant feel their input is being evaluated or judged
• dress to "blend in"
• good communicators.
• establish good rapport with participant
• be an active listener (listen to what the participant is saying, they must listen for the participant’s “inner voice” (p. 78) and they have to listen while being aware of the process and the substance of what is being said.)
• write well

Boostron's stages of a researcher (what the researcher sees):  video camera, play goer, evaluator, subjected inquirer, insider, and finally reflective interpreter.  It's interesting to see that, with qualitative research, there is absolutely a learning curve for the researcher, and one must work up to the point where multitasking as a "reflective interpreter" is possible.  How long does this process take?  Do researchers practice observing so they can get to the "reflective interpreter" stage before they draw conclusions and publish papers?


Case Study Lecture Notes:

Merriam's thoughts on the purpose of case study research:  "to gain an in-depth understanding of the situation and meaning for those involved...Insights gleaned from case studies can directly influence policy, practice, and future research."

Subject is defined:  a person, a specific group of people (for ex, a class), a policy, or a program.

Four types:  ethnographic, historical, interpretive, and evaluative


Can also be done as a multi-case study, with several subjects.  Data is collected and used to make generalizations.  In-depth, multiple methods of data collection.

"Another emphasis in qualitative research generally and case study research specifically is an understanding of a complex phenomenon from the participants’ perspectives rather than the researcher’s. This insider’s perspective, or emic, is in contrast to the etic, or outsider’s view of the phenomenon being studied."  (de Groot lecture) 

I see how case studies would be helpful because they allow researchers to gather so much data, with such specific context, and to really make meaning from it.  How difficult is it to get participants to join and stick with a case study?  Are longitudinal studies typically case studies?  If the purpose of a case study is to examine a specific instance (rather than to forward theories or influence policy), is the idea to collect several case studies on the same phenomenon and then look at the data from all of them as a whole?  Are there people who do this (analyze the data from multiple case studies), but who don't actually gather the information themselves?  What is the practical value (pragmatist alert) of an isolated case study?

Triangulation:  process of using multiple methods/observers/materials/perspectives in a single study as an alternative to validation.  Not an attempt to replicate findings (as in quantitative, scientific research), but an attempt to show different ways the same finding/phenomenon is being seen.  Question:  does "tri" mean there needs to be three ways?  Is this a rule, or a guideline?

Member Checking:  participants look over researcher observations and conclusions and offer their input.  "The participant is “asked to review material for accuracy and palatability”  Question:  are there cases when this might not be appropriate (other than with small children, and then their parents could do this)?  When there is a "conflict" regarding data or interpretations, is more weight given to the researcher or the participant?  Or is the "conflict" simply recorded as part of the study?

Value (to answer my previous questions):

1. Shows phenomenon from participant's perspective,
2. in-depth understanding can be gained,
3. Stake (1998) notes that case studies are of value “in refining theory and suggesting complexities for further investigation, as well as helping to establish the limits of generalizability” (p. 104).  (Good for a few of my questions!)
4. influence on policymakers and programs:  case studies provide ways “to explore the processes and dynamics of practice in order to develop useful insights into educational practice which can inform policy, practice, and future research (Ellis, 1997, p. 2).  Question:  do single case studies really have that much influence on policy?  

Strengths and Weaknesses:

Merriam's 4 strengths:  case study is a “way of investigating complex social units with multiple variables” (p. 41); it can provide a detailed, rich description of a phenomenon; it can expand a reader’s experiences through the insights provided by the research; and it can work to advance knowledge in a particular field of study.

Merriam's 5 weaknesses:  length of time and amount of money involved in this kind of research can be more substantial than in other kinds of research; the final product or report can be long because of the large amount of data collected and interpreted; it relies heavily on the researcher’s skills and abilities to collect, analyze, interpret, and report on the phenomenon being studied; researcher bias is possible; and because case studies are simply a “slice of life” (p. 42) and not the whole picture, they can be oversimplified or exaggerated.

From the lecture:  The merits of the design outweigh the weaknesses as long as the method is suited for the research problem.  In other words, if case study is the right way to examine a question or problem, then the strengths outweigh the weaknesses.  So research should be designed with the question/problem in mind, not based on strengths/weaknesses of an individual method?

Risks of case studies include oversimplification, audiences forgetting they are seeing a "snapshot" rather than a whole picture and drawing inappropriate conclusions based on that, the fact that the researcher is the observer/collector/analyzer of all data, and researcher bias (leaving out details that might influence conclusions, or putting too great an emphasis on other details.

I will come back to this later and glean some questions to post on the message boards (if any are still unanswered at that point).