Qualitative Research Design (Creswell, 2007- Ch. 8)

 

In Chapter 8, Creswell (2007) successfully presented how to deal with data analysis and representation. Creswell explained effective three analysis strategies in 3 steps (p. 148):

Step #1: Data analysis in qualitative research consists of preparing and organization the data

Step #2: Reducing the data into themes through a process of coding and condensing the codes

Step #3: representing the data in figures, tables, or a discussion.

Also, explaining in detail developing codes or categories, and coding process required in qualitative research, Creswell mentions several cautionary issues arising from such courses of actions.

Unfortunately, Creswell’s “interpreting the data (interpretation)” exhibited limitation in which it must be contrasted with a social science construct or idea through the scope of a social science construct or idea or a combination of personal views. Concerning this weakness, the author insists that data analysis may appear tentative, inconclusive, and questionable to postmodern and interpretive researchers. This observation is reminiscent of my memo on Creswell’s comments written on Jan 29^th of 2009:

“The basic concept is that knowledge claims must be set within the conditions of the world today and in the multiple perspectives of class, race, gender, and other group affiliations” (Croswell 207, p. 25), I had asked the following questions: Then, can the world provide “The Truth” that we can completely believe and accept? This is vague (January 29, 09).

 

Today, people possess various and different perspectives. For this reason, interpretation must take into consideration making sense of the data, the “lesson learned” as the author asserts. However, in qualitative research, the points of emphasis brought by postmodern and interpretive researchers are too broad thus perpetuating repetitive questions and ambiguous interpretations rather than seeking plausible interpretation and effective method through research. The purpose of research, I believe, is to suggest credible truth attained through research of discovered or undiscovered facts, theories, and phenomena within the vernacular of research methodology. However, the perspectives and interpretations of postmodern and interpretive researchers are prone to cause errors of creating utter confusion instead of embracing diverse perspectives. Perhaps, what postmodern and interpretive researchers need is dependable truth, not different perspectives.