March 13, 09 (Importance of Writing about Qualitative Research; Creswell, 07- Ch. 7)

In Chapter 7, Creswell, strongly address the IMPORTANCE of WRITING ABOUT QUALITATIVE RESEARCH.

Here are some tips it would be useful for my research from Creswell.

Good Questions about Qualitative writing:

Also, there is increased concern about the impact of the writing on the participants.  

-       How will they see the write up?

-       Will they be marginalized because of it?

-       Will they be offended?

-       Will they hide their true feelings and perspect1ves?

-       Have the participants reviewed the material, and interpreted, challenged, and dissented from the interpretation \Weis & fine, 2000)?- p. 179

Also, the writing has an impact on the reader, who also makes an interpretation of the account and may form an entirely different interpretation than the author or the participants. – p. 179

Language may ‘kill” whatever it touches, and qualitative researchers understand that it is impossible to truly “say” something (va Manen, 2006). – Must be careful to remember!!!

 

MUST REMEMBER ALL QUALITATIVE RESEARCHERS ABOUT THEIR WRITINGS:

Should I write about what people say or recognize that sometimes they cannot remember or choose not to remember?

-       What are my political reflexivities that need to come into my report?

-       Has my writing connected the voices and stories of individuals back to the set of historic, structural, and economic relations in which they are situated?

-       How far should I go in theorizing the words of participants?

-       Have I considered how my words could be used for progressive, conservative and repressive social policies?

-       Have I backed into the passive voice and decoupled my responsibility from my interpretation?

-       To what extent has my analysis (and writing) offered an alternative to common sense or the dominant discourse?

Phenomenological Structure

Those who write about phenomenology (e.g., Moustakas, 1994) provide more extensive attention to overall writing structures than to embedded ones.

 

매우중요: The highly structured approach to analysis by Moustakas (1994) presents a detailed form for composing a phenomenological study.

The analysis steps-

-       Identifying significant statements,

-       Creating meaning units,

-       Clustering themes,

-       Advancing textural and structural descriptions,

-       Making a composite description of textural

-       Structural descriptions into an exhaustive description of the essential invariant structure (or essence) of the experience-provide a clearly articulated procedure for organizing a report (Moustakas, 1994).

 

In my experience, individuals are quite surprised to find lightly structured approaches to phenomenological studies on sensitive topics (e.g., “bein51eft out,” “insomnia,” “being criminally victimized,” “life’s leaning,” “voluntarily changing one’s career during midlife,” “longing,” leaning,” “voluntarily changing one’s career during midlife,” “longing,” “adults being abused as children”; Moustakas, 1994, p. 153).

 

Moustakes (1994) recommends “Structure” in phenomenological research:

-       Chapter 1: Introduction and statement of topic and outline. Topics include an autobiographical statement about experiences of the author leading to the topic, incidents that lead to a puzzlement or curiosity about the topic, the social implications and relevance of the topic, new knowledge and contribution to the profession to emerge from studying the topic, knowledge to be gained by the researcher, the research question, and the terms of the study.

 

-       Chapter 2: Review of the relevant literature. Topics include a review of databases searched, an introduction to the literature, a procedure for selecting studies, the conduct of these studies and themes that emerged in them, a summary of core findings and statements as to how the present research differs from prior research (in question, model, methodology, and data collected).

 

 

-       Chapter 3: Conceptual framework of the model. Topics include the theory to be used as well as the concepts and processes related to the research design, (Chapters 3 and 4 might be combined).

 

-       Chapter 4: Methodology. Topics include the methods and procedures in preparing to conduct the study, in collecting data, and in organizing, analyzing, and synthesizing the data.

 

 

-       Chapter 5: Presentation of data. Topics include verbatim examples of data collection, data analysis, a synthesis of data, horizonalization, meaning units, clustered themes, textural and structural descriptions, and a synthesis of meanings and essences of the experience.

 

-       Chapter 6: Summary, implications, and outcomes. Sections include a summary of the study, statements about how the findings differ from those in the literature review, recommendations for future studies, the identification of limitations, a discussion about implications, and the inclusion of a creative closure that speaks to the essence of the study and its inspiration for the researcher. 

Creswell, 2007- Ch. 9

 

In Chapter 9, Creswell (2007) successfully described writing a qualitative study as structure. Creswell also cited rhetorical issues of which qualitative researcher and writer must be aware. The issues include writing reflexively and with representations, the audience for the writing, the encoding for the audience, and the use of quotes. Then, the author dealt with each of the five approaches (narrative, phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, and case study) of inquiry and overall rhetorical structures as well as embedded rhetorical structures in specific ways. Finally, Creswell concluded this chapter with differences in writing structures among the five approaches.

In Chapter 9, I, out of several topics Criswell stresses, find the section on “Reflexivity and Representations in Writing” agreeable.

As the author pointed out, interpretation can be transmitted differently according to the readers’ cultural, social, gender, class, and political backgrounds. For this reason, “positioned” and “within a stance” are essential in writing a Qualitative study. Also qualitative researchers must be flexible to and embrace a wide range of readership (p. 179).

As a learning novice of qualitative research, I am not ready to acknowledge several analysis steps in the five approaches of qualitative study by Criswell. Frankly, I felt as though I had gained technical and intellectual information about qualitative study in writing after reading Chapter 9. However, I remain skeptical about their effectiveness and legitimacy in my research area. Currently, I am conducting a research for this semester using phenomenological methodology (structures, analysis, observation) Creswell (2007) and Moustakes (1994) mention. As I always realize, the purpose of qualitative research is writing and informing the readers by clearly recording the findings from research thus inspiring them and engaging them in active research with renewed motivation. For the remainder of the chapters in Creswell (2007), I attempt to portray myself learning qualitative research through the research process during the current semester.  

 

 

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.

Qualitative Research Design (Creswell, 2007)

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions (2nd Ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

In Chapter 5, through five different short articles that illustrate good models, Creswell (2007) successfully presents basic characteristics of five methodologies that reflect qualitative research in the social, behavioral, and health science literature. The five methods of approach Creswell describes are for more effective qualitative research design and procedures. They may be summed up as follows: First, a narrative study is to examine single individual life experiences when the person is willing to share and documents or other archival material is accessible. Second, a phenomenology study is to focus on understanding of a concept or phenomenon or the meaning of the lived experiences of individuals about the phenomenon. Third, a grounded theory is to develop a theory. Fourth, ethnography is to describe or determine the behaviors of a culture-sharing group. Fifth, a case study is to research the study of an issue explored, bounded in time or place and contexts. Unfortunately, Creswell’s five methods of approach were largely built upon personal experience and various literature on qualitative research within the realms of the social, behavioral, and health science literature. His methodology displays some of the limitations and shortcomings of qualitative research. This paper identifies one major merit of postmodern perspectives, one of qualitative research interpretations and one major flaw of qualitative research. 

The first matter of great concern for the merit of postmodern perspectives in relation to qualitative research is its ability to establish the standards of interpretation within various perspectives. Creswell defines postmodern perspectives as follows: “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” (p. 25). “Within the conditions of the world today” and “in the multiple perspectives” refers to observation and analysis of events and incidents from various angles. For instance, in Appendix C, Cognitive Representations of AIDS (a phenomenological study) may offer postmodern perspectives on AIDS patients’ cognitive representations of their illness using categorization under gender, nationality, and age. However, a postmodern perspective, while beneficial for interpreting incidents from various mindsets, may not lend itself to a clear, concise definition because of its variations. 

The second matter of concern regarding possible flaws of qualitative research is ambiguous, personal definition of terms. “Definition of terms” derived from multiple literatures offers cogent standards of interpretations of certain incidents and personal experience from an objective point of view, thus preventing bias. According to Creswell (2007), such “definitions of terms” lack academic weight in qualitative research for participants’ definitions are of more significance. If a research project only vaguely portrays its essential quality of subjectivity, the credibility of the researcher may be at stake. In this respect, a qualitative researcher has to maintain the perfect balance between personal experience and theory or perspectives.