Read three articles. Write a 2 page single spaced summary/reflection

timer Asked: Oct 20th, 2018
account_balance_wallet $9.99

Question Description

A return to methodological commitment summary should be one page.

Book Review summary should be half a page.

Qualitative Inquiry and Research summary should be half a page.

Total of 2 pages single spaced. Please include some direct citations in the summary.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Second Edition QUALITATIVE INQUIRY& RESEARCH DESIGN Choosing Among Five Approaches . John W Creswell University of Nebraska, Lincoln (i.\SAGE Publications Thousand Oaks • London 11 New Delhi 2 Philosophical, Paradigm, and Interpretive Frameworks T he research design process in qualitative research begins with philosophical assumptions that the inquirers make in deciding to undertake a qualitative study. In addition, researchers bring their own worldviews, paradigms, or sets of beliefs to the research project, and these inform the conduct and writing of the qualitative study. Further, in many approaches to qualitative research, the researchers use interpretive and theoretical frameworks to further shape the study. Good research requires making these assumptions, paradigms, and frameworks explicit in the writing of a study, and, at a minimum, to be aware that they influence the conduct of inquiry. The purpose of this chapter is to make explicit the assumptions made when one chooses to conduct qualitative research, the worldviews or paradigms available in qualitative research, and the diverse interpretive and theoretical frameworks that shape the content of a qualitative project. Five philosophicalassumptions lead to an individual's choice of qualitative research: ontology, epistemology, axiology, rhetorical, and methodological assumptions. The qualitative researcher chooses a stance on each of these assumptions, and the choice has practical implications for designing and conducting research. Although the paradigms of research continually evolve, four will be mentioned that represent the beliefs of researchers that they bring to qualitative research: postpositivism, constructivism, advocacy/participatory, and pragmatism. Each represents a different paradigm for making claims about knowledge, and the characteristics of each differ considerably. Again, 15 16 Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design the practice of research is informed. Finally, the chapter will address theoret· ical frameworks, those interpretive communities that have developed within qualitative research that informs specific procedures of research. Several of these frameworks will be discussed: postmodern theories, feminist research, critical theory and critical race theory, queer theory, and disability inquiry. The three elements discussed above-assumptions, paradigms, and interpretive frameworks-often overlap and reinforce each other. For the purposes of our discussion, they will be discussed separately. Questions for Discussion .. When qualitative researchers chose a qualitative study, what philosophical assumptions are being implicitly acknowledged? • When qualitative researchers bring their beliefs to qualitative research, what alternative paradigm stances are they likely to use? • When qualitative researchers select a framework as a lens for their study, what interpretive or theoretical frameworks are they likely to use? o In the practice of designing or conducting qualitative research, how are dons, paradigms, and interpretive and/or theoretical frameworks used? Philosophical Assumptions In the choice of qualitative research, inquirers make certain assumptions. These philosophical assumptions consist of a stance toward the nature of reality (ontology), how the researcher knows what she or he knows (epistemology), the role of values in the research (axiology), the language of research (rhetoric), and the methods used in the process (methodology) (Creswell, 2003). These assumptions, shown in Table 2.1, are adapted from the "axiomatic" issues advanced by Guba and Lincoln (1988). However, my discussion departs from their analysis in three ways. I do not contrast qualitative or naturalistic assumptions with conventional or positive assumptions as they do, acknowledging that today qualitative research is legitimate in its own right and does not need to be compared to achieve respectability. I add to their issues one of my own concerns, the rhetorical assumption, recognizing that one needs to attend to the language and terms of qualitative inquiry. Finally, I discuss the practical implications of each assumption in an attempt to bridge philosophy and practice. The ontological issue relates to the nature of reality and its characteristics. When researchers conduct qualitative research, they are embracing the idea of multiple realities. Different researchers embrace different realities, as Philosophical, Paradigm, and Interpretive Frameworks Table 2.1 17 Philosophical Assumptions With Implications for Practice Implications for Practice (Examples) Assumption Question Characteristics Ontological What is the nature of reality? Reality is subjective and multiple, as seen by participants in the study Researcher uses quotes and themes in words of participants and provides evidence of different perspectives Epistemological What is the relationship between the researcher and that being researched? Researcher attempts to lessen distance between himself or herself and that being researched Researcher col1aborates, spends time in field with participants, and becomes an "insider" Axiological What is the role of values? Researcher acknowledges that research is valueladen and that biases are present Researcher openly discusses values that shape the narrative and includes his or her own interpretation in conjunction with the interpretations of participants Rhetorical What is the language of research? Researcher writes in a literary, informal style using the personal voice and uses qualitative terms and limited definitions Researcher uses an engaging style of narrative, may use first-person pronoun, and employs the language of qualitative research Methodological What is the process of research? Researcher uses inductive logic, studies the topic within its context, and uses an emerging design Researcher works with particulars (details) before generalizations, describes in detail the context of the study, and continually revises questions from experiences in the field . """"",,,',' ,. ""', .... ===="",,=' -=" 18 Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design do also the individuals being studied and the readers of a qualitative study. When studying individuals,qualitative researchers conduct a study with the intent of reporting these multiple realities. Evidence of multiple realities includes the use of multiple quotes based on the actual words of different individuals and presenting different perspectives from individuals. When writers compile a phenomenology, they report how individuals participating in the study view their experiences differently (Moustakas, 1994). With the epistemological assumption, conducting a qualitative study means that researchers try to get as close as possible to the participants being studied. In practice, qualitative researchers conduct their studies in the "field," where the participants live and work-these are important contexts for understanding what the participants are saying. The longer researchers stay in the "field" or get to know the participants, the more they "know what they know" from firsthand information. A good ethnography requires prolonged stay at the research site (Wolcott, 1999). In short, the researcher tries to minimize the "distance" or "objective separateness" (Guba & Lincoln, 1988, p. 94) between himself or herself and those being researched. All researchers bring values to a study, but qualitative researchers like to make explicit those values. This is the axiological assumption that characterizes qualitative research. How does the researcher implement this assumption in practice? In a qualitative study, the inquirers admit the value-laden nature of the study and actively report their values and biases as well as the value-laden nature of information gathered from the field. We say that they "position themselves" in a study. In an interpretive biography, for example, the researcher's presence is apparent in the text, and the author admits that the stories voiced represent an interpretation and presentation of the author as much as the subject of the study (Denzin, 1989a). Researchers are notorious for providing labels and names for aspects of qualitative methods (Koro-Ljungberg & Greckhamer, 2005). There is a rhetoric for the discourse of qualitative research that has evolved over time. Qualitative researchers tend to embrace the rhetorical assumption that the writing needs to be personal and literary in form. For example, they use metaphors, they refer to themselves using the first-person pronoun, "I," and they tell stories with a beginning, middle, and end, sometimes crafted chronologically, as in narrative research (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000). Instead of using quantitative terms such as "internal validity," "external validity," "generalizability," and "objectivity," the qualitative researcher writing a case study may employ terms such as "credibility," "transferability," "dependability," and "confirmability" (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) or "validation" (Angen, 2000), as well as naturalistic generalizations (Stake, 1995). Words such as "discover," and "meaning" form Philosophical, Paradigm, and Interpretive Frameworks 19 the glossary of emerging qualitative terms (see Schwandt, 2001) and are important rhetorical markers in writing purpose statements and research questions (as discussed later). The language of the qualitative researcher becomes personal, literary, and based on definitions that evolve during a study rather than being defined by the researcher. Seldom does one see an extensive "Definition of Terms" section in a qualitative study, because the terms as defined by participants are of primary importance. The procedures of qualitative research, or its methodology, are characterized as inductive, emerging, and shaped by the researcher's experience in collecting and analyzing the data. The logic that the qualitative researcher follows is inductive, from the ground up, rather than handed down entirely from a theory or from the perspectives of the inquirer. Sometimes the research questions change in the middle of the study to reflect better the types of questions needed to understand the research problem. In response, 'the data collection strategy, planned before the study, needs to be modified to accompany the new questions. During the data analysis, the researcher follows a path of analyzing the data to develop an increasingly detailed knowledge of the topic being studied. Paradigms or Worldviews The assumptions reflect a particular stance that researchers make when they choose qualitative research. After researchers make this choice, they then further shape their research by bringing to the inquiry paradigms or worldviews. A paradigm or worldview is "a basic set of beliefs that guide action" (Guba, 1990, p. 17). These beliefs have been called paradigms (Lincoln & Guba, 2000; Mertens, 1998); philosophical assumptions, epistemologies, and ontologies (Crotty, 1998); broadly conceived research methodologies (Neuman, 2000); and alternative knowledge claims (Creswell, 2003). Paradigms used by qualitative researchers vary with the set of beliefs they bring to research, and the types have continually evolved over time (contrast the paradigms of Denzin and Lincoln, 1994, with the paradigms of Denzin and Lincoln, 2005). Individuals may also use multiple paradigms in their qualitative research that are compatible, such as constructionist and participatory worldviews (see Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). In this discussion, I focus on four worldviews that inform qualitative research and identify how these worldviews shape the practice of research. The four are postpositivism, constructivism, advocacy/participatory, and pragmatism (Creswell, 2003). It is helpful to see the major elements of each paradigm, and how they inform the practice of research differently. 20 Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design Postpositivism Those who engage in qualitative research using a belief system grounded in postpositivism will take a scientific approach to research. The approach has the elements of being reductionistic, logical, an emphasis on empirical data collection, cause-and-effect oriented, and deterministic based on a priori theories. We can see this approach at work among individuals with prior quantitative research training, and in fields such as the health sciences in which qualitative research is a new approach to research and must be couched in terms acceptable to quantitative researchers and funding agents (e.g., the a priori use of theory; see Barbour, 2000). A good overview of postpostivist approaches is available in Phillips and Burbules (2000). In terms of practice, postpositivist researchers will likely view inquiry as a series of logically related steps, believe in multiple perspectives from participants rather than a single reality, and espouse rigorous methods of qualitative data collection and analysis. They will use multiple levels of data analysis for rigor, employ computer programs to assist in their analysis, encourage the use of validity approaches, and write their qualitative studies in the form of scientific reports, with a structure resembling quantitative approaches (e.g., problem, questions, data collection, results, conclusions). My approach to qualitative research has been identified as belonging to postpositivism (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005), as have the approaches of others (e.g., Taylor & Bogdan, 1998). I do tend to use this belief system, although I would not characterize all of my research as framed within a postpositivist qualitative orientation (e.g., see the constructivist approach in McVea, Harter, McEntarffer, and Creswell, 1999, and the social justice perspective in Miller and Creswell, 1998). In their discussion here of the five approaches, for example, I emphasize the systematic procedures of grounded theory found in Strauss and Corbin (1990), the analytic steps in phenomenology (Moustakas, 1994), and the alternative analysis strategies of Yin (2003). Social Constructivism Social constructivism (which is often combined with interpretivism; see Mertens, 1998) is another worldview. In this worldview, individuals seek understanding of the world in which they live and work. They develop subjective meanings of their experiences-meanings directed toward certain objects or things. These meanings are varied and multiple, leading the researcher to look for the complexity of views rather than narrow the meanings into a few categories or ideas. The goal of research, then, is to rely as much as possible on the participants' views of the situation. Often these Philosophical, Paradigm, and Interpretive Frameworks 21 subjective meanings are negotiated socially and historically. In other words, they are nbt simply imprinted on individuals but are formed through interaction 'with others (hence social constructivism) and through historical and cultural norms that operate in individuals' lives. Rather than starting with a theory (as in postpositivism), inquirers generate or inductively develop a theory or pattern of meaning. Examples of recent writers who have summarized this position are Crotty (1998), Lincoln and Guba (2000), Schwandt (2001), and Neuman (2000). In terms of practice, the questions become broad and general so that the participants can construct the meaning of a situation, a meaning typically forged in discussions or interactions with other persons. The more open-ended the questioning, the better, as the researcher listens carefully to what people say or do in their life setting. Thus, constructivist researchers often address the "processes" of interaction among individuals. They also focus on the specific 'contexts in which people live and work in order to understand the historical and cultural settings of the participants. Researchers recognize that their own background shapes their interpretation, and they "position themselves" in the research to acknowledge how their interpretation flows from their own personal, cultural, and historical experiences. Thus the researchers make an interpretation of what they find, an interpretation shaped by their own experiences and background. The researcher's intent, then, is to make sense (or interpret) the meanings others have about the world. This is why qualitative research is often called "interpretive" research. In the discussion here of the five approaches, we will see the constructivist worldview manifest in phenomenological studies, in which individuals describe their experiences (Moustakas, 1994), and in the grounded theory perspective of Charmaz (2006), in which she grounds her theoretical orientation in the views or perspectives of individuals. Advocacy/Participatory Researchers might use an alternative worldview, advocacy/participatory, because the postpositivist imposes structural laws and theories that do not fit marginalized individuals or groups and the constructivists do not go far enough in advocating for action to help individuals. The basic tenet of this worldview is that research should contain an action agenda for reform that may change the lives of participants, the institutions in which they live and work, or even the researchers' lives. The issues facing these marginalized groups are of paramount importance to study, issues such as oppression, domination, suppression, alienation, and hegemony. As these issues are studied and exposed, the researchers provide a voice for these participants, 22 Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design raising their consciousness and improving their lives. Kemmis and Wilkinson (1998) summarize the key features of advocacy/participatory practice: ., Participatory action is recursive or dialectical and is focused on bringing about change in practices. Thus, at the end of advocacy/participatory studies, researchers advance an action agenda for change . ., It is focused on helping individuals free themselves from coristraints found in the media, in language, in work procedures, and in the relationships of power in educational settings. Advocacy/participatory studies often begin with an important issue or stance about the problems in society, such as the need for empowerment . ., It is emancipatory in that it helps unshackle people from the constraints of irrational and unjust structures that limit self-development and self-determination. The aim of advocacy/participatory studies is to create a political debate and discussion so that change will occur. s It is practical and collaborative because it is inquiry completed "with" others rather than or "to" others. In this spirit, advocacy/participatory authors engage the participants as active collaborators in their inquiries. Other researchers that embrace this worldview are Fay (1987) and Heron and Reason (1997). In practice, this worldview has shaped several approaches to inquiry. Specific social issues (e.g., domination, oppression, inequiry) help frame the research questions. Not wanting to further marginalize the individuals participating in the research, advocacy/participatory inquirers collaborate with research participants. They may ask participants to help with designing the questions, collecting the data, analyzing it, and shaping the final report of the research. In this way, the "voice" of the participants becomes heard throughout the research process. The research also contains an action agenda for reform, a specific plan for addressing the injustices of the marginalized group. These practices will be seen in the ethnographic approaches to research found in Denzin and Lincoln (2005) and in the advocacy tone of some forms of narrative research (Angrosino, 1994). Pragmatism There are many forms of pragmatism. Individuals holding this worldview focus on the outcomes of the research-the actions, situations, and consequences of inquiry-rather than antecedent conditions (as in postpositiv ...
Purchase answer to see full attachment

Tutor Answer

School: UC Berkeley

Hey there, I have posted the answers, kindly confirm and contact me if you have any questions, thank you.



Article Summaries



A Return to Methodological Commitment
This article clearly outlines the epistemological and ontological commitments which form
the basis of the methodological commitments of the inquiry of narratives. Since the coming out
of narrative inquiry as a social science in research methodology, 25 years ago, researchers have
incorporated the idea of narrative inquiry to name their methodology. In this inquiry, the
occurrence is contemplated narratively and uses the thoughts of relational knowing and being,
recognition to the artistry of and within experience, and reactivity to the coinciding stories which
bring together in research relationships. The article attends to the living, telling, retelling, and
reliving of stories of experience (Caine, Estefan, & Clandinin, 2013).
Narrative inquiry is based on its significance on relational commitment, whereby the
social essence and perception of an experience grows of a relational commitment to a research
puzzle. It is important for the inquirers in the narrative to carefully determine who they are, and
who they are becoming in the research puzzle. Researchers find out the position of relationships
when studying and interpreting experiences narratively. When retelling a narrative, we are
reminded that a narrative inquiry is essentially a relational research methodology. While it is
research, it is also a transaction between people. This makes concerns regarding living well with
others and ethical issues, central to the inquiry. While we contemplate exper...

flag Report DMCA

Goes above and beyond expectations !

Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors