comps reading - Handbook of Research on Educational Communication and Technology Ch.39 Qualitative Research Issues and Methods

It's been a while since last post, the one on 24th Aug. For one reason, I was busy in using google site to build my resume, as mentioned earlier, though not much progression since then. On the other hand, I think I need to apologize for myself being procrastinated over and over again. It almost tool me one week to finish another comps reading: Handbook of Research on Educational Communication and Technology-Ch.39 Qualitative Research Issues and Methods: An Introduction for Educational Technologists. Though it is a big book and the chapter I read was really many pages long, yet I admit these are only excuese. It's really only a matter of being persistent and concentrated enough to determine if you can succeed.

Anywyay, here's the excerpt, three pages long in MS word. Though lengthy it is, I think this does provide a comprehensive overview for qualitative study in our field. With other revelant textbook handy, now I don't think I need to print the CH.39 out. In a way, I save some small money, which is always something I did as usual.

1. Borg and Gall (1989) name the two approaches (i.e. qualitative and quantitative) positivistic and naturalistic, comparing them on the dimensions of the vision of the nature of reality, the relationship of the researcher to the research subject, issues of generalizability, discussion of causality, and the role of values (P.1046).

2. Early research efforts often used qualitative methods to evaluate and describe the use of media in the classroom (P.1047).

3. Although not researchers per se, instructional systems designers have always used the qualitative methods of surveys, interviews, and observations during the front-end analysis and evaluation phases of development. […] Driscoll (1995) suggests that educational technologists select research paradigms based on what they perceive as the most critical questions. […..] Many teachers, trainers, administrators, managers, community members, and instructional leaders contend that the evolution of new technologies will continue to change the nature of teaching, training, instruction, and learning (Ambron & Hooper, 1990, 1998; Lambert & Sallis, 1987; Schwartz, 1987; Schwier, 1987; U.S. Congress, OTA, 1988). (P.1048)

4. Qualitative Research Methods:

(1) Grounded theory

(2) Participants Observation

(3) Nonparticipant observation

(4) Interviews—Goetz and LeCompte (1984) describe three techniques for structured interviews: confirmation instruments, participant-construct instrument, and projective devices (P.1057).

¨ Confirmation instruments verify the applicability of data gathered from key-informant interviews or observations across segments of the population being studied.

¨ Participant-construct instruments may be used to measure degrees of feelings that individuals have about phenomena or in having them classify events, situations techniques, or concepts from their perspectives.

¨ Projective devices such as photographs, drawings, other visuals, or other objects may be used to elicit individuals’ opinions or feelings, helping researchers clarify what is going on in the situation.

(5) Documents and artifacts analysis (P.1058)

¨ Goetz and LeCompte (1984, P.155) provide guidelines for artifact collection, identifying for activities in this type of method: locating artifacts, identifying the material, analyzing it, and evaluating it. They recommend that the more informed the researcher is about the subjects and setting, the more useful artifacts may be identified and the more easily access may be gained to those artifacts.

¨ The meaning of artifacts is often intensely personal and subjective, so that verification of findings through triangulation is recommended.

5. Overall approaches to analyze qualitative data—based on the philosophical approach underlying the study (P.1059). Miles and Huberman (1994) outline three overall approaches to analyzing qualitative data:

¨ An “interpretive” approach would be phenoniological in nature or based on social interactionism.

¨ A “collaborative social research” is often used by action researchers in partnership composed of members of many, and sometimes opposing, organizations.

¨ “Social anthropology” relies primarily on ethnography, providing detailed and rich descriptions across multiple data resources. Goetz and LeCompte (1994) call this “recursive approach.”

6. Miles and Huberman (1994, P.10) state that qualitative data analysis consists of “three concurrent flows of activity: data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing/verification.”

7. Researchers may derive patterns in ways Goetz and LeCompte call “analytical induction (P.179),” reviewing data for categories of phenomena, defining sets of relationships, developing hypothesis, collecting more data, and refining hypotheses accordingly. Those using a grounded-theory approach may employ “constant comparison.” […..] Field notes consist of observations and the researcher’s interpretations. Bogdan and Biklen (1984) call former content “the descriptive part (P.108)” and the latter “the reflective part (P.121).”

8. Coding data (P.1060):

(1) Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest that data can be coded descriptively or interpretively.

(2) Bogdan and Biklen (1992) recommend reading data over at least several times to begin to develop a coding scheme.

(3) Goetz and LeCompte describe coding to form a taxonomic analysis, a sort of outline of what is related to what, and in what ways.

9. Criteria for evaluating qualitative studies (P.1063)—validity can be created in three ways:

(1) multiple observers in teams can cross-check data and patterns continually

(2) the researcher can refine and test propositions and hypotheses throughout the study, in a grounded-theory approach

(3) the researcher can write using “verisimilitude” or “vraisemblance” (P.383), or writing that makes the world of the subjects real to the reader; the reader recognizes the authenticity of the results. (member check)

10. Lincoln and Guba (1985) agree with others that conventional criteria are inappropriate for qualitative studies and that alternate criteria do exist: a) credibility; b) transferability; c) dependability; and d) confirmability. Erlandson et al (1993) describe the following techniques for ensuring the quality of a qualitative study (P.1064):

(1) prolonged engagement

(2) persistent observation

(3) triangulation

(4) referential adequacy

(5) peer debriefing

(6) member checking

(7) reflexive journal

(8) thick description

(9) purposive sampling

(10) audit trail