QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS

These notes began their evolution as lectures given in a class in Qualitative Research in Education, taught on two occasions at The University of Georgia (1995 and 1996). They were further developed and refined for a pre-conference half-day seminar for the Christian Association for Psychological Studies (CAPS) in Chattanooga, Tennessee (1998). They were again revised for presentation at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in 1999 as a half-day seminar for the faculty of education and counseling. The following morning doctoral students were given a brief introduction to qualitative research, which is now available in four sections for downloading (the presentation to students has been edited and illustrative videos and pictures of children in the school, charts of data, and drawings have been added). Click on the title of each section to download these videos:

Part One            

Part Two           

Part Three          

Part Four             

The first edition of these web pages was created  for the Southwestern presentations and later used in part for an afternoon seminar for doctoral faculty and students in psychology at Wheaton College. The two main sources used are:

LeCompte, M. D., & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design
in educational research, 2nd ed. San Diego, Cal.: Academic Press.  and
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 2nd. ed.
Newbury Park, Cal.: Sage Publications. The latter source is now available in a third edition (2001).

[You may click on underlined green type for more details.]

About two hours and forty minutes of audio is available from the CAPS seminar that generally follows the first four parts, although there are asides where material is presented out of sequence, often because of questions raised during the session. These audio segments, ranging from 30 minutes to 45 minutes, can be played as you go through the notes, but it will probably help to scan all five sections of the notes prior to listening to the tapes. You may also save these audio files to your computer for later use by right clicking on the titles.

Introduction and Overview  (corresponds with first section of Part One)

Emic, Etic, and Other Matters    (corresponds with second section of Part One)

Sampling and Roles (corresponds with Part Two and Part Three)

Data Collection, Triangulation, and Analysis (corresponds with Part Four primarily)

[Note: Audio corresponding to Part Five is not available, but there are comments on the other segments that relate to data analysis.]

I have received many positive comments about this outline over the last several years from a wide variety of readers in the North America, South America, the United Kingdom, and many other countries. Several graduate students and faculty have commented that this summary is one of the easiest to understand sources introducing qualitative research. I am very grateful that people have found these pages to be of help, and I hope that remains the case for future readers. Of course they represent my particular take on qualitative research, which emphasizes the more classic designs and ethnographic roots of qualitative work in contrast with many qualitative books published in the 1990s and 2000s that have a more postmodern influence. While  there are important insights to be learned from newer perspectives, I belive there is considerable value in affirming more empirically grounded forms of qualitative work. To me, conclusions using some of the newer approaches need to be held very tentatively until they can be considered in greater detail using the more robust methods found in classic qualitative--as well as quantitative--methods. Another emphasis you will find here is the combining of qualitative and quantitative perspectives, which probably has occurred far more often than generally recognized, even in early research conducted in psychology, education, and other fields of study. One final emphasis should be recognized--my emphasis upon faith and spirituality, which is highlighted occasionally in the notes and even more often in the audio. I hope this is not a distraction, and perhaps it will be a catalyst for further thinking in this area by those of various faiths and those who do not share such faith. One most valuable contributions of the postmodern era is the increased openness to differing perspectives, including affirmation of the spiritual aspects of humanity.

--Don Ratcliff January, 2005

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION

[My background]

[The Master Ethnographer]

Definition of qualitative research:

"Qualitative research is a loosely defined category of research designs or models, all of which elicit verbal, visual, tactile, olfactory, and gustatory data in the form of descriptive narratives like field notes, recordings, or other transcriptions from audio- and videotapes and other written records and pictures or films." --Judith Preissle

Also called : interpretive research, naturalistic research, phenomenological research [although this can mean a specific kind of qualitative research as used by some], descriptive research.

No nice neat definition really encapsulates qualitative research. It's as much a perspective as it is method.

My biases:

• I appreciate both quantitative and qualitative; have conducted published research with both and teach both.
• Qualitative and quantitative are different perspectives, have different assumptions, and look at different things (meanings vs. counting; narrative vs. numbers).
• I advocate blends and combinations. Most researchers know one variety of research over the other, so most combinations emphasize either qualitative or quantitative.
• I am a bit uncomfortable with some of the looser varieties of qualitative work--especially those that deny any objective reality and ideologically-driven views that involve the filtering of all data through presumed conclusions (such as neo-Marxist views). These newer approaches can provide important insights that can fruitfully be explored by using classic approaches, but a fundamental aspect of research--of any kind, I feel--is that research should have the potential to change existing theory and one's perspective on an issue. These seem fundamental to what research is all about.

Classic distinction between qualitative and quantitative. [from Cook & Reichardt (1979)]

 adapted from Cook and Reichardt (1979)

But Cook and Reichardt conclude this is a false dichotemy. These don't have to characterize each form of research (although they often do).

Quantitative methods use numbers and statistics. Examples: experiments, correlational studies using surveys & standardized observational protocols, simulations, supportive materials for case study (e.g. test scores). General sequence:

Qualitative methods use descriptions and categories (words). Examples: open-ended interviews, naturalistic observation (common in anthropology), document analysis, case studies/life histories, descriptive and self-reflective supplements to experiments and correlational studies. General sequence:

Today the trend is toward blending and combining aspects of two approaches.

Three Methods: [Patton]

1. Detailed but open-ended interviews (not highly structured or limited responses).

2. Direct observation (or essentially direct via video).

3. Written documents (work with words and visual data, not numbers).

Easier to quantify, well established guidelines, and stats are increasingly a computer operation (still must understand stat process). In qualitative you analyze conceptually and not just one procedure (like stat). Quantifying has drawback of limited scope (2 or 3 articles from a study vs. book or books and dozens of articles from a good qualitative study).

I believe in and use quantitative research, but see limits and strengths in both approaches.

Ideally need to use both, but they have very different methods and philosophical orientations, so most researchers specialize in one and may dabble in the other.

Old 70's and 80's antagonism is quickly becoming a thing of the past.

OVERVIEW OF PATTON Ch. 1-2

Characteristics of qualitative research.

The 3 kinds of data collection: Interviews, Observation, Documents

Producing 3 kinds of data: Quotations, Descriptions, Excerpts of documents

Resulting in 1 product: Narrative description (sometimes charts and diagrams too).

Very dependent on researcher as a person.

Researcher is an instrument (not a mechanical device or test instrument as in quantitative).

Research and evaluation is art and science. Put a lot of self into it (for example, my dissertation has 5 chapters of methods - how I did it).

Ten Themes: (Patton)

1. Naturalistic - not manipulating situation, watch naturally occurring events, not controlling them.

2. Inductive - categories emerge from observing, creation and exploration centered, theories emerge from data. Often induce hypothesis, test it, then look for other possible explanations or additional hypothesis.

3. Holistic - look at total, what unifies phenomenon, it is a complex system, see overall perspective. Often research and academics study smaller and smaller parts and overlook big picture. Need to try to get larger picture, including the specific and unique context. But can look at specific variables too.

4. Thick description - lots of detail, lots of quotations.

5. Personal contact - share the experience, not trying to be objective outsider. Must know people to understand them, and gain insight by reflecting on those experiences. If try to be objective, probably won't understand their views (but might understand things about them).

6. Dynamic - constant shifting with the changing phenomenon and context: what method fits now and also use trial error (but don't get stuck in one approach that works best at one point in time). Realize things may unfold differently than expected, go with the flow.

7. Unique case selection - not as concerned about generalizeability (actually generalization is a cooperative venture of researcher and reader = researcher describes context fully and reader decides if new context is similar in crucial respects).

8. Context sensitivity - emphasize many aspects of social, historical, and physical context.

9. Empathic - trying to take a view of other person via introspection and reflection, yet non-judgmental. Not subjective in terms of my biases, not objective in terms of no bias, but taking on their perspective to the degree possible. How does reality appear to those studied. Yet also reporting own feelings and experiences as part of the data. Try to defer judgments, but freely admit own feelings (admitting biases and feelings adds to validity - not trying to hide them as sometimes occurs in quantitative).

10. Flexible design - you don't always specify it completely before research; variables and hypotheses and sampling and methods are at least partly emergent - needs to unfold. Need to be able to tolerate ambiguity. Trial and error with categories too - need to reformulate many times. "Recursive." Go from parts to whole and back to parts - cycle back and forth: pull it apart, then reconstruct, pull data apart again, make better reconstruction, etc. Also may need to immerse in social situation, then draw apart to reflect, then immerse again, etc. Use multiple methods, or many as feasible, as long as get better picture of what is happening and how it is understood - even use quantitative methods.

LeCOMPTE AND PREISSLE Ch. 1

(Historical, disciplinary, and theoretical backgrounds)

Ethnography is process (method of doing research and analysis) and product (the book, article, dissertation).

Some disagreement on ethnography - how big a group to be cultural group? School? or whole culture? Harry Wolcott - a key person in educational ethnography says school in its community, others say study of a school is a microethnography. quasi-ethnography-- not a bounded group. Play it safe - call it on ethnographic study (to me an ethnography is a whole tribe or cultural group - in keeping with anthropological background of ethnography).

Three historical streams by disciplines.

1. Anthropology (strongest)

2. Sociology (also strong)

3. Psychology (least of the 3)

(also influenced to lesser degrees by many other disciplines)

Can also look at three kinds of theories (pp. 24-25 and chart on pp. 128-133).

"Making the familiar strange" - new perspective on familiar situation -- My work = school hall is like tribal group. (Teachers are as aware of school environment as fish are of water.)

vs.

"Making the strange familiar" - finding commonalities of unusual group and everyday life.

(As old anthropologists did -- find commonalities between exotic tribe and American life)

e.g. in Childhood videotapes, showed the strong peer based sharing of street children who were professional thieves (and commonalities of these kids with most any children).

Phenomenological--involves the constructs of those studied (not imposed constructs).

Child-like perspective - learn the culture as a child would, open and receptive, immersed (in) rather than formal study (about).

School as tribal group - cultural perspective

Actually 2 cultures:

1. School culture -- structured, directed by adults, learn academics.

2. Peer culture/child culture - unstructured, playful, have fun, same sex oriented, age and grade hierarchies.

hidden curriculum - structures and processes in school that perpetuate society's expectations. (Lower class schools have teachers that are more directive and listen to kids less (thus preparing them for working class jobs where they must blindly take orders) while kids at upper class schools allowed to be more creative and innovative. (See chapter in Spindler's Doing the Ethnography of Schooling.)

Is it all very subjective?

An alternative is to affirm an objective reality, but to know it requires a reference point outside the human condition. A transcendent perspective is affirmed by Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.

Return to Outline of Seminar

Continue on to Section Two

updated 1/21/06