RON MCDERMOTT spoke of RESEARCH to DAN TRIPLETT on 10-14-96
RM>DT>...but I also firmly believe that qualitative research practices
RM>DT>do meet scientific qualifications.  
RM> 
RM>CB>I don't.  Such "observations" are too easily influenced by the 
RM>CB>enthusiasm of the observer or the participants. 
RM> 
RM>DT>An easy out....but not if strict criteria is set up in the first
RM>place..   
RM>For example?  I still haven't seen any delineation of what
RM>is permissible to your way of thinking...
RM> 
RM>DT>Buy the way, how would you set up a qualified scientific study
RM>DT>regarding spelling instruction?
RM> 
RM>Identify the various methodologies, try individual and/or
RM>combinations over as wide a spectrum of abilities as
RM>possible, evaluate GROWTH... Now design an EXPERIMENT
RM>using what appears to be the most promising of the methods
RM>from the previous STUDY, complete with controls, in a
RM>variety of settings, with a variety of students, and see if
RM>the inferences of the STUDY are bourne out in the EXPERIMENT.
RM>Repeat to verify experimental results.
This sounds purely quantitative to me.  All educational research must 
include experiments and control groups?  Does this include qualitative 
approaches or are you one of those in education who dismiss qualitative 
approaches as mere fluff?
RM>DT>Which group would you want your child to participate in??
RM> 
RM>Not the point... Subjects of an experiment don't get to vote!
RM>One can argue that this is "unfair", or whatever, but this
RM>is how it works...
How it works.......could that be an oxymoron?
RM> 
RM>DT>If we were to research a kindergarten dramatic play area to see 
RM>DT>what kinds of "natural" interactions take place there, we wouldn't
RM>DT>need a control group for that.
RM> 
RM>And it wouldn't be "research", it would be a "survey"...
No....actually it would be an *observational* *case* *study.* Such an 
approach to research has occurred in the past (many times) and such an 
approach is considered valid.
The following information is gleaned from _Qualitative_ _Research_ _For_ 
_Education_ which is a Master's level text used at the University Of 
Portland in Oregon (and elsewhere).  The authors are Robert Bagdan and 
Sari Knopp Biklen.  Badgan has a Masters Degree in Education and a Ph.D 
in Sociology from Syracuse University.  He also holds a dual 
professorship in Special Education and Sociology at Syracuse.  He has 
authored other books on qualitative research and written for many 
professional publications.
Biklen has her Ed.D in Education from the University of Massachusetts at 
Amherst.  She teaches qualitative research workshops for graduate 
students and is director of the Education Design Group, a not-for-profit 
research and consulting firm.  In addition to having done research for 
the Fleischmann Commission, she has also taught at Syracuse University.  
She too has written a book on qualitative research.
If what these two educators have to say about qualitative research and 
it's use in education doesn't cause you to sit up and take notice, then 
I, a mere kindergarten teacher of 8 years with very little first hand 
research experience (especially of the type you describe....my research 
training was mostly qualitative) then this thread may as well end right 
here.  Nothing *I* say to you will matter if don't acknowledge 
qualitative research approaches as valid.    
A *case* *study* is a detailed examination of one setting, or one single 
subject, or one single depository of documents, or one particular event.  
In an observational case study (like the one I have described), the 
major data collecting technique is participant observation and the focus 
of the study is on a particular organization (such as a school) or some 
aspect of the organization.  Parts of the organization that become a 
foci in organizational studies are typically the following:
1 A particular place in the organization (like my classroom)
2 A specific group of people (my kindergarten students)
3 Some activity of the school (or classroom (like my House Center))
The methodologies are more lengthy to describe so I won't describe them 
here.  I will wait to see how you view this information first before 
going further.
Please note that I said a case study is "detailed" and is singularly 
focused.  It is a specific and purposeful study.  In the example of a 
case study of the activities that take place in a kindergarten house 
center (also known as dramatic play area) the data collected my not be 
generalizable to the larger population but, such a study can tell me a 
great deal about how this center is being used, what is working well, 
what is not working well, and perhaps give me clues on how to design the 
the center better (an educational improvement).  If I were to observe 
over time (a year maybe more) many sites, perhaps I could find some 
generalizable data if certain patterns in behavior were clearly seen.  I 
don't know what I'd find for sure.  I may find differences between 
groups that are puzzling.  
RM>DT>Not every Quantitative study proved to be useful or correct
RM>DT>either.   Doesn't mean Qualitative research is unreliable.
RM> 
RM>Doesn't mean it isn't, either...    ;-)
No...but that argument is true no matter what the study or the method 
used.  I agree that just because a study is called research doesn't mean 
that the "data" is useful or even correct.  But the idea that 
observations are not considered "research" just doesn't fit the 
definition of many qualitative approaches.  
Dan
--- GEcho 1.11+
---------------