Epistemology... doing a bit of soul searching outside my comfort zone

 

As I get ready to start my EdD journey with the WELS Institute of the Open University, I was directed to have a read through a paper entitled, "Three approaches to Case Study Methods in Education:  Yin, Merriam, and Stake" (Yazan, 2015).  And I have to say I find myself really challenged by what I'm reading.  Thanks Dr Dennis @azumahcarol.  

("A student solves a mathematics equation at the Mfantsipim Boys School in Cape Coast" by World Bank Photo Collection is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.)

As must people who read my blog know, my undergrad degree was in Applied Mathematics.  Perhaps from that perspective, my interest in the mathematical science reflected my desire to believe the world was a stable, controlled and deterministic place.  And much of my career I've been driven to share that view with others.  And, in reading about the epistemology of educational research in Cohen et. al (2018) I came to understand this to be representative of the positivist traditions often espoused by the physical sciences. Despite the fact that the authors go on to offer clear critiques of this epistemological stance, as a mathematician this theory of knowledge made a lot of sense to me.  Even though I admit that human behaviour is colourful, erratic, irritating, unpredictable, joyful, frustrating and wonderful in its complexity, I would still cling on to inferential statistics and quantitative approaches that give some kind of measure of confidence on which I can hang my hat when presenting my results.

But examining this paper by Yazin (2015) I'm starting realise that something else is going on.  What if I'm clinging to quantitative approaches because I'm confident with numbers?  Is it possible to adopt qualitative while simultaneously honoring my historical commitment to positivism?  Or, in recognising the complexity of human reality and how that reality is formed, do I need to think more broadly about the constructivist approach?   

I'm starting to realise that this is all about comfort zones and, while I'm definitely moving out of my own personal comfort zone, I'm reminded of the work of Burgess and Wellington (2010) who cite examples of other EdD students who have experienced a growth in mindset by being outside of their comfort zones.

("Comfort Zone Suge" by emily @ go haus go is licensed under CC BY 2.0.)

What has really struck me is the fact that I think I'm starting to understand how positivism and qualitative approaches are not mutually exclusive, but largely depend on the world view of the researcher and the research itself.  Crotty (1998, as cited by Yazan, 2015) points out that the concepts of objectivity, validity and generalisability are very much part of the positivist epistemology.  But this doesn't pre-clude qualitative methods.  Moreover, Yin (2002, as cited by Yazan, 2015) refers to the yardsticks of construct validity, internal validity, external validity and reliability as being a crucial frame of reference of researchers at every stage of the research process.  Again, you'll get no disagreement from me.  Yet, I have to acknowledge that these yardsticks again don't preclude qualitative methods.  

However, what the positivist view does fail to acknowledge is the complexity of human nature behaviour that is ever present in the field of education as expressed by Merriam (1998, as cited by Yazan, 2015):

"...the key philosophical assumption upon which all types of qualitative research methods are based is the view that reality is constructed by individuals interacting within their social worlds."

As educators, if we've learned nothing else during the past few years, surely we've learned to value the human element of our profession.  Moreover, in the context of my recent blog about symbolic interactionism and the work of Herbert Blumer, one must recognise the situated nature of what we do as educators and the fact that interaction with our colleages and, arguably more importantly, with our students changes both their reality and our own.  The nature of our professional relationships is very much reciprocal.    

But, from the perspective of someone who has an interest in research the experience of others, making sense of those experiences myself and then reporting those experiences in the production of a thesis that will in turn be read and interpreted by those who come after me, I'm beginning to recognise the huge responsibility placed on researchers to honour and do justice to the honest and objective portrayal of the experience of any research subjects I might encounter along the way.  Funny that...  even in my attempt to embrace the constructivist perspective I find myself returning to one of the pillars of positivism - objectivity.  

("Coming full circle" by courtneyp is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.)

I think I'm discovering, even at this very early stage, that the philosophical standpoint of the researcher is crucial though perhaps not as clear cut as I once believed.  So I'm grateful for the acknowledgement by Yazan (2015) that:

"[Readers] can either choose to utilize the tools offered by one methodologist or construct an amalgam of tools from two or three of them."

Perhaps I am that amalgam.

References

Burgess, H., & Wellington, J. (2010). Exploring the impact of the professional doctorate on students’ professional practice and personal development: Early indications. _Work based learning e-journal_, _1_(1), 160-176.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. and  Morrison, K. (2018)  Research Methods in Education, 8th Edn., Oxon, Routledge.  

Yazan, B. (2015). Three approaches to case study methods in education: Yin, Merriam, and Stake. The qualitative report, 20(2), 134-152.