EDUC 6013 – Unit 2, Discussion 1 – Qualitative vs Quantitative Research
While different fields draw on various philosophical frameworks, there are two overarching research approaches: Qualitative Research and Quantitative Research. Please draw from the readings thus far to explain which approach has the most resonance for you. Your explanation should account for philosophical resonance and the role of objectivity/subjectivity (pp 14 & 20 in your text might provide helpful starting points in thinking about philosophical resonance).
I have spent these past 40 years working in law enforcement, and I enjoy working with qualitative and quantitative research approaches. My preference is qualitative research because I enjoy dealing with people and not numbers. The philosophical resonance for me is that I have skewed the results using both approaches to suit either my or the police need to profit from the results. I am not proud of that, but it is a fact. Please try not to be offended by that comment. The skewing of the results is for many reasons but mostly for the good of the community. “It is important to remember that all research reflects a point of view, whether it is declared or not “(Reid et al., 2017, p. 47). On many occasions, my point of view and direction were pre-set before my research. For example, to show the crime rate had dropped (quantitative) in my community is a worthy and meaningful purpose by identifying the type of crime to identify low or less crime. “We live in a numbers dominated world” (Denzin, 2017, p. 9). I conducted interviews with a few choice citizens in the community (qualitative) who said they felt safe and the community was happy. I understood my location as a researcher was vitally important, resulting in meaningful social action. My positionality limited my understanding of others, but I did not care because I was focused on the results. I lived in the community and was as close as possible to the group being studied. My reflexivity was open, honest, and I considered my power and researcher position while in a position of power to translate and interpret (Ali, 2015). My documents and statistics were transparent, and I appreciated methodological, epistemological, and political influences in all stages of my research. I created my own standards of evaluation, my own measures of quality, influence, excellence and social justice impact (Denzin, 2017).
My research was conducted, statistics gathered, results analyzed. Crime in my community was reduced – at least on paper – and my stakeholders were happy.
I know research and ethical dilemmas are an incredibly challenging topic of conversation. Add the role of objectivity vs subjectivity while lacking an ethical framework, and the flood gates are open to bias, personal values, attitudes, and theoretical perspectives.
What is really interesting in conducting research using my example and many more in the mounted police, I was not under any obligation to identify any of my biases. I was never asked. The research and numbers were merely accepted as objective and as long as the desired results were obtained all was good. Do not worry, this is NOT how research should be conducted nor will it be done that way in the future.
As stated by Robin DiAngelo, American academic and author, “I don’t believe it’s humanly possible to be free of bias.”
How do I disclose my bias?
I have spent 40 years in law enforcement and diagnosed with PTSD for the majority of that time. I stuffed my feelings and emotions down, but my bias and prejudices were allowed to flourish. As a result of years of counselling, I realize what triggers contribute to the creation of personal biases. Self-awareness of all my biases is important – positive or favourable, as well as negative or unfavourable. That allows me to manage, mitigate, or avoid them actively. I try to encourage an empathy-centred approach to instruction and my learners. I get to know my professional self and develop self-awareness as an on-going process.
Ali, R. (2014, October). Rethinking representation: negotiating positionality, power and space in the field. Gender Place and Culture A Journal of Feminist Geography 22(6):1-18
DOI: 10.1080/0966369X.2014.917278
Denzin, N. K. (2017). Critical qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(1), 8–16. https://journals-sagepub-com.libraryservices.yorkvilleu.ca/doi/full/10.1177/1077800416681864
Reid, C., Greaves, L., & Kirby, S. (2017). Experience, research, social change: Critical methods (3rd ed.). University of Toronto Press. Chapter 3: Being a Researcher, pp. 47-52.
EDUC 6013 – Unit 1, Discussion 1 – Understanding Epistemology, Ontology, and Methodology
Drawing from this unit’s readings, consider epistemology, ontology, and methodology. Using your own words, or perhaps creating a metaphor or visual, explain each of these terms and discuss how they determine our research approach (e.g. Qualitative, or Quantitative).
Thank you for reading my post.
To reply to this discussion question, I read the unit readings. However, I found myself doing more “research” to find a more straightforward and more explicit explanation of the two philosophies, 1) epistemology is the philosophy of knowledge seeking to answer the questions “What is knowledge? And “How is knowledge acquired?” and 2) ontology is a theory that studies concepts such as existence, being, becoming, and reality (Reid et al., 2017).
The methodologyis a framework for research that guides the choices researchers or other users make. The methodology does not provide solutions but offers a perspective for understanding which method, set of plans, or best practices can be applied to the research questions. It can encompass a spectrum from a quantitative approach towards a qualitative approach, but researchers may blend these two approaches in answering their research objectives (Reid et al., 2017).
Ok, I am going to give the metaphor a try. Yesterday, my wife, Sharon, was doing Fall yard work and lost an earring. She and I searched the yard and focused on the earring (epistemology). We both knew what was real and was legitimate knowledge. This knowledge could be measured and observed in our life experiences. We found small pieces of metal like nails during the search, a pop can lid, and a screw. Everything (ontology) looked like the ring but was not, but the possibility existed we would find the earring. Both exist as real, and both can be claimed to work as a knowledge device.
The methodology would be the study of what research problem or question Sharon and I were investigating. In our case, it was searching for the earring. I would suggest the research would be qualitative because our investigation of the yard and the garden area would be searched systematically, recording what we were seeing, and detailing where we have searched. We had no need for quantitative research such as taking a survey or poll of the neighbours to see if they had seen Sharon lose the earring.
Laurie
Reid, C., Greaves, L., & Kirby, S. (2017). Experience research social change: Critical methods (3rd ed.). University of Toronto Press.
Interesting example Laurie. It works! Although we are just beginning this journey, do you see benefits to both qualitative and quantitative approaches as they relate to a research interest you may have? Thanks…Doris
Good morning Doris,
Yes, I can see the benefits of both qualitative and quantitative approaches being used in my research. I had a few aha moments in my previous EDAE 6323 course on sociological purposes that influence adult education. Interesting to see how the critical paradigm examines the societal structures and power relations in how they play a role in promoting inequalities and disenabling people. This critical paradigm is founded on reflective knowledge of postcolonialists, Indigenous, and queer theories, to name a few (Reid et al., 2017, p. 12). It was fascinating to read about how the early 1900’s Canadian social change movements such as Women’s Institutes and Frontier College planted the seeds for adult education. According to (Reid et al., 2017, p. 13), blending qualitative and quantitative methodologies can be the most effective way to answer research questions. Researchers within the critical paradigm can use both qualitative and quantitative methodologies to answer their questions.
With a little imagination, I know I can relate both methodologies for my research.
Reid, C., Greaves, L., & Kirby, S. (2017). Experience research social change: Critical methods. University of Toronto Press.
Hi Cheryl,
Thank you for your post and for introducing me to the two new articles by Biesta and Garcia-Olp. They were exciting readings.
My take is that maybe education should run like a well-oiled machine, but there are far too many variables. Biesta talks about education as an open system due to its interaction with its environment rather than being disconnected. That is where the machine metaphor breaks down. There are just too many unpredictable elements and variables to consider. I am unsure if I want my education and classes to function in a patterned and predictable way. As noted by Biesta, to be machine-like in education, we would need to close contextual interference, have total control over the process of meaning-making, interpretation, thinking, and judging. Not as much fun. I loved it when Biesta mentioned the point of education where students learn something for particular reasons. Talk about getting right to the point.
I enjoyed the article from Garcia-Olp and her take on the Indigenous epistemological shift and her focus on increasing Indigenous student interest in STEM studies (science, technology, engineering, mathematics). Storytelling and poetry as methods of knowledge sharing and knowledge gathering with artistic expression are brilliant. Indigenous communities’ understandings of the natural world and interconnections with the environment were something I assumed, but to have Dr. Garcia-Olp explain it in a way to protect Indigenous epistemologies was so appropriate. Spirals of a pinecone describing numerical symmetry, aka the Fibonacci sequence, allow students to learn and engage with mathematics and science simultaneously. This information exchange truly integrates the Indigenous epistemologies and traditional practices of reciprocity with the earth, animals, and nature in general (Garcia-Olp, 2020, p. 7).
Laurie
Biesta, G. (2015). On the two cultures of educational research, and how we might move ahead: Reconsidering the ontology, axiology and praxeology of education. European Educational Research Journal, 14(1), 11–22.
Garcia-Olp, M., Nelson, C., Hinzo, A., & Young, D. A. (2020). Indigenous Epistemologies: Implementing Indigenous practices and perceptions to the area of STEM. Curriculum & Teaching Dialogue, 22(1/2), 197–215.
On Task Teaching 