(E)pistemological awareness, instantiation of methods, and uninformed methodological ambiguity in qualitative research projects

Educational Researcher

Volumn 38, Issue 9, 2009, Pages 687-699

  Koro Ljungberg, Mirka ^a   Yendol Hoppey, Diane ^b   Smith, Jason Jude ^b   Hayes, Sharon B ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^b WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Awareness; Epistemology; Methodology; Qualitative research; References

Indexed keywords

EID: 77951463111     PISSN: 0013189X     EISSN: 1935102X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0013189X09351980     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Alcoff, L., & Potter, E. (1993). Feminist epistemologies: Thinking gender. New York: Routledge.
2. American Educational Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 33-40.
3. Angen, M. (2000). Evaluating interpretive inquiry: Reviewing the validity debate and opening the dialogue. Qualitative Health Research, 10, 378-395.
4. Audi, R. (Ed.). (1995). The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5. Berger, P., & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. New York: Anchor Books, Doubleday.
6. Blaauw, M., & Pritchard, D. (2005). Epistemology A-Z. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
7. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (2006). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
8. Carter, S., & Little, M. (2007). Justifying knowledge, justifying method, taking action: Epistemologies, methodologies, and methods in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 17(10), 1316-1328.
9. Coe, C. (2001). Learning how to find out: Theories of knowledge and learning in field research. Field Methods, 13, 392-411.
10. Creswell, J. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research. London: Sage.
12. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). The future of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 1018-1023). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1-32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Derrida, J. (1997). Of grammatology (G. Spivak, Trans.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. (Original work published 1967)
15. Freeman, M., deMarrais, K., Preissle, J., Roulston, K., & Elizabeth, S. P. (2007). Standards of evidence in qualitative research: An incitement to discourse. Educational Researcher, 36, 25-32.
16. Gee, J. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
17. Greckhamer, T., & Koro-Ljungberg, M. (2005). The erosion of a method: Examples from grounded theory. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 18, 729-750.
18. Guba, E. (1990). The alternative paradigm dialog. In E. Guba (Ed.), The paradigm dialog (pp. 17-27). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19. Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 191-215). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
20. Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests (2nd ed.; J. J. Shapiro, Trans.). Boston: Beacon.
21. Habermas, J. (1990). Moral consciousness and communicative action (C. Lenhardt & S. Weber Nicholson, Trans.). Cambridge, UK: Polity.
22. Harding, S. G., & Hintikka, M. B. (2003). Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology, and philosophy of science. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
23. Hatch, A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany: State University of New York Press.
24. Heidegger, M. (1996). Being and time (J. Stambaugh, Trans.). Albany: State University of New York Press.
25. Hills, L. (2006). Playing the field(s): An exploration of change, conformity and conflict in girls' understandings of gendered physicality in physical education. Gender and Education, 18, 539-556.
26. Kamberelis, G., & Dimitriadis, G. (2005). Qualitative inquiry: Approaches to language and literacy research. New York: Teachers College Press.
27. Kuhn, T. (1996). The structure of scientific revolutions (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28. Lantolf, J., & Appel, G. (1994). Vygotskian approaches to second language research. Westport, CT: Ablex.
29. Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. New York: Routledge.
30. Lather, P. (1993). Fertile obsession: Validity after poststructuralism. Sociological Quarterly, 34, 673-693.
31. Lather, P. (2001). Validity as an incitement to discourse: Qualitative research and the crisis of legitimation. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 241-250). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
32. Lather, P. (2006). Paradigm proliferation as a good thing to think with: Teaching research in education as a wild profusion. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(1), 35-57.
33. Lather, P. (2007). Getting lost: Feminist efforts toward a double(d) science. Albany: State University of New York Press.
34. Lyotard, J.-F. (1999). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge (G. Bennington & B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1979).
35. McCormick, J., Rodney, P., & Varcoe, C. (2003). Reinterpretations across studies: An approach to meta-analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 13, 933-944.
36. McIntyre, L. (2004). Intentionality, pluralism, and redescription. Philosophy of Social Sciences, 34(4), 493-505.
37. Morgan, D. L. (1988). Focus groups as qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
38. Morse, J., & Richards, L. (2002). README FIRST for a user's guide to qualitative methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39. Pallas, A. (2001). Preparing education doctoral students for (e)pistemological diversity. Educational Researcher, 30(5), 6-11.
40. Polkinghorne, D. E. (1989). Phenomenological research methods. In R. Valle & S. Halling (Eds.), Existential-phenomenological perspective in psychology (pp. 41-60). New York: Plenum.
41. Quantz, R. (1992). On critical ethnography (with some postmodern considerations). In M. LeCompte, W. Millroy, & J. Preissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 447-505). San Diego: Academic Press.
42. Richardson, L., & St. Pierre, E. (2005). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 959-978). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
43. Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
44. Scheurich, J. J. (1996). The masks of validity: A deconstructive investigation. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 9(1), 49-60.
45. Schwandt, T. (2001). Dictionary of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
46. Spivak, G. (1993). Outside in the teaching machine. New York: Routledge.
47. St. Pierre, E. (2002). "Science" rejects post-modernism. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 25-27.
48. St. Pierre, E. (2006). Scientifically based research in education: (E)pistemology and ethics. Adult Education Quarterly, 56, 239-266.
49. Thayer-Bacon, B. (2003). Relational "(e)pistemologies." New York: Peter Lang.
50. Turner, J. (1992). The promise of positivism. In S. Seidman, & D. Wagner (Eds.), Postmodernism and social theory: The debate over general theory (pp. 156-178). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
51. Villaverde, L. (2008). Feminist theories and education. New York: Peter Lang.
52. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
53. Wilkinson, S. (2004). Focus groups: A feminist method. In S. Hesse-Biber & M. Yaiser (Eds.), Feminist perspectives on social research (pp. 271-295). New York: Oxford University Press.
54. Yanchar, S. C., & Williams, D. D. (2006). Reconsidering the compatibility thesis and eclecticism: Five proposed guidelines for method use. Educational Researcher, 35(9), 3-12.