David W. Jardine PhD (2002)
The arrival of new information technologies in our lives and the lives of our students means much more than simply new ways to provide the same old news. These new technologies demand that educators re-think the nature of their work. With the potentially relentless on-rush of new information, it becomes essential to re-consider what inquiry might mean in our schools. This re-thinking is obviously too much to consider all at once, because so many things are beginning to shift. These initial thoughts are merely a beginning.
What does it mean, to choose a topic for inquiry? It is commonplace in school, for teachers to choose activities that are geared and targeted to students’ abilities, grade, or developmental level. As someone who did part of their graduate work on Jean Piaget, this was, for me, a taken-for-granted feature of my work with student-teachers—instructing them on how to provide developmentally appropriate material for their students. However, one of the most common questions that student-teachers then raised was this: what about the students who are having trouble? What about the students who are finished in a flash? What about the child who barely speaks English? Who has a short attention span? Who hates math? Who is bored, over-stimulated, out of it, beyond it, over it? We all recognize something in these questions. Our attempts to outrun the differences that present themselves in any particular classroom are exhausting, confusing and, sometimes, nearly hopeless, especially with increasing classroom sizes, decreasing assistance in the classroom, and the social, economic and cultural pressures that are now ordinary in schools. Inquiry, and what it means about choosing topic has something to offer here.
Inquiry does not begin with a psychological and pathological version of differences, where each child has their own cultural, linguistic, personal and familial background, experiences, abilities, level, previous knowledge, intelligence (Gardner 2000). Rather, inquiry imagines a topic as a living topography, a living, interrelated place full of its own diversity, relations, multiplicity, history, ancestry and character. The question then is, what topics can be pursued in the classroom that have enough richness and complexity to embrace the full range of children and teachers’ work? Rather than beginning with difference and then doling out different pieces of topic, inquiry asks how we might take a class full of difference to a living place that can invite them all.
Here is a simple analogy. When I go out into the garden with my young son, I don’t send him off to a developmentally appropriate garden. I take him to the same garden where I am going to work. Now, once we get there and get to the work that place needs, of course, each of us will work as each of us is able. We are not identical in ability, experience, strength, patience, and so on. But both of us will be working in the same place doing some part of the real work that the garden requires. This garden and the real work it requires, is itself rich and generous and multiple and varied enough to embrace our differences. This place, this topography, this topic, has room for us both. It is a place where we can gather together in our differences and work in ways that each of us has something to offer to this place that is irreplaceable.
How can we imagine the topics listed in the curriculum guide as rich, generous, living topics, living topographies that are full of enough room for the full range of difference and diversity that we might bring to them, including, it must be added, the full adult attention of the teacher as well? How can these topics become experienced as living topics, full of real questions, real openings/opportunities for exploration? It is here that the hard work begins: how can we start imagining, for example, the phenomenon of number, or addition, or commas, or mapping the classroom, as parts of a living inheritance, as part of an already ongoing conversation into which we step, as inquirers?
It is this sort of imagining that inquiry demands of educators, especially now, when new information technologies are ready to break apart the old, fragmented, school-bound versions of knowledge that will no longer do.
Gardner, H. (2000) Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Unlike positivist or experimental research that utilizes a linear and one-directional sequence of design steps, there is considerable variation in how a qualitative research study is organized. In general, qualitative researchers attempt to describe and interpret human behavior based primarily on the words of selected individuals [a.k.a., “informants” or “respondents”] and/or through the interpretation of their material culture or occupied space. There is a reflexive process underpinning every stage of a qualitative study to ensure that researcher biases, presuppositions, and interpretations are clearly evident, thus ensuring that the reader is better able to interpret the overall validity of the research. According to Maxwell (2009), there are five, not necessarily ordered or sequential, components in qualitative research designs. How they are presented depends upon the research philosophy and theoretical framework of the study, the methods chosen, and the general assumptions underpinning the study.
Describe the central research problem being addressed but avoid describing any anticipated outcomes. Questions to ask yourself are: Why is your study worth doing? What issues do you want to clarify, and what practices and policies do you want it to influence? Why do you want to conduct this study, and why should the reader care about the results?
Questions to ask yourself are: What do you think is going on with the issues, settings, or people you plan to study? What theories, beliefs, and prior research findings will guide or inform your research, and what literature, preliminary studies, and personal experiences will you draw upon for understanding the people or issues you are studying? Note to not only report the results of other studies in your review of the literature, but note the methods used as well. If appropriate, describe why earlier studies using quantitative methods were inadequate in addressing the research problem.
Usually there is a research problem that frames your qualitative study and that influences your decision about what methods to use, but qualitative designs generally lack an accompanying hypothesis or set of assumptions because the findings are emergent and unpredictable. In this context, more specific research questions are generally the result of an interactive design process rather than the starting point for that process. Questions to ask yourself are: What do you specifically want to learn or understand by conducting this study? What do you not know about the things you are studying that you want to learn? What questions will your research attempt to answer, and how are these questions related to one another?
Structured approaches to applying a method or methods to your study help to ensure that there is comparability of data across sources and researchers and, thus, they can be useful in answering questions that deal with differences between phenomena and the explanation for these differences [variance questions]. An unstructured approach allows the researcher to focus on the particular phenomena studied. This facilitates an understanding of the processes that led to specific outcomes, trading generalizability and comparability for internal validity and contextual and evaluative understanding. Questions to ask yourself are: What will you actually do in conducting this study? What approaches and techniques will you use to collect and analyze your data, and how do these constitute an integrated strategy?
In contrast to quantitative studies where the goal is to design, in advance, “controls” such as formal comparisons, sampling strategies, or statistical manipulations to address anticipated and unanticipated threats to validity, qualitative researchers must attempt to rule out most threats to validity after the research has begun by relying on evidence collected during the research process itself in order to effectively argue that any alternative explanations for a phenomenon are implausible. Questions to ask yourself are: How might your results and conclusions be wrong? What are the plausible alternative interpretations and validity threats to these, and how will you deal with these? How can the data that you have, or that you could potentially collect, support or challenge your ideas about what’s going on? Why should we believe your results?
Although Maxwell does not mention a conclusion as one of the components of a qualitative research design, you should formally conclude your study. Briefly reiterate the goals of your study and the ways in which your research addressed them. Discuss the benefits of your study and how stakeholders can use your results. Also, note the limitations of your study and, if appropriate, place them in the context of areas in need of further research.
Chenail, Ronald J. Introduction to Qualitative Research Design. Nova Southeastern University; Heath, A. W. The Proposal in Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report 3 (March 1997); Marshall, Catherine and Gretchen B. Rossman. Designing Qualitative Research. 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1999; Maxwell, Joseph A. "Designing a Qualitative Study." In The SAGE Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods. Leonard Bickman and Debra J. Rog, eds. 2nd ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2009), p. 214-253; Qualitative Research Methods. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Yin, Robert K. Qualitative Research from Start to Finish. 2nd edition. New York: Guilford, 2015.