Beginning Interpretative Inquiry

A Step-by-Step Approach to Research and Evaluation

Richard Morehouse

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781136734793
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Beginning Interpretive Inquiry importantly makes the distinction between the use of 'inquiry' rather than interpretive research or interpretive evaluation. Richard Morehouse explores how inquiry is a far more inclusive concept that allows for a detailed understanding of both research and evaluation. The author draws on his personal experiences and observations that many academics and practitioners in education, psychology and many other academic disciplines are successfully engaged in both research and evaluation and that in practice these enterprises share much in common. This book provides detailed examples of different projects; some that are primarily research oriented, others that are primarily evaluation; and projects that effectively and seamlessly combine both research and evaluation.

Having provided a solid philosophical foundation for an understanding of interpretive inquiry, the author gives a detailed and accessible step-by-step approach that explores all stages of the process including:

• 
  
  

• How the processes of interpretive inquiry fit together

• 
  
  

• Understanding where inquiry ideas come from

• 
  
  

• How to develop an appropriate inquiry sample

• 
  
  

• Data collection mechanisms

• 
  
  

• Effective data analysis

• 
  
  

• Writing successfully for publication

Complete with case studies of a wide variety of interpretive inquiry projects this vital new book is an essential tool for researchers from a wide range of disciples. It will help them plan, conduct and evaluate research that successfully blends both qualitative and quantitative approaches.

Chapter 1

Introduction

This introduction provides a short answer to the question “What is interpretative inquiry?” (A more elaborate answer will be provided in Chapter 2.) After addressing the “what” question, I will briefly address the “why” question: specifically, is a book on interpretative research needed? I will also address some of the criticisms and barriers to research in the interpretative tradition and provide some preliminary answers to the critics. The final section of the introduction presents the plan for the rest of the book.

What is interpretative research?

Interpretative research is research within the hermeneutic and phenomenological traditions. The dictionary (Apple Dictionary, Version 2.0.2) says that hermeneutics serve to interpret or explain. That seems to be too much of a circular definition, that is, interpretative research is interpretative. Stated more clearly, hermeneutic research is interpretation within the specific framework of whole-part relationships; that is, one begins with the big picture, the Gestalt or whole, and then looks at the individual pieces in order to better understand the whole which leads back to a new look at the pieces, in an increasing spiral of complexity and relational connectivity. It is in this manner that an understanding of a phenomenon is acquired. Phenomenology is defined as an effort to understand experience as lived. “It is looking for what it is as a fact for us, before any thematizing” (Merleau-Ponty 1962: xv). As an approach to research, phenomenological inquiry examines conscious experiences of individuals as well as their direct experience of the world and their interaction in the world. A phenomenological perspective also sees experiences as embodied, embedded in the world (the lived-experience) and as complex and inter-connective. The hermeneutic/phonological perspective privileges human agency, lived experience, practice, and interpretation in context (Yanchar 2006). It also locates the inquirer in the world, the same world as the phenomenon under scrutiny. In other words, interpretative research has a worldview that differs from a positivist's perspective that has an impartial or “God's” eye view of the world that separates the observer from the world and also sees the world as more or less static.

As all research is to examine something or some relationship, why, one might ask, not conduct standard experimental research? What one wishes to avoid by doing interpretative inquiry is reductionism. Reductionism is the practice of analyzing and describing a complex phenomenon, especially a mental or social phenomenon, by looking at the simplest representations of the phenomena. These representations are held to be at a deeper and more fundamental level. “By focusing on what is usually a small number of causal factors, it renders a complex domain cognitively trackable” (Trout 2008). This becomes problematic when these reductions are said to provide a sufficient explanation. An alternative definition of explanation is a reason or justification given for an action or belief (Apple Dictionary, Version 2.0.2). Reasons and justifications come from an understanding of human interaction. Reason and justifications usually refer to agents and relationships. It is conscious and responsible actions of an agent that are explained via reasons and justifications from a hermeneutic/phenomenological perspective.

Traditional experimental research is generally thought to lean toward reductionist explanations as they oversimplify complex human relationships and are more-or-less static. This orientation to research is widely used in psychology and education and is often thought to be synonymous with research. In fact some in the educational research and policy community take the definition of research as proof that this is the only kind of legitimate research so seriously that they wish to exclude all research that is not experimental and proof-oriented (Moya 1990: 67).

I will now explore the kinds of research included within the interpretative inquiry framework before going on to examining more fully the controversy surrounding what counts as research. Research that explains and interprets is of three kinds: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed (qualitative and quantitative). Most, but not all qualitative inquiry is within the interpretative perspective. Some, but not all, quantitative and mixed quantitative or qualitative inquiry fit into the model of positivist research. Yanchar and Williams (2006) specifically reject the rigid two-paradigm position looking instead for criteria that would allow two modes of inquiry to be used together if they are found to be compatible. In what is to follow, the interpretative model will be wholly embraced, and an argument will made that the interpretative model can accommodate both qualitative and quantitative inquiry.

An interpretative perspective views the world and the observer as situated in a practice or activity within a lived world. That lived world is always in medias res, or in the middle of things; it is a view that places an agent in a living culture (Westerman 2006). A specific example of research that is conducted from an interpretative perspective is Ann L. Brown's project called Community of Thinking and Learning (1997). In this project, Brown explains the emergence over time of strategic and metacognitive knowledge in children between the ages of 6 and 12 years of age and the complex social and interpersonal environment that surrounds those changes. Bruner writes about this project in The Culture of Education (1996) arguing that understanding complex relational encounters such as teaching and learning come about by looking to how individuals act, reflect, and collaborate within a given cultural setting.

To determine what to include as interpretative inquiry, I need to ask several questions. The first question to ask is, what is to be interpreted? The answer is human action, human practice. This perspective begins with an understanding of how one studies human beings. Jerome Bruner in Acts of Meaning (1990) writes that the proper study of humans looks to action as opposed to behavior, meaning rather than information, and agents instead of subjects. An inquiry project that seeks to understand the connections between teachers and students as they engage in learning new skills and applying new knowledge fits Bruner's perspective for understanding humans as agents. Interpretative research, I would argue, is the research that seeks to take these three orientations (agency, action, and meaning) as the framework for research in education and psychology. Bruner goes on to explore how a psychology that is immersed in culture can be studied. As culture is essential to understanding human agency, our inquiry project must be organized around those meanings. It is the public and shared nature of culture that provides the vehicle within which inquiry is conducted. Interpretative inquiry explores shared meaning and shared concepts as well as shared modes of discourse for negotiating differences in meaning and interpretation (Bruner 1990: 12–13).

In a similar vein to Bruner's statement, Steven Yanchar (2006), arguing for a hermeneutic perspective, privileges human agency, lived experience, practice, and interpretation in context. This orientation to or perspective on research focuses on negotiation and interpretation.

The second question is, how is the action or relationship to be inquired into? The short answer is by looking at the phenomenon as a process rather than as a thing. Carlos Moya, in The Philosophy of Action (2003), argues that placing action and agents within a context in motion is essential if one does not wish to destroy the very ideas of action and agency.

Moreover, the idea of agency conflicts with our understanding causally related events where no room can be found for agents, for being capable of initiating new causal chains. The problem is that even the smallest gap in this causal network would mean its complete collapse.

(Moya 2003: 9)

In further support for the study of action, Michael Westerman states that as “a person is always already involved in meaningful practical activities in the world, and not a spectator fundamentally separated from the world” (2006: 196). Therefore, the researcher is obliged to look at the person as an agent in context acting in and with others in the world.

The third question to ask is what is the relationship of the researcher to issues of values? The study of human action is an implicit study of the values that direct action and to be blind to those values is to inevitably misinterpret action. Robert Selman's research as documented in The Promotion of Social Awareness: Powerful Lessons from the Partnership between Developmental Theory and Classroom Practice (2003) shows his commitment to values.

I belong to a group of practitioners and researchers concerned with the promotion of social competence and the prevention of the problems associated with impaired social development – primarily in children and youth, but also in adults. We believe that these objectives are important not only in the lives of individuals but also in our society's ability to provide – or fail to provide – for the good of all its members. In particular we are interested in research and practice that help build social competencies in children and youth who are growing up under difficult circumstances – that is, those who face psycho-pathology in their families, poverty in their neighborhoods, or prejudice in the wider culture in which they must make their way.

(Selman 2003: 2)

To conclude this section, interpretative inquiry is defined by agency, action, and the interpretation of meaning within complex relationships and values based. Interpretative inquiry “sees the meanings we live by as permeating and shaping the practice and institutions of others and the world ‘out there’ much as they belong to our ‘inner’ life’ “ (Bishop 2007: 71). This orientation to inquiry is also oriented toward understanding process over product. Finally, interpretative inquiry is values oriented. “The way we experience everyday life, values, and meaning are both in us and in the world around us” (ibid.). All three of these orientations are a form of practice.

Interpretative inquiry is a hermeneutic/phenomenological enterprise that may include qualitative, quantitative, and mixed data as long as the interpretation is contextual, creative, conceptually aware, coherent, and critically reflective (with apologies to Yanchar and Williams (2006) for what I hope is a minor modification of their thesis on methods usage). In other words, if quantitative and qualitative inquiry are to be used in the same study, they should interact with each other in a manner that is informed by seeing the part in terms of the whole and the whole with reference to each of its parts in an ongoing interplay that increases understanding. The inquirer, in other words, must be aware that the use of quantitative methods doesn't nudge her toward a positivist orientation. Moya (1990: 9) warns us “that every attempt to account for action within this deterministic picture, that is, every attempt to consider action as nodes of causal networks, will destroy what is specific about agency.”

Why a book on interpretative research?

There are already many books on qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. There are no books to my knowledge that accomplish the two things that this work hopes to do:

1 take students, beginning researchers, or anyone else who has not conducted a research project that uses both qualitative and quantitative data and approaches to gathering data, and

2 provide the underlying philosophical support and explanation that allows the beginning researchers to both complete their project and to defend the moves and strategies they used in conducting their research and presenting their findings, with an emphasis on the need for embracing an interpretative orientation when studying human action.

Let's start with the second point – the philosophical underpinnings. Is it important to know the underlying philosophy that guides research? Isn't it enough to know how to conduct a research project? I would argue that it is important, if not essential, to know the philosophical underpinnings of what you are doing as a researcher as it aids the development within the inquirer of several important qualities. Specifically, it enhances the ability to notice potential research problems as they arise, the ability to defend your work to supporters and critics, and the confidence to ask good research questions and match the questions with appropriate data collection methods and data analysis procedures. Understanding the philosophical underpinnings of a research project or evaluation provides a foundation on which to select data-gathering strategies, frame research questions, include and exclude various methods of data analysis, and to make a case for many other research choices that are required as the project moves from one phase to the next. Pardon a small aside here that will be developed later, in Chapter 9. One of the weaknesses that I have noted in some published qualitative studies is a less than comprehensive method discussion. A comprehensive and thorough method section is even more important in studies that use mixed methods. Research methods are at the heart of any research project and without a solid philosophical understanding of how methods and data analysis support each other; it is difficult to make a coherent case for your choices. Yanchar and Williams (2006) present five guidelines for method use. In their article, coherence is one of the guidelines. While cautioning against inflexibility with regard to methods usage, they state that coherence “would entail a recognition that questions, methods, practices, and interpretations should fit strategically within some larger theoretical purpose and do so without giving way to uninterruptable contradictions or self-refutation” (Yanchar and Williams 2006: 9).

Now to the first justification for this book – the need for a book that takes beginning researchers from the conception of the project or inquiry to the writing of the results. Inquiry (research and evaluation) is a process. Granted it is not necessarily a strictly linear process but it is a process nonetheless. This book is conceptualized as a process that develops or unfolds. You as a reader of this book will also be engaged in a process. Each chapter will have one or more inquiry exercises. These exercises are integral to a fuller understanding of the processes and products of an interpretative inquirer. My intention is to make them engaging and helpful as you learn step-by-step. Complete each exercise as you read unless otherwise directed.

Research exercise 1.1: Inquirer's notebook

As an aid to understanding the unfolding nature of your experiences as an inquirer, you are asked to start an inquirer's journal. This journal will be used for all the exercises undertaken as you read though the book. While you may use your laptop computer as your notebook, I suggest that you use a paper-bound notebook (your choice as to style, but pick something that is easy to carry with you and that may be accessed quickly and on the run). Your first assignment is to write your thoughts, fears, anticipations, and concerns as you begin your involvement as an interpretative inquirer. Your notes may be bullet points, sentence fragments, or complete sentences or paragraphs – the point is to begin your experiences as an interpretative inquirer.

Each step in the process is in a more-or-less sequential order. With the entry in your notebook, you have completed one of the first steps toward becoming an interpretative inquirer. I hope to lead undergraduate students, graduate students, and others as they work their way through a research or evaluation project. The book is designed so that as the beginning researchers complete one part of their project, the tools and information are available for them to tackle the next phase of their project.

My sense is that beginning inquirers not only need to know what they are currently doing, but what they will do next, and how each step in the process fits with the one that came before and the one that follows. Beginning inquirers need to be able to look in both directions from where they stand at the current moment in their project. In a surprising way, the ability to position themselves between what they have done and what they are about to do provides the inquirer with a certain flexibility in that it allows for recognizing and possibly correcting the inevitable missteps and mistakes that occur in all research and evaluation projects. By supplying a complete beginning through end arch, people new to research gain the confidence and perspective that is required to complete a research or evaluation project.

How the book unfolds

This work is divided into two sections: part I is “A philosophical foundation for interpretative inquiry”. Part II is “From ideas to publication.”

The first section has three chapters. An overview of the philosophical underpinnings of research is the opening chapter. Chapter 2 entitled “Before beginning your inquiry project,” extends the argument presented here regarding the nature of interpretative inquiry. I begin by distinguishing interpretative, hermeneutic perspectives from more positivism orientations and go on to discuss qualitative, quantitative, and mixed approaches to inquiry from a philosophical perspective while laying the groundwork for the practical implications that will follow. This chapter makes the case for why a philosophical perspective is helpful. Chapter 3, “The interpretative stance: Inquiry in medias res,” explores the implications of agency, action, and meaning within a context of both the researcher and the focus of inquiry being “in the middle of things.” A final short chapter ends the first section. This chapter (Chapter 4) is “A closer look at what counts as interpretative inquiry.” The premise that informs these closing remarks is that while it is important to define one's topic positively it is also helpful to look closely at what the topic is not. By looking especially at examples of inquiry that almost fit into the interpretative orientation, a sharper distinction can be made and, I hope, a clearer picture for the beginning interpretative inquirer can be made of what they expect to face as they begin their projects.

The second section of the book “From ideas to publication” provides a step-by-step approach to conducting a research or evaluation p...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• List of research exercises
• Acknowledgements
• Chapter 1 Introduction
• Part I A philosophical foundation for interpretative inquiry
• Part II From ideas to publication
• Appendix A: An electronic way to conduct qualitative data analysis
• Appendix B: Informed consent form
• Appendix C: Research proposal
• Appendix D: Final project report
• Bibliography
• Index