As qualitative inquiry has gained wider acceptance in genetic counseling research, it has become increasingly important for researchers and those who evaluate their work to recognize the diversity of methods that fall under this broad umbrella. Some of these methods adhere to the traditional conventions of scientific research (e.g., objectivity, reliability, validity, replicability, causality and generalizability). When such studies are evaluated by reviewers who are well versed in scientific methods, the rigor of the study may be readily apparent. However, when researchers are using methods that do not conform to traditional scientific conventions, the distinction between well conducted and poorly conducted studies may become more difficult to discern. This article focuses on grounded theory because it is a widely used qualitative method. We highlight key components of this method in order to contrast conventions that fall within a scientific paradigm to those that fall within an interpretivist paradigm. The intent is to illustrate how the conventions within these two different paradigms yield different types of knowledge claims--both of which can advance genetic counseling theory and practice.
Within the field of education, arts-based research is emerging as an inquiry tradition that reaches beyond disciplinary boundaries-creating innovative junctures among art, education, and research. Individuals with diverse talents and interests are being drawn to this newly coalescing discourse community and, in turn, are engendering rich and multifocal conversations not only about specific examples of arts-based research but also about the broader meanings of this approach to educational inquiry. These meanings, the authors contend, represent different positions within the field, and as the positions are articulated and debated, the contours of the discourse begin to take form. For this reason, the authors call on members of the arts-based discourse community to offer logics-ofjustification for their work and thereby contribute to an evolving culture of inquiry grounded in aesthetic rather than scientific ways of knowing. Keywords: arts-based educational research; aesthetic modes of knowing; culture of art; educational practitioner as researcherWe bring to the writing of this article three sets of experiences with artsbased research in the field of education. First are our own forays into the neb-182 Authors' Note: Drs. Piantanida, McMahon, and Garman have collaborated for more than 10 years on issues related to both conducting and teaching interpretive research. They bring to their more recent involvement with arts-based educational research backgrounds in English literature, literary criticism, and curriculum studies. As facilitators of a dissertation study group, they work with doctoral candidates who are using a variety of interpretive and arts-based methods to study issues embedded within educational practice.
We are grateful to our colleague, Patrick, for his willingness to so thoughtfully and eloquently enter into conversation about the nature of arts-based educational research. His articulation of a postmodern perspective of this approach to research is exactly the type of contribution that can foster productive discourse within this emerging community of scholars.In "Troubling the Contours of Arts-Based Educational Research," Patrick (2003 [this issue]) reminds us of the danger of putting forward a position that appears to be a single reality. In constructing his argument, Patrick equates our concept of "contours" with boundaries and then raises concerns about creating artificial boundaries that "are shaped rigidly or universally," serve to objectify and categorize others, and lead to stereotypes and marginalization of "persons who do not conform to dominant theories or genres" (p. 193). Clearly, these are grave concerns, grounded in Patrick's deep-seated passion for social justice. Yet we see an irony in his vehement distrust of boundary construction. Although sounding an alarm against the injustice of "boundaries as labels" that restrict human creativity, Patrick minimizes the power of "boundaries as constructs" to name and thereby to raise awareness of what has previously been unseen. In the realm of social justice, for example, "labels" such as racial profiling and sexual harassment have called attention to unjust practices that were once taken-for-granted social norms. More central to the thesis of our original article is the importance of the label "artsbased educational research," a social construct that we use to signal a boundary between a culture of scientific inquiry and a culture of aesthetic inquiry. As Goodman (1978) reminded us, concepts are ways of world making. For this reason, we are not so readily willing to abandon the notion of boundaries, 198
Recent literature in nursing research reflects a growing interest in qualitative research methods. This article discusses the process of construing results from qualitative data. Several pitfalls encountered commonly by novice researchers are presented, and strategies are suggested for avoiding or overcoming these difficulties. The importance is stressed of developing a line of reasoning in order to derive meaning from the data and to connect the results to a conceptual or theoretical base.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.