Sashaying Across Party Lines: Evidence of and Arguments for the Use of Validity Evidence in Qualitative Education Research

Abstract

Though the concept of validity is rooted in positivism, recent scholars have expanded the definition of validity to reflect more progressive paradigms, opening the door to consideration of validity in qualitative education research. Despite this evolution, to date a review of validity evidence in qualitative research has yet to be undertaken even though products offering recommendations for using validity or validity analogs (e.g., trustworthiness) in qualitative work has accelerated. In this chapter, I provide an overview of the history of validity in qualitative research and give an assessment of the use of validity evidence as presented in qualitative articles published in a high-impact journal. I use the results of this assessment to highlight validity practices that are well-represented in the research as well as those that are underrepresented, offering recommendations for how researchers can support the presentation of their work through reflection on these underrepresented elements. Additionally, I forward suggestions as to how qualitative researchers may approach using validity frameworks in planning their studies. Implications for qualitative and quantitative researchers are also discussed, along with suggestions for future work in exploring the use of validity in qualitative education research.

Making in‐the‐moment learning visible: A framework to identify and compare various ways of learning through continuity and discourse change

“…Rather than following a single method to establish trustworthiness in our analysis, we used a combination of strategies to incorporate multiple perspectives at all stages of project development, including researcher reflexivity, incorporating multiple voices and positionalities through collaboration, and consensus processes (Cian, 2021; Creswell & Miller, 2000; Saldaña, 2013). For the PEA coding, all interactions were separately analyzed by 2–3 coders, including all 6 authors and other group members, and then discussed to consensus.…”

Supporting STEM graduate students in strengthening their professional identity through an authentic interdisciplinary partnership

“…We undertook multiple strategies to ensure the quality of this study. Cian (2021) notes that there are many ways in which researchers may address trustworthiness, rigor and/or credibility in a qualitative study, including components for Creswell and Miller’s (2000) framework for validity in qualitative research as well as Messick’s (1995) framework for validity as applied to qualitative studies. This study spans five semesters (prolonged engagement), is grounded in theory (professional identity) and sought triangulation as well as disconfirming evidence throughout the data collection and analysis phases.…”

To Read Is the Challenge─Insights from 100 Days, 100 Papers Reading Challenge in Chemistry Education Research

“…Some papers were read by more than one participant. The most popular two papers were “Sashaying Across Party Lines: Evidence of and Arguments for the Use of Validity Evidence in Qualitative Education Research” and “Multifaceted Chemical Thinking: A Core Competence”, read by six participants each. Each of these papers was recommended within the group in the first 2 weeks of the challenge.…”