Contextualización de los Docentes

Qualitative research in education developed in the late 1 960s and early 1 970s (Atkinson, Delamont, & Hammersley, 1 993), and addresses questions concerned with matters of meaning. The nature of qualitative research emphasises the process, meaning and understanding of the phenomena studied (Merriam, 1 998). Eisner ( 1 99 1 ) described the hallmarks of qualitative research as flexibility, adjustment and iterativity. These are important as the inquiry participates in a paradigm that aims to highlight parts of an evolving complex world, rather than aiming to control variables in a laboratory-type setting. This enables the researcher to penetrate through the surface of the phenomenon.

Although qualitative research has a number of meanings, it is generally identified both by the way in which data are collected and in the way they are analysed. While Strauss and Corbin ( 1 990) defined qualitative research as "any kind of research that produces findings not arrived at by means of statistical procedures or other means of quantification" (p. 1 7), there can be some quantification of data collected through qualitative work. However, while some of the data may be quantified, the analysis undertaken is generally qualitative.

The drive for meaning rather than measuring is one of the key differences between a qualitative and quantitative approach, and as Strauss and Corbin ( 1 990) pointed out, qualitative methods allow the researcher to explore the intricacies of a phenomenon that is not always possible using quantitative approaches. To achieve this, different types of qualitative research can be employed including ethnography, the phenomenological approach, sociological studies, life histories, naturalistic inquiry, participant observation, case study, interpretive research, and conversational analysis (Merriam, 1 998; Neuman, 1 997; Strauss & Corbin, 1 990). In the case of the present study, the

meaning students ascribe to learning and self-assessment is sought firstly through a phenomenographic approach and secondly through an ethnographic approach.

Qualitative research methodologies make the assumption that such approaches rely on an interaction between the researcher and participant. This interaction is both a personal and political event because the researcher usually takes a dominant role from the start by asking the research questions and defining the methodology (Eisner, 1 99 1 ). Through research within an interpretivist paradigm, however, while the researcher defines the questions, the basic principle of understanding the participant's viewpoint remains paramount.

Merriam ( 1 998) differentiated qualitative research from quantitative research in a number of ways including the mode of analysis and the findings (see Figure 3 . 1 ). The features outlined by Merriam for qualitative research highlight important aspects in studying student learning and determined the type of research used in the present study.

Points of Comparison Qualitative research Quantitative research Focus of research Quality (nature, essence) Quantity (how much, how many)

Philosophical roots Phenomenology, symbolic Positivism, logical empiricism

interactionism

Associated phrases Fieldwork, ethnographic, naturalistic Experimental, empirical, statistical

grounded, constructivist

Goal of investigation Understanding, description, discovery, Prediction, control, description,

meaning, hypothesis generating confirmation, hypothesis testing

Design characteristics Flexible, evolving, emergent Predetermined, structured

Sample Small, non random, purposeful, Large, random, representative theoretical

Data collection Researcher as primary instrument, Inanimate instruments (scales, tests, interviews, observations, documents surveys, questionnaires, computers) Mode of analysis Inductive (by researcher) Deductive (by statistical methods)

Findings Comprehensive, holistic, expansive, Precise, numerical

richly descriptive

Figure 3. 1. Characteristics of Qualitative and Quantitative research (Merriam, 1 998, p. 9)

Research that sets out to understand the world of the participant requires a qualitative approach that allows the researcher into another cultural world. It is for this reason that qualitative methods are used in both phases of this study. Qualitative research is a

useful vehicle with which to enter into another world because the meanmg the participants bring to the phenomenon may be explored through a variety of techniques. These can include observations, indepth interviews, field notes and visual data such as video recording or photographs (Punch, 1 994).

In order to address the current research questions in a meaningful way for both the participants and the researcher, a qualitative design is integral in achieving comprehensive and descriptive findings. An essential aspect of qualitative work was described by Geertz ( 1 973) when he introduced the notion of "thick description" to explain the importance of moving away from describing to understanding the deeper issues. The use of thick description encapsulates the notion of meaning, and while the initial use of thick description was used to focus on the nature of method and aims of ethnography (Geertz, 1 973), it is a term used by many qualitative researchers to describe the way in which attempts are made to produce full descriptions of the context, setting, content and interactions of the participants and their environment. Eisner ( 1 99 1 ) described thick description as an "effort aimed at interpretation, at getting below the surface to that most enigmatic aspect of the human condition: the construction of meaning" (p. 1 5).

A number of researchers have identified a range of characteristics considered to be fundamental aspects of qualitative research (Bogdan & Biklen, 1 982, 1 998; Eisner, 1 99 1 ; Merriam, 1 998; Taylor & Bogdan, 1 998). Bogdan and Biklen ( 1 982) outlined five characteristics associated with qualitative research, which included that the research is undertaken in natural settings, the data are descriptive, there is a concern with process, the analysis of data is largely inductive, and meaning is the primary concern for the researchers. These characteristics were recognised as still current 1 6 years later (Bogdan & Biklen, 1 998).

While the characteristics described by Bogdan and Biklen highlight the naturalistic setting and the aim of qualitative research, the essential aspect of exploring the meaning that people attribute to events and objects is not featured. Taylor and Bogdan ( 1 998) identified that qualitative researchers were concerned with the meanings people attach to things in their lives; and also noted that in qualitative research there is a holistic analysis of people and settings; more specifically, they suggested that all perspectives are worthy of study. Merriam ( 1 998) identified features of qualitative research that are

consistent with the work of other qualitative researchers (Bogdan & B iklen, 1 998; Eisner, 1 99 1 ; Taylor & Bogdan, 1 998).

F or this study, Eisner ( 1 99 1 ) provides the more useful framework for discussing the critical features of qualitative work because his list identified both researcher and paradigm influences. While his list is similar to Bogdan and Biklen ( 1 998) and Taylor and Bogdan ( 1 998), Eisner identified the presence of voice in text, as well as the importance of detail. The characteristics Eisner ( 1 99 1 ) identified as playing an inherent part in qualitative research are: that qualitative studies tend to be field focussed; that the self is an instrument; that qualitative studies are interpretive in character; that the use of expressive language and the presence of voice is in text; that attention is given to particulars; and that the study has coherence, insight and instrumental utility. In the sections below, the aspects of qualitative research identified by Merriam ( 1 998) and Bogdan and B iklen ( 1 998), will be explored within the features identified by Eisner because Eisner encapsulates both researcher and paradigm characteristics.

Qualitative studies tend to be field focussed: Most qualitative research involves the

researcher entering the world of the participant. In order to do this effectively, such research is undertaken within the usual setting of the participant, as distinct from either a controlled laboratory setting, or an environment that the participant is less familiar with (Newman, Griffin, & Cole, 1989; Strauss & Corbin, 1 990). As the context is usually an integral part of the study, the research generally takes place within the setting (Merriam, 1 998). Therefore, researchers within the qualitative paradigm usually enter the field by physically going to the site or setting where the people work, learn, or live. This enables the researcher to study the participants in their natural setting within a familiar context. In the present study, the second phase took place within a number of learning contexts involving both school and out-of-school settings.

The self is an instrument: Within qualitative research, the researcher is the principal instrument for collection of data and subsequent analysis (Guba & Lincoln, 1 98 1 ; Kvale, 1 996; Neuman, 1 997). Often the data collection and analysis phase are inextricably linked within the research process and can, at times, occur simultaneously.

The rationale for identifying the researcher as the key research instrument has been outlined by Merriam ( 1 998).

The researcher is responsive to the context; he or she can adapt techniques to the circumstances; the total context can be considered; what is known about the situation can be expanded through sensitivity to nonverbal aspects; the researcher can process data immediately, can clarify and summarise as the study evolves, and can explore anomalous responses (Merriam, 1 998, p. 7).

Given that the researcher is the key instrument, essential tools of qualitative research are personal qualities, such as communication skills, empathy, sensitivity (Merriam,

1 998) and the power of listening (K vale, 1 996; Woods, 1 986).

Qualitative studies are interpretative in character: The meanings people have

constructed are the underlying focus in qualitative work (Bogdan & Biklen, 1 998; Merriam, 1 998). This is a key feature that differentiates qualitative work from quantitative work. It is through identifying the meaning constructed by the participant that the phenomena come to be understood in qualitative research. The ability to interpret the significance of the whole in relation to its parts is a factor of qualitative research. In comparison, quantitative research sets out to measure aspects of the phenomenon and looks at component parts that make up the whole, rather than attempting to see the interrelatedness of the whole. While all interpretivist inquiries are largely based on the ability to "watch, listen, record and examine" (Schwandt, 1 994, p. 1 1 9), the interview is seen as the most powerful tool used in attempts to understand people (Fontana & Frey, 1 994).

The use of expressive language and the presence of voice in text: The written reports

and use of expressive language to acknowledge the researcher's role in the process is a feature of qualitative work. There are fewer attempts to achieve obj ectivity or neutrality in the writing (Eisner, 1 973, 1 99 1 ; Strauss & Corbin, 1 990). Eisner ( 1 991 ) referred to the "presence of voice" in text to describe the importance of identifying the participant's views through their language, as well as writing in a more personal way as a researcher. However, while Eisner argued clearly for the "presence of voice" in text, Strauss and Corbin ( 1 990) believed it is dependent on the audience and scientific journal for which the work is intended. Regardless of how it is expressed through language, the end product is "richly descriptive" (Merriam, 1 998, p. 8). Through employing both phenomenographic and ethnographic methods, the current study acknowledges that the inclusion of student voice is an integral component of both the

data collection and description of results. Lancy ( 1 993) stated that "every aspect of one's work as a qualitative researcher demands more writing than would be the case for a quantitative scholar. Writing is to qualitative research what mathematics is to quantitative research" (p. 234). Within the present study, the presence of student voice is dominant in the presentation of results.

A ttention to particulars: Eisner ( 1 99 1 ) discussed the importance of not losing the

meaning and relevancy of the phenomena in qualitative research. He argued that through other methods of research within a quantitative paradigm, meaning is lost in the management and treatment of numerical data. In this study, the use of phenomenography (Phase One) ensures that the meaning of the phenomenon is identified and developed, and ethnography (Phase Two) allows this meaning to be explored in a number of contexts.

It has coherence, insight and instrumental utility: Eisner ( 1 99 1 ) believed that qualitative inquiry is about persuasion because the data and analysis are about abstracting meaning in a certain way to determine what counts. As Eisner ( 1 99 1 ) stated "in qualitative research there is no statistical test of significance to determine if results 'count'; in the end, what counts is a matter of judgement" (p. 3 9). This is perceived as both a strength and weakness of qualitative research. For example, one of the cautions of interpretive work is that the researcher can extract meaning to illustrate a point, and can influence the results through the interpretation (Stronach & MacLure, 1 997). Stronach and MacLure ( 1 997) raised concerns that researchers can lead others to a meaning through the interpretation and analysis of data, and that there are often a variety of ways of interpreting the data. Within this study the collection of data and subsequent analysis occurred over two phases to ensure greater reliability of results and insight into the phenomena of learning and self-assessment. The benefits of employing two different methods over two phases give greater confidence to the data because the conceptions of learning and self-assessment are first looked at from the student' s point of view (phenomenographic phase), and second within the context of student learning ( ethnographic phase).