Spring, 2006

 

Professor Joanne Larson and Professor Kevin O’Connor

Time:  Wednesdays, 4:50 - 7:30 PM

Room:  Dewey 2-110D

Office Hours:  By appointment

Phone: 275-0900

E-mail: joanne.larson@rochester.edu; kcoconnor@its.rochester.edu

 

Course Objective: 

This required doctoral research methods course will introduce PhD and EDD students to qualitative research in education.  The course will offer students an opportunity to explore the theoretical and philosophical foundations of qualitative inquiry while applying these principles in a research project.

 

Course Requirements:

1. Research Project (65% of grade):  This course will require you to observe in a field site and to interview local participants.  This is an informal observational study for purposes of experiencing the methods of qualitative research only.  Sample locations may include public malls, parks, shopping centers, or your own family and friends (a field “site” does not mean only a physical location or a group.  A study of a certain individual and that person’s life context is also acceptable).

1.1  Site selection prospectus (10%):  The site selection prospectus will include a description of the selected place, group, or individual and a rationale for your selection.

1.2  Field note and Interview data (20%):  Students will observe at their selected site four to five times for at least one hour and transcribe those field notes.  In addition, at least one interview must be conducted, audiorecorded, and transcribed.  (To be submitted throughout the semester as noted in the syllabus). 

1.3  Class presentation and Final Qualitative Research Paper (35%): The final paper will consist of a report of the class project that includes: a clear statement of the question being investigated, the theoretical context in which the question and methodology are grounded, a description of the context for the project and the methodology used, a discussion of what the investigation found and implications that might apply.  Presentation of the project to the class will round out this assignment. (Papers should not be less than 20 pages).

 

2. Qualitative Research Study Review (20% of grade):  Students will review a published ethnography and write a critical/analytic review to an audience of their professional peers (e.g., counselors to counselors/counselor educators). This assignment is designed to familiarize students with how qualitative research is reported and to provide students with the experience of “reading” qualitative research (8 – 10 pages).

 

3. Critical Commentaries (15% of grade): Students will be required to write three critical commentaries during the semester. Critical commentaries should be typed, double-spaced, and approximately 3-5 pages in length.  Commentaries should address important theoretical, methodological, and substantive issues that emerge from your reading of the texts, your research project, and class discussion.  These papers are not summaries, but should be a careful synthesis and analysis of the readings.  Commentaries will be used as a basis for class discussion.

 

NO LATE ASSIGNMENTS WILL BE ACCEPTED

 

Required Texts:

Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (2005).  The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

 

Barton, D. & Hamilton, M. (1998). Local Literacies. New York: Routledge.

 

Wolff, M. (1992). A thrice told tale: Feminism, postmodernism, and ethnographic responsibility. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

 

Additional readings may be accessed online using WebCT. 

 

Recommended:

Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (1992).  Qualitative research in education:  An introduction to theory and methods.  Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

 

Geertz, C. (1995).  After the fact: Two countries, four decades, one anthropologist.  Cambridge, MA:  Harvard University Press.

 

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research:  Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, Second Edition. London: Sage.

 

Wolcott, H. (2001).  Writing up qualitative research, Second Edition.  London:  Sage.

 

Grading:

Research Project:                                                 65 points

            (Site Selection Prospectus:                                    10 points*)

            (Field note and Interview Data:                   20 points*)

            (Presentation/Final Paper:                         35 points)

Qualitative Research Study Review:                        20 points

Critical Commentaries:                                         15 points

Total:                                                                100 points

 

15		20		35		65		100
15 – 14 13 – 12 11 - 9	A B C	20 – 16 15 – 11 10 - 5	A B C	35 – 31 30 – 26 25 – 21 20 – 16 15 – 11 10 - 5	A A- B+ B B- C	65 – 61 60 – 56 55 – 51 50 – 46 45 – 41 40 - 35	A A- B+ B B- C	100 – 96 95 – 91 90 – 86 85 – 81 80 – 76 75 - 70	A A- B+ B B- C

 

 

* These assignments do not receive letter grades.

Class Schedule:

(1) January 18

Overview of the course

 

(2) January 25

Introducing Qualitative Research

Site selection prospectus due

 

Readings:

Erickson, F. (1986).  Qualitative methods in research on teaching.  In M. Wittrock (Ed.) Handbook of research on teaching, (pp. 119-161).  Washington:  AERA.

McLeod, J. (2001). Qualitative Research in Counseling and Psychotherapy, pp. 1-20. London: Sage.

Wolf, Chapters 1-2, pp. 1-60.

 

Recommended:

Bogden & Biklen, Part 1

 

(3) February 1

Fieldwork

First Critical Commentary Due

 

Readings:

Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (2003). Qualitative Research for Education Fourth Edition, pp. 73-146 & Appendix B. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Geertz, C. (1973).  Thick description:  Toward an interpretive theory of culture.  In The interpretation of cultures, pp. 3-30.  New York: Basic Books.

Becker, H.S. (1996). The epistemology of qualitative research.  In R. Jessor, A. Colby, & R.A. Shweder (Eds). Ethnography and human development: Context and meaning in social inquiry, pp. 53-71. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Barton & Hamilton, Part 1

 

(4) February 8

            Contested Foundations

First impression field notes due

 

Readings:

Luke, A. (2003). The trouble with context.  Unpublished manuscript. University of Queensland.

Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research/Locating the field. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 1-41. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wolf, Chapter 3, pp. 61-92.

 

(5) February 15

Ethics

 

Readings:

Lincoln, Y. (2005). Institutional review boards and methodological conservatism: The challenge to and from phenomenological paradigms. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 165-181. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lankshear, C. Knobel, M. (1997). The moral consequences of what we construct through qualitative research.  Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education. Brisbane, Australia.

Fine, M., Weis, L., Weseen, S., & Wong, L. (2000). For whom? Qualitative research, representations, and social responsibilities. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research Second Edition, pp. 107-131.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

 

Students who have not completed the Human Subjects Protection Program in ED 506 must complete the exam.  The University of Rochester Research Subjects Review Board (RSRB) materials can be found at: http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/ohsp/

 

(6) February 22

Qualitative Study Design

Second Critical Commentary Due

 

Readings:

Stake, R. (2005). Qualitative Case Studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 443-466. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (2005). Participatory action research: Communicative action and the public sphere. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 559-603. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bloome, D. & Katz, L. (2003). Methodologies in research on young children and literacy.  In Hall, N., Larson, J., & Marsh, J. (eds.). Handbook of Early Childhood Literacy. pp. 381-399. London: Sage.

Barton & Hamilton, Part 2

 

(7) March 1

Participant Observation

 

Readings:

Angrosino, M. (2005). Recontextualizing observation: Ethnography, pedagogy, and the prospects for a progressive political agenda. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 729-745. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Jorgensen, D. (1989). Participant observation: A methodology for human studies, pp. 12-81.  London: Sage.

 

(8) March 8

Ethnography

Second Field notes Due

 

Readings:

Duranti, A. (1997).  Ethnographic methods.  Linguistic anthropology, pp. 84-121. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Tedlock, B. (2000). Ethnography and ethnographic representation. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research Second Edition, pp. 455-486.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Markham, A. (2005). The methods, politics, and ethics of representation in online ethnography. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 793-820. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wolf, Chapter 4, pp. 93-126.

 

 

 

 

 

(9) March 15

Interviewing

 

Readings:

Fontana, A. & Frey, J. (2005). The interview: From neutral stance to political involvement. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 695-727. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kamberelis, G. & Dimitriadis, G. (2005). Focus groups: Strategic articulations of pedagogy, politics & inquiry. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 887-907. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Spradley, J. (1979). The ethnographic interview, chapter 2. ????:Wadsworth.

Seidman, I.E., (1991).  Technique isn’t everything, but it is a lot.  Interviewing as qualitative research, (pp. 56-71).  New York:  Teachers College Press.

Wolf, Chapter 5, pp. 127-139.

 

(10) March 22

Understanding Data analysis

Third Critical Commentaries Due

 

Readings:

Atkinson, P. & Delamont, S. (2005). Analytic perspectives. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 821-840. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21^st century: Applications for advancing social justice studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 507-535. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Barton & Hamilton, Chapters 9 – 11.

 

(11) March 29

            Transcription and Analyzing Talk

Interview transcripts and field notes due

 

Readings:

Ochs, E. (1979).  Transcription as theory.  In E. Ochs & B. Schieffelin (Eds.)  Developmental pragmatics, (pp. 43-72).  New York:  Academic Press.

Peräklä, A. (2005). Analyzing talk and text. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 869-886. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change, pp. 62-100. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Barton & Hamilton, Chapters 12 – 15.

 

 

(12) April 5

Coding and analyzing

Book review due

 

Readings:

Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (2003). Qualitative Research for Education Fourth Edition, pp. 147-184. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Weitzman, E. (2000). Software and qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research Second Edition, pp. 803-820.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Miles, M. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis, Second Edition, pp. 50-89. London: Sage

Recommended:

Strauss & Corbin, Part 2

 

(13) April 12

NO CLASS MEETING

Video and other representations

 

Readings:

Harper, D. (2005). What’s happening visually? In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 747-762. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Frow, J. & Morris, M. (2000). Cultural studies. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research Second Edition, pp. 315-346.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Anfara, V., Brown, K., & Mangione, T. (2002). Qualitative analysis on stage: Making the research process more public. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 28-38.

 

(14) April 19

Writing, publishing, and presenting qualitative data

Coded interview transcripts and field notes due

 

Readings:

Heath, S.B. (1993). The madness(es) of reading and writing ethnography.  Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 24(3). 256-268.

Denzin, N. (2005).  Emancipatory discourses and the ethics and politics of interpretation. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 933-958. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Richardson, L. & St. Pierre, E. (2005). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 959-978. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

 

Recommended:

Wolcott, H. (2001).  Writing up qualitative research, Second Edition.  London: Sage.

 

(15) April 26

Future directions and considerations

 

Readings:

Fine, M. (1994).  Working the hyphens:  Reinventing the self and other in qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of qualitative research, (pp. 70-82).  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Rist, R. (2000). Influencing the policy process with qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). Handbook of Qualitative Research Second Edition, pp. 1001-1017.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

House, E. (2005). Qualitative evaluation and changing social policy. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, Third Edition, pp. 1069-1081. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

 

Recommended:

Bogdan & Biklen, Chapter 6.

 

(16) May 3

Student presentations of projects

 

(17) May 10

Student presentations of projects

 

May 12           Final papers due by 5PM