Читать книгу Qualitative Dissertation Methodology - Nathan Durdella - Страница 38

Given the unique methodological characteristics of qualitative research and the historical development of beliefs about the assumptions, principles, and procedures of qualitative research, the need to surround yourself with a like-minded team who values the approach to inquiry in empirical investigations and who will best support you through the dissertation research process is extremely important. If you sense—even ever so slightly—that a prospective dissertation chair or committee member may disagree with your plans to design a qualitative study or oppose your use of specific qualitative data collection procedures, then move on—and quickly!

Practical Advice on Selecting Dissertation Committee Members

Your personal process to select dissertation committee members should follow a similar approach as the selection of a chair. In many cases, doctoral programs and/or university policies circumscribe dissertation committee composition and chairs assume a direct role in assigning committee members to you, so you may have less discretion in whom you can invite. However, in general, committee membership should be comprised of faculty members with whom you have worked closely as students—perhaps course instructors, first-year advisors, or program mentors. If you have wide latitude in the selection process, you need to be strategic in your approach—just as in the selection of a chair—and systematically apply criteria discussed here to strengthen methodological or content expertise or balance personalities on the committee.

While academic values encourage scrutiny of approaches to investigate human social life and foster a range of beliefs about what makes for good research, qualitative research has historically tended to be on the outside looking into the academy. While prevailing attitudes about research may be changing, Peshkin (1993, p. 23) aptly describes the experiences of many doctoral students and early career faculty members in the academy when they encounter systematic bias against qualitative research, saying that they may be marginalized because they do not test hypotheses, use theory to drive a study, or aim to generalize findings from a sample to a population. Perhaps you have encountered someone in your program or on campus who readily reproduces this bias. As a dissertation chair, I certainly can attest to this intellectual insularity of some colleagues. A recent encounter that I had with a committee member of one of my dissertation advisees reminds me of the importance of recruiting and inviting faculty members who value, understand, and support the use of qualitative research in dissertation studies and view the dissertation research process, in part, as an instructional or developmental activity. Indeed, this committee member seemingly argued that the improvement of practice and specific approach to the development of new knowledge were at odds in the students’ research purpose. More importantly, this committee member appeared to oppose the methodological decisions that the student made because he or she did not test hypotheses and did not use a large (interpreted as generalizable) sample. At the initial proposal hearing and right before the final dissertation defense, the use of a specific qualitative research tradition and set of methods (including sample size) undermined the value and clarity of the study, from the perspective of this committee member.

The use of qualitative approaches to gathering and making sense of information does not undermine the credibility, dependability, transferability, or confirmability—the trustworthiness—of doctoral students’ dissertation study or research work. Indeed, the innovative and original use of these methods is a perfect opportunity to illustrate how the dissertation research process is an instructional exercise for students to grow, mature, and develop as scholars and practitioners—especially in the case of applied (and an increasing number of research) doctoral programs. In fact, there are countless examples of how dissertation studies shape research (new knowledge) and practice—one only needs to access ProQuest and both scholarly and applied research journals to see them. With supportive and caring feedback from dissertation committee members who understand and collaborate with students to improve the nuances and complexity of students’ qualitative research work, these dissertations offer everyone with a stake in the process and outcome an opportunity to learn.

Because “human interaction—namely, the interaction between faculty and students” is an important factor in doctoral student experiences (Nettles & Millett, 2006), the need to interact with supportive, caring faculty advisors and committee members is paramount. Not just faculty advisors, chairs, mentors, and committee members, but peer reviewers and supporters outside of the academy and your doctoral program offer the best solution to enhance your dissertation work. Sometimes just a single peer reviewer does the trick; other times, a group of student colleagues offers the best approach—given busy schedules and commitments. The idea here is to establish and build relationships with others who are collegial, respectful, and understanding of the value of your approach to inquiry.