Case Study Analysis Campus Response to a Student Gunman - Essay Example

? Case Study Analysis – ‘Campus Response to a Gunman’ by Kelly J. Asmussen, John W. Creswell Where does this school of thoughts fit into paradigmatic frameworks discussed? The study of Asmussen and Creswell is based on qualitative research; the specific method of research has been chosen due to the nature of the study’s subject. At the next level, reference is made to a case study that offers information on the issues under discussion. In other words, a paradigmatic framework of research has been chosen aiming to show the actual aspects of the theme analyzed through the specific study. The framework chosen for supporting the qualitative research employed in this study reveals the following fact: the priority of the researchers is that the truth is identified and is made known to the public. At the next level, the framework of the research tools involved in such research projects is usually described, using the term phenomenography, a research method emphasizing on the criteria under which people are likely to develop different views on the same events. Moreover, it should be noted however that paradigm as part of the qualitative research has two different forms, the traditional paradigm and the interpretivist paradigm (Denzin and Lincoln 536); the latter is preferred in qualitative research since it offers an in-depth analysis of a series of events – allowing the development of a ‘verdict’ in regard to the problem under investigation. In any case, the research scheme chosen for the study under examination, i.e. the qualitative research based on interpretivist paradigm, is fully justified – taking into consideration the scope of the study and the resources available. How does it distinct itself from other research approaches? The research approach used in the study under examination has similarities with the traditional paradigm, as a tool for identifying the causes and consequences of a particular problem – as in the study of Asmussen and Creswell. However, the traditional paradigm is not appropriate for the case under discussion, since it involves in the following problems: it cannot be used when the sample available in the research is quite small; moreover, it cannot be used when the variables of the research are not stable – another problem of the research conducted by Asmussen and Creswell. The interpretivist paradigm used in the case under examination can face the above two problems, using the above rules: the assumption that is most reasonable is set as a priority – referring to the case that the testimonies on the events examined are contradictory, as in the research conducted by Asmussen and Creswell. Moreover, the interpretivist paradigm is differentiated from the traditional paradigm at the following point: the findings of the research are likely to be descriptive – and not quantitative, as in the case of traditional paradigm. What is its ontological assumption? Phenomenography – as part of the interpretivist paradigm – on which the research developed by Asmussen and Creswell is based – refers to the following ontological assumptions: a subjectivist one and a non-dualistic one; the former implies that the status of the world is pre-defined, cannot be changed, everything is placed in accordance with a particular order; the second implies that there are no two different worlds – the one of the researcher and the one described by participants; the world is one and this fact needs to be reflected to the discussion on the findings retrieved through phenomenography. What is its epistemological essence? The epistemological essence of phenomenography is reflected in the following principle: the assumptions produced in regard to the findings of the research need to be extensively justified – in the context that each fact is followed by its interpretation. However, at this point the following issue needs to be taken into consideration: the description of the events under examination may be different – across the participants; for this reason, it is necessary for the researcher to identify the most reasonable explanation having in mind that the relationship between the actors and the event/ phenomenon need to be adequately clarified; in other words, emphasis should be given not so much on the event under examination but rather on the relationship between this event and the actors. What are its axiological and rhetorical assumptions? In the context of phenomenography, the description of events by the participants is expected to be different – as explained above. The researcher has to interpret their views in order to identify the most reasonable explanation on the event under examination. The researcher develop this task using a series of axiological and rhetorical assumptions; the former refers to the values on which the researcher will be based for interpreting the findings of the research; the latter refers to the language and the writing style that the researcher will use for expressing the findings and his assumptions on the issues under discussion. What are appropriate methods or techniques for this approach? As noted above, phenomenography – as part of the interpretivist paradigm – aims to present the various aspects of a specific event, as people who experienced the specific event understood this. Under these terms, the qualitative research, and especially the interviews, is considered as the most appropriate method for responding to the requirements of phenomenography. It should be noted here that other methods of qualitative research, for instance participant observation or focus groups, would be also appropriate for the particular research method – in accordance with the resources available and the conditions in the research site/ where the research need to focus on events developed within a particular area, as in the case under examination. What is the writing style involved? In accordance with the issues discussed above, phenomenography involves in the presentation of the aspects of the event examined through a particular research project. On the other hand, it has been made clear that phenomenography requires that the aspects of the event under examination are analytically justified, referring to the descriptions of the participants. In other words, clear description and extensive justification are two essentials requirements of the writing style used in the specific research approach. What are its limitations? The limitations of phenomenography, as part of the interpretivist paradigm, can be summarized as follows: the researcher interprets the event – as described by the participants – using his own axiological criteria; the researcher may perceive the event differently from participants, or else, he may make mistakes when interpreting the descriptions of the event – as these descriptions were given by the participants. The risk of the failure of the researcher to perceive appropriately the views of participants is one of the most important limitations of phenomenography. A failure may be also identified in the rhetorical assumptions of the researcher regarding the language and the writing style, which are appropriate for presenting the findings of the research. In case that the researcher chooses inappropriate writing style or language for presenting the findings of the research, then the credibility of his study would be reduced – even if the researcher had perceived appropriately the descriptions of the participants on the event under examination. What research is (or is not) suitable for this approach? In the context of the interpretivist paradigm – and the phenomenography research, on which the study of Asmussen and Creswell is based, specific methods of research need to be used; for instance, interviews can be conducted aiming to reveal the actual aspects of the events under examination. In any case, the qualitative research has to be preferred, not the quantitative, which would be appropriate for the traditional paradigm. The key characteristic of the research conducted using the specific approach is the following one: the research should be extensive as possible, covering all potential aspects of the events discussed. Otherwise, there is the risk that the material gathered to be inadequate for covering all issues of the study – having in mind the fact that in interpretivist paradigm the need for justification of the assumptions made is extensive, in opposition with the traditional paradigm where the justification involved can be limited. Works Cited Norman, Denzin and Lincoln, Yvonna. Handbook of Qualitative Research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1994, p. 536. Kelly J. Asmussen , John W. Creswell ‘Campus Response to a Student Gunman’ Read More