Validity in Qualitative Research in Education - Essay Example

The Issue of Validity in Qualitative Research in Education 2006 Outline Introduction A. Development of the qualitative research in education B. Notion of validity in qualitative research C. Definitions of validity D. Types of validities Conclusion Description In this paper we will briefly outline the development and the importance of the notion of validity in qualitative research, its possible definitions and types as defined by different scholars. The history of the qualitative research method in the education process is not very long and took place over the recent time. It gained popularity over the last years and is being increasingly used in the contemporary education. In this paper we will investigate the importance of the qualitative research method to the education, its problems and benefits. We will also touch upon the particular problem of validity in qualitative research in education, its possible interpretations and types. First of all let’s discuss the importance of the qualitative research method in education. Research methods appeared to be applied in the field of education only in recent times. Among these methods we can also notice the qualitative research method though even now its application remains limited. Many researches like Johnson /1995, p.5/ believe that “qualitative techniques are powerful tools for intensifying our understanding of teaching and learning”. He also agrees to the fact that these methodologies received ever growing popularity and acceptance over the last years. Yet it should be mentioned that although qualitative methods are very useful still many researches know little of them and the usage of these methods present great difficulties to them /Stallings, 1995, p.31/. Scholars believe that the main benefit in usage qualitative methods in education is more complete description of a phenomenon. The final objective of usage of qualitative method is better understanding of the information through giving additional details and appealing to the reader’s experience / Stake, 1978, p.5/. Qualitative research is used in the education process for several reasons. First of all qualitative research assist in understanding new of badly investigated phenomenon /Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p.42/. Secondly, qualitative research helps to comprehend new details about the phenomenon, which is already investigated. And finally qualitative research provides more deep and profound information which can’t be done by quantitative methods / Hoepfl/. Still the benefit of the qualitative method to the education can not be fully and explicitly defined. For example, Lancy believes that “...topic, theory, and methodology are usually closely interrelated in qualitative research” /Lancy, 1993, p.18/. Other researchers like Glesne and Peshkin claim that qualitative research covers many “philosophical orientations to interpretive research” and deals with a bride range of disciplines like educational criticism, ethnography, case study, phenomenology and others / Glesne and Peshkin, 1992, p.9 /. As the main problem of our study is validity in qualitative research in education, now we will proceed to the definition of this term and its main aspects within our field of study. From the first glance it’s clear that validity is a complex concept encompassing many other terms / Shank, 1995/. Validity is not a universal concept. Many researchers describe it as “a contingent construct, inescapably grounded in the processes and intentions of particular research methodologies and projects” /Winter, 2000/. One of the main problems of the problem of validity is that its application to qualitative research is not recognized by some scholars. Others claim that that there still exists the necessity to qualifying measure for the research /Golafshani, 2003, p.5/. In education there exists no single definition of the term validity. In this paper we will briefly outline some of them, which are provided by leading researchers and gained the greatest popularity. One of the most popular definitions of the term validity is that proposed by Hammersley. He says that “an account is valid or true if it represents accurately those features of the phenomena, that it is intended to describe, explain or theorise” / Hammersley, 1987, p.69/. On the one hand this definition is universal and involving all aspects. But on the other hand for some scholars this definition appears to be not appropriate. Substantial cause for his is that individual person’s point of view and his/her belief system have a considerable influence on the meaning of the term and its variations. In the research works the term validity often occurs in the combination of reliability / Hammersley, 1987, p.75/. Some scholars point that these two terms are even interchangeable in the qualitative research the others say that only some meanings of the both terms are the same but the meaning of reliability is also very broad as the meaning of validity /Winter, 2000 /. In this regard Hammersley redefines the notion of validity with regard to different researches made by various scholars, supporting different methodological points of view /Winter, 2000 /. So, on the basis of various definitions of the term validity we can differentiate two main questions concerning this problem of validity. The first point concerns the accuracy of the means of measurement. The second problem deals with intention of the researcher and aims to discover whether they really measure that very notion, which the researchers were aimed to measure /Winter, 2000/ The argument between the scholars appears on the basis of these two points, with some giving greater emphasis on the first one and the second supporting another. But even the greater disagreement appears on the basis of the difference between the terms reliability and validity with these terms being often misunderstood and confused / Winter, 2000/. Though accuracy is often related to the term validity, it is also can be applied to the term reliability as well. The other boundary notion between the terms validity and reliability is that of replicability. But on the basis of the numerous researches we can make a conclusion that the common definition of the term reliability is associated with the notion of replicability and the general meaning of the term validity could be summarized in the meaning of accuracy /Winter, 2000 /. Some scholars consider that validity concerns the whole process of investigation. Others view it as concerning a certain stage of the research process or combinations of several stages. Relying on the second viewpoint Maxwell distinguishes five main types of validity depending on the stages of the research process, though not all of them were recognized by other scholars / Winter, 2000/. The first type of validity is called descriptive. Maxwell believes that this type of validity is related to the initial stage of qualitative research, which usually deals with data gathering. Here validity refers to the exactness and accordance while stating the information statements, which sum up the data gathered /Maxwell, 1992, p.280/. The aspects, which can influence validity on this stage, are the choice of language and relevant data. Maxwell comments this point in the following way: “If different observers or methods produce descriptively different data or accounts of the same events or situations, this puts into question the descriptive validity of the accounts” / Maxwell, 1992 /. The second type of validity defined by Maxwell is interpretative. Maxwell uphold the realistic attitude to validity says that any valid account “must respect the perspectives of the actors in that situation”/Maxwell, 1992, p.280/. These two types of valitities share the common feature: both of them are based on the unanimity of terms, the difference is only in accuracy. The next type of validity is a theoretical one and is more abstract. Maxwell believes that theoretical validity is less specific and descriptive. It depends upon the constructions, applied or developed by the researcher in the process of the research /Winter, 2000 /. The other type of validity refers to the term of generalisability. Maxwell finds it helpful to provide differentiation between qualitative and quantitative research methods on the bases of degree of the generalisability of the phenomenon. Generalisability provides a real test to the validity of quantitative and qualitative research and is inherent only in quantitative method /Winter, 2000 /. Qualitative researchers also make use of sampling as an important aspect of the statistical test. As for the generalisability, qualitative research uses only internal generalisations, while quantitative research makes use of both internal and external ones / Maxwell,1992, p.282/. The last type of validity in researches is evaluative one. This type refers to the usage of the evaluative framework. According to Maxwell evaluative frameworks are typical for both qualitative and quantitative research /Maxwell, 1992, p.282 /. But having analyzed Maxwell’s theory and compared it with some other ones we came to the conclusion that not all Maxwell’s statements and notions can be true or valid. It seems that the typology of validity proposed by the Burke Johnson is more appropriate. Johnson differentiates between the three types of validity in qualitative research. The first type of validity is differentiated by Johnson is the same as proposed by Maxwell. This is descriptive validity. This first type deals with the actual accuracy of the account, which is discussed and reported by the researcher providing qualitative research /Johnson, 1997, p.6/. The second type of validity is interpretive one, which according to Johnson depends on the degree of accuracy of understanding the ideas, intentions and thoughts of the participants of the research by the researchers /Johnson, 1997, p.6 /. And finally the third type of validity is the theoretical one, which depends on the theoretical development of the research study and whether this theory is credible and real /Johnson, B., 1997, p.6 /. The problem of the application of the term validity in the qualitative research is caused by the fact that this notion was traditionally limited within the field of quantitative research tradition. So, many scholars even now doubt whether the term validity should be applied to qualitative research. Some qualitative researchers even say that reliability and validity are not typical for qualitative research /Smith & Heshusius, 1986, p.6/. Smith claims that the main epistemological and ontological characteristics of qualitative and quantitative research are quite different and so, the notions of reliability and validity are not relevant in the qualitative research /Smith & Heshusius, 1986, p.9/. The application of the term validity to the qualitative research depends on the quality of the research itself. The term validity is mentioned in regard to the qualitative research if it is performed on the high level and can be characterised as credible and trustworthy. In this case the qualitative research is defensible. The maximization of validity leads to increasing the level of the qualitative research in general. So, we can make the conclusion that the validity is quite a recent term in the field of qualitative research and in constantly gains popularity and becomes very important issue for the conduction of trustworthy and creditable report. References Glesne, C. & Peshkin, A. 1992. Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. New York: Longman. Golafshani, N. 2003. Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 8. Johnson, S. D. 1995. Will our research hold up under scrutiny? Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 32. Hammersley, M. 1987. Some notes on the terms validity and reliability. British Educational Research Journal, 13. Hoepfl, Malie C. Choosing Qualitative Research: A Primer for Technology Education Researchers. Boon. Lancy, D. F. 1993. Qualitative research in education: An introduction to the major traditions. New York: Longman. Maxwell, J. A. 1992. Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review, 62. Johnson, Burke. 1997. Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education. Smith, J. K., and Heshusius, L. 1986. Closing down the conversation: The end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational inquirers. Educational Researcher, 15. Stake, R. E. 1978. The case study method in social inquiry. Educational Researcher, 7. Stallings, W. M. 1995. Confessions of a quantitative educational researcher trying to teach qualitative research. Educational Researcher, 24 (3). Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. 1990. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Shank, Gary. 1995. Semiotics and Qualitative Research in Education: The Third Crossroad. The Qualitative Report, Volume 2. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR2-3/shank.html retr. 11 July 2006 Winter, Glyn. 2000. A Comparative Discussion of the Notion of Validity in Qualitative and Quantitative Research. The Qualitative Report, Volume 4. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR4-3/winter.html retr.10 July, 2006 Read More