Linda M. McMullen University of Saskatchewan Teaching Qualitative Inquiry in Undergraduate Psychology Programs: Enhancing Students’ Methodological Literacy Linda M. McMullen University of Saskatchewan

Context: U Saskatchewan Undergraduate Psychology Curriculum research-intensive history of teaching qualitative research in the department location of this course in the curriculum introductory course second-year courses in statistics and research design/methods third-year research courses for majors first-term courses second-term courses fourth-year Honours thesis

Objectives to provide students with an understanding of how to situate qualitative methodologies vis-à-vis quantitative methodologies in psychology to introduce students to the wide range of topics and research questions that can be pursued via qualitative inquiry in psychology to familiarize students with the range of qualitative methodologies and methods of generating and analysing data to provide a basic, hands-on experience with analysing discourse to begin to prepare students to conduct qualitative research in the future

Outline of Course situating qualitative inquiry in psychology overview of ontology, epistemology, methodology, method covering the components of a research proposal rationale for a qualitative study; the importance of the research question how to think (differently) about the role of the literature methods of data generation methodologies data analysis ethics criteria for assessing quality Situating qualitative research in psychology Recent history and significant developments Historical traditions in Canadian and American departments of psychology Overview of ontology, epistemology, methodology, and method (distinguish – Crotty) Review of positivism, post-positivism, objectivism as a contrast to constructionism CHALLENGE: WHEN TO INTRODUCE THESE CONCEPTS, IN HOW MUCH DEPTH? WHAT DO STUDENTS KNOW ABOUT THE ASSUMPTIONS OF POST-POSITIVISM, OBJECTIVISM? Covering the components of a research proposal Rationale for a qualitative study; the importance of the research question CHALLENGE: HOW TO THINK IN TERMS OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS VS. HYPOTHESES; HOW AND WHAT VS. WHY QUESTIONS (NOT FACTORS AND OUTCOMES or GROUP DIFFERENCES)   How to think (differently) about the role of the literature CHALLENGE: STUDY DOES NOT HAVE TO BE CONCEIVED AS THE NEXT LOGICAL STEP (SCIENCE AS PROGRESSION); THE CONSTRAINTS OF EXISTING KNOWLEDGE; USE OF OTHER LITERATURES (DISCIPLINES; GREY) AND SOURCES BOTH BEFORE AND FOLLOWING ANALYSIS Methods of data generation CHALLENGE: THINK BROADLY AND CREATIVELY (INTERVIEWS OFTEN A FALL-BACK POSITION) Methodologies CHALLENGE: WHICH METHODOLOGIES AND IN HOW MUCH DEPTH? Data analysis NOT OVERWHELMING STUDENTS WITH THE COMPLEXITY OF DATA ANALYSIS Ethics ETHICS AND DISCOURSE ANALYSIS Criteria for assessing quality MODELS OTHER THAN STAND-ALONE FOR TEACHING QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH: (1) EMBEDDED – in the context of content courses; or bring more substantive content into research courses; (2) SINGLE COURSE – side-by-side, team-taught, from a mixed methodologies framework

Arguments against the Model of the Stand-Alone Course Reinforces the methodology/methods-driven focus of our discipline Separates the learning of methodologies and methods from substantive content Reinforces the quantitative – qualitative binary which is seen as a false dichotomy Reinforces the methodology/methods-driven focus of our discipline Separates the learning of methodologies and methods from substantive content Reinforces the quantitative – qualitative binary which is seen as a false dichotomy We should be focused on the distinction between confirmation and exploration (Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2005)

Arguments for the Model of the Stand-Alone Course Increases the visibility, status, and depth of coverage of qualitative inquiry in our discipline Reinforces the methodological diversity that characterizes our discipline Provides the time necessary for a sustained immersion in a new language of research Enables proficiency in one language of research to be further enhanced through repetition and comparison when learning comparable concepts in the new language, e.g., epistemology; sampling; generalization Increases the visibility, status, and depth of coverage of qualitative inquiry in our discipline Reinforces the methodological diversity that characterizes our discipline Provides the time necessary for a sustained immersion in a new language of research [ontologies, epistemologies, social constructions, abduction, research questions, theoretical sampling, data generation, accounts, versions, claims, reflexivity] Enables proficiency in one language of research to be further enhanced through repetition and comparison when learning comparable concepts in the new language, e.g., epistemology; sampling; generalization

Comparisons Epistemology  objectivism, constructionism, critical realism Hypotheses vs. research questions Sample (random; stratified; vs. purposive or exemplary; theoretical) Generalization (sample to population; vs. abductive; case-to-case; communicative) Quality control (criteria linked to epistemological stance) Epistemology  objectivism, constructionism, critical realism Hypotheses vs. research questions Sample (random; stratified; vs. purposive or exemplary; theoretical) Generalization (Inductive – e.g., statistical [sample to population]; theory-carried [e.g., generalization from results to cases/phenomena that belong to the scope/domain of the theory, not to the theory itself]; VS. Analogical – e.g., case-to-case [concerned with the apparent similarities between a case that has been researched and another case that has not]; communicative [reader decides on extent to which results generalize, either on his/her own or in interaction with researcher]) Quality control – criteria tied to epistemological stance – OBJECTIVIST: (reliability vs. dependability [achieved by use of audit trail]; internal validity vs. credibility [achieved by, e.g., prolonged engagement, use of peer researchers, participant checks]; and external validity vs. transferability [achieved by providing sufficient information about the researcher, the context, processes, practices, etc.); CONSTRUCTIONIST: (differences among methodologies [and among variants of methodologies] and among forms of constructionism); CRITICAL REALIST: (consequential validity [extent to which the research achieves its goals of social and political change]; transgressive validity [extent to which research incites discourse and contributes to a more critical social science]) (Morrow, 2005).

Outline of a Restructured Undergraduate Psychology Curriculum Introductory course – inclusion of qualitative research via textbooks or selected readings, coupled with a curriculum-based research experience in both quantitative and qualitative approaches Mandatory, stand-alone, second-year courses in both quantitative and qualitative approaches Focus on how qualitative inquiry has shaped substantive areas of our discipline Optional, senior-level courses that focus on in-depth coverage of a particular qualitative methodology Capacity to complete an Honours thesis project based in qualitative inquiry Introductory course – inclusion of qualitative research via textbooks or selected readings, coupled with a curriculum-based research experience in both quantitative and qualitative approaches [need to expose students to the assumptions, principles, key methodological features of qualitative inquiry and present-day yields in substantive areas]   Mandatory, stand-alone, second-year courses in both quantitative and qualitative approaches; [hands-on assignments] Focus on how qualitative inquiry has shaped substantive areas of our discipline Optional, senior-level courses that focus on in-depth coverage of a particular qualitative methodology Capacity to complete an Honours thesis project based in qualitative inquiry

Aspirational Outcomes learning the languages of research: setting a foundation for bilingualism (quantitative and qualitative research) (Collini, 1993) awareness of unstated assumptions in both quantitative and qualitative research research must be intellectual, not technical, in nature; develop “a metaunderstanding of the character of research work” (Alvesson & Skӧldberg, 2000)