10
is acknowledged that the researcher impacts on the situation
and in turn is impacted
upon (Appleton & King, 2002; Guba & Lincoln, 1994).
Criticisms of interpretivism and constructivism and their related qualitative
methodologies focus on what is seen as their lack of scientific rigour (Kelly & Long,
2000; Schwandt, 1994). The difficulty with this argument is that it is based on the
‘failure’ to meet the criteria used to
assess quantitative research, for example,
objectivity, validity, reliability, generalizability, and replicability. Ironically the
weaknesses of interpretivist/constructivist research are increasingly being viewed as
their strengths (McPherson & Leydon, 2002). It has been suggested that qualitative
researchers concern with reflexivity (a critical examination
of researchers beliefs,
preconceptions, values and interests) force them to consider their role during data
collection and analysis adding a critical dimension to the research (McPherson &
Leydon, 2002) not normally addressed by quantitative researchers. Qualitative work
can also be criticised for having too small a sample and as a result has been described as
merely anecdotal and unrepresentative. It can also be argued
that small-scale work can
provide richness and depth not always evident in large-scale quantitative studies.
Dostları ilə paylaş: