Steven I. Miller

How Does Grounded Theory Explain

This article argues that the concept of grounded theory, widely used in research in the human sciences, has not been adequately analyzed as to its structure as a theory. Analyzing grounded theory from predictionist and accommodationist views, as well as focusing on the issue of inference to the best explanation, it is concluded that this form of theorizing is basically accommodationist. Moreover, grounded theory, in terms of providing explanations, is simply a different version of a standard inductive argument. However, grounded theory’s strength lies in its potential to articulate a unique context and logic of discovery.

Mixed-Methods and Evaluation Research: Trends and Issues

In this article, the authors attempt an initial exploration of the relevancy of the newly emerging field of mixed-methods research for educational evaluation. They give a brief introduction concerning the intent and variety of mixed-methods designs and models. They focus the analysis on some of the general issues and problems of this emerging field, including the lack of clear-cut procedural rules and differing ontological commitments. However, they argue that a particular form of mixed-methods design called quantitative-dominant sequential analysis might prove useful for some educational evaluation and policy studies.

The Nature of "Evidence" in Qualitative Research Methods

The article is an attempt to show that a continuing issue in qualitative research methods is describing and justifying how qualitative data become “evidence” for a claim. Several models from the field of Confirmation Theory are developed and described within the context of a qualitative research example. It is argued that for the qualitative research case, the meaning and application of what constitutes evidence is best viewed in terms of a primary logical distinction.

Postpositivistic Assumptions and Educational Research: Another View

This analysis attempts to look again at the major concepts of the “new philosophy of science” in terms of their relevance for educational research. The argument is made that such concepts as underdetermination and incommensurability have limited applicability to many areas of educational research. This is due to the fact that such terms are based on the existence of genuine theories as found in the natural sciences, and the requirements for such theories cannot be (presently) met in the human sciences. There is also the related problem of ambiguity on how these terms are to be applied exactly to the field of educational research. The analysis further contends that writers in this area have not dealt with the critical concept of indeterminacy. It is argued that of all the concepts of the new philosophy of science, this term has most promise for defining the direction of educational research. From one view, indeterminacy may suggest even a greater degree of relativism; looked at from another angle, it is seen that indeterminacy is a means of structuring and fruitfully debating the purpose of educational research.

An Ethnographic Study of the Influence of a Mobile Home Community on Suburban High School Students

This study provides an ethnographic account of a mobile home park with specific attention upon the lives of adolescents living in the park and attending a local suburban high school. A symbolic interactionist perspective is utilized. Historical factors leading to the mobile home experience, as well as present policies at the local, state, and federal levels, perpetuate the outsider status of the mobile home park dweller. The mobile home unit and the mobile home park defy conventional categories and are thus “polluted”; an extension of this attitude comes to attach to the consumer of the mobile home experience as likewise being polluted or undesirable. Furthermore, the park dweller appears in the eyes of the American “mainstreamer” to fail to uphold an important symbolic value: the sacred site-built house. Park students are shunned in the school and, when at home, tolerate an adversary relationship with park management. An aura of fear in the park is reflected in the passivity on the part of the tenants. Most importantly, his lack of belonging is an obstacle to the self-image of the park adolescent. He is considered profane in one-to-one relations and becomes part of a new minority group (the mobile home park dweller) in terms of other group relations.

Quality and quantity: Another view of analytic induction as a research technique

SummaryThis discussion has tried to illustrate that analytic induction as a technique used by qualitative researchers may be extended in several ways. This is not to suggest that numerical analogs should be used to supplant the purpose of analytic induction. The present analysis has merely tried to show, following Robinsons suggestions, the broad similarities between analytic induction and what Robinson calls enumerative induction. The transition from one to the other mode of analysis requires a trade-off, however; that is, numerical estimates of the analytic inductive model can be made only if the logical structure is modified. Thus, placing even a minimal value in cell 3 automatically precludes the possibility of stating the logically necessary condition for the phenomenon—which is the focal point of analytic induction.This sacrifice of logical necessity may be ameliorated somewhat by showing that if certain numerical values are assumed, then, from a statistical point of view, the strength of the relationship may suggest conditions under which both necessary and sufficient conditions may be fulfilled. Thus, even sophisticated statistical methods such as path analysis (Kerlinger, 1973) assume a logical relationship between the variables (usually the sufficient condition) without being overly concerned that the correlations between the paths are usually moderately large at best. Indeed, another question would be whether logical considerations in empirical research should even be of central interest. Of course, in a very minimal way, they are important in the sense of saying that variable A logically antecedes variable B. However, unless propositions of this kind are left at a very general level of analysis or, alternatively, are recognized to be tautologies (e.g., “if societies are stratified, then they will have occupational hierarchies”), the utility of strictly logical considerations is not central. Thus, enumerative induction stresses quantitative “proofs” over logical ones, while analytic induction stresses logical considerations over quantitative ones. The point made by Robinson, however, is that they are not contradictory approaches, at least at some levels of analysis. What relates the two approaches more directly, even though this is not made explicit by Robinson, is the assumption that the qualitative researcher must know the characteristics of his group and/or setting intimately. Only then will he be able to suggest the reasonableness of assuming other (quantitatively distributed) characteristics of his sample.

Some brief notes on the “unfinished business” of qualitative inquiry

The paper argues that there are a variety of ”implicit” issues in qualitative inquiry that need to be addressed if the area is to develop in some “normal science” sense. This “unfinished business” is concerned with a deeper investigation of basic terms that are now simply taken for granted, such as “theme” and “pattern”. It also includes the need to develop “rules” which will assist in making and justifying how qualitative interpretations are made from the implicit processes of inference. Specific suggestions are made for accomplishing these issues.

Naturalistic Inquiry and Reliabilism: A Compatible Epistemological Grounding

In this brief analysis, the authors suggest that naturalistic inquiry as a field must return to a more rigorous interpretation of epistemological issues. The need is highlighted by the fact that ideological and methodological claims are increasingly becoming conflated. This produces a distancing of what is truly at stake: a need to defend a genuine epistemological theory consistent with the aims of naturalistic perspectives and establish some ontological commitments as a result. The authors argue that the epistemological theory of process reliabilism is worth examining critically. They also suggest its consistency with the ontological claims of minimal realism.

The Family Resemblance Metaphor: Some Unfinished Business of Interpretive Inquiry

The rapidly expanding discipline of interpretive inquiry, especially in its narrative analysis form, has not been fully cognizant of certain crucial epistemological and methodological assumptions that form the ultimate basis of its purpose. Even after abandoning traditional positivist views, the related disciplines within the human sciences that are engaged in interpretive inquiry have still not discovered the core implicit assumptions that militate against a full acceptance of this form of inquiry. This article outlines the locus of these implicit assumptions and then argues that the legitimacy of these enterprises must be grounded in a well-known but heretofore undiscovered perspective, namely, Wittgenstein’s notion of a family resemblance. It is argued that this metaphoric phrase is the key to unlocking the real and unique nature of narrative analysis.

Confirmation and qualitative evidence-instances: justifying the use of qualitative research methods

This article is a preliminary attempt in outlining the directions for a new approach in confirming qualitative research findings. The basic argument is that traditional Confirmation Theory may be applied to establish a firmer epistemological foundation for the acceptance of hypotheses within qualitative-ethnographic research. While all aspects of Confirmation Theory are not applicable to the qualitative case, because the probability calculus is not used in qualitative studies, the basic logical framework of this theory, nevertheless, may be utilized to establish the credibility of qualitative findings. It is argued, therefore, that qualitative research findings, as they bear on the confirmation issue, may be properly considered as a sub-set of traditional Confirmation Theory. To do this, however, requires the development of certain justification rules unique to qualitative research. Some of these rules are developed, and an attempt is made to show how they conform to Hempels classic development of confirmation.