A colleague remarked to me recently that she heard it takes forever to get respected as a qualitative researcher. “Is this just an unfounded rumor?” she inquired. That is a difficult question, and I am probably one of the least prepared to answer that. So, I’ll try.
Of course, David Silverman in Interpreting Qualitative Data (2006) acknowledges the sentiment that some call qualitative researchers “journalists or ‘soft scientist’ who’s work is ‘termed unscientific, or only exploratory, or entirely personal and full of bias” Denzin and Lincoln 1994:4). This seems to support her premise in general. Also, in the overview, the Research Methods Knowledge Base, a comprehensive web-based textbook that addresses social research methods, links lack of respect of qualitative researchers to perceived validity of research. They offer an alternate criteria for judging qualitative research (it is highly debatable) of which some of their proposals entail basing credibility from the perspective of the participant instead of externally and judging transferability of research not by remarks from the author, but rather, positioning it in the domain of the reader who has been supplied all the relevant data. However, when she asked about “being respected” as a qualitative researcher, my first response was “respected by whom”?
Her life and experiences are quite different than mine. Research was not a part of my education. I am a professor and an architect, and thus, I am in a field where, in my opinion, you gain expertise from the ‘doing’ – the art of design and the business of building. Granted, I conduct research frequently in my practice, but it is highly quantitative with comparison of proficiencies for building systems and materials. Indeed, within our 5 year bachelorate program, my students learn little about research (this is similar with Masters Programs). Also, keep in mind that a master’s degree in architecture or design is the terminal degree for professorship at nearly all universities in America. It is interesting that at the post-graduate level in architecture and design, one often has their first formal introduction into research methods! One of my colleagues and none of my department administration have doctoral degrees. Nevertheless, although not in an educational setting, there is common exposure to qualitative methods.
If I am concerned about respect as a qualitative researcher from my peers (architects who might use the findings to aid in the creation of their work or fellow faculty or department professors),it is important to know that qualitative research methods are commonplace in the professional architecture and design literature. From the arguably foundational “House as a Mirror of Self: Exploring the Deeper Meaning of Home “ by Clare Cooper Marcus (1995), which uses an open interview method to the many published case studies by the Harvard University, such work abounds. I believe that architects and designers, in general, respect a qualitative methodology as a way to more fully explore the experiential perception of a space, but they look at it with the scrutiny of one devoid of formal research education, wary of being told “convincing stories” as David Silverman remarks in his Preface on page xiii.
Respect from the architectural research community (AIA Committee on Architecture for Education, Interior Design Education Council, etc…) I’m sure, is more hard-earned. Now, with my entry into the PhD program, I move from being largely a recipient to a contributor of works. I hope that it will not be a matter of me being respected as a qualitative researcher, but rather, my qualitative research earning respect.
No comments:
Post a Comment