Special Online Issue
 |
Edited by Diane McGrath |
formerly Journal of Research on Computing in Education
Volume 28 Number 5 Summer 1996
Technology, Multimedia, and Qualitative Research in Education
Trudy Campbell
Kansas State University
Abstract
The role of technology and multimedia in enhancing research
is illustrated
through the use of examples from more qualitative approaches to
inquiry. The
author makes reference to key characteristics of qualitative
techniques and
emphasizes implications for data collection, data analysis, and the
presentation
of findings. Articles appearing in this issue of the Journal of
Research
On Computing In Education serve as illustrations of both the
characteristics
of qualitative research and examples of the impact of technology and
multimedia
on the research process.
Advances in technology are changing the way teaching
and learning occur. Schools now have the capacity to offer a wider range
of courses through distance education, more practical experiences
through simulated laboratory settings, and access to almost unlimited
sources of information through the Internet. Students are able to
communicate directly with other learners
in a variety of settings, teachers are able to structure a learning
environment which promotes inquiry, and administrators may process large
databases efficiently to better inform decisions affecting the learning
community. But course offerings, access to information, and increased
communication are not the only areas which will be affected by the use
of multimedia in the schools. Technology and multimedia also have great
potential for enhancing the role of research in influencing educational
practices. To better understand how this potential may be realized,
qualitative approaches to research have
been selected for illustration. Through a discussion of the
characteristics associated with qualitative research, examples of
current and potential uses of technology and multimedia to promote the
conduct and use of educational research will be presented.
Characteristics of Qualitative Research
The characteristics of qualitative research are
frequently presented as dichotomies or contrasts to more traditional
quantitative approaches (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992; Creswell, 1994;
Firestone, 1987; Glesne & Peshkin, 1992; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Purists
argue that they are essentially different paradigms with unique
perspectives on how inquiry should be conducted. Qualitative research is
primarily viewed as an inquiry process based on building a holistic,
complex understanding of a social problem. It is characterized by data
collection in a natural setting where the researcher acts as a key
instrument. Furthermore, the research contains deep, rich description
and is more concerned with process than specifying outcomes or products.
Generally, the data are analyzed in an inductive process to provide
meaning to the research consumer. Qualitative researchers assume
reality is socially
constructed and that variables are complex, interwoven, and difficult to
measure. The researcher seeks the insider's point of view and is
personally involved in the process. Generally, these types of studies
end with hypotheses (assertions, themes, patterns) or grounded theory.
Even the presentation of the findings differs. In this case, much more
descriptive, often first person accounts are common. In contrast,
quantitative approaches to research seek
to show causality, to predict, or to generalize findings to other
populations. Quantitative researchers select variables that can be
identified and relationships that can be measured because there is an
assumption that social facts have an objective reality. The outsider's
point of view is sought and the researcher is to remain detached and
impartial to avoid contaminating the data. The methods are generally
deductive and experimental in nature and reduce data to numerical
indices. The presentation of the findings uses more formal, abstract
language in an attempt to provide and objective portrayal. Peshkin
(1993) summarizes the range of outcomes
emanating from four basic categories of analysis in qualitative research
studies: description, interpretation, verification, and evaluation.
Descriptive analyses yield information on processes, relationships,
systems, people, and the setting or situations.
Bier, Gallo, Nucklos, Sherblom & Pennick (1996) [this issue], for
example, investigated the use of information technology use in private
homes by individual families. The participants in the study were
provided home access to the Internet and reported an integration of
technology into their daily lives. They were able to seek information
about health concerns and to help their children raise their grades in
school through extra credit assignments improved by the use of the
information on the Internet. More interpretive analyses provide
explanations or even help to create some generalizations. New concepts
may be developed or extended. Interpretive studies help provide insights
that have the power to change behavior, refine knowledge, or to identify
problems. Harris (1996) [this issue] reports a type of interpretive
study designed to expand and generalize theories
related to children's drawings as psychological assessment tools. Some
analyses take on the task of verifying assumptions, theories or
generalizations. Christie's (1996) [this issue] work approaches this
type of analysis when she challenges the nature of gender stereotypes
and how pedagogy impacts both confirmation and defiance of those
stereotypes. Finally, evaluative efforts yield information on policies,
practices, or innovations. The NIE Project (Whelan, Frantz, Guerin &
Bienvenu, 1996) [this issue] is a pilot state program to infuse Internet
use into K-12 classrooms. Details on the project, the evaluation
process, and recommendations offer readers valuable insights into issues
surrounding technical problems, participants' perceptions, and use and
access policies.
Readers of research will recognize a wide range of
research strategies commonly used to arrive at the outcomes previously
discussed (Marshall & Rossman, 1995). When the purpose of the study is
exploratory in nature, case or field studies are conducted. In case
studies, the researcher explores a single phenomenon (person, activity,
site, group) which is defined or bounded by specified conditions. Over a
sustained period of time, detailed information
is collected through a variety of data sources (Merriam, 1988; Yin,
1989). Bier et al. (1996) selected an elementary school site and
identified six families typically underserved by school processes. These
families were provided Internet access and training for electronic
communication. Over a period of six months they collected data through
weekly home interviews, monthly group interviews, intermittent technical
support visits, telephone and e-mail interactions, and actual
participant sharing sessions. Explanatory or descriptive studies
generally require
multisite case studies to search for patterns or themes, and histories
and ethnographies to understand the meaning of the experiences of the
participants in the culture. McGrath et al. (1996) conducted seven case
studies of multimedia science projects
to search for patterns in how learners connect with important science
issues in their communities. The term "ethnography" is frequently seen
in the research literature. Wolcott (1980) calls ethnography the science
of cultural description. It is important to note that an ethnography
differs from a case study in its depth and detail and is not as
frequently conducted given the length of the field study needed to
complete such an investigation.
The Impact of Technology and Multimedia on Qualitative Research Now that
the characteristics
commonly associated with qualitative research have been described, these
characteristics
may now serve as illustrations of the impact of technology and
multimedia. Three
basic steps of the inquiry process (data collection, data analysis, the
presentation
of the findings) and the use of research to guide educational practices
will be
examined.
Data Collection
One potential for technology and multimedia to
contribute to research occurs during data collection. The need for
detailed description and multiple sources of data encourages the use of
many forms of media and technology. Marshall and Rossman (1995) provide
a comprehensive list of data collection methods along with their
relative strengths and weaknesses. The primary data sources
are those which include some form of interview (informal, formal,
ethnographic, elite, focus groups), observation (participant as an
observer, observer as a participant, or observer as a non-participant),
document or artifact collections (written materials, films, photos,
questionnaires) or any combination of these methods. With any method
there are characteristics to consider. The work of Turner and Dipinto
(1996) [this issue] illustrates common data sources. In their study of
peer collaboration in a hypermedia learning environment, they observed
individuals and pairs of students as they interacted with each other,
with the software, and with the teacher. They also videotaped and
transcribed selected sessions. A second set of data were brief, informal
interviews of the teaching that the researcher conducted several times
during the unit identified for the study. A third data set focused on
student reflections. Once every two or three weeks the teachers asked
the students to write a paragraph reflecting on what they had learned
that week as they worked on the HyperCard project. Students also wrote a
final reflective essay after the project completion. All of these data
were collected each year during the four-year study.As noted earlier,
with any method there are both
advantages and disadvantages associated with the various forms of data
collection. For example, interviews allow the researcher to obtain large
amounts of expansive and contextual data quickly but data are open to
misinterpretation because of cultural differences. Bier et al. (1996)
were troubled by what they heard in their interviews of participants who
were given access to the Internet. Their participants had integrated
technology into their daily lives to the degree they became very
dependent on the access and reported growing fear of the
time when they would be expected to return the borrowed equipment.
Listen to Andy in Christie's study (1996) [this issue], when he
interacts with his teacher. He has learned over the years he can engage
in demanding irresponsible behavior because he is bright and male.
Participant observations facilitate cooperation from the research
subjects yet they could be fraught with ethical dilemmas. In this case,
the teacher felt compelled to discuss this inappropriate behavior with
him. Document reviews yield data which are easy to manipulate and
categorize for analysis but can lead the researcher to "miss the forest
while observing the trees." Qualitative research is generally language
intense.
Language provides a source for understanding cultures and the viewpoints
of the participants. By constantly asking natives for the names of
things, ethnographers, for example, arrive at the cognitive system of
the identified culture (Frake, 1968). For many years, researchers have
been able to capture natural language or speech through the use of both
video and audio tapes. Many details both
verbal and nonverbal are preserved. More recently, rapid data entry
(e.g., recording each instance of an identified speech event and the
conditions under which it took place) at the site has been enhanced by
the use of laptop computers, a tool not available just a few years ago.
Computer forms can be developed for more accurate records of dates,
locations, times and people interviewed (Glesne & Peshkin, 1992).
Computers also facilitate the accounts of progress in the field work and
point out gaps in the data collection. Field notes and journal entries
may be recorded more systematically and reflection becomes an integral
part of data collection as interviews are transcribed into text files.
In fact, during data collection preliminary analysis actually begins
(Bogdan & Biklen, 1992). Researchers are encouraged to make decisions
about narrowing the study, developing analytic questions,
revising data collection procedures, and playing with metaphors,
analogies, and concepts relevant to the study. All of these tasks are
made more efficient through the use of technology and assist in the
reflective process so critical to final analysis.
Scanners now allow copies of documents to be placed in computer text
files,
quickly increasing the likelihood of more systematic and in depth
uses. Photos
or video of artifacts allow the collection of additional data sources
commonly
overlooked or considered too cumbersome. Wolcott (1988) colorfully
illustrates
the importance of gathering nonwritten sources of data when he asks us
to envision
a scene in which colleagues eagerly assemble to see what a
quantitatively oriented
researcher has brought back to the office after an intense interlude
of data
gathering. This scene is much more difficult to imagine than that of
the ethnographer
who has collected pictures, maps, or examples of local handiwork for
us to admire
even when the field site was a nearby classroom. Student-generated
cards from
hyperstacks from the McGrath et al. study (1996) [this issue]
illustrate the
understanding to be gained from having access to less traditional
forms of data.
Technology and multimedia allow researchers to extend the range and
depth of
materials invaluable in analysis.
Data Analysis
A second contribution of technology and multimedia to
research occurs during the data analysis. "Analytic procedures fall into
five modes: organizing the data; generating categories, themes, and
patterns; testing the emergent hypotheses against the data; searching
for alternative explanations of the data; and writing the report"
(Marshall & Rossman, 1995, p. 113). Each phase of the process requires
reduction of the massive amounts of data for the purpose of interpreting
or assigning meaning to the words and actions
of the members of the culture or site being studied.
Historically, researchers used a "cut and paste"
method for separating chunks of information. Units of text would be
pasted on index cards or highlighted using a color coding system. The
colors or cards could then be used to sort and resort as categories and
themes were created and revised. Word processors or data base managers
have certainly allowed a more efficient "cut
and paste" process to occur but more recently, the development and
use of software specifically designed for qualitative analysis shows
great promise (Qualitative Research Management, 1995). Programs for
MS-DOS (e.g., Textbase Alpha, QUALPRO, The Ethnograph, KWALITAN, AQUAD,
ATLAS/ti, and MAX) and programs for Microsoft WINDOWS (HyperRESEARCH,
WINMAX) are capable of assisting in data analysis. The ability to import
text from narratives, field notes, interview transcripts, diaries,
open-ended questionnaires, and documents has already been noted. For
coding, researchers are now able to indicate the boundaries of text
segments in their data, assign project information to the text segments
for retrieval, and assign subcategories for sorting them. In fact, a
single segment of data may be nested within a larger segment (multiple
coding) and codes may be altered in successive rounds of sorting as
themes or patterns continue to emerge or are refined. Finally, the
results of the analysis can then be placed in an ASCII file and stored
for use in most word processors as the final report is being written.
This capacity greatly facilitates the inclusion of verbatim quotes from
participants to illustrate key themes.
Researchers must be aware that selection of software
for qualitative analysis is based on the methodological approach most
suited to the study: descriptive/interpretive
analysis and theory-building analysis. When the researcher works to
provide detailed narrative accounts to allow others to better understand
the phenomenon under study, coding according to themes and retrieving
segments in various combinations of coding categories is common. Most
software programs allow these functions. When the task is one of
building theory, a more sophisticated process takes place. In this
instance, "a code, rather than signaling that a segment is about the
reaction to a particular experience, for instance, indicates the nature
of the reaction (examples: "negative attitude towards X:, or "optimistic
expectations about future"). Analysis is now taking place on a more
abstract level, at the level of concepts and their relationships to each
other. For theory building, programs such as
HyperRESEARCH and AQUAD might be more appropriate.
There are some cautions to be mentioned when using the
computer programs for analysis (Glesne & Peshkin, 1992). There is no
question using the computer increases efficiency and may even lead to
greater depth and consistency in exploring issues or themes (Becker,
1984). In addition, the process of using the computer requires the
researcher to clarify thinking and carefully attend to coding decisions
(Miles & Huberman, 1984). Yet, the use of software programs may
contribute to analyses being shaped by what is convenient or compatible
to the program rather than what is appropriate to the data. There may
also be a question of confidentiality depending on security measures
governing computer files and access. Finally, as with any technology,
there is a potential for data to be lost due to operator error or
equipment malfunction.
The Presentation of Findings
Just as the designs of qualitative research vary, the
write-up takes on different formats depending on the purpose of the
study and the targeted audience. Bogdan and Biklen (1992) highlight
three common approaches or foci for writing up the research: thesis (a
proposition you put forth and then argue), theme (a concept or theory
that emerges from your data), and topic (a unit of a particular aspect
of what you were studying). Taylor and Bogdan (1984) report on five
different approaches, including descriptive life histories,
presentations of participants' perspectives, relating practice
and theory, and extending or creating theory. Van Maanen (1988)
identifies three different genres in the writing: realist tales of the
culture under study, confessional tales or personalized accounts, and
impressionist tales of the field workers displaying their experiences in
the field. Read what Christie (1996) [this issue] has to say about her
study. She indicates her study tells a story. She is the storyteller and
the story reflects her beliefs, biases and world view. She is, in a
sense, providing impressionist tales of experiences in the classroom.
The key factor is that writing up qualitative research is an
"interpretive craft and that the text can take a variety of forms,
researchers can be liberated from some of the conventions that inhibited
their creative expressions" (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992, p. 197).With the
use of technology and multimedia, some
practical problems of presentating the findings are somewhat resolved.
Ethnographers, for example, used to wrestle with the amount of field
data to include in the report (Chilcott, 1987). How does one provide
enough information from the field to illustrate, yet not overwhelm the
reader? Publishing on the computer could allow for
access (through buttons created in some form of hypermedia program) to
extensive background and data at the choice of the reader. Manuscripts
are frequently limited to a specified number of pages which do not allow
for adequate description. Again, electronic publications would allow for
lengthier, more detailed reporting more consistent with qualitative
research.
The creativity of the writer is also enhanced by the
use of technology and multimedia. With the inclusion of sound, video,
graphics, and animation writers have a multisensory approach to
publication to extend readership. "With multimedia, we can not only
write a poem, but have our audience hear our reading of it, and with
on-screen video, perform dramatic portions for them as well."
(d'Ignazio, Madian & Wagner, 1994, p. 32). This approach to writing and
publishing is clearly consistent with Gardner's (1983) thoughts on
multiple intelligences and learning environments that are sensitive to
the diversity of learners.
Implications and Conclusions While there are numerous examples of how
technology
and multimedia impact the processes of research from data collection to
analysis
and finally to presentation of the results of those analyses, there are
other
concerns which go beyond the individual steps or stages of the process.
These
concerns involve the use of research for influencing changes in schools
and how
research practices could be improved.
Using Research for Change
Why do we conduct research in education? The most common
defense (Borg & Gall, 1983) has been that it contributes to the
knowledge about
education for the continual development and improvement of educational
practice.
Yet, talk to any group of teachers or administrators and you are
likely to hear
complaints that research is primarily written for other researchers.
The language,
the statistics, and the problems are not applicable or understandable
for many
practitioners. On the other hand, we are told that significant changes
in schools
will likely occur at the classroom level, school by school (Fullan,
1992). One promising approach to school improvement or change may
be an old concept, action research (Corey, 1953). In action research,
systematic
inquiry to resolve day to day problems of the schools and to assist in
decision
making are goals. Generally, the method is less rigorous than
traditional experimental
designs, a fact which makes it easier for teachers and administrators
to conduct.
In addition, action research employs many of the techniques and
characteristics
of qualitative research (e.g., classroom observations, interviews,
open ended
questionnaires, artifact and document collections, focus groups,
natural settings).
The benefits of action research are numerous (Calhoun, 1993).
Educators report
the process allows them to experience and model problem solving to
their students
as well as creating a professional environment which values this
approach. It
can revitalize the entire learning community as participants assume
ownership
through conducting the steps of the inquiry process. Those most likely
to implement
changes based on the findings are those conducting the research.
Furthermore,
valuable insights are gained when the voices of the members of the
"culture"
are heard.
Technology and multimedia certainly play a role in facilitating the
use of
research. First, research is more likely to be read and key ideas
reinforced
when it contains multisensory components. Second, technology and
multimedia
allow the researcher to express ideas in more creative, artistic ways
rather
than being trapped in a traditional text with scholarly language and
little
personality. Third, more school change agents are likely to engage in
research
when tools like the computer facilitate data collection and technology
expands
definitions of what constitutes viable data (photos, videos, scanned
documents,
artifacts). Finally, the ease of access to research via the Internet
and the
World Wide Web increases dialog about problems needing resolution as
well as
providing multiple perspectives or resources for detailed information.
Thurston,
Secaras and Levin (1996) [this issue] noted the use of sample teaching
units
developed by undergraduate elementary education students included 1301
computer
"hits" in one month from seven countries outside the United States and
at least
fifteen states within the U.S. Fewer than 10% of the hits came
internally from
the university where the lesson plans were created.
Improving Research Practices
Finally, technology and multimedia provide additional
avenues for establishing standards of quality and raising questions to
guide researchers toward more ethical practices when conducting
qualitative research. Lincoln & Guba (1985) discuss quality when they
address the question of how we can face the charges of "sloppy"
research. Several techniques are described for establishing
"trustworthiness." In more conventional paradigms, researchers sought
validity, generalizability, reliability, replicability, and objectivity.
More naturalistic paradigms seek credibility, transferability,
dependability, and confirmability. A specific technique for establishing
credibility includes triangulation (use of multiple sources, methods,
and investigators). Transferability of the findings rests on thick
description. Dependability and confirmability are achieved through the
use of an inquiry audit (a process similar to a financial audit where
the steps of the research are verified through examination of such items
as raw data, data reduction products, and process notes). Clearly, the
computer has increased systematic
collection and analysis of data. Triangulation is made easier by the use
of technology; for example, audio and video taping are less cumbersome.
Writing and reporting findings can now be expanded to include "thick
description" through hypermedia programs.
The issue of ethics surfaces in many forms. Although
Bier et al. (1996) [this issue] attended to more traditional concerns
about the privacy and confidentiality of the participants, use and
ownership of the data, and sensitivity to the special needs of the
participants, an unanticipated dilemma surfaced. Participants described
the researchers as being "worse than the dope peddlers" for their role
in creating a dependency on the technology that would be removed at the
end of the study. These unanticipated consequences
appear to be more problematic when qualitative researchers follow
ethical codes established for quantitative approaches. Bogdan and Biklen
(1992) suggest that the relationship between researcher and subject is
so different for qualitative investigations that a new code of ethics
may need to be written. In qualitative research, the relationship with
participants is ongoing and evolves over time. The design of the
research is not precise and participants often affect its creation. This
makes proposals to human-subjects committees less complete and leaves
room for changes that might involve ethical questions.
Certainly, ethics are not ignored and principles have
been established. Generally these principles of ethical behavior include
protection of the identities of informants with special attention to
sharing sensitive information at the research site. In addition,
researchers must take care to treat their participants with respect and
seek their cooperation. The terms of the agreement to participate must
always be clear and finally, the researcher has an obligation to tell
the truth when presenting the findings (even when there is pressure to
report results not revealed by the data). Attention to ethical concerns
are imperative to future access to sites and candid portrayal of
participants' perspectives.
References Becker, H. (1984). Field work with the computer: Criteria for
assessing
systems. Qualitative Sociology,7 (1-2), 16-33.
Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. K (1992). Qualitative research for education:
An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Borg, W. R. & Gall, M. D. (1983). Educational research: An
introduction (4th ed.). New York: Longman.
Calhoun, E. F. (1983, October). Action research: Three approaches.
Educational Leadership, 51(2), 62-65.
Chilcott, J. H. (1987, Summer). Where are you coming from and where are
you going? The reporting of ethnographic research. American
Educational Research Journal, 24(2), 199-218.
Corey, S.M. (1953). Action research to improve school practice.
New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
Creswell, J. (1994). Research design: Qualitative &quantitative
approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
d'Ignazio, F., Madian, J., Wagner, R. (1994, November/December). The
(in)sane person's guide to multimedia in education. Electronic
Learning, 28-40.
Firestone, W. (1987, October). Meaning in method: The rhetoric of
quantitative and qualitative research. Educational
Researcher,16(7), pp. 16-21.
Frake, C. O. (1968). The ethnographic study of cognitive systems. In
R.A. Manners & D. Kaplan (Eds.), Theory in anthropology: A
sourcebook (pp. 507-514). Chicago: Aldine.
Fullan, M. & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational
change (2nd ed). New York: Teachers College Press.
Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple
intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
Glesne, C. & Peshkin, A. (1992). Becoming qualitative researchers: An
introduction. White Plains, NY: Longman.
Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury
Park, CA: Sage publications.
Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. (1995). Designing qualitative research
(2nd edition). Newbury Park: Sage.
Merriam, S. B. (1988). The case study research in education. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. & Huberman, M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A
sourcebook of new methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Peshkin, A. (1993, March). The goodness of qualitative research.
Educational Researcher<,22(2), 23-29.
Taylor, S. J. & Bogdan, R. C. (1984). Introduction to qualitative
research and methods: The search for meaning . New York: Wiley.
Qualitative Research Management. (1995, Spring). [Computer Software].
Desert Hot Springs, CA: Author.
Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing
ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wolcott, H. (1980, Fall). Culture, community, and school: Criteria for
an ethnographic approach to research in schools. The Journal of
Thought,15(3), pp. 23-44.
Wolcott, H. (1988). Ethnographic research in education. In R. M. Jaeger
(Ed.), Complementary methods for research in education
(pp. 187-249). Washington, DC: American Educational Research
Association.
Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research. Design and methods.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage publications.
Contributor
Trudy A. Campbell
Trudy A. Campbell is an assistant professor at Kansas State University
in the
Department of Educational Administration and Leadership. Her research
focuses
on diversity in leadership and school improvement and she currently
teaches
graduate courses on qualitative research and strategies for school
change and
supervision. (Address: Dr. Trudy A. Campbell, Kansas State University,
311 Bluemont
Hall, Manhattan, Kansas 66506. E-mail: tac@coe.educ.ksu.edu.). [Note:
Since
1996 Dr. Campbell Salsberry has been promoted to associate professor,
and her
new e-mail address is: tac@ksu.edu.]
Copyright © 1996, ISTE (International Society for Technology
in Education).
All rights reserved.
|