Creswell Chapter 1 Summary
Reading Summary
Alanna Staton
Liberty University
Dr. Randy Tierce
October 26, 2014
Creswell Chapter One Summary
As an introduction to the text, Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches, Cresswell (2013) first provides a purpose and rationale for writing the book. Although the purpose is not clearly formulated by the author, it is shown that Cresswell’s (2013) primary intention when writing the book was to fully examine the five qualitative approaches to inquiry.
” (p. 4). Moreover, no effort has been spared by Creswell (2013) to minimize subjectivity and personal bias, through the provision of multiple resources, a detailed glossary and the provision of analytical tables which present a diversity of philosophical and theoretical perspectives on various qualitative approaches; specifically as they related to various fields and disciplines (p. 5).
Creswell (2013) justifies his selection of the five approaches from a highly commendable knowledge-based perspective which he terms “positioning myself” (p. 6). The concept of positioning oneself embraces both philosophical and experiential values and seeks to illustrate the transient nature of qualitative inquiry and research design. In describing his personal journey, Creswell (2013) asserts, “over the years I have evolved into an applied research …show more content…
methodologist with a specialization in research design, qualitative research, and mixed methods research (p. 6). Such is the complexity of the research development process.
Creswell (2013) concludes chapter one by articulating the rationale behind the final selection his five qualitative choices. At the corpus of his analysis and reflective introspection
Creswell Chapter Two Summary Chapter two of Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (Creswell, 2013) provides a foundation and rationale as to how philosophical assumptions and interpretive frameworks are formulated. The critical issues are to collectively and intentionally assess one’s awareness of such assumptions and core beliefs, and secondly to decide whether or not one is purposefully prepared to engage them in qualitative research studies (Creswell, 2013). Moreover, Creswell (2013) highlights the various philosophical assumptions that have been embraced by qualitative researchers over time as well as the theoretical and interpretive frameworks that guide their belief systems (p. 15). In essence, the interrelationships of philosophies, theoretical and interpretive frameworks are examined in the context of the research process. Creswell (2013) uses an inductive approach to investigating philosophical assumptions and interpretive frameworks. First, he poses a number of key discussion questions which seek to unravel the genesis of philosophical assumptions and interpretive frameworks. With the support of an illustrative chart, Creswell (2013), details a five-phased approach to understanding the philosophical slant of the research process. Phase 1 addresses the multicultural researcher issues, phase 2 theoretical paradigms and perspectives, phase 3 research strategies, phase 4 the methodology behind data collection and analysis and phase 5 the nuances of interpretation and evaluation (pp.17-18). Against this backdrop, the importance of philosophy comes into central focus in qualitative research. Creswell (2013) distinguishes between the simplicity of cause-and-effect type research questions and the exploratory nature and depth associated with “a single phenomenon as found in qualitative research” (p. 19). Central to the research process is gaining a conceptual understanding of the four pillars of philosophical assumptions namely: ontological, issues related to reality and its characteristics, epistemological or knowledge-based approach to inquiry, the axiological or value-laden nature of the study, and the methodological, which is at its core, constructive and inductive (p. 20). Creswell (2013) segues into a more in-depth review of interpretive frameworks that is essentially buttressed on social science theories and social justice theories. This theoretical approach inherently provides the discerning reader with several interpretive frameworks from which to choose (p. 23). Some of these frameworks include: post positivism which is essentially systematic in nature and builds on grounded theory (p. 24), social constructivism which seeks to understanding the world of the participant (pp. 24-25), and transformative frameworks which espouses a societal power-base based on social relationships that can be developed either through active collaboration or participation (pp. 25-25). Creswell (2013) continues to build on his thesis with discussions on postmodernism as perceived by many of its historical and contemporary exponents.
He also examines pragmatism with emphasis on its implication to research inquiry, primarily alluding to the position this worldview upholds that multiple methods of data collection be engaged with a view to discover “what works” (p. 28). Creswell continues to give his readers a broad perspective of views by discussing a number of other theories including the feminist theories, the critical theory, the critical race theory (CRT), the queer theory and the disability theories (Creswell,
2013). Creswell (2013) concludes chapter two with a review of some best practices as to how to use social justice interpretive frameworks in qualitative research. He further highlights the importance of understanding the specific topics and issues under investigation, the diversity of procedural research primarily in the context of cultural diversity, as well as the diversity of scholastic avenues from which social justice can be voiced; including more conservative methods such as poetry and the arts. (p. 35). Finally, Creswell (2013) addresses the issue of interpretive framework contextualization. In other words, Creswell (2013) is careful to provide the caveat that there is no one-size-fits-all when one conducts qualitative research inquiry.
APA Chapter Three Summary
The third chapter of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA, 2010) provides general principles for writing clearly and concisely. Significant emphasis is placed on organization, writing style, specific guidelines aimed at reducing writer bias and improving grammatical proficiency. However, a key foundational element discussed is the organizing and structuring of one’s thoughts so that they flow logically. For example, in addressing organization, the APA (2010), advocates brevity noting that “as a rule “less is more” (p. 61). In addition, one of the key structural components emphasized in the APA (2010) writing manual is methodical organization and adherence to level and formatting of headings. In this regard, seriation is discussed as a pivotal tool to getting the reader to understand the ideas he or she seeks to convey to his or her audience. In short, “all items should be syntactically and conceptually parallel” (p. 63). In terms of writing style, the APA (2010) articulates fundamental concepts such as continuity of ideas. This can best be achieved with well-thought through punctuation and the use of suitable “transition words” (p. 65). In essence, transition words are integral for the reader to get a sense of flow to the writer’s thoughts. Other transition devises are also recommended such as “time links” (p. 65), “cause-effect links” (p. 65) “additional links” (p. 65) and “contrast links” (p. 65). Writing styles are also governed by smoothness of expression, tone, economy of expression, precision and clarity, and other subtle linguistic devises. Depending on the content and context of the discussion, the APA (2010) suggests reading one’s manuscript aloud, having a colleague review the manuscript if applicable, or putting it aside and review at a later opportunity. Also the use of the presence tense is recommended as a technique to unify with one’s readers (p. 66).
The achievement of the right tone can also present considerable writing challenges. In this regard, the APA (2010) suggests keeping one’s audience in sharp focus as a useful tool to achieve success in this area. With regard to economy of expression, this goes hand in hand with brevity. In short, the APA (2010) advises to “say only what needs to be said” (p. 67). Conceptually, a number of strategies are given by the APA (2010) aimed at improving one’s writing style. Three specific approaches are recommended “(a) writing from an outline; (b) putting aside the first draft, then rereading it later; and (c) asking a colleague to review and critique the draft with you” (p. 70). The APA (2010) concludes chapter three with discussions on two key topics: guidelines for reducing bias and grammar usage. Needless to say, these are two of the major challenges which confront most writers. According to APA (2010) specific areas which need attention with respect to bias reduction, are to describe appropriate levels of specificity. The rule of thumb is to be as specific as possible, yet not be offensive to individual cultural groups. (p. 71). The second guideline given is to be sensitive to labeling persons and groups. This can be deemed offensive to individual communities and those who are closely connected to them. In sum, “respect people’s preferences; call people what they prefer to be called” (p. 72). Specific offenses to be watchful of are, correct use of gender, sexual orientation, as well as racial and ethnic identification, disabilities and age categorizations.
In closing, the APA (2010) is deliberate and extensive in its discussion on grammar specifically correct verb choices and usage, suitable mood conveyance, proper sentence construction, particularly agreement with subject and verb, correct use of pronouns, adjectives, adverbs, conjunctions. In sum, there is an implicit exhortation to comprehensively review various parts of speech, grammar and sentence construction with a view of being better armed to effectively engage one’s scholastic and professional writing exploits.
References
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Reading Summary Grading Rubric
Include this rubric immediately after your reference page so that your instructor can grade your assignment, demonstrating exactly how you received your grade.
Criteria
Creswell Chapter 1
Creswell Chapter 2
APA Chapter 3
Total Points
Clear and concise topic sentences
/5
/5
/5
/15
Supports choice of important reading points through careful writing and personal connections
/5
/5
/5
/15
Adheres to current APA writing guidelines
/20
Total Points Earned
/50
Alanna Staton
Liberty University
Dr. Randy Tierce
October 26, 2014
Creswell Chapter One Summary
As an introduction to the text, Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches, Cresswell (2013) first provides a purpose and rationale for writing the book. Although the purpose is not clearly formulated by the author, it is shown that Cresswell’s (2013) primary intention when writing the book was to fully examine the five qualitative approaches to inquiry.
” (p. 4). Moreover, no effort has been spared by Creswell (2013) to minimize subjectivity and personal bias, through the provision of multiple resources, a detailed glossary and the provision of analytical tables which present a diversity of philosophical and theoretical perspectives on various qualitative approaches; specifically as they related to various fields and disciplines (p. 5).
Creswell (2013) justifies his selection of the five approaches from a highly commendable knowledge-based perspective which he terms “positioning myself” (p. 6). The concept of positioning oneself embraces both philosophical and experiential values and seeks to illustrate the transient nature of qualitative inquiry and research design. In describing his personal journey, Creswell (2013) asserts, “over the years I have evolved into an applied research …show more content…
methodologist with a specialization in research design, qualitative research, and mixed methods research (p. 6). Such is the complexity of the research development process.
Creswell (2013) concludes chapter one by articulating the rationale behind the final selection his five qualitative choices. At the corpus of his analysis and reflective introspection
Creswell Chapter Two Summary Chapter two of Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (Creswell, 2013) provides a foundation and rationale as to how philosophical assumptions and interpretive frameworks are formulated. The critical issues are to collectively and intentionally assess one’s awareness of such assumptions and core beliefs, and secondly to decide whether or not one is purposefully prepared to engage them in qualitative research studies (Creswell, 2013). Moreover, Creswell (2013) highlights the various philosophical assumptions that have been embraced by qualitative researchers over time as well as the theoretical and interpretive frameworks that guide their belief systems (p. 15). In essence, the interrelationships of philosophies, theoretical and interpretive frameworks are examined in the context of the research process. Creswell (2013) uses an inductive approach to investigating philosophical assumptions and interpretive frameworks. First, he poses a number of key discussion questions which seek to unravel the genesis of philosophical assumptions and interpretive frameworks. With the support of an illustrative chart, Creswell (2013), details a five-phased approach to understanding the philosophical slant of the research process. Phase 1 addresses the multicultural researcher issues, phase 2 theoretical paradigms and perspectives, phase 3 research strategies, phase 4 the methodology behind data collection and analysis and phase 5 the nuances of interpretation and evaluation (pp.17-18). Against this backdrop, the importance of philosophy comes into central focus in qualitative research. Creswell (2013) distinguishes between the simplicity of cause-and-effect type research questions and the exploratory nature and depth associated with “a single phenomenon as found in qualitative research” (p. 19). Central to the research process is gaining a conceptual understanding of the four pillars of philosophical assumptions namely: ontological, issues related to reality and its characteristics, epistemological or knowledge-based approach to inquiry, the axiological or value-laden nature of the study, and the methodological, which is at its core, constructive and inductive (p. 20). Creswell (2013) segues into a more in-depth review of interpretive frameworks that is essentially buttressed on social science theories and social justice theories. This theoretical approach inherently provides the discerning reader with several interpretive frameworks from which to choose (p. 23). Some of these frameworks include: post positivism which is essentially systematic in nature and builds on grounded theory (p. 24), social constructivism which seeks to understanding the world of the participant (pp. 24-25), and transformative frameworks which espouses a societal power-base based on social relationships that can be developed either through active collaboration or participation (pp. 25-25). Creswell (2013) continues to build on his thesis with discussions on postmodernism as perceived by many of its historical and contemporary exponents.
He also examines pragmatism with emphasis on its implication to research inquiry, primarily alluding to the position this worldview upholds that multiple methods of data collection be engaged with a view to discover “what works” (p. 28). Creswell continues to give his readers a broad perspective of views by discussing a number of other theories including the feminist theories, the critical theory, the critical race theory (CRT), the queer theory and the disability theories (Creswell,
2013). Creswell (2013) concludes chapter two with a review of some best practices as to how to use social justice interpretive frameworks in qualitative research. He further highlights the importance of understanding the specific topics and issues under investigation, the diversity of procedural research primarily in the context of cultural diversity, as well as the diversity of scholastic avenues from which social justice can be voiced; including more conservative methods such as poetry and the arts. (p. 35). Finally, Creswell (2013) addresses the issue of interpretive framework contextualization. In other words, Creswell (2013) is careful to provide the caveat that there is no one-size-fits-all when one conducts qualitative research inquiry.
APA Chapter Three Summary
The third chapter of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA, 2010) provides general principles for writing clearly and concisely. Significant emphasis is placed on organization, writing style, specific guidelines aimed at reducing writer bias and improving grammatical proficiency. However, a key foundational element discussed is the organizing and structuring of one’s thoughts so that they flow logically. For example, in addressing organization, the APA (2010), advocates brevity noting that “as a rule “less is more” (p. 61). In addition, one of the key structural components emphasized in the APA (2010) writing manual is methodical organization and adherence to level and formatting of headings. In this regard, seriation is discussed as a pivotal tool to getting the reader to understand the ideas he or she seeks to convey to his or her audience. In short, “all items should be syntactically and conceptually parallel” (p. 63). In terms of writing style, the APA (2010) articulates fundamental concepts such as continuity of ideas. This can best be achieved with well-thought through punctuation and the use of suitable “transition words” (p. 65). In essence, transition words are integral for the reader to get a sense of flow to the writer’s thoughts. Other transition devises are also recommended such as “time links” (p. 65), “cause-effect links” (p. 65) “additional links” (p. 65) and “contrast links” (p. 65). Writing styles are also governed by smoothness of expression, tone, economy of expression, precision and clarity, and other subtle linguistic devises. Depending on the content and context of the discussion, the APA (2010) suggests reading one’s manuscript aloud, having a colleague review the manuscript if applicable, or putting it aside and review at a later opportunity. Also the use of the presence tense is recommended as a technique to unify with one’s readers (p. 66).
The achievement of the right tone can also present considerable writing challenges. In this regard, the APA (2010) suggests keeping one’s audience in sharp focus as a useful tool to achieve success in this area. With regard to economy of expression, this goes hand in hand with brevity. In short, the APA (2010) advises to “say only what needs to be said” (p. 67). Conceptually, a number of strategies are given by the APA (2010) aimed at improving one’s writing style. Three specific approaches are recommended “(a) writing from an outline; (b) putting aside the first draft, then rereading it later; and (c) asking a colleague to review and critique the draft with you” (p. 70). The APA (2010) concludes chapter three with discussions on two key topics: guidelines for reducing bias and grammar usage. Needless to say, these are two of the major challenges which confront most writers. According to APA (2010) specific areas which need attention with respect to bias reduction, are to describe appropriate levels of specificity. The rule of thumb is to be as specific as possible, yet not be offensive to individual cultural groups. (p. 71). The second guideline given is to be sensitive to labeling persons and groups. This can be deemed offensive to individual communities and those who are closely connected to them. In sum, “respect people’s preferences; call people what they prefer to be called” (p. 72). Specific offenses to be watchful of are, correct use of gender, sexual orientation, as well as racial and ethnic identification, disabilities and age categorizations.
In closing, the APA (2010) is deliberate and extensive in its discussion on grammar specifically correct verb choices and usage, suitable mood conveyance, proper sentence construction, particularly agreement with subject and verb, correct use of pronouns, adjectives, adverbs, conjunctions. In sum, there is an implicit exhortation to comprehensively review various parts of speech, grammar and sentence construction with a view of being better armed to effectively engage one’s scholastic and professional writing exploits.
References
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Reading Summary Grading Rubric
Include this rubric immediately after your reference page so that your instructor can grade your assignment, demonstrating exactly how you received your grade.
Criteria
Creswell Chapter 1
Creswell Chapter 2
APA Chapter 3
Total Points
Clear and concise topic sentences
/5
/5
/5
/15
Supports choice of important reading points through careful writing and personal connections
/5
/5
/5
/15
Adheres to current APA writing guidelines
/20
Total Points Earned
/50