Into the Labyrinth : A PhD Comprehensive Portfolio

Validity = Credible + Trustworthy

     The notions of validity and reliability are inconsistent with a social-constructivist epistemology and the ethnographic, interpretivist research design used for this research, since it comes from a positivistic perspective. While the nature of ethnographic research is “creative, inventive, emotionally charged, and uneasy. “Good enough” researchers find ways to sustain all these aspects” (Luttrell, 2000, p. 8). Trustworthiness, rather than validity, will emerge as my criteria for quality research, “rooted in the epistemological/ethics nexus” of standards such as positionality, discourse communities, voice, critical subjectivity, reciprocity, sacredness, and privilege (Guba & Lincoln, 2005, p. 209). In this research, the claims, warrants and justifications will be explored and explicitly revealed (Hart, 1998; Carter & Little, 2007). 
     In order for this research to be perceived as having value and merit, I will frame my research in terms of trustworthiness, credibility, and transparency. From an interpretivist stance, research should include clarifying positionality, ontological authenticity, fairness, and voice; from a critical theory approach this is seen in researcher reflexivity (Guba & Lincoln, 2005). By applying a crystallizing methodology, credibility and trustworthiness develops over time, through many diffuse reflections and refractions within the data collections, data analysis, and data representations.

Crystals are prisms that reflect externalities and refract within themselves, creating different colors, patterns, arrays, casting off in different directions, what we see depends upon our angle of repose. Not triangulation, crystallization … crystallization provides us with a deepened, complex, thoroughly partial understanding of the topic” (Guba & Lincoln, 2005, p. 208).

     Trustworthiness and credibility of the research findings will become evident in the depth, complexity, and rigour in the constructions created (Stewart et al., 2017). Authenticity and dependability are revealed, not as an absolute truth, but in the reported reflexivity and interactions between researcher, researched, and research data re-visualization techniques (Stewart et al., 2017).  Providing a trusted and reliable representation of the research data will come from consistently comparing, reporting, sharing thick, rich descriptions of the data, and providing a chain of evidence for all field notes, memos, member reviews, debriefs, engagements, observations, frameworks, typologies and recreations (Stewart et al., 2017). By preserving links and threads through the research process, readers will recognize the logical paths and recursive steps taken, in ways that are methodical, transparent, and adhere to best practices for data management (Stewart et al., 2017). As an example, by providing a word cloud data visualization from a participant’s blog post as an alternative presentation for the coded data collection, the readability of resulting analysis will improve and potentially refract thinking to provide new insights. In this way, researched and reader can recognize how I, as the researcher, dependably managed alchemic and crystallizing data analysis strategies.
 

This page has paths:

Contents of this tag: