Qualitative research design is defined as “the collection of extensive narrative data on many variables over an extended period of time, in a naturalistic setting, in order to gain insights not possible using other types of research” (Gay, 1996, p. 623). There are several characteristics that distinguish qualitative research from quantitative. These include but are not limited to: a) its general framework which seeks to explore phenomena versus confirming hypotheses about the phenomena, b) its analytical
objectives which describe variations rather than quantify variations, c) its question format which is open-ended instead of closed-ended, d) its data format which is textual rather than numeral, e) and its flexibility rather than rigidity in study design (Mack et al., 2005). The major differences that are most important to this researcher are flexibility derived from qualitative research and the possible relationships formed between the researcher and the participants. Flexibility surfaces as a result of the types of questioning. Unlike the closed-ended questions that are typically generated from quantitative surveys and
questionnaires which participants are asked the same questions and in an unchanged order, qualitative researchers ask mainly open-ended questions. This form of questioning is more flexible because it “gives the participant the opportunity to respond in their own words, rather than forcing them to choose from fixed responses” (Mack et al., 2005, p. 4). Moreover, because the data collection from qualitative research is typically face to face, the relationship between the researcher and participants is often informal. This unofficial type of approach often allows the participant to feel comfortable in providing more
38
elaborate and in-depth responses, and permits a more natural interaction between the researcher and his or her participants. (Mack et al., 2005).
Qualitative Approaches
Creswell (2006) described five types of qualitative paradigms: a) narrative research-an approach which studies “one or two individuals, gathering data through the collection of their stories, reporting individual experiences, and chronologically ordering the meaning of those experiences” (p. 54), b) phenomenology-a focus on explaining the meaning of lived experiences for several individuals rather than a single individual to obtain an understanding of those individuals experiencing the same or common
experiences of a phenomenon, c) grounded theory-looks at the meaning of an experience for several individuals; however, it not only provides a description, but its purpose is to also generate a theory, d) ethnography-similar to grounded theory in that this research also “develops a theory from examining many individuals who share in the same process, action or interaction” (p. 68), however the difference lies in the location and size of the participants, and lastly e) case study design-“an idiographic examination of a single individual, family, group, organization, community or society. Its chief purpose is description, although attempts of explanation are also acceptable” (Rubin & Babbie, 2014, p. 478). Although all of these approaches have commonalities in terms of the research process (i.e., the research problem, the data collection and analysis, and the research report), for the most part, their differences lie in what they hope to accomplish. Creswell (2006) explains:
A narrative about an individual’s life forms a narrative research. A description of the essence of the experience of the phenomenon becomes a phenomenology. A
39
theory, often portrayed in a visual model, emerges in grounded theory and a holistic view of how a culture-sharing group works results in an ethnography. An in-depth study of a bounded system or a case (or several cases) becomes a case study (p. 77).
Consequently, since it was this researcher’s intent to gain an understanding of high school counselors’ experiences of the social justice advocacy phenomenon,
phenomenological research seemed most appropriate for this study. Although, other methods such as grounded theory and narrative research also seek to gain understanding of the human experience of a phenomenon (Hays & Woods, 2011), this researcher is not interested in saturating data to develop a theory (a characteristic of grounded theory), nor using a chronological order of events (a characteristic of narrative research).
Phenomenological Research
Phenomenology was first employed to social science by the German philosopher, Edmund H. Husserl (1913/1954) as a philosophical tradition for the purpose of studying individuals’ descriptions of experiences through their senses. Husserl believed that human beings could “only know what we experience by attending to perceptions and meanings that awaken our conscious awareness” (Patton, 2015, p. 116). He also hypothesized that understanding derives from a sensory experience of the phenomena. However, to truly comprehend the experience, it must be described, explicated, and interpreted. Thus, phenomenologists’ concentration is on how people are able to make sense of the phenomena they experience which will in turn result in them developing their worldview. Even more, Patton (2015) postulated that:
40
There is no separate (or objective) reality for people. There is only what they know their experience is and means. The subjective experience incorporates the objective thing and becomes a person’s reality, thus the focus on meaning making as the essence of human experience (p. 116).
Hence, “the sole purpose of phenomenology is to describe the depth and meaning of participants’ lived experiences” and it is the phenomenological researcher’s task to “understand the phenomenon through the eyes of those who have direct, immediate experience with it” (Hays & Wood, 2011, p. 291). In an effort to obtain this in-depth construction of knowledge, this research will follow Moustakas’ transcendental
phenomenology which encourages the researcher to set aside his or her own experiences to focus on the experiences of the participants (Hays & Woods, 2011; Moustakas, 1994).