Tuesday, April 1, 2025

Lichtman, Marilyn. (2006). Qualitative Research in Education: A User's Guide. Reviewed by Donald K. Sharpes, Arizona State University

Education Review. Book reviews in education. School Reform. Accountability. Assessment. Educational Policy.

Lichtman, Marilyn. (2006). Qualitative Research in Education: A User's Guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

248 pp.
$40 (papercover)   ISBN 9781412937344
$78 (hardcover)   ISBN 9780761929352

Reviewed by Donald K. Sharpes
Arizona State University

December 12, 2006

Qualitative research originating in anthropology in the 1980s is a regrettable term in one sense because it assumes that researchers not using it are engaging in non-qualitative studies. In fact, qualitative research was used to distinguish the method of gathering data from quantitative research where numbers and statistics dominate. The questions for all researchers at the time and since were: Were qualitative researchers using procedures like interviews, narratives and ethnographic studies really scientists? Was qualitative research scientific? How should its findings be accepted? Were their conclusions unbiased and objective? A simple way to consider educational research is to think of it as one or more methods for collecting information about an inquiry, or learning about a schooling process.

In the long history of human investigation and observation, myth was the first method in the history of research techniques for learning. Stories like the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh enlightening people about the human condition, and biblical stories that expanded on similar myths, became the most popular form of education and entertainment for a literate audience. Then 2,500 years ago historians Herodotus and Thucydides illuminated our understanding of peoples by writing history to explain human actions. By the time of Zeno and Parmenides, philosophy literally was a search for wisdom, for meaning in life. Subsequently, writers used allegory in literature, writing about symbolic fictional characters to reveal the truths of human existence. Symbols became the new method for understanding reality. By the time of the Aristotle logic became the standard methodological tool for arriving at new truths, prevailing for over a thousand years right through the Renaissance, and is still the preferred method in rhetoric and law.

The scientific explosion in the Enlightenment witnessed the erosion of logic and philosophy as the primary ways of explaining reality. A new era of observation began with Galileo using with the new technology of the telescope. This testing of observations with experiments inaugurated the scientific method, and it is still the preferred choice for new knowledge of the universe. Its formula is simple: formulate a question, test it with a proven instrument, analyze and publish the results.

As formal schooling expanded to universally accepted status among growing populations in the western world, investigators only reluctantly employed methods of science and invariably fell back on philosophical principles to test whether or not students were learning. Only with the advent of psychology, after it gradually divorced itself from philosophy, and Wilhelm Wundt’s experiments with introspective techniques and studies of memory, and William James popularization of psychological principles for use by teachers, did the beginnings of a scientific method in education begin to gain respect.

Marilyn Lichtman’s new and engaging book, Qualitative Research in Education, A User’s Guide, is the latest text to expand on the merits of qualitative research. She was herself once a dedicated scholar in her early career of quantitative methods, but has become a qualitative convert. She has an easy, conversational and engaging writing style that captivates and pulls the reader into her description or argument. Her abundant use of focused and relevant research examples and practical applications are a huge bonus.

Lichtman includes multiple examples of observational, interview and case study approaches, all very useful and based on her extensive teaching experiences. Her use of anecdotes from her teaching career are always apposite, especially her personal experiences of taking family therapy courses and being transformed by that work that resulted in her looking at research in a broader context than statistics. Lichtman’s book is the most sensibly intelligent book on research since Jacques Barzun’s The Modern Researcher, first published in 1957 and now in its 6th edition.

I was particularly impressed with her discussions of appropriate philosophical positions, especially phenomenology, that have ideological fits with qualitative research objectives and methods. Although she writes extensively and accurately on this highly relevant philosophy, I would have wished for more clarity on its assumptions and implications for a research mentality. Husserl, phenomenology’s founder, reacted against the idealism of Kant who asserted that we never really know reality. Instead we have to rely on the phenomena, our perceptions of reality. But Husserl in his ponderous writings, particularly the two volumes of Logical Investigations, never really resolved how this method would improve our understanding of external reality. Existentialists returned to the problem of human existence. Incidentally, one of Husserl’s most gifted students and his chosen graduate assistant was Edith Stein. Her doctoral dissertation, The Problem of Empathy from 1916, based on phenomenological principles and her volunteer work as a nurse in WWI, offers insights into how this philosophy relates to concern for others, or empathy, and to qualitative research.

If we concede that the origins of western philosophy can be traced to the time of Zeno and the 6th century BCE, than Pythagoras’s belief that all reality could be reduced to the language of mathematics and numbers has ever since had a stranglehold on scientific consciousness that qualitative research is seeking to untangle. The universe as the embodiment of mathematical laws catapulted Newton’s discoveries.

But even in the early 20th century philosophers were still using the ancient categories of existences and essences, substances and accidents Aristotle had suggested, and medieval scholastic philosophers elaborated on, as the routes to acquire epistemological knowledge. Descartes’ bifurcation of mind and matter, thought and reality, confused two centuries of philosophers, including Kant, who followed his lead. Using perception as a subject of investigation, as Husserl suggested, presumed that there was a perceiving mind. The philosophy contrary to phenomenology, espoused by Marx, Nietzsche, Watson, Skinner and Darwin among others, is that there is no mind, only material reality of which humans and their organic brains are an integral part.

Moreover, I have always been curious as to why researchers did not take kindly to Kurt Lewin’s (1935) intriguing proposal of the life force, with its positive and negative vectors of cognitive processes that drew inspiration for methodology from geometry, and the specialty known as topology, and physics with its valences and lines of force. His theory, complete with actual experiments with children, seemed to bridge the gap between numbers and text, quantitative and qualitative, by providing graphic illustrative examples of behavior that possessed some predictability. I would hope researchers and psychologists would revive interest in Lewin’s compelling theories.

It’s hard to tell if the popularity of qualitative research is a predictable reaction to the presumed dullness of quantitative methods like statistics, or a paradigm shift towards more historically accepted methods of seeing reality. We want any literate student at any age to be knowledgeable about, and demonstrate skill in, reading, writing and mathematics. Unquestionably, qualitative research is a rejection of the use of the scientific method because it does not test a hypothesis, though this does not make it less authentic as a method. Qualitative research is a definite reaction against the sterility of quantitative rigor by introducing a more humane and subjective narrative into the observation of human activities. It is, in my opinion, a return to more ancient methods of gaining knowledge when even writing itself was in its infancy. Pythagoras would not be amused.

About the Reviewer

Donald K. Sharpes is Adjunct Professor of Education at Arizona State University specializing in international education, educational psychology, foundations and policy.

Copyright is retained by the first or sole author, who grants right of first publication to the Education Review.

No comments:

Post a Comment