Reflective Reading Log #3

CRESWELL (Ch. 9) - Writing a Qualitative Study

Summary of Chapter 9
Chapter 9 of Creswell focused specifically on the writing of a qualitative study. The narrative report is what brings together the whole study and Creswell describes the necessary pieces that should ultimately be considered and incorporated into a qualitative study. He begins with exploring several rhetorical issues that deserve attention regardless of the approach. Reflexivity and representation offers the writer ways to consider how their writing is reflective of their own culture-based interpretations as well as consider the ways in which their writing can impact the reader and the participant. Audience is an essential consideration as many researchers often tailor their writing to match or fit the audience. Encoding is also directly related the audience and emphasizes the importance of language in shaping the text. The style of writing should invite the reader to be a part of the study. The voice of participants in brought in through the use of quotes. Creswell describes the uses of three types of quotes including short eye-catching quotations intended to signify different perspectives, embedded quotes intended to “prepare a reader for a shift in emphasis or display a point” (Creswell, p. 182), and longer quotations used to convey more complex understandings.

Creswell then discusses each of the five approaches and examined overall rhetorical structure and embedded rhetorical structure. The former is the general format or organization of the study at large and the latter is the various strategies and techniques employed in the study. Each approach offers a unique set of structural detail based on the different data analysis procedures and variability of each approach. Throughout the discussion of each approach, Creswell provides the reader with literature and examples of the strategies employed and recommended guidelines for structure. Creswell concludes the chapter with a brief comparison of narrative structures emphasizing why and how structure is directly related to and different because of the nature of its approach.

Reflections and Analysis
This chapter challenged me, once again, to ask myself questions about the research writing process that I had not considered previously. For example, considering the audience in my writing. Alex has mentioned this on several occasions, but for whatever reason I was not thinking about who my audience was that I should consider in my writing. Creswell identified four potential audiences and presented how researchers often revise the structure of their narrative to fit and elicit the best response from the selected audience.

Similarly, it is important to also consider the writer’s responsibility in writing. Creswell presented some great questions that a writer should think about considering “how we write is a reflection of our own interpretation based on the cultural, social, gender, class, and personal politics that we bring to research” (p. 179). For example, have I considered how my words could be used for progressive, conservative, and repressive social politics, or, what are my political reflexivities that need to come into my report? Understanding how one approaches the writing process and the content of the research will help the writer to shape and accept how the data will be presented and interpreted. Furthermore, it is interesting to think about how the writing process not only impacts the reader, but the participant(s) as well. How they will respond, whether or not they will be marginalized or offended, and how they perceive the interpretation—how might this differ from the perceptions of the readers? These are great things to consider in qualitative research and I appreciate Creswell’s attention to them.

I was relieved to find that there is some amount of structure and certainly strategy in qualitative research writing— albeit open to interpretation and the stylistic preferences of both the researcher and the selected research approach. Nonetheless, the overall rhetorical structure indicates the general direction or set-up of the study and the “core elements” that should perhaps be included with each approach. I appreciated Creswell’s suggested readings and recommendations to literature that provide guidelines or suggestions for the overall structure within each approach. The embedded rhetorical structure is much more fluid and offers maximum flexibility in structure. These are more or less the strategies that a writer employs within a research approach throughout the written report, adhering to the core elements of the overall structure of course. Here, Creswell explored various research articles and studies that employed various strategies and provided an example.

I don’t think I expected each approach to be so drastically different in terms of structure. Some approaches share similar aspects, but over all each approach provides a unique way of reporting information that is quite specific the aspects and expectations of that approach. For example, we are reading about an ethnographic writing style through the Nathan book, but in Creswell, he describes the several forms that ethnographies take such as “Tales.” These range from the often-used realist tales, confessional tales, impressionistic tales, to the seldom-used critical tales, formalist tales, literary tales, and jointly told tales. That’s just the overall structure; the embedded structure presents ethnographic information using strategies such as metaphors and tropes. Different, but very fascinating.


MY FRESHMAN YEAR (Ch. 4-5)

Summary of Chapters 4 and 5
Nathan opened up chapter four by exploring her gravitation towards other “partial outsiders” and understanding how culture can often go unnoticed by its natives. Using thirteen formal interviews and several informal conversations, Nathan explored the perceptions of several students from international cultures on American culture and U.S. college life. The resistance these students faced and the interesting aspects of American life that they each encountered in different ways are very telling of higher education in the U.S. Through individual experiences, Nathan described how many of the student’s first encountered American students and their perceptions that American friendliness is only a surface thing. The lack of interest that American students had in international students was replaced by the comfort international students felt with US minority students, American students who were well traveled or who had been exchange students themselves, and Americans students with whom they found common interests or hobbies. The idea of relationships and friendships looked very different for international students as compared to American students and exposed the true individualistic nature of American students. Nathan went on to describe how international students perceive the American attitude and rituals within the classroom setting. While the faculty was more involved in students’ lives and choice was abounding, American students were less respectful in general, and course content was usually less rigorous according to most international students. Nathan ended the chapter with a description of the ignorance that American students possess in terms of misinformation and lack of information about other countries and about themselves.

Chapter five focused on the classroom setting and the nature of academics at AnyU. After describing the unconscious norms and acceptable classroom behavior, Nathan depicted the rituals of the classroom and the level of teacher-student interaction, or the lack thereof. Her notion of stated opinions as opposed to class debates reflected how students opted out of the commentary process in class discussions. Nathan’s observations revealed that students employed boundaries such that outside of the classroom, students did not “talk among themselves about the ideas presented in their classes or the issues of the day” (p. 97). Nathan investigated this notion further by collecting data in the residence halls. Her findings revealed that students discussed topics such as body image, relationships, personal histories, entertainment, alcohol, drugs, and sex—nothing related to class content or academics. Nathan described how students were more compelled to stay in college because of the social community they were a part of, not because of the learning that took place in the classroom. Nathan concluded the chapter by exploring one course in particular that was popular among students. She found the course’s unconventional technique and socially acceptable content, “sexuality” to align with what students desire in a learning environment or community.

Reflections and Analysis
Chapters 4 and 5 were hard to swallow considering I am an “American” student who experienced the traditional American college and likely exhibited many of the annoying dominant culture behaviors that Nathan talks about throughout both of these chapters. Nothing is more sobering that listening to the many accounts of international students only to realize that they ALL say the same thing about American students.

I thought it was interesting in chapter four to find that international students found it easier to get to know US minority students than white students not because they could relate easier to them but because they found that minority students were more interested in the lives of the international students, unlike the white students who never asked and did not seem interested. Similarly, that in order to relate to American students, international students felt that they had to find areas of interest or hobbies in common with one another.

It was even more disturbing to learn about how students behave in the classroom, what they discuss outside of the classroom, and how out of touch students are from academia when they are not seated in a classroom. I still can’t believe students attribute most of their learning to the experiences they have outside of the classroom, in social groups, and with their peers. They enjoy college not to learn, but to be a part of the social community that only exists in college.

Content aside, these two chapters captured the essence of ethnographic writing. It was clear in these chapters how the themes emerged and were told as a story, supported with vignettes and quotes. In chapter four, “As Others See Us” Nathan explored why and how she was drawn to international students and outsiders and how her conversations with these students were “illuminating” and led to the addition of 13 formal interviews and several informal conversations. The stories told by these students and the flow of Nathan’s writing really had an impact on me as the reader in deep ways. I found myself writing notes and reacting aloud to some of the perceptions that these students had, I’m sure a reaction that Nathan was intending.

Ironically, Creswell discussed in Chapter 9 the uses of three types of quotes including short eye-catching quotations intended to signify different perspectives, embedded quotes intended to “prepare a reader for a shift in emphasis or display a point” (Creswell, p. 182), and longer quotations used to convey more complex understandings. Nathan employed all three of these types throughout both chapters, though more so in chapter four. Throughout her analysis she embedded quotes from international students make her point and contribute to the theme. When essential, she would use long indented quotations indicating a student’s story or perspective. I would be curious to know how she sifted through all of the data and chose what seemed like the most impactful accounts, quotes, and stories among the dozens she encountered. Her level of focus both to the unveiling theme and description of supporting events was clearly depicted and really allowed the reader to jump into the story with her. I feel like I was there listening to these students and experiencing “the classroom” as she did.

I appreciated Nathan’s strategy in Chapter five in exploring academics, conversation, and “real” learning. This chapter seemed to move through a process where one observation led to the exploration of another. She first began with exploring classrooms norms and lack of participation; this led to her curiosity about conversations and dialogue in the classroom, which then led to her curiosity of conversations and dialogue outside of the classroom. Finally recognizing that virtually no conversations concerned class content or learned material, she pursued more of what students really learn in college, realizing “how little intellectual life seemed to matter in college” (p. 100). Finally in her analysis she touched on “The Perfect Class” and explored what made students want to take a particular course, learn the content, or participate openly and willingly during class. Ironically, and amazingly, she tied it all back to “community” and realized that students learned when the course reflected their culture and paralleled their social world.