Mapping the possibilities of qualitative research in music education: a primer

Abstract

Increasing numbers of music education researchers have begun to use qualitative methods to examine research topics using interviews, observations, documents, and archival data. In this article, I review qualitative research methodology and its origins and methods, discuss topics that have been studied by music education researchers using qualitative research methods, and show possible ways that qualitative research methods might be used to investigate topics in music education. The purpose of this paper is to provide guidance to researchers in music education exploring qualitative methodology, music educators who supervise students conducting qualitative research projects; and classroom practitioners who would like to explore the possibilities of qualitative research design and methods to study research problems in school settings. This mapping of possibilities for qualitative research provides a broad palette of options from which music education researchers might choose to examine significant issues of interest.

Acknowledgments

This is a revised version of an invited paper presented at the annual meeting of the Georgia Music Educators Association, Savannah, Georgia in January, 2006. I would like to thank my colleague Dr Roy Legette, of the School of Music at the University of Georgia for his interest in learning more about qualitative research methods, and his inspiration and encouragement to write this paper.

Notes

1. I recognize that any ‘quick guide’ to qualitative research risks oversimplification. My intent is to provide some points of reference to those who would like to further explore qualitative approaches to research in music education.

2. Proposals for the effective preparation of researchers in education have recently been discussed in Eisenhart and deHaan (2005), Golde and Walker (2006), and Shulman et al. (2006). The current debate taking place within the field of education may provide the impetus for fruitful discussion in the field of music education.

3. There have been numerous texts that chronicle the development of grounded theory as a methodology, and ongoing debates. A recent addition from Charmaz (2006) provides guidelines for a ‘constructivist’ grounded theory.

4. Further examples of these research designs drawn from outside music education are included in Appendix 1.

5. The issue of evaluation of ‘quality’ of educational research is a thorny one, and there is a plethora of literature devoted to the issue of judging the quality of qualitative research (e.g. LeCompte & Goetz, 1982; Eisenhart & Howe, 1992; Altheide & Johnson, 1994; Seale, 1999 2004; Smith & Deemer, 2000; Smith & Hodkinson, 2005). For the purposes of this paper, I have selected examples of music education research that employs a variety of qualitative research designs that have either been published in refereed journals in the field of music education, or books published by experienced researchers. Further discussion of issues to do with the evaluation of qualitative research and design is beyond the scope of the present article. In the USA, there is vigorous debate concerning research design and the quality of educational research, particularly with respect to publications from the National Research Council (2002, 2005) that have sought to ‘strengthen’ and improve the quality of educational research. See Oakley (2000) for an historical analysis of methods in social science research.

6. See for example, Qualitative Inquiry, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, and Text and Performance Quarterly.

7. One recent exception is that of deVries (2006), who, in a reflective narrative showed how through performance and improvisation he was able to identify and rectify problems experienced in his music education classes. While this piece makes reference to Ellis's work on autoethnography, deVries himself situates it within the genre of ‘self study.’

8. In contrast to ‘positivist’ paradigms, in which there is a ‘real world’ whose ‘characteristics can be observed, sometimes measured, and then generalized about in a way that comes close to the truth’; ‘empirical correlations between behavior and events can be discovered and inferences can be made about their significance’; and ‘assessments of the relative importance of different factors that explain a social phenomenon can be made with some degree of reliability and validity’ (Alford, 1998, p. 3); researchers using ‘post-positivist’ paradigms of inquiry assume that knowledge is ‘contingent’ and ‘fallible.’ As demonstrated in Table 2, there is a ‘great variation in postpositivist views of the aim of social inquiry, the role of method, and so forth’ (Schwandt, 1997, p. 121).

9. An overview of the research designs used in the three examples included below is included in Appendix 2.

10. ‘Discourse’ is also a contested term. MacLure (2003) in defining ‘discourse,’ distinguishes between two broad traditions: (i) a stream of work that stems from European philosophical and cultural thought associated with poststructuralism, and (ii) work with an origin in Anglo-American linguistics (p. 174). Maclure notes: ‘readers should bear in mind, however, that definitions always shrink, compartmentalize and petrify; and that meanings have a fluidity that always exceeds such attempts to pin them down’ (p. 174).

11. One listing of journals is found at: http://www.menc.org/research.html#A. For those interested in learning more about qualitative research, a list of journals that publish qualitative research may be found at: http://www.coe.uga.edu/leap/qual/research/journals.html