1. Linda M. McMullen University of Saskatchewan
Teaching Qualitative Inquiry in Undergraduate Psychology Programs: Enhancing Students’ Methodological Literacy
Linda M. McMullen
University of Saskatchewan

2. Context: U Saskatchewan Undergraduate Psychology Curriculum
research-intensive
history of teaching qualitative research in the department
location of this course in the curriculum
introductory course
second-year courses in statistics and research design/methods
third-year research courses for majors
first-term courses
second-term courses
fourth-year Honours thesis

3. Objectives
to provide students with an understanding of how to situate qualitative methodologies vis-à-vis quantitative methodologies in psychology
to introduce students to the wide range of topics and research questions that can be pursued via qualitative inquiry in psychology
to familiarize students with the range of qualitative methodologies and methods of generating and analysing data
to provide a basic, hands-on experience with analysing discourse
to begin to prepare students to conduct qualitative research in the future

4. Outline of Course situating qualitative inquiry in psychology
overview of ontology, epistemology, methodology, method
covering the components of a research proposal
rationale for a qualitative study; the importance of the research question
how to think (differently) about the role of the literature
methods of data generation
methodologies
data analysis
ethics
criteria for assessing quality
Situating qualitative research in psychology
Recent history and significant developments
Historical traditions in Canadian and American departments of psychology
Overview of ontology, epistemology, methodology, and method (distinguish – Crotty)
Review of positivism, post-positivism, objectivism as a contrast to constructionism
CHALLENGE: WHEN TO INTRODUCE THESE CONCEPTS, IN HOW MUCH DEPTH? WHAT DO STUDENTS KNOW ABOUT THE ASSUMPTIONS OF POST-POSITIVISM, OBJECTIVISM?
Covering the components of a research proposal
Rationale for a qualitative study; the importance of the research question
CHALLENGE: HOW TO THINK IN TERMS OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS VS. HYPOTHESES; HOW AND WHAT VS. WHY QUESTIONS (NOT FACTORS AND OUTCOMES or GROUP DIFFERENCES)
How to think (differently) about the role of the literature
CHALLENGE: STUDY DOES NOT HAVE TO BE CONCEIVED AS THE NEXT LOGICAL STEP (SCIENCE AS PROGRESSION); THE CONSTRAINTS OF EXISTING KNOWLEDGE; USE OF OTHER LITERATURES (DISCIPLINES; GREY) AND SOURCES BOTH BEFORE AND FOLLOWING ANALYSIS
Methods of data generation
CHALLENGE: THINK BROADLY AND CREATIVELY (INTERVIEWS OFTEN A FALL-BACK POSITION)
Methodologies
CHALLENGE: WHICH METHODOLOGIES AND IN HOW MUCH DEPTH?
Data analysis
NOT OVERWHELMING STUDENTS WITH THE COMPLEXITY OF DATA ANALYSIS
Ethics
ETHICS AND DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
Criteria for assessing quality
MODELS OTHER THAN STAND-ALONE FOR TEACHING QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH: (1) EMBEDDED – in the context of content courses; or bring more substantive content into research courses; (2) SINGLE COURSE – side-by-side, team-taught, from a mixed methodologies framework

5. Arguments against the Model of the Stand-Alone Course
Reinforces the methodology/methods-driven focus of our discipline
Separates the learning of methodologies and methods from substantive content
Reinforces the quantitative – qualitative binary which is seen as a false dichotomy
Reinforces the methodology/methods-driven focus of our discipline
Separates the learning of methodologies and methods from substantive content
Reinforces the quantitative – qualitative binary which is seen as a false dichotomy
We should be focused on the distinction between confirmation and exploration (Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2005)

6. Arguments for the Model of the Stand-Alone Course
Increases the visibility, status, and depth of coverage of qualitative inquiry in our discipline
Reinforces the methodological diversity that characterizes our discipline
Provides the time necessary for a sustained immersion in a new language of research
Enables proficiency in one language of research to be further enhanced through repetition and comparison when learning comparable concepts in the new language, e.g., epistemology; sampling; generalization
Increases the visibility, status, and depth of coverage of qualitative inquiry in our discipline
Reinforces the methodological diversity that characterizes our discipline
Provides the time necessary for a sustained immersion in a new language of research [ontologies, epistemologies, social constructions, abduction, research questions, theoretical sampling, data generation, accounts, versions, claims, reflexivity]
Enables proficiency in one language of research to be further enhanced through repetition and comparison when learning comparable concepts in the new language, e.g., epistemology; sampling; generalization

7. Comparisons
Epistemology  objectivism, constructionism, critical realism
Hypotheses vs. research questions
Sample (random; stratified; vs. purposive or exemplary; theoretical)
Generalization (sample to population; vs. abductive; case-to-case; communicative)
Quality control (criteria linked to epistemological stance)
Epistemology  objectivism, constructionism, critical realism
Hypotheses vs. research questions
Sample (random; stratified; vs. purposive or exemplary; theoretical)
Generalization (Inductive – e.g., statistical [sample to population]; theory-carried [e.g., generalization from results to cases/phenomena that belong to the scope/domain of the theory, not to the theory itself]; VS. Analogical – e.g., case-to-case [concerned with the apparent similarities between a case that has been researched and another case that has not]; communicative [reader decides on extent to which results generalize, either on his/her own or in interaction with researcher])
Quality control – criteria tied to epistemological stance – OBJECTIVIST: (reliability vs. dependability [achieved by use of audit trail]; internal validity vs. credibility [achieved by, e.g., prolonged engagement, use of peer researchers, participant checks]; and external validity vs. transferability [achieved by providing sufficient information about the researcher, the context, processes, practices, etc.);
CONSTRUCTIONIST: (differences among methodologies [and among variants of methodologies] and among forms of constructionism);
CRITICAL REALIST: (consequential validity [extent to which the research achieves its goals of social and political change]; transgressive validity [extent to which research incites discourse and contributes to a more critical social science]) (Morrow, 2005).

8. Outline of a Restructured Undergraduate Psychology Curriculum
Introductory course – inclusion of qualitative research via textbooks or selected readings, coupled with a curriculum-based research experience in both quantitative and qualitative approaches
Mandatory, stand-alone, second-year courses in both quantitative and qualitative approaches
Focus on how qualitative inquiry has shaped substantive areas of our discipline
Optional, senior-level courses that focus on in-depth coverage of a particular qualitative methodology
Capacity to complete an Honours thesis project based in qualitative inquiry
Introductory course – inclusion of qualitative research via textbooks or selected readings, coupled with a curriculum-based research experience in both quantitative and qualitative approaches [need to expose students to the assumptions, principles, key methodological features of qualitative inquiry and present-day yields in substantive areas]
Mandatory, stand-alone, second-year courses in both quantitative and qualitative approaches; [hands-on assignments]
Focus on how qualitative inquiry has shaped substantive areas of our discipline
Optional, senior-level courses that focus on in-depth coverage of a particular qualitative methodology
Capacity to complete an Honours thesis project based in qualitative inquiry

9. Aspirational Outcomes
learning the languages of research: setting a foundation for bilingualism (quantitative and qualitative research) (Collini, 1993)
awareness of unstated assumptions in both quantitative and qualitative research
research must be intellectual, not technical, in nature; develop “a metaunderstanding of the character of research work” (Alvesson & Skӧldberg, 2000)