Educational Technology

Hoepfl, M. C. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology education researchers. Journal of Technology Education, 9(1), 47–63.

This article elaborates on the reasons for choosing qualitative methodologies and provides a basic introduction to the features of this type of research for many people who are unfamiliar with these methods. An overview of qualitative versus quantitative research paradigms provides a snapshot of this great debate between educational researchers and the education field. The author emphasizes that using qualitative methodologies should be considered carefully. By its very nature, qualitative research can be emotionally taxing and extraordinarily time-consuming. At the same time, it can yield rich information not obtainable through statistical sampling techniques.

The article has many strengths for the educational researcher. First, it describes eight prominent characteristics of qualitative (naturalistic) research. Notably, the researcher uses the natural setting as the data source versus a controlled environment such as a laboratory. Moreover, the researcher is the “human instrument” of data collection. Lastly, qualitative research is judged by using unique criteria for the trustworthiness of the data. Essentially, the author also prescribes what the qualitative researcher must do before conducting research. Likewise, the author also specifies nine steps for the design of natural inquiry where serval things are determined (focus for the inquiry, fit of the research paradigm to the research focus, data collection resources, successive phases, and additional instrumentation needed), and planned (data collection and recording modes, data analysis procedures, logistics of data collection, and techniques to determine trustworthiness). Finally, the author emphasizes the significant power of interviews (personal intended data collection technique) and observations.

Upon reflecting, the article has direct applicability to my future research endeavor regarding the continued efforts of adding to Dr. John Plifka’s work on the U.S. Army learning institutional accreditation enterprise program. Additionally, I reiterate the author’s meaningful message within the article’s title, that this article is, indeed, a primer for educational researchers providing a fundamental baseline with regards to qualitative research, which is easy to understand and is not written in a complex manner. For me, one of my most significant challenges is identifying relevant and valid themes to categorize and code (open and axial), which I look forward to this action.