Polishing One's Philosophical Lens: Reflexive Journaling as a Means to Sharpen Novice Researcher's Philosophical Acuity
Location
1052
Format Type
Event
Format Type
Workshop
Start Date
January 2019
End Date
January 2019
Abstract
An initial step in developing a qualitative research project is deciding on the philosophical and theoretical framework through which students conceptualize and construct their research design. Numerous researchers and qualitative methodologists have emphasized the value of this initial step in the qualitative research endeavor (Flynn & Korcuska, 2018; Maxwell, 2013). A challenge for educators is developing a process in which students can interact with the various philosophical/theoretical positions and increase their self-awareness of their own positionality. Ultimately, this self-awareness leads to students’ statements of philosophical/theoretical positionality that will be utilized in framing their qualitative research activities. This presentation will outline the structure and use of reflexive journals used to hone students’ philosophical/theoretical positionality statements. These reflexive journals are intentionally structured utilizing DeBono’s Six Thinking Hats (1999), and DeMeyer’s (2018) “Guidelines for Reflexive Journals” based upon her discourse analysis of reflexive journals in a counselor education program. Such intentionality seeks to facilitate deeper, and more focused, processing of thoughts toward the various philosophical/theoretical stances.
DeBono, E. (1999). Six thinking hats. Boston: Back Bay Books.
DeMeyer, M. (2018). Constructing reflexivity through journal writing:
Exploring Pre-Practicum students’ written discourse. Unpublished Dissertation. Idaho State University
Flynn, S. V, and Korcuska, J. S. (2018). Grounded theory research
design: An investigation into practices and procedures, Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, DOI: 10.1080/21501378.2017.1403849
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications
Keywords
Reflexive Journals, Discourse Analysis, Researcher Positionality
Polishing One's Philosophical Lens: Reflexive Journaling as a Means to Sharpen Novice Researcher's Philosophical Acuity
1052
An initial step in developing a qualitative research project is deciding on the philosophical and theoretical framework through which students conceptualize and construct their research design. Numerous researchers and qualitative methodologists have emphasized the value of this initial step in the qualitative research endeavor (Flynn & Korcuska, 2018; Maxwell, 2013). A challenge for educators is developing a process in which students can interact with the various philosophical/theoretical positions and increase their self-awareness of their own positionality. Ultimately, this self-awareness leads to students’ statements of philosophical/theoretical positionality that will be utilized in framing their qualitative research activities. This presentation will outline the structure and use of reflexive journals used to hone students’ philosophical/theoretical positionality statements. These reflexive journals are intentionally structured utilizing DeBono’s Six Thinking Hats (1999), and DeMeyer’s (2018) “Guidelines for Reflexive Journals” based upon her discourse analysis of reflexive journals in a counselor education program. Such intentionality seeks to facilitate deeper, and more focused, processing of thoughts toward the various philosophical/theoretical stances.
DeBono, E. (1999). Six thinking hats. Boston: Back Bay Books.
DeMeyer, M. (2018). Constructing reflexivity through journal writing:
Exploring Pre-Practicum students’ written discourse. Unpublished Dissertation. Idaho State University
Flynn, S. V, and Korcuska, J. S. (2018). Grounded theory research
design: An investigation into practices and procedures, Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, DOI: 10.1080/21501378.2017.1403849
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications
Comments
Breakout Session C