ESSAY: COMPARING TWO STUDIES - "A PHENOMENOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF 'GOOD' SUPERVISION EVENTS" AND "TOOTLE: A PARABLE OF SCHOOLING AND DESTINY"
The study conducted by Worthen and McNeill (2002) was a phenomenological study in the phenomenological tradition of qualitative research. The Worthen and McNeill (2002) study was "A Phenomenological Investigation of 'Good' Supervision Events". The Burbules (2002) study was a critical research analysis. According to Merriam (2002), critical research "has its roots in several traditions" (p. 327). The root traditions of qualitative research apparent to some extent in the Burbules (2002) study are ethnography, grounded theory, and case study. The Burbules (2002) study was "Tootle: A Parable of Schooling and Destiny".
Merriam (2002) provides two frameworks within which to compare and contrast qualitative research studies - Assessing the "Quality" of Qualitative Research and Strategies for Promoting Validity and Reliability. The two studies are compared and contrasted within these two frameworks in the discussions that follow.
The framework for Assessing the "Quality" of Qualitative Research has four dimensions - Problem, Methods, Findings, and Discussion. With respect to Problem, both studies investigate problems that are appropriate for qualitative inquiry. Each study met each of the constructs of the Problem dimension,
With respect to Methods, Worthen and McNeill (2002) clearly identified their research design as being within the phenomenological tradition of qualitative research. Sample selection, data collection methods, data analysis, and ethical issues were clearly addressed. The Burbules (2002) study was clearly identified as critical research analysis; however, there were no participants involved in this study. Rather, the study was a case study of a children's book of some note. The purpose of the study was to identify and assess critically the social and educationa...