Where are the Interpretive LT folks?
After taking so many research courses here, I am fully versed in the epistomological and ontological divides between positivistic and interpretive research folks. I live in two academic worlds: literacy and LT. The work I am familiar with in literacy is primarily interpretive -- where is the interpretive and/or critical science LT research?
Of course, I am looking for the purists at this point -- the folks who are lined up both personally and professionally with interpretive and critical science paradigms. The Design-Based Research "movement" in LT seems to feel more interpretive to me. I want to do more searching to see how/if ethnography and phenomenology are used within LT. Of course, my other foot is in literacy, and there is a ton of interpretive work done in it. What I need to do is carve out a space for my research that reaches both audiences -- I need to figure out where the holes are, where my niche can be as a scholar in both areas.
I had the good fortune of taking the research core course with Jerry McClelland and the experience has left me questioning my own personal and professional ontology and epistemology. We spoke at length in class about "mixed methods" and how it is not possible - you can have separate questions and separate studies, but you should not/cannot have one study that embraces positivistic and interpretive methodologies. Of course, quantitiative methods can be used wthin interpretive research and qualitiative methods can be used within positivistic research, but I need to be cautious when thinking about methods and methodologies. The research question needs to drive the type of research, but doesn' the researcher's interests and personal beliefs drive the type of research one wants to explore? If I believe that meaning is context-specific and dialogic, then it does not make sense for me to want to do positivistic research.