Chronotopes of Human Science Inquiry - Essay Example

Running Head: QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS Qualitative Research Methods Name: Institute: Date: Chronotopes of Human Science Inquiry Introduction In this chapter, authors hoped to contribute more to the growing and complicated discussion about qualitative research methods. They argued for a language which could work best across and through the multiple approaches in the sophisticated and nuanced manner or through ways that can easily open a more nuanced discussion that could result to a truly inter-and multi-methodological approaches. These authors provided an account of what they considered as the prevalent chronotopes of inquiry which ground and lead to the most informative qualitative research. Based on the argument of Strike that all the research attempts are governed through expressive potential which delimits the objects that may be worthy of investigation, the units of analysis considered to relevant and to be conducted, the research questions which may be asked, the claims made about the objects of investigation as well as the modes of explanation which may be invoked. They argued for the new language that may be considerably important to discuss across the range of disciplinary and the methodological approaches. This is from ethnography to both genealogy and rhizomatics. In this language attempt, the authors highlighted the possibilities and dangers of this period of meta-disciplinary coalescence. They concluded their research by providing a new metaphor of genealogist for a qualitative research (Norman & Giardina, 2006). The study provides a critical analysis and summary of this chapter about Chronotopes of Human Science Inquiry based on -Why Chronotopes, examine how chronotopes of qualitative inquiry index are durable historical realities that constitute what is common, natural and expected by collectives of social scientists who conduct particular kinds of qualitative research. It center on the following chronotopes as the commonly ground qualitative inquiry in education and literacy studies, Objectivism and Representation, Reading and Interpretation, Skepticism, Conscientization and Praxis and Power or Knowledge and De-familiarization Why Chronotopes The authors argue that, though, it is related to the logics-of-inquiry which is commonly known as expressive potentials, this construct of chronotopes of inquiry extends such constructs to more significant ways. Chronotopes which literally refer to time-space, do not necessary associate particular times and spaces with some specific cultural events but delineate sedimentations of concrete and motivated social happenings that replete with typified themes, forms of agency, plots, effective dispositions, ideologies, value orientations as well as some kinds of intentionality. This implies that chronotopes are the normalizing frames which present the world as really things through the celebration of the prosaic regularities useful in developing the world as well as considered recognizable and predictable for persons around. These authors connote some ideal ways to understand contexts and actions, events, practices and agents that constitute such contexts. They supported Bakhtin’s idea that chronotopes are not basically priori structures, but more durable structuring structures that are included in concrete histories of human activity done across time and space (Prior & Shipka, 2003). Therefore, chronotopes illustrate the lines of force which locate, distribute and associate specific sets of efforts, goals, practices and groups of actors. These articulations not only engage selections and configurations from the practices undertaken, but also a distribution of chronotopes within and across the social time and space. This suggests that chronotopic assertions are stratagems of genealogy, indicating that all chronotopes have varying and common cultural sense or sensibilities, tastes and logics. Such dimensions of being are embodied among the people who specifically work in chronotopes to the extent that they can be considered as part of the chronotope itself. It becomes apparent that what appears to be natural, obvious and proper to people is aligned with the common cultural sense in the chronotope. The authors focused on the four main chronotopes of inquiry which currently operate within powerful and pervasive manner in the contemporary scene of the educational research, particularly in connection to the literacy studies (Goodwin, 2000). Objectivism and Representation The origin of this chronotope extend back to the early critiques of communication theories of truth, the logistics of verification that dominated representational approaches to qualitative research in anthropology and philosophy. Therefore, correspondence theories about truth hypothesize the possibility of directly and non-problematic mapping of the symbolic representations of facts within the world and through a one-to-one fashion. Such theories derive from Descartes’ dualism of both the minds and body which have entirely become synonymous with scientific method. The dualism nature presents the individual human subject as completely separate from the external world, though, able to identify this by reflection and thought (Kamberelis & Greg, 2005).  The authors examined that various methods as well as research tools have been created in the chronotope of objectivism and representation. Such methods and tools are predicated based on the holiness of the mind-body binary. This means that language is interpreted as a neutral medium which is used for accurate representation of the observed relations within the external world. Most of the qualitative research which is conducted within the field of both language and literacy is applicable in this chronotope of objectivism and representation. Therefore, modernism not only embraces the scientific modes of reason hidden in objectivist epistemologies, but also involves modes of reason which are linguistically mediated as well as grounded within the experience of being-in-the-world. The authors argued that it is very possible to experience both objectivist-modernist articulations and interpretive-modernist. Based on this perspective, therefore, the existence of the real world external to the human subjects is imaginable. However, faith in the eternal, universal nature of the world-knowledge association provides the view that to generate representations which can map that world in foundational terms is not acceptable (Teri & Amy, 2007). Reading and Interpretation In the chronotope of reading and interpretation, it has been discovered that the subject-object dualism of enlightenment project is as well assumed, but the subject and object are placed with the dialogic tension. This tension is considered to be the hallmark of the philosophical hermeneutics and is the foundation on which this chronotope of reading and interpretation was developed. Majority of the philosophers of both science and social theories, more often than not position the beginnings of the chronotope of reading and interpretation in the nineteenth-century of Germany philosophy. Hermeneutics generally refers to the process of coming to comprehend a phenomenon of interest such as text, social activity and experience or simply developing an interpretation a similar phenomenon. This is achieved without necessarily placing more emphasis on the idea of inter-subjectivity through empathy (Matusitz & Kramer, 2000). On contrary, interpretive inquiries are usually predicated on understanding meanings and practices in accordance with the situations in which they take place. These modes of inquiry, therefore, are related to the concept of the hermeneutic circle considered as a more unique and influential strategy for understanding as well as knowledge building. This implies that by using this strategy, comprehending the part, for instance, a text, a person or an act also undertakes understanding the whole idea of context, the life history and activity setting. It is apparent that through heavy influential of this concept of hermeneutic circle, the qualitative inquiry which is conducted in the chronotope of reading and interpretation does not focus on generating the basic knowledge claims (Prior & Shipka, 2003). However, it aims at refining and deepening the interpreters’ sense of what it entails to understand other people as well as their social practices. This includes both language and literacy practices in the most relevant contexts of communication and interaction. Classified in the philosophical terms, such forms of inquiry are more related to enlightenment of discovering knowledge. Additionally, this involves having a genuine interest in either understanding and enriching life worlds or the lived experience of some other people, commonly referred to as research participants. Therefore, researchers who operate in the chronotope of reading and interpretation promote a linguistically mediated perception of existence and knowledge in which both are composed and not just represented within and through the human language practices. Among the language practices that researchers study include storytelling, conversation and disciplinary writing as they reveal as well as understand both the contexts and ontologies they index (Crotty, 1998). Although the historical origin of the reading and interpretation chronotope perhaps could be traced to the nineteenth-century of the Germany philosophy, it has developed exponentially for the past two decades. However, what appears to be interesting and a bit ironic is that this trend was not initially visible within the major language as well as literacy journal until some few years back. It has been clearly visible only in the journals from the allied disciplines such as Anthropology and Education Quarterly and the International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education. The authors argue that despite the fact that research conducted in the chronotope of reading and interpretation was initially resisted within their mainstream journals but later smuggled into their field by less mainstream openings. It should be considered as a testimony to a more powerful, long-lasting and pervasive grip which the chronotope of objectivism and presentation has faced and has on the field of qualitative inquiry. Nonetheless, the reading and interpretation chronotope has ultimately managed to become oblige to be reckoned with in the research on both language and literacy (Goodwin, 2000). The praxis turn The general interest in Praxis has long roots of history in philosophy. Praxis involves some actions which lead to acting with and for other people who promote moral goodness as well as the good life. This implies that praxis always refer to what people do with regard to each other so as develop their respective lives. However, the term praxis has more often than not been applied to mean the general process of connecting theory and practice, knowledge and action in order to develop the possibilities of communitas as well as create a better world for all the people to live in. In addition, praxis has been used to mean the practical and dialogic relationships that the researchers may build with other research participants. Through these relationships, most researchers have managed to impose mandates on themselves so as to work collaboratively with the research participants to enable such individuals improve their life status. It has been examined that both researchers and research participants become involved in reciprocal relationships in which the common work experience should be as much avenue for intellectuals and workers to develop their perceptions and interests. Therefore, reciprocal relationships should contribute to the development of some common goals. To some extent these goals must articulate the transformative possibilities of a particular dialogic community (Matusitz & Kramer, 2000). Power or Knowledge and De-familiarization Generally, when people think about the concept of critical qualitative research, they tend to assume that it must be framed in the postmodern or post-structural epistemologies and theories. The authors examined that critical qualitative research has dominated in postmodern and post-structural perspectives. Since power or knowledge and de-familiarization are considered as constructs central to these perspectives, it is commonly used to characterize the chronological understanding of power or knowledge and the games of truth. Partly due to its more or less exclusive alignment with the post-modernism and post-structuralism. This type of chronotope is moderately discontinuous with the chronotope of Skepticism, praxis and conscientization. This suggests that the hallmark of the post-modern and post-structural critical theorists is the level at which the authors debunked the modernist ideas of knowledge. This is simply because they argued that knowledge is often related to power. On the other hand, the development of de-familiarization becomes significant in the exploration of tactics at the center of conjectural analysis. It is also important for understanding the manner in which chronotope Power or Knowledge and De-familiarization reflects a sharp break as a result of the effects from other chronotopes. This is in particular to the ideas of nature and the process of research as well as the stances of various researchers driven to the objects of their respective research (Teri & Amy, 2007). Various scholars have argued that hermeneutics of vulnerability foregrounds the ecstasies of fieldwork, the varying and contradicting positioning of both the researchers and research participants, the utility of self-reflexivity as well as the imperfect control an ethnographer. This implies that self-reflexivity entails making transparent the poetic and rhetorical work of an ethnographer of rendering the object of her or his study. Furthermore, self-reflexivity refers to the attempts made by the researchers and research participants so as to engage in the acts of de-familiarization in regard to one another. Self-reflexivity as de-familiarization is as well important since it encourages a reflection on ethnography as the major practice of knowledge gathering and self-transformation by involving in the self and mutual reflections with each other. Qualitative Inquiry seems to be a new mark on this trajectory of more understanding about research (Crang & Thrift, 2000). Conclusion The taxonomy which the authors have used to organize their arguments is an important heuristic device. It drives the thinking about very complex and nuanced ways through which particular episteme, theories, methods and epistemologies have coalesced within the emergent ways so as to become the regimes of truth which inform inquiry of practices in more powerful and pervasive ways. These regimes of truth constitute a significant continuum for researchers to think about how the various articulations of subjectivity, language, knowledge and truth, rationality appeared historically and turned to be durable chronotopes. This poses a question to examine why they continue to affect in more powerful ways on how the qualitative inquiry is imagined and practiced in literary studies, education as well as social sciences. Translating the ideas of regimes truth in some research practices is considerably important to generate a good fit between research questions and the researchers to locate themselves on the continuum of chronotopes. Therefore, a deep reflection on the existing relations among the various epistemologies, approaches, strategies and theories is required. References Crotty, M., (1998). The foundations of social research: meaning and perspective in the research process. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks. Crang, M., & Thrift, N., (2000). Thinking Space. London: Routledge. Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and Embodiment within Situated Human Interaction. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 489-522. Kamberelis, G & Greg, D., (2005). Qualitative Inquiry:  Approaches to Language and Literacy Research.  New York:  Teachers College Press.  Matusitz, J & Kramer, E., (2000).A critique of Bernstein’s beyond objectivism and relativism: science, hermeneutics, and praxis. Poiesis & Praxis: International Journal of Technology Assessment and Ethics of Science.7(4), 291-301. Norman, K. D & Giardina, D.M., (2006).Qualitative inquiry and the conservative challenge: Chronotopes of Human Science Inquiry. Left Coast Press. Prior & Shipka, J., (2003). Chronotopic lamination: Tracing the contours of literate activity. In Chuck Bazerman & David R. Russell (Eds.), Writing selves, writing societies: Research from activity perspectives. Fort Collins, CO: WAC Clearinghouse and Mind, Culture, and Activity. Teri, H & Amy, M. K., (2007).A Fresh Perspective on Qualitative Inquiry. Journal of Literacy Researc.39 (2), 281-288. Read More