Narrative approaches


After reading on narrative approaches, I can not help but think that narrative approaches are similar to phenomenology in at least one aspect: the making sense of human experiences. Maybe they differ in the details of how the research questions are asked; that is narrative approaches would try to identify what experiences have in common or not (or what experiences reveal when retold/analyzed) with regards to, let’s say state, or status (what does it mean to be an undocumented student in a public school, or engagement with diversity issues on a given campus), while phenomenology starts from looking closely at one phenomenon (like being bullied, or feeling discriminated for being of a different ethnicity than the main stream). It is almost like narrative approaches go from a wide range of views (many told stories by various people) to a more focused view(the retold story of the researcher), while phenomenological approaches go from an identified theme(one phenomenon) to the wide possible generalization. I wonder if narrative research could be used as research material (literature review) for phenomenological research (along with other data-interviews, observations, etc.).

In other words, if I were to take on a study of experiences of international teachers in the US public schools, I would most likely go with a narrative approach, and most likely my voice as a researcher would co-construct the voice of the participants ; if I wanted to explore the feeling of “in between-ness” or feeling a “stranger” as an international teacher, I would most likely go with a phenomenological approach, and my position as a researcher(biases and personal beliefs) would be clear from the research onset.

This can be very confusing?!

Dr. Davis, am I making sense? I feel right now that little knowledge is my greatest enemy, and I feel that my assumptions may be a bit farfetched.

phenomenological approaches

Phenomenological approaches

I think that up to this point, after studying and reading about various qualitative approaches, I identify my research interests to situate themselves within the phenomenological approach continuum. I am using the term continuum for I am not sure yet on the specific type of phenomenology I would go with , if hermeneutic, or, existential. I am interested in exploring human experiences and translating that into meaning within consciousness, individual or/or collective. I am still at the beginning of my learning, and while I may make general assumptions, nevertheless, I strongly feel that I identify my research interests with this line of research; particularly, because it starts with the researcher’s self-reflexion to identify personal biases and preconceptions regarding the issue under research, before the inquiry would proceed to identifying the participants experiences and understandings ; this multi-folded view (self and of participants’) would unveil depth of meaning on a consciousness continuum- collective and/or individual.

I am going to read more on phenomenological inquiries; I will start with Heidegger and van Mannen- for I feel I need to understand the historical and philosophical direction that this type of inquiry has taken in time before I read what other scholars had to say on this method of inquiry.


I was born and educated in a different country than the US, and I would like to explore the experience of my counterparts-teachers, those born elsewhere and educted elsewhere than the US, and their experience as 'foreigners" or 'assimilated proffessionals" in the context of public education in the US. Also, because I work with/teach expats,or students of various native backgrounds and US documentation (legal, illegal, transient, migrant)I would like to explore their life experiences, and what they make of their learning/currerre in the US schools, and how they see possible, or manage to continue education beyond high school.

Grounded Theory

It looks like the choice for grounded theory research approach should start with the researcher’s question of whether he or she wants to inductively generate theory or hypothesis from data to explain a process under study. That means that a researcher relies on data collection, coding, and permanent comparison of data to generate theory. I understand that there are different views on grounded theory approaches depending on the philosophical (pragmatism, postmodernism, post-structuralism, constructivism) and personal positioning of the researcher (Savin-Baden & Major, 2013). According to Savin-Baden & Major(2013), “researchers who want to stay close to the data, and who do not necessarily seek ’truth’ but rather a conception of what is taking place in a particular situation will benefit from a grounded theory approach”(p. 183). That in Charmaz’ (2006) understanding (constructivist grounded theory) means that researchers along with participants will construct their own realities. Researchers, when coding, label various instances/situations/discourses using language that ultimately expresses one way of looking at things. In this regard, Charmaz (2006) points out that “specific use of language reflects views and values...[and] coding should inspire us to examine hidden assumptions in our own use of language and that of our participants”(p. 47). Later in the chapter, Charmaz brings to our attention the idea of personal preconceptions that stem from concepts such as class, gender, , race, age, and others that “may permeate an analysis without the researcher’s awareness”(p. 67). Assumptions, preconceptions, or taken for granted cultural views may have an influence on how researchers make sense of what they are studying, and I think this is why realizing and conceptualizing our positionality is important when we take on a grounded theory approach.

I find the whole process of coding fascinating; building an understanding and eventually unveiling a hypothesis or stating a theory depends on coding and on how the researcher interacts with data. I think I have a general understanding of how coding is being done-through stages of line by line or in vivo, followed by focused coding, axial, and theoretical coding. I would be very interested of deconstructing one strong grounded theory research study so that I could better understand coding step by step. Applying this theory to practice could only work for me if I did this process in reverse- going from one study and analyzing each stage along with theory on coding within GT. approaches.

I think I had a little taste of that when I did my small scale research on school secretaries (I wanted to explore their experiences and if they felt they were important to the school curriculum). While coding I stumbled over surprising categories that revealed an interesting turn I could take in researching this further, particularly school culture, and the culture keepers.


Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage Publications.


Savin-Baden, M., & Major, C. H. (2013). Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

Feminist approaches

I am confused about the information I have read thus far about feminist approaches in qualitative research. Reading some of the theory on feminism, it seems that the feminist approaches in a purist form are concerned with unveiling and also politically combating and changing inequalities linked to gender, race, class , heterosexism, with a particular focus on women and their oppression in our society. Initially, I thought feminist approaches had to do mainly with inequalities where the oppressed are the weak, the children, women, the poor, and so on. I thought that feminist approaches in qualitative research were not limited to research participants being female. And thus, the examples that I read are confirming my initial thoughts. For example, Ramirez (2013) is interested in the examination of the Latinos/as’ process in choosing a graduate program. Her study involves both males and females! As I understand it at this point feminism is a more extremist take on critical social theory than it is a pure theory in itself. Are feminist approaches more related to challenging the masculine organization of society in general than anything? That makes me think of my own experience of taking a job as language instructor for the US Department of Defense in Iraq. I encountered many situations of sexism and oppression based on gender; I feel I had to work twice as hard and had to keep myself in a very conscious and tight state of mind to prove that I could function and perform as well as a man (I had to face adversity of negative judgment for my decision on taking such a task here in the States, there within the US Air Force, and some of my Iraqi male students); however, there were few situations where my physical weakness -based on weight and endurance , were a challenge; as a matter of fact I outperformed some of my male counterparts and military reps in intellectual and cultural awareness performance! Maybe feminist approaches also have to do with particular situations; for example, if I were to describe my experience in Iraq , working with both American and Iraqi officers, I would most likely use a feminist approach, because the cultural situation, the military cultural milieu (unfortunately) were encouraging oppression based on gender and sexism.