Alice MacGillivray is an associate faculty member in the School of Leadership Studies and the School of Environment and Sustainability at Royal Roads University, Victoria BC Canada (alice@4km.net).

“Let’s Try Another Viewpoint” is designed to help students in higher education settings explore methodology options and related research questions for their applied research work. Following preparatory tasks, the activity itself is approximately 45 minutes in length, and is followed by a debrief. It can be used face-to-face or online. Rather than timing the group activity, one could leave it with groups (overnight for example) to work on their own schedules.

Rationale

Higher education programs often require original research. Most doctoral programs have major research components, which can take forms such as traditional dissertation documents, publications, or some combination. Other programs often have thesis options, capstone projects involving research, or course papers requiring the student to engage in some research.

In many cases the students have methodology options that go beyond quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods. For relatively inexperienced researchers, this can be daunting. They may not know what the “buffet options” are, may not recognize them when they see them, and may not know how to choose or employ options. Think of times when you have been in restaurants where the cuisine is foreign to you, the menu does not use your alphabet, and the servers do not speak a language you understand. Students may be experiencing similar feelings: being an outsider, hoping for a safe and successful adventure, and feeling anxious about basics such as what questions to ask.

“Let’s Try Another Viewpoint” is primarily a small group activity. It is intended to ease tensions and give students a 30,000-foot view of methodology options. To increase focus on these key intentions, I tend to ignore scope. For example, if a group drafts an excellent question for a study that would be too large, that might be mentioned in passing, but the focus would stay on why the question is excellent.

One of my inspirations for refining this activity was the book Mindful Inquiry in Social Research (Bentz & Shapiro, 1998). The authors come from very different scholarly backgrounds and bring that expertise to a 30,000-foot view of “cultures of inquiry.” For each “culture,” they address topics such as typical concerns, epistemological assumptions, and researcher standpoints.

Assessment

At Royal Roads University, we align with course learning outcomes for marked assignments, and use outcomes less formally for activities. This activity can help build knowledge and skills in many areas. Students may:

• Become more conversant with related terms such as research approach, methodology and method, as well as inductive and deductive.
• Appreciate strengths of peers in their course or program.
• Get closer to a final decision about methodology.
• Appreciate the value of other methodologies and ways of doing research.
• Implicitly appreciate other ways of seeing the world and the value of reframing.

Resources for Further Learning

There are many methodology resources available, and readers of this book probably have favourites. Some are generic; others are tailored to work in particular contexts (for example, psychology, tourism, activism, organizational studies, nursing, engineering, and so on). Some argue there are few methodologies and that new ones (such as netnography) are variations, so older resources can be valuable. The following may expand the perspectives of your students.

Overview

To Prepare for the Activity

Have students explore good methodology resources. This might take place through lectures and activities earlier in the course. Student activity options follow:

Presentations:

Have students or student teams do brief presentations about different methodologies to share and reinforce learning. These could be formally assessed. Include a short refresher to emphasize how a methodology differs from a method. This difference warrants creative communication with novice researchers.

Explore Methodologies and Metaphors:

For example, methodologies are similar to music genres. Principles guide the ways in which research is designed and conducted, methods are chosen within those guidelines (with potential for thoughtfully mixing genres). I sometimes use the Cynefin framework (Snowden & Boone, 2007) to present musical genres as metaphors. A symphony orchestra performance illustrates the complicated domain. There are “rules,” or correct ways to do things. Some instruments are included (e.g., strings and brass for example) and some are excluded (e.g., bagpipes). The symphony often has four movements. There is a correct way to perform the symphony (although conductors add nuances). One must follow sheet music.

On the other hand, improvisational jazz could represent the complex domain of the Cynefin framework. There are basic guidelines (e.g., chord progressions) and many differences. Jazz musicians improvise without sheet music and adjust to others’ improvisations. Individual musicians perform solos; solo artists may decide from moment to moment what they will play and for how long. At any given point in the performance the musicians may not know exactly what’s coming next. Wynton Marsalis spoke about jazz as a metaphor and guide for decision making both in music and in democracy during his CBC radio interview (Terry Powers, personal communication, Jan. 25, 2021.

Explain any restrictions or guidelines; e.g., “You will use qualitative research in your final assignment,” or “You will work with your committee to decide on methodologies,” or “From a program perspective, you may use variations of X, Y, and Z.”

Choose one relevant, program-related theme for the activity. This should be general, such as patient care, climate change, immigration, public health, religion-based conflict, or early childhood education.

Co-create a Theme:

Students could engage in an activity to decide collectively on a theme for methodology options.

Describe the activity, its purpose, intended outcomes, and if/how learning will be assessed. In describing the purpose, I find it valuable to provide a systems context about how context shapes methodologies and how methodologies shape everything from researcher identity to decisions about methods. A version of this systems view is illustrated in Figure 1.

Figure 1

Exploring research approaches and methodologies.

• Option: Each group could be assigned particular methodologies, perhaps with overlaps so groups can compare.

The Activity Itself

1. Organize students into groups of four if possible (generally I find online activities can be successful with fewer members and face-to-face groups can be a bit larger). Depending on the school, program etc., there are different criteria for choosing groups. Common ground could be helpful if you know something about students’ upcoming research themes and want to group related topics. Diversity could be helpful if you want to expose students to different ways of thinking (ontologies, epistemologies, and research goals).
2. Each group (around a table in person or in a break-out room or similar space online) crafts and refines questions for the general topic, using at least three methodologies.
3. Be sure you (or guests or colleagues) are familiar with the methodologies you offer. At the end of this activity, students’ questions might not be polished, but they should be coherent with the methodologies chosen.
4. The following are examples of research questions similar to those the students might produce if working with the general topic of “sustainability.” The list of methodologies is not exhaustive. Published research questions are cited.

• Action Research: How could environmental sustainability be better integrated into operations at Company X? This question has an explicit action orientation. The researcher could be a catalyst of sorts, working with leaders from Company X.
• Case study: How do standard grounds maintenance practices affect biodiversity on X campus? This question narrows a broad field to a specific context and may involve use of theoretical models or standardized measures.
• Ethnomethodology: How are sustainability professionals defined by the interactions they have within their workplace cultures? This question looks at relationships between culture and specific types of social interaction.
• Ethnography: What does Central Park mean to New Yorkers? This study would inductively explore the meaning of a relatively natural area to residents, probably through observation and interaction.
• Evaluation: How have infrastructure developments on Campus X in the past five years helped or hindered progress towards carbon neutrality?  This approach is defined by the intent of systematically assessing an element of sustainability.
• Grounded theory: What does environmental protection advocacy work mean to participants personally and at broader levels? This aims to reveal a theory, which is grounded in detailed analysis of real-world data.
• Hermeneutics: How has Covid-19 influenced consumerism in Portland, Oregon? This study would involve cycles of interpretation, perhaps based on studies of records and media, and potentially including interviews.
• Indigenous (métissage): Is it possible to blend Western and Indigenous knowledge and philosophies of nature (Lowan, 2011)? I am hesitant as a settler to describe Indigenous ways of knowing or researching. For consistency, I’ll say this study would likely involve the reframing of Indigenous/settler relations, and would emphasize respect, reciprocity, and relationality (Wilson, 2008).
• Participatory: How might ethnotourism contribute to sustainable economic recovery in rural British Columbia? This question foreshadows extensive involvement with participants and stakeholders.
• Phenomenography: What are varied ways of understanding carbon taxes in Canada? This study would reveal different categorizations, which could lead to more productive dialogue, communication, and action.
• Phenomenology: What is the lived experience of international students during their first field trip in course X? This question would lead the researcher to describe and/or interpret experiences, which might be significantly different than those of EuroCanadians teaching the course. On a practical level, this could open new layers of communication about cultures and values.
• Statistical analysis 1: How have assured sustainability report characteristics evolved since the 2002-2004 period, and what are some of the potential reasons for this evolution (Mock et al., 2013)? This could result in concrete outputs to shape and defend practical decisions.
• Statistical analysis 2: How much energy, water, and nutrient requirements are required to grow lettuce in a warehouse setting (Butler, 2019)? Similarly, this study could lead to comparisons of different food security strategies.
• Statistical analysis 3: Multiple discriminant analysis—how can sustainable organisational performance be developed into a new corporate ratings approach for publicly traded companies? This question could lead to more widespread attention to sustainability in large corporations.

There are several ways in which this activity can be integrated with feedback or assessment: (a) this could be an activity for experiential learning with no formal assessment or with formative feedback; (b) rubrics could be set up for grading of the team’s questions; (c) the activity could feed into a subsequent assignment in which individuals craft and justify their questions and draft methodologies and methods in the context of their research plans.

A debrief can explore links between the activity experience and other course content or current events. The students might describe the experience including “AHAs,” frustrations, and insights. Were there methodologies they became curious about, if only for the future? Did the experience help them to understand where others may be “coming from” in their workplaces, communities, or families?

Reflections

On the surface, this activity is about the transition from research ideas through to research methodologies (at their intersection, ideas and methodologies help to refine research questions). At a deeper level, this activity has the potential to open students’ eyes to different ontologies, epistemologies, and worldviews. Some students may struggle with this, especially if their education/lives to date have been grounded in a specific discipline or an unwavering belief in a single, external truth.

Not long ago, there were strong connections between fields or disciplines and methodologies: anthropologists used ethnography; natural scientists used the scientific method; and so on. Lines have blurred in at least three ways.

• Individual researchers may branch out beyond the traditional: a biologist might use action research to explore the potential of citizen science to protect biodiversity.
• Some researchers (such as Gerald Midgley) are pluralists, mixing methodologies as an artist might mix paints from a palette. One might have a case study informed by ethnography, or grounded theory informed by action research.
• At a broader scale, we see evidence of boundary spanning in fields such as astrophysics, sociobiology, sociolinguistics, and ecopsychology. As our world becomes more complex, I find that boundary-spanning approaches can produce important insights. However, one needs to balance thoughtful boundary-spanning with scope. A student may want to do a mixed method study, for example, when it would be more realistic to conduct qualitative research that could guide a subsequent quantitative study.

In my experience, frictions may emerge between forms of positivism and other ways of knowing. This may need to be addressed through parallel dialogue.

People facilitating this activity may not feel comfortable with some types of research. This could stem from biases, lack of knowledge, or lack of experience. If the discomfort comes from an informed view that a particular methodology is inappropriate for the program, then it might be removed from the list of students’ options. Otherwise, it may be possible to access resources in texts, on the web, or through guest presenters.

This activity is designed for novice academic researchers, or researchers considering new forms of inquiry. However, I believe the learning benefits can be much broader. The activity can help people learn to understand different perspectives and experience the power of re-framing (Jorgenson & Steier, 2013). These skills can help with processes including personal leadership, systems change, problem-solving, conflict resolution and innovation.

References

Bentz, V. M., & Shapiro, J. J. (1998). Mindful inquiry in social research. SAGE Publications.

Butler, A. R. (2019). Quantifying energy, water, and nutrient inputs to vertical farming systems (Publication No. 13864086) [Master’s Thesis, Villanova University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

Jorgenson, J., & Steier, F. (2013). Frames, framing, and designed conversational processes: lessons from the world café. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 49(3), 388–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886313484511

Lowan, G. E. (2011). Navigating the wilderness between us: Exploring ecological métissage as an emerging vision for environmental education in Canada (Publication No. NR91119) [Doctoral Dissertation, University of Calgary]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

Mock, T. J., Rao, S. S., & Srivastava, R. P. (2013). The development of worldwide sustainability reporting assurance: worldwide sustainability reporting assurance. Australian Accounting Review, 23(4), 280–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/auar.12013

Today on q. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/q/monday-jan-25-2021-wynton-marsalis-yulissa-campos-and-more-1.5886218

Snowden, D. F., & Boone, M. E. (2007). A leader’s framework for decision making. Harvard Business Review, 85(11), 68–76.

Wilson, S. (2008). Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Fernwood Publishing.

Appendix A: Additional Resources for Learning

Ciesielska, M., & Jemielniak, D. (Eds.). (2018). Qualitative methodologies in organization studies (Vol. Volume 1, theories and new approaches). Palgrave Macmillan.

Costley, C., & Fulton, J. (Eds.). (2019). Methodologies for practice research: Approaches for professional doctorates. SAGE Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (Fifth). SAGE Publications.

Midgley, G. (2000). Systemic intervention: Philosophy, methodology, and practice (Ser. Contemporary systems thinking). Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

Rahman, Md. S., (2017). The advantages and disadvantages of using qualitative and quantitative approaches and methods in language “testing and assessment” research: A Literature Review. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(1). https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/10026.1/16598/EJ1120221.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y