Confusions and Conventions: Qualitative Research in Engineering Education
Confusions and Conventions: Qualitative Research in Engineering Education
复制标题
困惑与惯例：工程教育的定性研究
DOI：
10.1002/jee.20031
复制
发表时间：
2014
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
E. Douglas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
C. Baillie;E. Douglas
进入一个新的研究领域，特别是跨学科领域，从技术到社会研究数据，可能会令人望而生畏。有许多新的术语和全新的做事方式。此外，从工程教育研究小组中出现的新的定性研究品种可能介于两者之间-来自社会科学或工程领域的评论家都不承认他们认为的质量，因此拒绝工作。作为编辑委员会的成员，我们已经看到越来越多的定性研究论文提交给工程教育杂志在过去的几年里，但我们感到不安的是这些被拒绝的数量。我们如何评估未知和创新工作领域的质量？这篇客座社论旨在阐明工程/物理科学和社会科学文化并置所产生的困惑，以便为更好的研究论文和更好地评论本刊和其他地方的定性研究奠定基础。特别是，我们试图强调研究设计如何包括认识论，理论，方法论和方法-所有这些都以一种连贯的方式整合。
Moving into a new area of research, especially an interdisciplinary area and from technical to social research data, can be daunting. There are many new terms to encounter and whole new ways of doing things. Furthermore, the new variety of qualitative research emerging from engineering education research groups can fall in betwixt and between – with reviewers from neither social science nor engineering domains recognizing what they see as quality and hence rejecting the work. As members of the Editorial Board, we have seen an increasing number of qualitative research papers submitted to the Journal of Engineering Education over the last couple of years, but we are disturbed by the number of these that get rejected. How can we assess quality in unknown and innovative areas of work? This guest editorial aims to throw some light on the confusions arising at this juxtaposition of engineering/physical science and social science cultures in order to lay the foundations for better research papers and better reviews of qualitative studies in this Journal and elsewhere. In particular, we seek to highlight how research design encompasses epistemology, theory, methodology, and methods – all of them integrated in a coherent way.