2.3 The qualitative dissertation: still hazy after all these years  (Page 13/14)

Getting to the“so what”stage of the dissertation requires full immersion in and living with the data (Van Maanen, 1988, 1995). And living with the data requires time, a commodity that is often perceived as scarce by students. Time above all other factors seems to be a deterrent to choosing to write a qualitative dissertation for some. Understanding the role of time in the dissertation process can relieve fears and can make the choice of qualitative method, assuming that is it the best choice, a viable alternative for the“time fearful”student. In my experience, when a student resists living with the data long enough to become immersed, it may indicate a lack of saturation and repetition in the data, failure to adequately reduce the data to a level where the audience can make sense of the findings readily, and/or failure to grasp the notion that the data represent a picture in time. Living with the data can be misinterpreted as being in the field (Piantinada&Garman, 1999), but sometimes living with the data means exiting the field for a time or stepping back from the data long enough to recognize saturation. Living with the data also implies an“action”to many students, but sometimes it means the opposite—inaction (Piantinada&Garman, 1999). It is this haziness that produces frustration and consternation in students (and faculty alike) and clouds the decision of when there should be an end to living with the data Even the most capable students grow prematurely weary of living with the data and easily can‘go beyond’the data when pressed to answer the“so what”question.

Conclusion: The“So What”

I attempt to allay the fears about when to end the dissertation study by describing the scholarly process as“joining the conversation”rather than“having the last word.”Most students can conceptualize a conversation where different speakers have alternative views and differing information, each enriching the conversation. As time passes and the conversers continue to learn and grow, the conversation becomes further enlightened and enriched. Indeed, the process of joining the conversation is what produces longitudinal exploration of research questions, one study building from others, and scholars using different methods and data sources that result in creation of theory and new knowledge in the field. My participation here is intended as a continued conversation about the persistence of traditional notions of scientific investigation that intentionally or unintentionally influences scholars in a particular direction. By making these observations and concerns explicit, and by offering implications and suggestions that can buffer contextual complexity, scholars can collectively consider their own views and veracity regarding the choices that novice scholars will make, embracing marginalized voices and alternative methodology as“authorized’and valued in academe.

References

Atkinson, E. (2001) Deconstructing boundaries: Out on the inside? International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 14, 3.