what we're after generally and we know to some extent what
it looks like and that can be argued different, different
books for different people. But it is this thing
that we're all trying to, you know, it's the
backdrop of everything we do in research. You can't just,
again you can just go and recite a poem without you know,
although you know you can but I'm saying you have
to go, mathematics is the underpinning so we're asking specific
questions about it, where we go somewhere with it. We have to
take it into the mathematics arena is what I'm getting at.
Yeah, see, Thanks. And that's what, that's what I
was getting at. Would have part of this, before you got
into underpinning stuff, but um, so if you go
back and slide, I was gonna ask you a
second ago like if, like if you do research
right, and you collect this data, and you like
make these observations. So you've got all this stuff
and then you want to start reporting on it right, you would
analyze the data. All right. So I was
wondering um for reliability or objectivity I think it would
be more objective if it was somebody else that was
seeing the same data that you've seen. Yeah.
How likely is it that they're going to report on
the same things that you would report on, and come to the same conclusions?
I think. I think triangulation standardizes that kind of thing, and at least
gives it a foundation. Analytic defensibility. Yeah! And, that's
very important, yeah. And, I agree. You know, I bring
that up somewhere along the line here and
that's part of it. And that's also what I was
getting getting out with the difference in Math Ed research and
in general, general qualitative research. Another thing I guess, and
I'll just talking about it now is you, some of
the notions that I have with the research was have
no preconceived notions just, just see what material, what
emerges from the data and I like that. But
at the same time I think it's important especially with
my textbook analysis as I need to look at specific
things that I already know about. You can't you
can pretend like you don't know about anything but I'm
not sure that that's helpful and oftentimes it Math Ed research
you have these notions that are you know, definitely
backed up by literature theory that and that's also the
case in general qualitative world to some extent. And
different researchers will say yeah. Use the start list
because you have the knowledge, use it. I think you told me,
and you told me that before you have, you have
some knowledge of mathematics and the real numbers. So
[inaudible]. I had a comment. Yeah,Please do. Yeah. It's
photos and I'm not really, I don't know if
I can address like your issue of what makes it
specific to Math Ed or not, but when I think of
triangulation I think of it in two different contexts so the
one context I think of it as, and this is
record for my qual one class, like how I was taught about triangulating is that have
a research question you might have like some of the
subsets to that research questions. So When I was
in qual one, I doing the quantitative literacy project that
Angie and I did a couple years ago. We talked about
that, about attitudes, disposition and some beliefs. So we had three
components to our research question. I only have these
interview questions made up and then part of our triangulation
was matching up the interview questions to the different components
of the research question. And it was triangulation was
a way to sort of align our entire process of
what interview questions are we using? Do they answer
the research questions we're trying to ask? So it was also
a way to like you were talking about the rigor,
It was a way to make sure that the
questions you are asking in interviews or in observations would actually
answer the research question. So, it's just one way [inaudible].
So you're saying forming a link between your research question
and your data. Yes, linking the two? Yeah.
Yeah, I think that's important, very
important actually. That's a great point. The other
context that I was thinking of was with mixed method analysis, which
uses both quantitative and qualitative data, simultaneous, right
? Yeah. Regulation of Some sort of like warming
those two together in terms how does that not to
get off topic, but I wonder how how do
they handle? I'm not I've never had any mixed
Yeah. But I've always wondered how they handle the
paradigmatic difference is because you're trying to take this paradigm
and mix that paradigm. Yeah. Really doing don't
mix. I've kind of mixed them here but I
think it's down to the individual where you have to
say, well, going to be a pragmatist going
on, I'm going to be able this and say
it's practical for me to use both of these matters
taking into this question but that's what versus the theoretical
underpinning that and what do we got? Well,
um those are all these are three things that I
decided to include one of the discussions ahead of time
. We see multiple data sources, construction has been
mentioned, multiple investigators, multiple theoretical perspectives, multiple
investigators, you know, all these things and one
thing that we consider in research is that what is
the cost out there? Some of these things have
high costs associated. So they're difficult to pull off
. I think I guess the longest sort of what
I'm trying to say here is triangulation is very important
and when you say, you know this is you
know, use triangulation, trying to do, say
what it is, it needs to be stated that
it needs to be clear or else you risk validity
the animal, so reliability. Now this is a
Yes, there are books written on the liability or
something like that. Certainly chapters but uh um how
research would account for and disclose their push to all
aspects of the research process. Are you evaluating their
works? Uh substantively substantively and a lot of theme
development and building relationship between research questions and data source
. Yes, kind of these effects. Internal.
External generalizing how yours right play out in real world
. And so that brings us to grounded theory in
general and constant comparative method. Mhm. And what
it is. And does anybody want to take a
stab with constant comparative method is decided. Well,
okay, Alexis included Alexis last. Oh, probably
not. I'd say maybe change any ideas on constant
comparative. Sure, calm down, calm down.
And then sorry, just you know, jean nervous
. Well, I know genius read some of the
same stuff I have for sure. It just basically
means that you're taking. Uh huh. I like
it. Okay. You're you're okay. Yeah,
there have been some complaints and yeah, the wide
world of research that constantly decorative is just used.
It's thrown out there. It means almost anything.
Then. The way the way the theory was developed
, it was developed by glass from stress in 1967
. It's actually sort of grounded theory. And constant
comparative are kind of synonymous. But it's supposed to
be a rigorous analytical tools That you use. And
it has four stages. And I can tell you
a little bit about the four stages. As jean
pointed out, parent begin by comparing incidents to a
category or you start taking your dad and start looking
at it okay. Yeah. You start saying,
well, it has these properties. You start noticing
properties of of an incident, whatever your incident is
. In my case, it's a a patient.
If we have time we'll get to it. It's
a page of the textbook and there are incidents.
So I look for properties and then I try to
develop once you establish the properties you see it's got
uh you know thinking about the video that so many
of us have watched, where remember his name,
fellow takes that candy bar and trust that's it.
Isaac. Right? Ah Okay tries to, you
know after you watch that video you see incidents in
that video that have certain properties. I'm gonna make
one up now like like Isaac turns red whenever candy
bar whatever that's a property. And then if you
see another student for instance turn red. Well okay
that's the property. Then you have a dimension of
that property. How red did he turn when you
got a candy bar and then you start associating other
, you know in there. And I hope we'll
get to this. I hope I can make this
clear. And then you get to the point where
you begin, there are two types of, well
let me just put uh as far as you have
properties and you have dimension to the problem um You
know, does Isaac allergic to sugar. Is there
a diabetic issue with these students? I don't know
. You see what I'm saying is there's no right
way but that's what compared that's what comparing is you
compare incidents in stage one uh to a category um
In stage two you compare incident with incident, I'm
sorry the incident with the incident changes to compare an
incident with properties of cattle at that stage. Sure
, let me, let me restate that cause I
feel like I I didn't state that clearly, you
start with thinking.