Student-Faculty Engagement and Paradigmatic Pragmatism
As someone who has largely done quantitative research, as I learned about different research paradigms, I struggled with the idea that quantitative work is largely positivist or post-positivist (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). To me, quantitative methods are simply tools used to try and understand our complex world. Throughout my coursework, I analyzed existing surveys and read qualitative research that examined student-faculty engagement (Cejda & Rhodes, 2004; Chang, 2005; Cotten & Wilson, 2006; Hagedorn et al., 2000). As I continued to research this construct, I realized that the questions most compelling to me could not be answered by either method alone. For me, it is not the method that drives my research, but it is the question that drives my method. This paradigmatic pragmatism (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998) guides my work in that I believe that all methods have value, and are appropriate depending on the research questions and study.
I received a two-year fellowship (Steffensen-Cannon Scholarship) for my dissertation research which is a mixed methods grounded theory study of community college student-faculty engagement. In this study, I first utilized existing institutional data (Community College Survey of Student Engagement) to examine what factors predict student-faculty engagement. I then used those results to develop a selection strategy and interview protocol for four rounds of interviews with current community college students. The interviews aimed to understand how students understand their experiences with faculty and why they engage with faculty. I then utilized both the quantitative and qualitative results to examine how existing measures of student-faculty engagement reflect how students understand their experiences with faculty.
I see research as a way to put together pieces of the puzzle, to try and get a complete picture while realizing that a finished puzzle is not possible. We can only attempt to get there utilizing multiple methods and lines of inquiry. The research design of my dissertation study recognizes that each method or data source utilized is incomplete and that by combining them we gain a better understanding of student-faculty engagement than we would have through either method or data source alone. This will continue to guide my research agenda, as I continue to utilize quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods in both of my current areas of research.
How do graduate programs prepare faculty to teach? How do faculty view their interactions with students? What factors influence faculty to engage students? What institution/department policies/practices encourage student-faculty engagement? How do retention/promotion/tenure policies value engagement with students?
These are some of the questions that I aim to answer through future research. My dissertation study centered the community college student voice in the exploration of student-faculty engagement. However, there are many future projects that have emerged from this research that aim to examine both the faculty voice, and the institutional/departmental context for student-faculty engagement.
As someone who has largely done quantitative research, as I learned about different research paradigms, I struggled with the idea that quantitative work is largely positivist or post-positivist (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). To me, quantitative methods are simply tools used to try and understand our complex world. Throughout my coursework, I analyzed existing surveys and read qualitative research that examined student-faculty engagement (Cejda & Rhodes, 2004; Chang, 2005; Cotten & Wilson, 2006; Hagedorn et al., 2000). As I continued to research this construct, I realized that the questions most compelling to me could not be answered by either method alone. For me, it is not the method that drives my research, but it is the question that drives my method. This paradigmatic pragmatism (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998) guides my work in that I believe that all methods have value, and are appropriate depending on the research questions and study.
I received a two-year fellowship (Steffensen-Cannon Scholarship) for my dissertation research which is a mixed methods grounded theory study of community college student-faculty engagement. In this study, I first utilized existing institutional data (Community College Survey of Student Engagement) to examine what factors predict student-faculty engagement. I then used those results to develop a selection strategy and interview protocol for four rounds of interviews with current community college students. The interviews aimed to understand how students understand their experiences with faculty and why they engage with faculty. I then utilized both the quantitative and qualitative results to examine how existing measures of student-faculty engagement reflect how students understand their experiences with faculty.
I see research as a way to put together pieces of the puzzle, to try and get a complete picture while realizing that a finished puzzle is not possible. We can only attempt to get there utilizing multiple methods and lines of inquiry. The research design of my dissertation study recognizes that each method or data source utilized is incomplete and that by combining them we gain a better understanding of student-faculty engagement than we would have through either method or data source alone. This will continue to guide my research agenda, as I continue to utilize quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods in both of my current areas of research.
How do graduate programs prepare faculty to teach? How do faculty view their interactions with students? What factors influence faculty to engage students? What institution/department policies/practices encourage student-faculty engagement? How do retention/promotion/tenure policies value engagement with students?
These are some of the questions that I aim to answer through future research. My dissertation study centered the community college student voice in the exploration of student-faculty engagement. However, there are many future projects that have emerged from this research that aim to examine both the faculty voice, and the institutional/departmental context for student-faculty engagement.
