Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Methodological Challenges in Multi-Investigator Multi-Institutional Research in Higher Education

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Methodological diversity has enriched higher education research. One area about which little is known is the dynamics of multi-investigator multi-institutional projects. This paper examines what happens inside a large-scale, team-based research project with an emphasis on decision points related to methodology and reporting results. Systematically reflecting on the tensions that emerged during one effort can give license to other investigators to openly discuss and manage more productively the decisions and struggles in their research and avoid pitfalls that could compromise the research endeavor.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Angrosino, M. V., & Mays de Perez, K. A. (2000). Rethinking observation: From method to context. In N.␣K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). (pp. 673–702). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 25(4), 297–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data: Complementary research strategies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontana, A., & Frey, J. H. (2000). The interview: From structured questions to negotiated text. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (pp. 645–672). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (1983). Ethnography: Principles in practice. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodder, I. (2000). The interpretation of documents and material culture. In: K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln, (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage, (pp. 703–715).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, D. L. (1989). Participant observation: A methodology for human studies (Vol. 15). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuh, G. D. (2001a). Assessing what really matters to student learning. Change, 33(3), 10–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuh, G. D. (2001b). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual framework and overview of psychometric properties. Bloomington: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuh, G. D., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., & Associates (1991). Involving colleges: Successful approaches to fostering student learning and personal development outside the classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  • Kuh, G. D., & Whitt, E. J. (1988). The invisible tapestry: Culture in American colleges and universities. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, No. 1. Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagemann E., & Shulman L. (Eds.), (1999). Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liggett, A., Glesne, C., Johnston, A., Hsazi, S., & Schattman, R., (1994). Teaming in qualitative research: Lessons learned. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 7(1), 77–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • LeCompte, M. D., & Preissle, J. (1993). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merriam S. B. (Ed.), (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pace, C. R. (1980). Measuring the quality of student effort. Current Issues in Higher Education, 2, 10–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2003). Inquiry into appreciative evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 100, 85–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, L. (2002). Using N6 in qualitative research. Melbourne, Australia: QSR International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rist, R. C. (1980). Blitzkrieg ethnography: On the transformation of a method into a movement. Educational Researcher, 9(2), 8–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership. (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. (October, 1999). Looking toward the 21st century: Challenges of educational theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(7), 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schratz, M. (1993). From cooperative action to collective self-reflection: A sociodynamic approach to educational research. In: M. Schratz (Ed.), Qualitative voices in educational research. Washington DC: The Falmer Press, (pp. 56–71).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwandt, T. A. (1997). Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. (2000). From Minsk to Pinsk: Why a scholarship of teaching and learning? Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 48–53.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spradley, J. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, W. G. (1988). Organizational culture in higher education: Defining the essentials. The Journal of Higher Education, 59(1), 2–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney, W. G. (1993). Building communities of difference: Higher education in the twenty-first century. Westport: Bergin & Garvey.

    Google Scholar 

  • VanMaanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasser, J. D., & Bresler, L. (1996). Working in the interpretive zone: Conceptualizing qualitative research teams. Educational Researcher, 25(5), 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitt, E. J. (1993). Making the familiar strange: Discovering culture. In: G. D. Kuh (Ed.), Using cultural perspectives in student affairs work. Alexandria: ACPA Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitt, E. J., & Kuh, G. D. (1991). Qualitative research in higher education: A team approach to multiple site investigation. Review of Higher Education, 14, 317–337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jillian Kinzie.

Additional information

Presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA, April, 2004. Manuscript under review by Higher Education. This research was supported by Lumina Foundation and the Center of Inquiry in the Liberal Arts at Wabash College. The views reflected in this paper are the interpretations of the Project DEEP research team and do not necessarily reflect those of the granting agencies.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kinzie, J., Magolda, P., Kezar, A. et al. Methodological Challenges in Multi-Investigator Multi-Institutional Research in Higher Education. High Educ 54, 469–482 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-006-9007-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-006-9007-7

Keywords

Navigation