A Contextualist Research Paradigm for Rhetoric and Composition
Nature of "Knowledge"
This mode of inquiry privileges theories of epistemic justification which hold that a researcher's understanding of a research process should be grounded not so much in competing epistemologies, but in an epistemological dynamic that allows the researcher to find the best available means of knowing at a given time, in a given place. Paramount in this mode of inquiry is the analysis of context and the assertion that all justification of beliefs is a social act. Because justification is a social act, the contexts in which it occurs will vary and naturally include both quantitative and qualitative methods of understanding phenomena. The decision on research methods for a particular project should be based not on politics or on personal preferences, but on the context in which our research questions arise.
Louise Wetherbee Phelps' discussion on Contextualism:
"Contextualism... frames the world as event. Pepper and his interpreters develop the concept of event in two basic categories: (1) process or change, and (2) context. Context (also system, field, whole, ecology, relation) refers to the total set of relationships from which particular entities and qualities derive. This whole is, by virtue of the principle of change, in a constant state of flux, a dance of information/energy patterns that underlies all the apparent stabilities, structures, and laws we experience in nature or society. ...
A contextualist theory is one in which all parts are not only interdependent but mutually defining and transactive, so that through their shifting relationships they continually constitute new parts or elements as well as new structures. This premise holds for the system in general, and specifically for the relationships between subject and object, observer and observed. Neither is fixed; the line between the two is neither sharp nor stable, because each is derived from and defined by the constantly new relationships in which it participates. Further, transactions in a contextualist system are both horizontal and vertical. All levels are embedded, that is, reciprocally related to all others, so that change spreads through the whole system from any given level. " (33)
(from Composition as a Human Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988. )
Inquiry
Inquiry for t he Contextualist Research Paradigm begins with the heuristic below. Through the close analysis of the context--with the questions in this grid as guidance--the researcher will shape an inquiry that is attuned to the context of the research study.
from Johanek, Cindy. Composing Research. Logan: Utah State Press, 2000.
|
The Social: |
The Personal: |
The Factual: |
Question/Issue |
What types of readers or listeners will value this study, and how do I prioritize those potential readers? |
What intuitions, observations, or experience have driven me to ask this question? What do I hope to learn? Why am I curious? Do any ethical concerns bother me? |
How should I word my question such that I can answer it with the resources available to me? What is the most accurate portrayal of my task? Does my question have ethical problems? |
Purpose |
Whom will my research benefit? How will my research benefit them? |
Where would I "fit" in the available literature? When I read related literature, with what points do I disagree? Agree? |
What evidence will most fully help me answer this question? What types of data should I explore? |
Method(s) |
How does my audience usually discuss this question? What methods, if any, could I borrow from others? Do scholars in my field call for new methods to be applied to this question? |
Do I have resources, access, and expertise necessary to accurately and ethically explore this question? What are my strengths and weaknesses in this project? How is my research question different? |
What methods and/or literature will help me find and evaluate the data I am seeking? Which data are readily available? What instruments will I need to borrow/construct? |
Publication |
What is the best form and language for presenting my research, given the audience I envision? |
How do I want to be perceived as a researcher in the final presentation? What voice would best enhance what I am trying to say? |
How do I articulate my evidence accurately, persuasively and ethically? What conclusions can I ethically draw? |
(112)
Modes of Inquiry Home
This site contains direct excerpts from The Making of Knowledge in Composition by Stephen North. Portsmouth: Heineman, 1987.
Lirvin Researching | Site created by Lennie Irvin, San Antonio College (2007) | Last updated
April 11, 2008