Thread by @DrPetra

Today's #ResearchTip is be wary if using qualitative approaches and are encouraged to make your research "more reliable" by
- using a random sample
- converting qual data to numerical data
- incorporating quant approaches
#AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter #PhDChat #HigherEd /1

I bore myself having to say this but we are decades beyond any qual vs quant debates, teaching qual in contrast to quant, implying qual methods are lesser to quant ones, or artificially forcing qual methods into quant approaches. Stop it already! /2

This #ResearchTip is prompted by seeing yet another example of someone being told to "improve" qual research by making it more quant (applying randomisation). If you're not expert in qual methods stop telling people how to do them and go learn yourself /3

You can combine qual and quant, but only if it's appropriate. "Triangulation" for the sake of it doesn't magically strengthen your research (it often worsens it). And quantifying qual data also often makes a real muddle so needs doing with care /4

If you're not proficient in a method you should not be teaching it, examining PhDs or other research degrees using said methods, or telling other people they're wrong for using qual approaches you don't understand. Instead, learn more or stay in your lane /5

Also if you teach qualitative methods as 'qual versus quant' this needs to change. You don't teach quant methods as anything other than that, qual methods deserve the same approach and believe me there's more than enough you can cover in a qual module without quant mentions /6

I can't tell you how many invitations I get to teach introductions to qual methods with the specific request I set out how different qual methods are from quant ones (medical schools I'm looking at you). It's so BORING. We can do better /7

But this is largely why we have the problem. In many disciplines people who've a very limited understanding and experience of qual approaches teach methods courses, introducing errors, misunderstandings and myths. And perpetuating confusion and harm /8

TL;DR all methods are useful for the job they're designed to do. They don't need teaching in oppositional formats. You should only use the tools in your toolbox you're adequately trained for otherwise what you build will be shoddy /9

ps. if you suspect you've been taught qual methods badly or used qual approaches but been examined or edited by someone who clearly doesn't know qual methods it's always good to ask people who do know their stuff for advice, better training, or evidence to back you up /10