I get frustrated when I see "rigorous" and "evidence-based" applied exclusively (or even primarily) to quantitative research. Narrative research is also "rigorous." Stories are evidence. Emotions are evidence. Analysis of affective responses is evidence. History is evidence.
I bristle altogether at the phrase "evidence-based," because of the gatekeeping contexts where I so often see it used. I immediately wonder, what kind of evidence? What ways of knowing are being privileged? And at the expense of whose voices going unheard?
And most meanings of the word "rigor" have no productive place in education, unless you believe school (and disciplinary culture) should be about policing, punishing, and gatekeeping -- again with the effect of excluding already marginalized voices.
rig·or /ˈriɡər/
: a sudden feeling of cold with shivering accompanied by a rise in temperature, often with copious sweating, especially at the onset or height of a fever.
: short for rigor mortis.
: extremely thorough, exhaustive, or accurate.
from Latin, literally ‘stiffness'
: a sudden feeling of cold with shivering accompanied by a rise in temperature, often with copious sweating, especially at the onset or height of a fever.
: short for rigor mortis.
: extremely thorough, exhaustive, or accurate.
from Latin, literally ‘stiffness'
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
