dc.contributor.author |
Soobrayan, Venitha
|
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2017-05-22T15:03:16Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2017-05-22T15:03:16Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2010 |
|
dc.identifier.citation |
Venitha Soobrayan (2003) Ethics, Truth and Politics in Constructivist Qualitative Research, Westminster Studies in Education, 26:2, 107-123 |
en |
dc.identifier.issn |
0140-6728 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0140672030260204 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/10500/22586 |
|
dc.description.abstract |
In this article I make two claims with respect to the ethics, truth and politics of qualitative research. The first is that confronting ethics, truth and politics in research is in effect a confrontation with the self. Although this may appear to be self‐evident, in qualitative research in particular, such an assertion needs to be consciously made and recognised.
The second related claim is that there is no single set of rules or practices that govern the ethics, truth and politics of a research project. In effect, the ethics, truth and politics of a research project are contextually driven and simultaneously contextually bound. This does not imply that a laissez‐faire ‘anything goes’ approach is defensible. On the contrary, the qualitative researcher is constantly and consistently called upon to consciously and deliberately engage with the ethical, truth and political implications of his research and writing. For the researcher ethical epiphanies are rare. Confronting and making an ethical decision is a demanding process, not an event in the life of a researcher. To extend this second point beyond the boundaries of South Africa, I draw on the works of local and international philosophers of education who offer similar arguments. |
en |
dc.language.iso |
en |
en |
dc.title |
Ethics, Truth and Politics in Constructivist Qualitative Research |
en |
dc.type |
Article |
en |
dc.description.department |
Educational Leadership and Management |
en |