Citation: 

Takayoshi, Pamela, Elizabeth Tomlinson, and Jennifer Castillo. “The Construction of Research Problems and Methods.” Practicing Research in Writing Studies, ed. by Katrina M. Powell and Pamela Takayoshi, Hampton Press, 2012, pp. 97-121.

Summary: 

In this chapter, Takayoshi, Tomlinson, and Castillo explore how researchers make decisions and how a practice of ongoing, guided, critical self-reflection can improve research processes in the field of writing studies. The authors acknowledge the importance of striving toward objectivity when conducting research but argue that ignoring the influence of our subject-positions obscures rather than increases objectivity. They posit that accountability to our influences may improve our process. 

Through interviews with 11 recently-published writing studies scholars, the authors gathered data around the origin and creation of research questions and methods. Most respondents came to their research questions within the context of their other work, and most described a curiosity, a discovery of cognitive dissonance, or an observation of something missing in the field as reasons they formed the questions that they did. Most participants create their methodologies based off of prior experience, the work of others, or through discussion with others in their field. To Takayoshi, Tomlinson, and Castillo, these interviews show that all the work, inspiration, problem-solving, and creation take place within specific contexts and being more aware of these contexts will improve work, or at least the understanding of the work.  

The authors propose a heuristic through which researchers might recognize the influence of their own contexts on their research. The questions are: “what are your motivations,” “what do you already believe,” how will those beliefs influence your work, “what is your ideological commitment,” “what professional or intellectual need does this research fill,” and “what assumptions about academic scholarship shape your work?” (114-115) These questions are to be used ongoing as a process and as something to return to. Takayoshi, Tomlinson, and Castillo present this heuristic as a way for researchers to be cognizant of how their own contexts influence their work and, importantly, to hold themselves accountable.

Quotations: 

“If researchers are to be in control of their research practice, it is critical to explore (and understand) the roles our epistemological, political, and ideological assumptions and commitments, as well as our experiences and knowledge, play in the shaping of our problems and questions.” (98) 

“In recognizing the individual as the interpretive lens through which data is filtered, we suggest the importance of articulating the role our subject positions have on what we notice, what we understand, and what we find interesting in our research practices.” (107) 

“’As corny as it may sound, my decisions about problems and methodology rest on my reflective answers to one question: Why do I care?’” (109) 

“But very few studies can actually only be accomplished with one method. There are many ways of knowing and many types of data we can collect to create narratives of understanding.” (111) 

“method is interwoven with invention” (111) 

“Especially in the beginning of a research project, using writing as a means of engaging in an internal dialogue with ourselves can help us identify and work through our motivations and purposes” (113) 

“The goal of the heuristic is to think through the problem, but also to begin an ongoing written dialogue with one’s self that can be returned to throughout the research process and that can develop in complexity and clarity throughout the research process.” (116)

Reflection: 

I initially came to this article when I was wrestling with the development of my own research project. I could not decide which avenue to take and I was hoping this chapter would give me some insights to help me focus in. I did attempt to use the heuristic Takayoshi, Tomlinson, and Castillo put forth and found it interesting. However, my issue wasn’t that I was oblivious to my biases, it was that I couldn’t bring some ideas from ideal to practicality. So, this was the wrong heuristic for me. However, I do believe that it could still be useful. This process is very much like a guided journal. The researcher does a guided free write, takes away some insights, comes back and does it again.  

I can think of the utility of this heuristic within the context of English 101. Some of these questions (altered for course level) could potentially be helpful at several parts of our students’ research processes. I could see this being used at the initial question-formation stage, the methods formation stage, and the point in which they are discussing results and making conclusions. As my students presented their work at various stages it was often obvious what their beliefs already were. I did a lot of coaching about phrasing questions, for example, in particular with surveys.  

The discussion of how one’s identity, positioning, and background influence what we ask and how we ask it was interesting and I found it helpful that this chapter not only recognized that and got feedback from other researchers but also presented a concrete process as a concluding solution. Often when I read research or theory that aligns with my interests (I’m interested in how our biases influence our actions, and how to mitigate those biases), there is a critique and an acknowledgement that something should be done that aligns with the proposed ideals. It’s cool to have a concrete tool to take away.  

It seemed from the responses of the participants in Takayoshi, Tomlinson, and Castillo’s study that the researchers were aware on some level that their own position within social and academic contexts influenced what and how they researched. However, it didn’t seem like any were in the habit of consciously and consistently reflecting on such influences. Personally, I reflect on these things most often in conversations with others, because that is where I process best. The downside to conversation as process is that there isn’t a record to go back to. This idea of a structured journal alongside a piece of research (or any other class or project, perhaps), doesn’t allow us to let the insights fall away. Accountability is never out of style. I appreciate when journals are assigned in classes and I could definitely see this as an aspect of 101 in the future.