Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T23:39:08.343Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Grounded Theory and Focus Groups: Reconciling Methodologies in Indigenous Australian Education Research

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 July 2015

Jan Stewart
Jan Stewart*
Affiliation:
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Unit, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4072, Australia and School of Education, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, 4072, Australia
Get access

Abstract

This paper captures an ideological moment in time in which I contemplated the methodological approach I was embarking upon. In my search for a more appropriate approach for conducting research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tertiary students at the University of Queensland, I chose focus groups set within the qualitative process of grounded theory. This paper explores the meaning, usefulness and persistence of grounded theory, how it juxtaposes with focus groups, and the implications for the reciprocal integrity of the research for the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and me. Within this context and the tenets of grounded theory I ask questions such as, “For how long in the process can your research texts (linking data and theory) about field texts (participants’ narratives) remain purely inductive?” And, “How does the movement between inductive theory development and deductive assumptions fit widi issues of power and authority in an Australian Indigenous context?”

I see possibility in the complementary use of grounded theory and focus groups that creates dialogic relationships between the students as both narrators and audience. Through the interaction of retelling, reliving and recreating life experiences in conversations, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander tertiary students conceptualise their individual subjectivities in a process of self-construction. How perceptive I am in “seeing” developing concepts within the students’ testimonies, and how I interpret those concepts in relation to existing theoretical content, may lead to new theory that influences the ongoing deconstruction of grand narratives often assigned to group identities. Co-research among the participants can provide the opportunity for monitoring the generative process.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education , Volume 36 , Issue S1: (Re)Contesting Indigenous Knowledges & Indigenous Studies , 2007 , pp. 32 - 37
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bakhtin, M. (1986). The problem of the text in linguistics, philology, and the human sciences (V. Mcgee, Trans.). In Emerson, C., & Holquist, M. (Eds.), Speech genres and other late essays (pp. 103–131). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Bower, G., & Morrow, D. (1990). Mental models in narrative comprehension. Science, 247: 44–48.Google Scholar
Bruner, J. (1987). Life as narrative. Social Research, 54(1), Spring, 11–32.Google Scholar
Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 509–35). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. London: Harvester Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (2002). Confronting governments: Human rights. In Faubion, J.D. (Ed.), Power: Essential works of Foucault, 1954-1984 (Vol. 3). London: Penguin.Google Scholar
Freire, P. (1985). The politics of education: Culture, power and liberation. South Hadley, MA: Bergin and Garvey.Google Scholar
Gergen, K. (1994). Realities and relationships: Soundings in social construction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. New York, NY: Penguin.Google Scholar
hooks, b. (1992). Black looks: Race and representation. Boston, MA: : South End Press.Google Scholar
Huggins, J. (1998). Sister girl: The writings of Aboriginal activist and historian Jackie Huggins. St Lucia, QLD: University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
Janesick, V. (1998). The dance of qualitative research design metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning. In Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.),Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 35–55). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mackinlay, E. (2003). Disturbances and dislocations: Understanding teaching and learning experiences in Indigenous Australian women’s music and dance. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland.Google Scholar
McConaghy, C. (2000). Rethinking Indigenous education: Culturalism, colonialism and the politics of knowing. Flaxton, QLD: Postpressed.Google Scholar
Madriz, E. (2000). Focus groups in feminist research. In Denzin, N., & Lincoln, S. (Eds.),Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed. pp. 835–850). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Moreton-Robinson, A. (2000). Talkin’ up to the white woman: Indigenous women and feminism. St Lucia, QLD: University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
Nakata, M. (1995). Culture in education: A political strategy for us or for them. Ngoonjook: A Journal of Australian Indigenous Issues, 11, 40–61.Google Scholar
Nakata, M. (1997). The cultural interface: An exploration of the intersection of Western knowledge systems and Torres Strait Islanders positions and experiences. Unpublished PhD thesis, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland.Google Scholar
Nakata, M. (2000). Foreword. In McConaghy, C. Rethinking Indigenous education: Culturalism, colonialism and the politics of knowing (pp. 7–10). Flaxton, QLD: Postpressed.Google Scholar
Nakata, M. (2004). Ongoing conversations about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander research agendas and directions. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 33, 1–6.Google Scholar
Patton, M. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Reason, P. (1998). Three approaches to participative inquiry. In Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 261–289). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Sampson, E. (1993). Celebrating the other a dialogic account of human nature. New York, NY: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Sheehan, N. (2004). Indigenous knowledge and higher education: Instigating relational education in a neo-colonial context. Unpublished PhD thesis, JUniversity of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland.Google Scholar
Stewart, J., & Mackinlay, E. (2003). Fostering voice and representation: Exploring the use of focus groups with Indigenous Australian tertiary students (Ngulaig 19). Brisbane, QLD: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Unit, University of Queensland.Google Scholar
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Smith, L. (1999). Decolonising methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. New York: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Wortham, S. (2001). Narratives in action: A strategy for research and analysis. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar