Tracking the history of qualitative research is to some extent a personal journey, reflective of the individual's own experience in the field. Many scholars participated in the ongoing dialogue around the shift from a solely positivist model of research to a multiple-models context. There still remain some philosophical and practical problems, around which the field will be in dialogue for some time to come. Those problems include the issue of rapport, especially in the face of an increasingly critical turn in the social sciences, and the stances adopted for mixed-methods models. Conversations around these and other issues have never been more urgent, in light of the National Research Council's press for a return to conventional scientific inquiry.
Atkinson, P., & Delamont, S. ( 2006). In the roiling smoke: Qualitative inquiry and contested fields. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education , 19, 747-756.
2.
Bloch, M. ( 2004). A discourse that disciplines, governs and regulates: The National Research Council’s report on scientific research in education . Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 96-110.
3.
Bogdan, R., & Taylor, S.J. ( 1975). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A phenomenological approach to the social sciences. New York: John Wiley.
4.
Creswell, J.W. ( 2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5.
Creswell, J.W. ( 2009). Editorial: Mapping the field of mixed methods research . Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(2), 95-108.
6.
Creswell, J.W., & Plano Clark, V.L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S., & Giardina, M.D. (2006). Disciplining qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19, 769-782.
8.
Dimitriadis, G. ( 2001). Coming clean at the hyphen: Ethics and dialogue at a local community center. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 578-597.
9.
Dobbert, M.L. ( 1982). Ethnographic research: Theory and application for modern schools and societies. New York: Praeger.
10.
Eisenhart, M. ( 2006). Qualitative science in experimental time. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19, 697-708.
11.
Fine, M. ( 1994). Working the hyphen: Reinventing self and other in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 70-82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
Fine, M., Weis, L., Weseen, S., & Wong, L.M. ( 2000). For whom? Qualitative research, representations, and social responsibilities. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. l07-l32). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
13.
Goetz, J.P., & LeCompte, M.D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. San Deigo, CA: Academic Press.
14.
Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. ( 1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco : Jossey-Bass, Inc.
Harding, S., & Hintikka, M. B. (Eds.). (1983). Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology, and philosophy of science. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: D. Reidel.
17.
House, E.R. ( 2005). Qualitative evaluation and changing social policy. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. l069-l082). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
Jones, A., & Jenkins, K. ( 2008). Rethinking collaboration: Working the indigene-colonizer hyphen. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln, & L. T. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies (pp. 471-486). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
Knorr-Cetina, K.D. ( 1983). The ethnographic study of scientific work: Towards a constructivist interpretation of science. In K. D. Knorr-Cetina & M. Mulkay (Eds.), Science observed: Perspectives on the social study of science (pp. 115-140). London: Sage.
20.
Lather, P. ( 2004). This IS your father’s paradigm: Government intrusion and the case of qualitative research in education. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 15-34.
21.
Lather, P. ( 2006). Foucauldian scientificity: Rethinking the nexus of qualitative research and educational policy analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19, 783-792.
Lincoln, Y. S. (Ed.). ( 1985). Epilogue: Dictionaries For languages not yet spoken. In Y. S. Lincoln (Ed.), Organizational theory and inquiry (pp. 221-228). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
24.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Cannella, G.S. (2004). Dangerous discourses: Methodological conservatism and governmental regimes of truth. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 5-14.
25.
Lincoln, Y.S., & Denzin, N.K. ( 2008). Epilogue: The lions speak. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln, & L. T. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of critical and indigenous methods (pp. 563-571). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26.
MacLure, M. ( 2006). The bone in the throat: Some uncertain thoughts on baroque method. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education , 19, 729-746.
27.
Marcus, G.E., & Fischer, M.M.J. (1999). Anthropology as cultural critique: An experimental moment in the human sciences (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
Pinar, W.F. ( 1988). "Whole, bright, deep with understanding": Issues in qualitative research and autobiographical method. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), Contemporary curriculum discourses (pp. 134-154). Scottsdale, AZ: Gorsuch Scarisbrick.
29.
Popkewitz, T.S. ( 2004). Is the National Research Council committee’s report on scientific research in education scientific? On trusting the Manifesto . Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 62-78.
30.
Preissle, J. ( 2006). Envisioning qualitative inquiry: A view across four decades . International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education , 19, 685-696.
31.
Reinharz, S. ( 1992). Feminist methods in social research. New York: Oxford University Press.
32.
Schwandt, T. ( 2006). Opposition redirected. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19, 803-810.
33.
Springwood, C.F., & King, C.R. ( 2001). Unsettling engagement: On the ends of rapport in critical ethnography. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 403-417.
34.
St Pierre,E.A., & Roulston, K. ( 2006). The state of qualitative inquiry. A contested science . International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education , 19, 673-684.
35.
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36.
Wong, L.M. ( 1998). The ethics of rapport: Institutional safeguards, resistance, and betrayal. Qualitative Inquiry, 4, 178-199.
37.
Wright, H.K. ( 2006). Are we (t)here yet? Qualitative research in education’s profuse and contested present. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19, 793-802.
