The Great Divide

[onefixedstar]

While prepping for my Soc 101 tutorial, I noticed that the author of the first reading in the supplementary reader seems to have a rather strongly negative attitude towards qualitative research. "Okay," I thought, "this isn't the attitude I'd present to first year students, but I'm sure future articles will balance it out." I'm still waiting for that future article. The rest of the articles have all taken one of two positions: they ignore qualitative research, or they talk about it as a good preliminary technique that's useful for identifying the variables you're going to study once you get down to the serious, quantitative work. So far, there's not a single article that treats qualitative research as a legitimate enterprise unto itself. I'm disappointed, but not terribly surprised. The qualitative-quantitative divide remains a major one in sociology, driving otherwise reasonable people to do completely idiotic things like quit their job upon the passage of a proposal that enabled Ph.D. students to include a qualitative section on their methodology comprehensives. At this year's Annual Meeting of the Canadian Sociology and Anthropology Association, the discussant for the "Future of Anglo-Canadian Sociology" suggested that the meeting really ought to divide the panels by paradigm rather than substantive topic, on the grounds, one imagines, that people would be more likely to attend panels if they knew they wouldn't be subjected to a conflicting ontological position. My current school falls even more heavily on the quant side of the spectrum that my previous school (the one from which those foolish faculty departed so as not to have to bear graduating doctoral students with a knowledge of both qual and quant), and so I suppose it's only to be expected that the textbooks we use would parrot that message.

Up with numbers, down with Verstehen!

Comments

[mnemosyne9.livejournal.com]

I've actually spent a lot of time thinking about this- especially since the grad school I choose will shape the research I'm going to be able to do as a professional.
I like quantitative research, and I think that statistical research is interesting, but I also like qualitative stuff. I enjoy reading qualitative material, and I think that qualitative research is probably what got me interested in sociology in the first place... But during my undergrad years I haven't gotten a chance to really try either kind. So how can I be sure what I want to do?

All that aside, the programs I have looked into seem mostly focused on the quantitative, and I haven't found much as far as strong programs that are qualitative. *shrug* I just don't want to screw up and find myself in the wrong place for me, when it's too late to change it.

[onefixedstar.livejournal.com]

There are some qualitative people in the department. I think they mostly hide in their office and try not to attract the attention of the quant people. Well, except for JT. ;)

You won't be able to do straight SI or phenomenology here, but could probably manage an ethnography or historical analysis reasonably well and not have too much trouble putting together a committee.

[librisia.livejournal.com]

I guess that means I shouldn't apply to your university for a job when I graduate, huh?

statistics? What are those? Though I am in anth, not soc.