 |
 |
Don: To your original point, I have found that qualitative and quantitative are often used as shorthands for objective and subjective ways of knowing, as the definition you pointed to at the psychology site suggests. Maybe this is what gives "qualitative versus quantitative" its life. I wholly agree with the other posts (Gunnar, etc.) who find that qual and quant is not a "versus" situation, but are intertwined. Since I know you are also interested indesign education, I note and invite critical feedback on this: at UC the past several years in order to avoid the "qualitative versus quantitative" dichotomy we've been talking about "discovery and evaluative" design research as a more meaningful distinction. It's based on the purpose of the research over divergence of the methods used. Even then, we find that in practice discovery and evaluation blend as prototypes are made and tested as a process of discovery. Might this be an example of what you originally meant by 'testing' as the bridge to move from discovery (largely associated with qualitative) to evaluation (largely associated with quantitative)? I didn't quite understand that point in your original post. Mike Zender ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design -----------------------------------------------------------------