On Monks and Methodologies

Abstract

On August 15, 1997 I gave a talk to a group of Burapha University's Faculty of Education lecturers on the characteristics and strengths of qualitative research techniques and the kinds of issues that confront academics who chose this methodology over quantitative research techniques. In the subsequent discussion I was struck by the fact that our faculties face similar challenges in helping students to use these ethnographic methods. I believe that while participant-observation and extensive interviewing and other qualitative techniques are time-intensive and have certain ambiguities in practice, they are well worth pursuing, as Faculty of Education at Burapha expands its graduate programs, because of their ability to provide penetrating portrayals of educational phenomena in current Thai society.  I came to this methodology out of my own dissertation experience and the subsequent research I have conducted in Thailand over the past twenty years. I have researched Dr. Puay Ungphakorn's study-service programs, based at Thammasat University (1973-75), and the assimilation of minority tribal students into Thai schools in Chiang Mai province (1990-91). In each case I have spent extensive time periods with key participants (students, villagers, government officials and others) to gain multilayered perspectives on the issues under investigation.  For the “outside” researcher in Thai society, qualitative methods, particularly extensive interviewing and discussion with multiple sources, are practical and comprehensive approaches to understanding critical issues. Oversimplified (though at first convincing) analysis loses out to further question; apparent contradictions become more complex.  For the “inside” researcher, qualitative methods also can be extraordinarily useful, as always, depending on the research question that is being asked. During the seminar at Burapha, I mentioned several topics that might be of interest to faculty and students. In each case, the time-consuming but ultimately rewarding observation/interview techniques can provide insight not available from quantitative techniques. The topics mentioned included an investigation of sex bias in classroom teaching (Do we favor boys more than girls in our classroom interactions? How? Why?), a study of the teaching techniques employed by the Village Scouts, or Luk Sur Chao Ban, (a researcher could participate in the training sessions and analyze the techniques used as well as interview former and current members of the Village Scout organization), and a study of the northeastern workers currently doing construction work on campus (What are their economic and social backgrounds and current needs? Are they part of an invisible, underground economy?) Along with examples of potential research topics and the research techniques themselves, I also talked about problems often encountered by qualitative researchers. As a way to recap some of my thoughts on methodological issues, I would like to relate an incident that occurred during my visit to Burapha. While this example does not represent actual research processes, I think that it may illustrate both how qualitative techniques may help researchers who use these techniques.