M.A. / When Glaser departed from the University of California, Strauss was left to answer to those who critiqued grounded theory for its seeming looseness, its lack of variation, and the tangled description of it in their joint book, Discovery of Grounded Theory (Stern, 1994). Strauss' need to respond to critics led him in 1987 and in 1990, together with Corbin, to modify their description of grounded theory from its original concept of emergence to a densely codified, structured operation (Stern, 1994). Strauss's development of grounded theory differed considerably from the method that he and Glaser developed in 1967. Glaser (1992) said that what Strauss and his co-author, Corbin called "grounded theory" is "full conceptual description", and not grounded theory. Which method does the novice in grounded theory pursue? Which of the two methods is grounded theory? The goal of the present study is to provide the novice in grounded theory with an overview on the development and split in the methods. The aim is to help the beginning researcher make an informed decision when choosing one of the two particular methods of grounded theory. The first chapter of the book is a discussion of the history and development of qualitative research. The second chapter is a discussion of the history and development of grounded theory, which flows into a dialogue between Glaser, and Strauss and Corbin about their differences concerning the methods of grounded theory. The originators of grounded theory wrote their method mainly for qualitative researchers. Qualitative research developed out of the need to study social phenomena from the perspective of the participants. It moved away from numeric means of verifying theory, to develop an improved understanding of human behaviour and experience. Glaser and Strauss (1967) based the original approach to grounded theory on these assumptions about qualitative research. Strauss and Corbin (1994) then moved back to some of the positivistic assumptions of verification and interpreting the phenomena for the participants. This shift brought a major split in the methods of grounded theory. The rationale for this study is to provide a clear understanding on where grounded theory stemmed from. Strauss and Corbin published a book in which they explicated their method of grounded theory. Glaser (1992) felt that the original method of grounded theory was lost in Strauss and Corbin's (1990) book and he set out to correct the methods outlined in their book. He wrote a book analysing Strauss and Corbin's (1990) ideas of grounded theory. This dissertation presents the reader with a detailed explanation of Strauss's method and Glaser's method of grounded theory. Epistemologically Strauss and Corbin (1990) seem to have a different stance from Glaser (1992) with regard to grounded theory. I found that Strauss and Corbin's lack of reference to past books and publications of grounded theory might have caused them to depart from the original and fundamental ideas of grounded theory. Strauss and Corbin returned to that which grounded theory moved away from. From this point of view, I would rather support the Glaserian method of grounded theory because it holds more purely to the original method of grounded theory, notwithstanding that Strauss and Corbin did make tremendous contributions to the grounded theory methodology. This division in grounded theory will not end unless the loyal followers of grounded theory somehow merge the two theories to develop a unified theory.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:uj/uj:14651 |
| Date | 12 November 2008 |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds