Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

(Il)Legitimate Knowledge in English Language Education Research

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Reflections on Qualitative Research in Language and Literacy Education

Part of the book series: Educational Linguistics ((EDUL,volume 29))

Abstract

This chapter discusses the nature of legitimate knowledge in English language education research, arguing that what counts as knowledge in the field is a hugely contested matter. Our search for legitimate knowledge through objective and scientific means in research is far from being objective and disinterested. The problem is not simply the use of methods in research, but what methods count and do not count which, in turn, have implications for (de)legitimizing knowledge and evidence. The commoditization of knowledge in competitive markets outside the academe demands that the research predispositions of scholars and students be (re)aligned with a scientific habitus – disciplined, rigorous, and methodical – in order for them to be credible and for their research to be marketable. Therefore, the aim of this chapter is to trace a specific trajectory of the delegitimization of knowledge in (English) language education research, and then call for the greater democratization of knowledge production in the field, for example by recognizing that scholars and writers operate on radically different understandings of what methodology is.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abdallah-Pretceille, M. (2006). Interculturalism as a paradigm for thinking about diversity. Intercultural Education, 17(5), 475–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apple, M. (1999). What counts as legitimate knowledge? The social production and use of reviews. Review of Educational Research, 69(4), 343–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aronin, L., & Hufeisen, B. (2009). Methods of research in multilingualism studies. In L. Aronin & B. Hufeisen (Eds.), The exploration of multilingualism (pp. 103–120). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Athanases, S. Z., & Heath, S. B. (1995). Ethnography in the study of the teaching and learning of English. Research in the Teaching of English, 29, 263–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berg, B. L. (1989). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brinkmann, S. (2012). Qualitative inquiry in everyday life: Working with everyday life materials. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brinkmann, S., Jacobsen, M. H., & Kristiansen, S. (2014). Historical overview of qualitative research in the social sciences. In P. Leavy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp. 17–42). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. D. (2004). Research methods for applied linguistics: Scope, characteristics, standards. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 476–500). Malden: Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. A. (1995). Qualitative theory and methods in applied linguistics. TESOL Quarterly, 29(3), 10–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. K. (2009). The elephant in the living room: Or extending the conversation about the politics of evidence. Qualitative Research, 9(2), 139–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gao, Y., Li, L., & Lü, J. (2001). Trends in research methods in applied linguistics: China and the West. English for Specific Purposes, 20(1), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, L. (2014). Entering a crack: An encounter with gossip. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(7), 823–836.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henze, R. C. (1995). Book review: Guides for the novice qualitative researcher. TESOL Quarterly, 29(3), 595–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janesick, V. J. (1994). The dance of qualitative research design: Metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Sage: Thousand Oaks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juntti, M., Russel, D., & Turnpenny, J. (2009). Evidence, politics and power in public policy for the environment. Environmental Science and Policy, 12, 207–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamps, D., Abbott, M., Greenwood, C., Arreaga-Mayer, C., Wills, H., Longstaff, J., et al. (2007). Use of evidence-based, small-group reading instruction for English language learners in elementary grades: Secondary–tier intervention. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30(3), 153–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazaraton, A. (1995). Qualitative research in applied linguistics: A progress report. TESOL Quarterly, 29(3), 38–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, D., & Ratcliffe, R. (2012). After method? Ethnography in the knowledge economy. Qualitative Research, 12(2), 147–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. (2000). Applied linguistics and evidence–based classroom practice: The case of foreign language grammar pedagogy. Applied Linguistics, 21(3), 281–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrissey, D. (2014). An autoethnographic inquiry into the role of serendipity in becoming a teacher educator/researcher. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(7), 837–849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ono, K. (2010). Reflections on ‘problematizing “nation” in intercultural communication Research. In T. Nakayama & R. Halualani (Eds.), The handbook of critical intercultural communication (pp. 84–97). West Sussex: Wiley–Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, I. (2004). Criteria for qualitative research in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 1(1), 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polio, C. (2001). Research methodology in second language writing research: The case of text–based studies. In T. Silva & P. K. Matsuda (Eds.), On second language writing (pp. 91–115). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slavin, R. E. (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Education Researcher, 31(7), 15–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spigelman, C. (2001). Argument and evidence in the case of the personal. College English, 64(1), 63–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • St. Pierre, E. (2011). Post qualitative research: The critique and the coming after. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 611–626). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tafaghodtari, M. (2009). Qualitative inquiry: New alternatives for the applied linguist (Comparative book review). Language Teaching, 42(2), 272–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanggaard, L. (2013). Troubling methods in qualitative inquiry and beyond. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 9(3), 409–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Telles, J. A. (2000). Biographical connections: Experiences as sources of legitimate knowledge in qualitative research. Qualitative Studies in Education, 13(3), 251–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tupas, T. R. F. (2010). Insertions, interruptions: Strategies in challenging stereotypes in the classroom. ELTWO: English Language Teaching World Online, 2, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2009). Methods of critical discourse analysis (2nd ed.). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, 54H Nanyang View, 06-15, Singapore, 639669, Singapore

    Ruanni Tupas

Authors
  1. Ruanni Tupas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruanni Tupas .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Literature, Languages and History Department of English Language and Literature, Alzahra University, Tehran, Iran

    Seyyed-Abdolhamid Mirhosseini

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Tupas, R. (2017). (Il)Legitimate Knowledge in English Language Education Research. In: Mirhosseini, SA. (eds) Reflections on Qualitative Research in Language and Literacy Education. Educational Linguistics, vol 29. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49140-0_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49140-0_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-49138-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-49140-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation