Perdebatan Kajian Sains Sosial: Pengalaman Penyelidik
Abstract
In Malaysia, a qualitative research approach has not yet become a major methodology among social science researchers. Yusoff (2001: vii) has been argued that "qualitative research can not be regarded as additional or ancillary approach does not require the researcher to seriously mainstreamâ€. The argument in this paper is whether the research in social science paradigm is focused on positivist or non-positivist in Malaysia. Currently this issue has become an open discussion among social science researchers in Malaysia (Salleh, 2003; R. Ray, 2003; Yusoff,2001) or abroad (NK Denzin & Lincoln, 1998; Guba & Lincoln, 1994; Kelly, 1999: Cannon,1998; Patton, 2002), especially issues involving social science research methods qualitative flowing. Therefore, the scope of writing in this paper is divided into three parts. The first part will discuss the debate in the empirical study and methodological issues especially in the social science research. In this section, researcher will focus on the debate in social science research rather than pure science. Research experience before and during doctoral studies (Doctor of Philosophy, PhD) will be considered in the second part. The focus in this section is how to transition of researcher initially influenced by the positivist paradigm and ultimately appreciate the non-positivist paradigm when he was at the University of Wollongong, Australia. The last section in this paper will discuss the lessons received during and before in Australia and the future of social science research which based on non-positivist paradigm in Malaysia.
Di Malaysia, kajian kualitatif masih belum menjadi satu perkaedahan utama di kalangan penyelidik-penyelidik sains sosial. Yusoff (2001:vii) dalam buku suntingan yang bertajuk Penyelidikan Kualitatif: Pengalaman Kerja Lapangan telah memperdebatkan bahawa ‘penyelidikan kualitatif tidak boleh dianggap sebagai pendekatan tambahan atau sampingan yang tidak memerlukan mainstream researcher memberi pertimbangan serius’. Perdebatan dalam kertas
kerja ini ialah sama ada kajian dalam sains sosial hanya berfokus kepada paradigma beraliran positivist atau non-positivist. Kini isu ini telah menjadi perbincangan terbuka di kalangan pengkaji-pengkaji sains sosial di Malaysia (Salleh, 2003; R. Yusof, 2003; Yusoff, 2001) atau luar negara (N.K. Denzin & Lincoln, 1998; Guba & Lincoln, 1994; Kelly, 1999; Meriam, 1998; Patton, 2002) terutamanya isu yang melibatkan kaedah kajian sains sosial yang beraliran kualitatif. Oleh itu, skop penulisan dalam kertas kerja ini dibahagikan kepada tiga bahagian. Bahagian pertama akan membincangkan perdebatan dalam kajian empirik dan metodologikal terutamanya dalam kajian sains sosial. Dalam bahagian ini, penyelidik akan menumpukan perdebatan dalam kajian sains sosial, bukannya sains tulen. Pengalaman penyelidik sebelum dan semasa membuat kajian doktor falsafah (Doctor of Philosophy-PhD) akan diberi perhatian dalam bahagian kedua. Tumpuan dalam bahagian ini ialah bagaimana peralihan penyelidik yang pada mulanya dipengaruhi dengan paradigma positivist dan akhirnya menghargai paradigma non-positivist semasa beliau berada di University of Wollongong, Australia. Bahagian akhir dalam kertas kerja ini akan membincangkan pengajaran yang diterima semasa dan sebelum di Australia dan masa depan kajian sains sosial yang beraliran non-positivist di Malaysia.
References
Ayob, A. M. (2000). Kaedah Penyelidikan Sains Sosial. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Brannen, J. (1992). Mixing methods: Qualitative and quantitative research. Hants: Avebury.
Bryman, A. (2004). Social Research Methods (2nd Edition ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). Sociological Methods: A Sourcebook. New York: McGraw Hill.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1998). Strategies of Qualitative Research, . London: Sage Publications.
Ellie, F., Harvey, C., McDermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002). Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 36(6), 717-732.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. New York: Aldine.
Greene, J., & McClintock, C. (1985). Triangulation in Evaluation: Design and Analysis Issues. Evaluation Review, 9(5), 523-545.
Grix, J. (2004). The foundations of research. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K.
Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. USA: Sage Publisher.
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1998). Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research. In N. K.
Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Lanscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues. London Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Kelly, D. (Ed.). (1999). Researching Industrial Relations. NSW: The Federation Press.
Kitay, J., & Callus, R. (1998). The Role and Challenge of Case Study Design in Industrial Relations. In K. Whitfield & G. Strauss (Eds.), Researching the World of Work. USA: Cornell University Press.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Lunjew, M. D. (1994). Participation in decision making among trainers and relationship with performance and job satisfaction. Unpublished Doctor of Philosohpy, University Pertanian Malaysia, Serdang.
Meriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publication.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis : an expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Naceur, J., & Varatharajan, B. (2000). Participation and Job Performance in the Malaysian Public Service Department. International Journal of Commerce & Management, 10(3/4), 56-66.
Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and Quantative Approaches. 3rd Edition, Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3 ed.). Thousand Qaks: 3rd Edition, Sage Publications.
Poole, M., Lansbury, R., & Wailes, N. (2001). A Comparative Analysis of Developments in Industrial Democracy. Industrial Relations, 40(3), 490-525.
Rose, R. C. (2002). Japanese- style management abroad. Petaling Jaya: Prentice Hall.
Salleh, H. (2003). Qualitative research and the host community: Some perspective to work on. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2nd Qualitative Research Convention: Theory and Practice, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 21-23 October.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publication.
Yusof, R. (2001). Asas sains sosial dari perspektif sosiologi. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.
Yusof, R. (2003). Penyelidikan Sains Sosial (Social Science Research). Pahang, Malaysia: PTS Publications & Distributors (Malay Version).
Yusoff, M. (Ed.). (2001). Penyelidikan Kualitatif: Pengalaman Kerja Lapangan (Qualitative Research: Experiences from the fieldwork). Kuala Lumpur: Univesity Malaya Press (Malay Version).
Zin, R. M. (1998). Participation and commitment among Malaysian professionals. Bangi: UKM.
