Sarah Riegel

Honors Citizenship
Dr. .Childers-McKee
September 16, 2016
The Nuts and Bolts of Research
Mathematics, my own main field of study, is concerned with the proving of theoretical
truths, modeling how the world works, and problem-solving. In mathematics there is one right
answer built from reality and what has past been tested and proved based on a few assumptions
about the natural world. Yet, even in math there are many ways in which to arrive at or
understand the nature of such a correct answer. This is why I consider math to truly be a creative
discipline; furthermore, it is why variations in perspectives are actually quite useful in
mathematics. One of the main reasons for mathematics is to understand the world and predict
events in a more simplistic fashion, but models can only make allowance for so many variations
without becoming somewhat ineffective. I would suggest that most theoretical mathematicians
are very rooted in a Positivist Paradigm of research because of an ontology that assumes a fixed,
exterior truth about the world. I myself am more interested in applied mathematics research. As
such, in this field I mostly align my views with the Positivism Paradigm, but my ontology differs
slightly from what I think a pure positivist would hold true. The phrasing the author utilizes
when discussing the ontology that informs postpositivism in this weeks reading really resonated
with me. I believe that the world is approximately knowable (Glesne p. 7). By this I mean that
I believe there are certain natural truths about the world, only some of which humans are able to
ascertain, and that social or human interactions contain much more variability so that a greater
grey area exists when conducting research.
My epistemology and methodology naturally are influenced by my ontology. I consider
my place as a researcher to be that of observer, though I am completely aware that my own bias
is impossible to remove from the research process. I am considering career paths in the public
health field, either as a biostatistician or epidemiologist. Both are very statistics-based. Statistics
is a branch of mathematics that recognizes uncertainty in events, but is still concerned with
minimizing bias and generating significant data to indicate correlation. As such, even in these
fields I would be following largely the Positive Paradigm in striving to keep myself from
interfering with the data collection. However, my preference in methodology is generally for a

mixed-methods approach. This is because, while I adhere to a more positivist approach to

research in my main field of study, I find myself at least intrigued by the possibility for
application of the Critical Theory Paradigm to my future research. Before taking this class, I had
not considered research in these terms. I have always been unsatisfied with studies primarily
containing qualitative data, but I see the need for qualitative data from particularly
underrepresented citizens to inform inquiry in either applied mathematics or public health. In the
case of public health issues, this qualitative data can then be strengthened with statistical
analyses. I am also starting to understand that while generalizability is often strived for in
epidemiological studies, it is extremely valuable to at least start research in smaller communities.
If findings from every epidemiological study were deemed generalizable to the majority of
people, this could still serve to harm and further marginalize oppressed groups. Instead, the data
could easily be collected to explore and demonstrate the need for change.
It should be noted that the major difference between my approach to the Critical Theory
paradigm and its traditional construct is that the aim of my research is not necessarily to
challenge belief systems, as discussed in the reading. I would not be upset to have that be one
result of the process, but this is not what drives my research. Instead, the way I align the purpose
of research with that of Critical Theorists is that I want my research to exact change, even if not
of a necessarily social nature. The reason I want to have a career in research or analysis is to use
math and statistics skills to better help people. Especially having now learned about some
extreme health disparities facing marginalized members of the community, I want my applied
mathematics to at least be informed by the voices of the people I want to benefit and serve.
While I appreciate the discovery of knowledge for its own sake, the want for my research to
accomplish change and meet real needs is the reason I have tended toward applied mathematics
and statistics. I personally have asked myself a question generated by Critical Theorists: If not to
achieve change, why conduct research at all? I expect continued exploration of community-based
research, which is really under the umbrella of Critical Theory, to further inform and transform
my ontology, epistemology, and approach to the Positivist and Critical Theory research
paradigms.

Works Cited
Glesne, Corrine (2005). Meeting Qualitative Inquiry. Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An
Introduction (Chapter One). Retrieved September 15, 2016 from https://uncc.instructure.
com/courses/6854/files/757255?module_item_id=576742.