Between You and Me: Making Messes with Constructivism and Critical Theory

Abstract

New social science researchers often grapple with questions of scholarly identity and paradigm belongingness in a postmodern world. On one hand, there are perhaps more options than ever, in terms of philosophical orientations to research that are taken seriously across the landscape of social scholarly disciplines. On the other hand, however, these philosophical orientations (typically presented as paradigms) have solidified to such a degree in writing and teaching on qualitative inquiry that they can feel confining, leading students to feel that more than one “paradigm” resonates with their personal sensibilities, and therefore to wonder where the points of tension actually lie between different orientations to research—for indeed, what is learned in the classroom about convergences and divergences between research perspectives is sometimes not borne out in our lived experiences in the field. In this critical review article, which is meant to be both a personal reflection and an analytical methodology exploration, the author engages in an exercise of “rethinking,” in which she questions earlier claims regarding the tension between two increasingly popular research approaches in her own field of tourism studies—namely, constructivism and critical theory—and attempts to interrogate what is really at stake between these perspectives. Ultimately, the author concludes that the tension between these two traditions may lie in a surprising place: it may not be ontological, and not necessarily even political, but pedagogical and care oriented. She then ponders the inherent challenge that lies in the tension between these two perspectives, in terms of the quest to forge a social research approach that is reflexive, critically and politically oriented, and respectful of participants and their lived experiences. By situating her analysis within the context of her own doctoral research project, she hopes not only to capture the analytical dimension of working at a methodological crossroads, but also to offer a window into the ways that such issues are worked through in our own respective and embodied research journeys. (Abstract by A.-M.H.)