Names of Group :

Fauzi Abdul Aziz B

Giyas Fahmi N (1808103185)
Thoha Ahsin B (1808103204)

Paradigm, Philosophical Bases of Qualitatif Research

Introduction

Discussion
Dalam bagian ini akan dibahas beberapa filosofi dasar penelitian kualitatif. Menurut
[ CITATION Rac10 \l 1033 ] terdapat 5 filosofi dasar penelitian kualitatif, yaitu Fenomenologi
(Phenomenology), lnteraksi Simbolik (Simbolic Interactions), Ethnografi (Ethnography),
Heuristik (Heuristic Inquiry), dan Hermeneutika (Hermeneutics).
1. Fenomenologi
Kata fenomelogi berasal dari kata Yunani 'phenomenon' yang berarti
'menunjukkan diri' (to show itself). lstilah ini digunakan dalam diskusi filsafat sejak tahun
1765 khususnya oleh lmmanuel Kant. Namun arti teknis istilah ini dipopulerkan oleh
Hegel. Bagi Hegel, fenomenologi berarti 'pengetahuan sebagaimana nampak dalam
kesadaran'. Pengetahuan di sini maksudnya adalah apa yang dipersepsikan oleh
seseorang, apa yang dirasa dan diketahui melalui kesadaran atau pengalamannya.
Pengaruh sikap dan pandangan ini pada penelitian yaitu bahwa cara satu-satunya
bagi kita untuk mengetahui pengalaman orang lain adalah dengan menanyakan kepada
mereka arti yang mereka berikan pada pengalamannya. Menanyakan pengalaman mereka
berarti mewawancarainya. Lewat wawancara orang akan mengungkapkan makna
pengalamannya. Hal penting lagi untuk dapat memahami arti pengalaman orang lain
yaitu dengan terlibat langsung dalam konteks dan situasi mereka. Hanya dengan
mengetahui konteks dan keadaannya, peneliti akan dapat menangkap arti pengalaman
tersebut. Memahami konteks dan keadaan subjek yang diteliti berarti juga berada
bersama mereka. Berada bersama berarti mengalamai apa yang mereka alami. Orang
yang tidak mengalami gejala, peristiwa, fakta atau realita yang hendak diteliti akan sangat
sulit menangkap arti pengalaman orang lain. Ada banyak nuansa yang tidak akan
dirasakan dan dimengerti bila tidak berada dalam konteksnya.
Fenemologi, yang diterapkan sebagai metode penelitian, bertujuan untuk mencari
hakikat atau esensi dari pengalaman. Sasarannya adalah untuk memahami pengalaman
sebagaimana disadari. Peneliti, yang menggunakan metode fenomenologi, harus
mendekati objek penelitiannya dengan pikiran polos tanpa asurnsi, praduga, prasangka
ataupun konsep. Pandangan, gagasan, asumsi, konsep yang dimiliki oleh peneliti tentang
 gejala penelitian harus dikurung sernentara (bracketing) dan mernbiarkan partisipan
mengungkapkan pengalamannya, sehingga nantinya akan diperoleh hakikat terdalam dari
pengalaman tersebut. Peneliti juga harus mengenal dan mernaharni konteks pengalaman
partisipan, sehingga penafsiran atas pengalaman itu akurat dan dapat menghasilkan
nuansa dan teori baru, khusus dan unik.
2. Interaksi Simbolik
Teori Interaksi Simbolik sangat menekankan pentingnya arti dan penafsiran
sebagai proses hakiki manusia dalam bersikap dan berelasi. Sikap dan perilaku manusia
tidak terjadi secara mekanis sebagai reaksi atas sesuatu yang datang dari luar. Sikap dan
perilaku manusia adalah hasil suatu penafsiran yang memiliki arti tertentu yang kemudian
menentukan reaksinya terhadap stimulus dari luar.
Ada tiga premis dasar dari lnteraksi Simbolik. Pertama, bahwa tindakan manusia
terhadap sesuatu berdasarkan arti yang dimilikinya tentang sesuatu tersebut. Tindakan
manusia tidak akan sama kepada semua objek. Karena setiap objek memiliki ati tertentu,
maka reaksi manusia terhadap masing-masing objek akan berbeda. Kedua, arti dari
sesuatu muncul dari interaksi sosial. Manusia secara bersama-sama menciptakan arti
kepada suatu objek. Ketiga, arti dari sesuatu itu dimodifikasi lewat proses interpretasi.
Premis-premis inilah yang mendorong Blumer untuk
percaya bahwa metode kualitatif adalah cara yang paling tepat untuk mengerti bagaimana
manusia perceive, mengerti dan menafsirkan dunianya. Hanya melalui kontak langsung
dan pikiran terbuka serta lewat proses induktif dan interaksi simbolik manusia bisa
mengenal dan mengerti sesuatu. Mereka berasumsi bahwa pengalaman manusia ditengahi
oleh penafsiran dan manusia bertindak berdasar simbol-simbol. Tujuan hidup adalah
mengerti simbol-simbol tersebut, karena setiap simbol yang mempunyai arti. Bahasa
sendiri merupakan simbol. Karena itu, mengerti bahasa berarti memahami simbol.
3. Etnografi
Kata ethnografi berasal dari kata 'etnos' (bahasa Yunani) yang berarti 'orang',
'kelornpok budaya', 'budaya'. Budaya disini dimengerti sebagai keseluruhan yang
dipelajari, kebiasaan, dan nilai-nilai. Asumsinya bahwa manusia selalu berada dalarn
budayanya. Manusia mengerti dunia karena budaya. Tindakan manusia ditentukan oleh
budayanya. Manusia terbentuk oleh budayanya. Cita-cita manusia terbentuk berdasarkan
nilai budaya yang dianutnya.
Karena metode kualitatif bertujuan untuk menangkap arti,
maka memahami budaya merupakan unsur yang penting yang harus diketahui oleh
peneliti. Ethnografi bertujuan untuk mencari pemahaman tentang budaya. Peneliti yang
ingin memahami budaya suatu kelompok masyarakat harus meluangkan waktu yang
cukup tinggal bersama masyarakat tersebut. Makna suatu budaya hanya dapat dipahami
dengan berada komunitas tersebut. Asumsinya, bahwa manusia yang tinggal bersama
dalam kurun waktu yangagak lama akan membentuk budaya.
4. Heuristic
 Kata Heuristik berasal dari kata bahasa Yunani 'heuriskein' berarti 'menemukan'
(discovery) atau 'mendapatkan' (to find). Hal ini menunjuk kepada proses pencarian
internal, dimana seseorang berusaha untuk memahami hakikat dari pengalaman.
Heuristik juga berarti pemecahan masalah yang cepat (rules of thumbs). Bila ada masalah
yang dihadapi, orang langsung menunjuk solusinya berdasarkan intuisinya (intuitive
solution) yang tentu saja masuk aka1 dan dapat dipertanggung jawabkan secara ilmiah.
Karena itu heuristic disebut juga jawaban langsung sementara orang berpendidikan
(educated guesses) yang umum berlaku (common sense). Dengan menggunakan metode
ini, keseluruhan pribadi peneliti terlibat dalam proses. Sambil berusaha mengerti gejala
tersebut secara mendalam, peneliti juga melibatkan dirinya secara total dengan penuh
kesadaran, sehingga diperoleh pengetahuan yang komprehensif tentang ha1 tersebut.
Proses heuristik melibatkan proses diri dan penemuan diri yang
kreatif.
Ada 6 langkah penting dalam heuristic yaitu: keterlibatan awal, masuk lebih
dalam kepada topik, permenungan (incubation), pencerahan (illumination),
pengungkapan (revelation, explication), sintesa yang kreatif yang adalah puncak
penelitian. Metode ini memberikan perhatian pada pengertian bukan pada pengukuran,
perhatian pada pengalaman bukan sikap, pada kualitas bukan kuantitas. Pandangan
personal dan refleksi pribadi peneliti sangat berpengaruh. Kekuatan metode ini adalah
kemampuannya untuk mengungkapkan kebenaran melalui dialog dengan orang lain yang
nantinya akan rnenciptakan pengetahuan yang komprehensif.
5. Hermeneutika
Hermeneutika berasal dari kata Yunani 'hermeneuein' yang berarti 'mengerti' dan
'menerjemahkan' (interpretation). Hermeneutika dikembangkan pertama kali oleh
Frederich Schleiermacher (1768-1834) dan Wilhem Dilthey (1833-1911) kemudian
menerapkannya sebagai metode penelitian ilmu- ilmu kemanusiaan (human sciences).
Fokusdari hermeneutika adalah penafsiran untuk mengerti dan menangkap arti terdalam
dari informasi yang disampaikan oleh partisipan. Hermeneutika mensyaratkan
pemahaman konteks yang benar sehingga arti asli dapat terungkap.
Ada beberapa manfaat hermeneutika dalam penelitian modern. Pertama,
herrneneutika rnernberikan suatu perspektif untuk menafsirkan cerita legenda, cerita-
cerita dan teks lain, khususnya teks biblis dan teks hukum. Kedua, hermeneutika
membuat arti atas suatu teks. Ketiga, untuk rnengetahui apa yang sebenarnya diinginkan
atau dipikirkan oleh pengarang, atau apa yang hendak dikomunikasikan oleh penulis
dalam konteks dan budaya penulis atau pengarang.
Dalam metode kualitatif, hermeneutika membantu peneliti menarnpatkan diri
dalarn konteks dan menangkap arti sebenarnya dari teks sebagaimana dimengerti oleh
orang, komunitas atau masyarakat waktu itu. Hermeneutika juga rnernbantu peneliti
untuk rnengaktualisasikan realitas secara lebih jelas.
Research Paradigm

1. Definition

A thorough understanding of the context of a research paradigm is gained through a study of

literature by experts in the field. For example, American philosopher Thomas Kuhn (1962)
coined the term paradigm to describe a philosophical way of thinking in his book The Structure
of Scientific Revolutions. The word's aetiology comes from Greek and means "pattern." The
word paradigm is used in educational research to describe a researcher's 'worldview' (Mackenzie
& Knipe, 2006). This worldview informs the context or perception of research data by providing
a viewpoint, or reasoning, or school of thought, or collection of common beliefs.

A research paradigm is fundamentally reflective of the researcher's views on the world in which
she lives and wishes to live. It is made up of abstract values and principles that influence how a
researcher perceives the world, as well as how she interprets and behaves in it. When we claim
that a paradigm determines a researcher's worldview, we're referring to the abstract values and
principles that form how a researcher sees the world, interprets it, and behaves in it. It's the frame
of reference from which a researcher examines the universe. It's the frame of reference from
which a researcher examines the universe. It is the conceptual lens through which the researcher
explores the methodological aspects of their research project in order to evaluate the research
techniques to be used and the data to be analyzed.

2. Elements of a Research Paradigm

A research paradigm contains four elements, particularly regarding, epistemology, ontology,

methodology and axiology. It is critical to have a solid grasp on these elements since they
include each paradigm's basic assumptions, beliefs, norms, and values.

2.1 Epistemology

Epistemology gets its name from the Greek term episteme, which means "intelligence." Simply
put, epistemology is a term used in science to explain how we come to know something, such as
the truth or fact, or, as Cooksey and McDonald (2011) put it, what counts as information in the
universe. It is concerned with the very foundations of information – its origin, modes, and
acquisition, as well as how it can be transmitted to other humans. It focuses on the essence of
human intelligence and comprehension that you, as a researcher or knower, might be able to
learn in order to expand, enhance, and deepen your understanding of your field of study.

When thinking about the epistemology of your study, you ask questions like: Is understanding
something that can be learned or something that must be personally experienced? What is the
essence of intelligence, and how do the knower and the would-be known interact? What is the
link between me, the inquirer, and the known? These questions are crucial because they assist the
researcher in situating themselves within the research background, allowing them to explore
what else is new given what is already understood.

2.2 Ontology

Ontology is a branch of philosophy dealing with the assumptions we make in order to conclude
that something makes sense or is true, as well as the essence or meaning of the social
phenomenon we're searching at (Scotland, 2012). It is the philosophical study of the essence of
life, meaning, being, and being, as well as the basic categories of existing objects and their
relationships. It explores the fundamental belief system about the essence of being and life as a
researcher.

It was about the conclusions we make in order to believe anything makes sense or is true, or
about the existence or essence of the social phenomena were looking into. Philosophical beliefs
regarding reality's existence are critical to comprehending how you interpret the data you collect.
These observations, principles, or propositions will help you think about the research issue, its
importance, and how you can approach it in order to help solve it. Ontology is important to a
paradigm because it aids in the interpretation of the objects that make up the universe as we
know it (Scott & Usher, 2004). It aims to establish the true essence, or foundational principles, of
the themes that we examine in order to understand the significance embedded in research data.

2.3 Methodology

Methodology is a general concept that refers to the study design, methodology, techniques, and
techniques used in a well-planned investigation to learn something new (Keeves, 1997). Data
collection, participants, instruments used, and data interpretation, for example, are all aspects of
methodology. To summarize, methodology expresses the logic and flow of the formal methods
used to perform a research project in order to learn more about a research issue. It details the
observations that were made, as well as the weaknesses that were found and how they were
mitigated or minimized. It focuses on how we learn about the universe or a certain part of it
(Moreno, 1947).

2.4 Axiology

The ethical considerations that must be addressed when preparing a research project are referred
to as axiology. It examines the philosophical approach to making valuable or correct decisions. It
entails identifying, analyzing, and comprehending definitions of appropriate and inappropriate
behavior in relation to the study. It considers how much weight we will give to various aspects of
our study, such as participants, data, and the audience to whom we will present our findings.

The following questions will make you realize about it. As you perform your study, what
principles will you live by or be driven by? What should be done to ensure that all participants'
rights are respected? What are the moral concerns and features that must be taken into account?
What are the cultural, intercultural, and moral problems that occur, and how will I deal with
them? How can I ensure the participants' goodwill? How can I perform the research in a way that
is socially just, respectful, and peaceful? How am I going to avoid or minimize danger or harm,
whether physical, psychological, legal, social, economic, or otherwise?

3. Paradigms Applied in Educational Research

A large number of paradigms have been proposed by researchers but Candy (1989), one of the
leaders in the field, suggests that they all can be grouped into three main taxonomies, namely
Positivism, Interpretivism, and Critical paradigms.

3.1 Positivist paradigm

The term positivism refers to a branch of philosophy that rose to prominence during the early
nineteenth century because of the works of the French philosopher Auguste Comte (Richards,
2003, p. 37). Positivism assumes that reality exists independently of humans. It is not mediated
by our senses and it is governed by immutable laws. The ontological position of positivists is that
of realism. Positivists strive to understand the social world like the natural world. In nature, there
is a cause-effect relationship between phenomena, and once established, they can be predicted
with certainty in the future. For positivists, the same applies to the social world. Because reality
is context free, different researchers working in different times and places will converge to the
same conclusions about a given phenomenon. The epistemological position of positivists is that
of objectivism. Researchers come in as objective observers to study phenomena that exist
independently of them and they do not affect or disturb what is being observed.

Research located in this paradigm relies on deductive logic, formulation of hypotheses, testing
those hypotheses, offering operational definitions and mathematical equations, calculations,
extrapolations and expressions, to derive conclusions. It aims to provide explanations and to
make predictions based on measurable outcomes.

3.2 Interpretivist paradigm / Constructivism paradigm

Interpretivism is a “response to the over-dominance of positivism” (Grix, 2004, p. 82).

Interpretivism rejects the notion that a single, verifiable reality exists independent of our senses.
This approach makes an effort to ‘get into the head of the subjects being studied’ so to speak,
and to understand and interpret what the subject is thinking or the meaning s/he is making of the
context. Every effort is made to try to understand the viewpoint of the subject being observed,
rather than the viewpoint of the observer. Emphasis is placed on understanding the individual
and their interpretation of the world around them. Hence, the key tenet of the Interpretivist
paradigm is that reality is socially constructed . This is why sometimes this paradigm has been
called the Constructivist paradigm. In this paradigm, theory does not precede research but
follows it so that it is grounded on the data generated by the research act.
Interpretive methodology requires that social phenomena be understood “through the eyes of the
participants rather than the researcher” (Cohen et al., 2007, p. 21). The goal of interpretive
methodology is to understand social phenomena in their context. Interpretivists collect mostly
qualitative data from participants over an extended period of time, as in ethnography and case
studies. The approach to analyzing data thus generated is inductive, i.e. the researcher tries to
discover patterns in the data which are collapsed under broad themes to understand a
phenomenon and generate theory. This is the polar opposite of the deductive approach, in which
researchers start off by identifying patterns and themes before starting the data collection
process; once data is collected, researchers would search through the data for words, statements
and events which are instances of the pre-identified patterns and themes. Interpretivists use the
inductive approach instead of the deductive approach because “they tend to see theory as
deriving from data collection and not as the driving force of research” (Grix, 2004, p. 108).

3.3 The Critical Paradigm/Transformative Paradigm

Critical theory originates from the works of a group of twentieth century authors who were
affiliated with the Institute of Social Research at the University of Frankfurt, hence the name the
Frankfurt School’. They include Herbert Marcuse, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Erich
Fromm and later Jürgen Habermas. The ontological position of critical theorists is that of
historical realism. It is assumed that a reality exists, but it has been shaped by cultural, political,
ethnic, gender and religious factors which interact with each other to create a social system.
Epistemologically, critical theory is subjective in that it is assumed that no object can be
researched without being affected by the researcher. In critical research, mostly qualitative data
is generated, although quantitative data could also be used. Examples of qualitative data
collection methods are mentioned under the interpretive paradigm.

The Critical paradigm situates its research in social justice issues and seeks to address the
political, social and economic issues, which lead to social oppression, conflict, struggle, and
power structures at whatever levels these might occur. Because it seeks to change the politics so
as to confront social oppression and improve the social justice in the situation, it is sometimes
called the Transformative paradigm. This paradigm assumes a transactional epistemology, (in
which the researcher interacts with the participants), an ontology of historical realism, especially
as it relates to oppression; a methodology that is dialogic, and an axiology that respects cultural
norms.
References
Raco, J. R. (2010). Metode penelitian kualitatif. Jakarta: PT Gramedia Widiasarana Indonesia.