Phenomenology vs. Grounded Theory in Education Research

Introduction to Qualitative Approaches

Both phenomenology and grounded theory are commonly used approaches to qualitative research in the social sciences. While grounded theory and phenomenology can sometimes be used simultaneously in ways that "slur" or "blur" the distinction between multiple qualitative methods, researchers in education should ultimately focus their attention on the best method for exploring single, focused research questions and their real-world applications (Baker, Wuest, & Stern, 1992, p. 1355). Grounded theory has been described as a "practical method for conducting research" that shows how people construct meaning about their social world (Suddaby, 2006, p. 633). Therefore, grounded theory is sociological in origin and linked to the concept of symbolic interactionism (Starks & Brown Trinidad, 2007). The methods used for grounded theory approaches to research in the social sciences include observations and other ethnographic data collection techniques, coupled with open coding for data analysis (Creswell, 2013). Interviews are one of the most commonly used data collection methods in grounded theory, and are also used frequently in phenomenological research (Wimpenny & Gass, 2000). While the goals of grounded theory research in education can be pragmatic — such as influencing policy and practice — researchers generally use grounded theory to generate theory or suggest new directions for paradigms or concepts (Starks & Brown Trinidad, 2007). Essentially, the researcher shows how an emerging theory is grounded in reality, while also demonstrating how observed experiences, populations, or phenomena reflect emerging theory in the social sciences.

Phenomenology differs from grounded theory in several key ways, including its philosophical orientation. Whereas grounded theory focuses more on sociological interactions among research participants and sample populations, phenomenology focuses more on the abstract qualities and categories of lived human experience (Creswell, 2013). In phenomenological research, data collection can also be ethnographic in nature or may include specific methods such as interviews and focus groups. Like grounded theory, phenomenology usually entails the recognition of categories and themes that carry distinct meaning for the population. The researcher seeks broad "essential" elements that characterize the lived, shared experience of the population under study (Starks & Brown Trinidad, 2007, p. 1373).

Therefore, while grounded theory and phenomenology share certain similarities, they employ different research methods and have potentially different applications. As Suddaby (2006) points out, grounded theory is better suited when the researcher is working with "knowledge claims about an objective reality" and wants to observe or understand how actors construct meaning from that objective reality (p. 634). When researchers begin with more of a blank slate and want to uncover or explore a previously undefined or unknown issue, problem, or phenomenon, phenomenological research methods are better indicated. The researcher should ideally select the appropriate qualitative method to meet research goals and to best investigate the implications of the research questions. Qualitative research examples highlight the strengths and weaknesses of both of these major approaches and show how each can be judiciously applied in context.

In a dissertation presented to a university, Norton (2013) uses phenomenological approaches to study the self-efficacy beliefs of teachers who persist in their profession. In "Marshaling Resources," Yalof (2014) uses grounded theory to explore peer support systems used among students in online learning environments. A comparison of these two studies illustrates the differences between grounded theory and phenomenology in education research.