• Skip to Content
  • Skip to Main Navigation
  • Skip to Search

NSSE logo

NSSENSSENSSE

Open Search
  • NSSE
    • About NSSE
      • Conceptual Framework
      • Positions and Policies
      • Advisors
      • Partners
      • Employment
    • Survey Instruments
      • Topical Modules
      • Engagement Indicators
      • High-Impact Practices
    • Registration Details
      • Pricing
      • Campus Contacts
      • Administration Checklist
    • Administering NSSE
      • Population File
      • Customizing NSSE
      • Recruitment Method
        • Folder Name
      • Encouraging Participation
      • Terms of Participation
      • Accessibility
      • Data Security
    • Reports & Data
      • NSSE Administration Overview
      • Data Files
      • Sample Report
      • Institutional Report Guide
      • Report Builder
      • Data Summaries & Interactive Displays
    • Working with NSSE Data
      • Data Codebooks
      • Syntax
    • Psychometric Portfolio
      • Response Rates
    • NSSE Shorts (New)
      • Pricing and Registration
      • Administration Instructions
      • Item Sets
      • Reports & Data Use
      • Dashboard LogIn
  • FSSE
    • FSSE Portal Log-in
    • About FSSE
    • Survey Instruments
      • Main Survey
        • FSSE Scales
        • Disciplinary Areas
      • Topical Modules
      • Consortium Questions
    • Registration & Pricing
    • Administering FSSE
      • Administration Overview
      • Confidentiality
      • Customization
        • Preparing for Message Delivery
        • Population File Instructions
      • Data Security
      • IRB Protocol
        • Informed Consent
      • Locating Your Data & Results
      • Sample Reports
        • Administration Summary
        • FSSE Respondent Profile
        • FSSE Topical Module Report
        • FSSE Disciplinary Area Report
        • FSSE-NSSE Combined Report
        • FSSE Frequency Report
        • FSSE Snapshot Report
      • Terms of Participation
    • Findings, Data, & Reports
      • FSSE Overview
      • Content Summaries
      • Data Visualizations
      • Data Use Examples
    • Working with FSSE data
      • Using FSSE Data
      • Analysis Resources
      • Data User's Guide
    • Psychometric Portfolio
  • BCSSE
    • About BCSSE
    • BCSSE Survey
      • BCSSE Scales
    • Fall Check-In
    • Registration & Pricing
    • Administering BCSSE
      • Administration Protocol and Procedures
      • BCSSE Contacts
      • Demonstration Dashboard Portal
      • Institution Participation Agreement
      • IRB
      • Data Security and Accessibility
    • Reports & Data
      • BCSSE Overview
      • Accessing BCSSE Data
      • Summary Tables
    • Working with BCSSE data
      • Additional Resources
    • Dashboard Log-in
  • Support & Resources
    • For Participating Institutions
      • How Institutions Use Their Data
        • Lessons from the Field
          • Institution Examples
        • NSSE Data Use in Brief
        • Search for examples
        • Displaying Results
        • Data Use Teams
      • Data & Results Guides
        • Student Success Mapping
        • Navigating Your Institutional Report
        • Tips for More Inclusive Data Sharing and Analysis
        • Data User's Guide: Sense of Belonging
        • Accreditation Toolkits
        • Sharing and Disseminating NSSE Results
        • NSSE Data User’s Guide
        • Campuswide Mapping
        • Contextualizing NSSE Effect Sizes
        • Custom Analysis
      • Workshops and Webinars
    • For Partnerships
      • Special Projects
    • For Students & Parents
      • Pocket Guide
        • English
        • Spanish
    • For All Audiences
  • Research
    • Annual Results
      • Annual Results 2023
        • Special Report 1
        • Special Report 2
      • Annual Results 2022
        • 1. Rebounding Engagement
        • 2. Digging Deeper Into HIP Quality
        • 3. Hot Topics in Higher Ed
      • Past Annual Results
    • Publications & Presentations
      • Foundational Publications
      • Featured Publications
      • Recent Presentations
      • Lessons from the Field
      • DEEP Practice Briefs
      • Search
    • NSSE Essentials
    • NSSE Sightings (blog)
      • Search Posts
  • Institution Login
  • BLOG
  • Contact Us

Our Research: Projects,
Publications, and More

  • Home
  • NSSE
    • About NSSE
    • Survey Instruments
    • Registration Details
    • Administering NSSE
    • Reports & Data
    • Working with NSSE Data
    • Psychometric Portfolio
    • NSSE Shorts (New)
  • FSSE
    • FSSE Portal Log-in
    • About FSSE
    • Survey Instruments
    • Registration & Pricing
    • Administering FSSE
    • Findings, Data, & Reports
    • Working with FSSE data
    • Psychometric Portfolio
  • BCSSE
    • About BCSSE
    • BCSSE Survey
    • Fall Check-In
    • Registration & Pricing
    • Administering BCSSE
    • Reports & Data
    • Working with BCSSE data
    • Dashboard Log-in
  • Support & Resources
    • For Participating Institutions
    • For Partnerships
    • For Students & Parents
    • For All Audiences
  • Research
    • Annual Results
    • Publications & Presentations
    • NSSE Essentials
    • NSSE Sightings (blog)
  • Search
  • Institution Login
  • BLOG
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Research
  • NSSE Sightings (blog)

Considering Critical Quantitative Research

Rachel Renbarger and Christen Priddie

Wednesday, March 30, 2022

 Photo courtesy of Thompson Rivers University

At the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE) conference in November, Drs. Christen Priddie (National Survey of Student Engagement) and Rachel Renbarger (Accelerating Systemic Change Network) moderated a panel of critical quantitative scholars to discuss how higher education researchers could incorporate critical quantitative practices into their scholarship. Experts included Drs. Katherine Cho (Miami University), Cindy Ann Kilgo (Indiana University), and Kamden Strunk (Auburn University). The session was well-attended and insightful, with key takeaways for 4 main questions that were established with panelist prior to the session: 

  1. What is critical quantitative research? What are its goals?
    Critical quantitative research may not be possible to define, although the panelists did use key terms when describing it. They used terms such as systematic, systemic, and anti-positivistic and stated that critical quantitative includes an examination of race and racism within the analysis and interpretation, but also within the inclusion of theory. Ultimately, the goal of critical quantitative research would be for societal equity and ideally critical quantitative research would soon become the norm rather than the exception when it comes to education research. 
  2. How have scholars learned how to do critical quantitative work?
    All of the panelists and moderators learned how to do quantitative research from an “objective,” positivist lens, but through their doctoral work realized that research was problematic (including their own work!) because of issues with variable, coding, analysis, and model choices. Indeed, Dr. Kilgo reflected that “How can I be objective when I get to choose what goes into the model and how I interpret it?” These choices demonstrate the power that researchers have within the seemingly unaffected quantitative science. Learning how to do this work came from learning from others, including qualitative researchers and communities of color who had been challenging research norms for a long time. 
  3. What does critical quantitative research look like from the beginning to the end of a project?
    Panelists described the difficulties for quantitative researchers who are brought in after data collection which results in their objective centering on harm reduction rather than true critical quantitative work. Ideally, critical quantitative research occurs through every step of the process, from choosing a theoretical framework to writing up the findings. Dr. Cho stated that this work happens even within the literature review stages: “Does this gap in the literature actually exist? Does this research question even need to be analyzed?” This is because researchers often do not read the work of marginalized communities who have already solved these problems. Researchers should also ask themselves who this work is for; participants should want this research question answered and check to ensure they are not recreating harm through any sort of eugenics framing. When reporting, researchers should tell stories with the data, explain the results that will have actual utility for participant groups, policymakers, and practitioners, and avoid recreating harm (i.e., pitting groups against each other, perpetuating stereotypes) in what gets published. In each step of the process, researchers must think through and justify their research decisions while understanding that internalized and unchecked biases (e.g. racism, classism, sexism, heteronormativity, etc.) can harm our participants. 
  4. How can we collaborate with other researchers who are less familiar with critical quantitative work?
    As with any collaborative work, panelists suggested finding colleagues who were open to new ideas and feedback during the research process. Dr. Strunk mentioned that, like anything, there is a distribution of colleagues’ willingness to interrogate their own thinking and processes. Identifying colleagues who understand the need for critical work can help prevent research projects getting stuck or not turning out the way it was intended. Critical quantitative researchers should not act like they’re the authority, but be willing to provide stories, explanations, or readings for colleagues who do not understand epistemological or methodological approaches. 

In sum, critical quantitative work does not have an easy formula or guidebook; researchers must think deeply about their own perspective and system inequities at all points of the research process. For folks interested in engaging in critical quantitative work, please see resources mentioned in the session (along with those on Dr. Cho’s website): 

  • Books: 
    • Patel, L. (2015). Decolonizing educational research: From ownership to answerability. Routledge.
    • Zuberi, T. (2001). Thicker than blood: How racial statistics lie. University of Minnesota Press.
    • Zuberi, T., & Bonilla-Silva, E. (Eds.). (2008). White logic, white methods: Racism and methodology. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
  • Articles/Chapters: 
    • Garcia, N. M., López, N. & Vélez, V. N. (2018). QuantCrit: Rectifying quantitative methods through critical race theory. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(2), 149-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1377675
    • Gillborn, D., Warmington, P., & Demack, S. (2018). QuantCrit: Education, policy, ‘Big Data’ and principles for a critical race theory of statistics. Race Ethnicity and Education, 21(2), 158-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2017.1377417
    • Harper, S. R. (2012). Race without racism: How higher education researchers minimize racist institutional norms. The Review of Higher Education, 36(1), 9-29.
    • Strunk, K., & Hoover, P. (2019). Quantitative methods for social justice and equity: Theoretical and practical considerations. In K. Strunk & L. Locke (Eds.), Research methods for social justice and equity in education (pp. 191-203). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05900-2
  • Annual Results
  • Publications & Presentations
  • NSSE Essentials
  • NSSE Sightings (blog)
    • Search Posts

Evidence-Based Improvement in Higher Education resources and social media channels

  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • YouTube

RELATED SITES

  • Center for Postsecondary Research
  • Indiana University Bloomington School of Education

Evidence-Based Improvement in Higher Education

Center for Postsecondary Research
Indiana University School of Education
201 N. Rose Avenue
Bloomington, IN 47405-1006
Phone: 812.856.5824
Contact Us


NSSE, FSSE, BCSSE, and the column logo are registered with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
Accessibility | Privacy Notice | Copyright © 2021 The Trustees of Indiana University

Center for Postsecondary Research | Indiana University Bloomington School of Education