Nari Kim
Abstract
This paper critically examines the growing debate over the relevance of replication in qualitative research, especially within language education. While replication has long been central to quantitative research as a means of ensuring generalizability, transparency, and methodological rigor, its applicability ...
Read More
This paper critically examines the growing debate over the relevance of replication in qualitative research, especially within language education. While replication has long been central to quantitative research as a means of ensuring generalizability, transparency, and methodological rigor, its applicability to qualitative paradigms remains contested. Advocates argue that replication, particularly in its conceptual form, can enhance the trustworthiness of qualitative inquiry by promoting transparency and reflexivity. Critics, however, question whether replication is compatible with qualitative traditions that emphasize contextuality, subjectivity, and co-construction. This paper explores these tensions by differentiating between generalizability and transferability and evaluating whether the notion of replication, originally rooted in positivist assumptions, can be reframed to align with qualitative values. The paper further examines alternative concepts such as analytic and intersectional generalizability. It concludes that the term replication may not fully capture the aims of many qualitative inquiries, and the broader goals of rigor, transparency, and meaningful knowledge-building can still be pursued through established qualitative practices. This discussion invites more nuanced approaches to evaluating quality in qualitative research by considering how replication aligns with, or conflicts with, the epistemological and methodological foundations of different qualitative paradigms.
