Concerns with the issues of validity in qualitative research have dramatically increased. Traditionally, validity in qualitative research involved determining the degree to which researchers’ claims about knowledge corresponded to the reality (or research participants’ construction of reality) being studied. The authors note that recent trends have shown the emergence of two quite different approaches to the validity question within the literature on qualitative research. The authors categorize and label these ‘transactional’ validity and ‘transformational’ validity. While useful, the authors assert that neither approach is sufficient to meet the current needs of the field. The authors propose a recursive, process-oriented view of validity as an alternative framework.

This chapter addresses a wide range of theories and practices related to the evaluation of qualitative research (EQR). First, six categories of EQR are presented: (1) a positivist category, (2) Lincoln and Guba’s alternative category, (3) a “subtle-realist” category developed by Hammersley and Atkinson, and Seale, (4) a general EQR category, (5) a category of post-criteriology, and (6) a post-validity category. Second, evaluation strategies for EQR are offered by providing a variety of actual examples. Third, the chapter discusses a path forward for EQR that includes both internal and external elements. The chapter concludes with a holistic view of EQR needed to collectively construct/confront inner and outer challenges to qualitative paradigms in the twenty-first century. Twenty-first-century criteria supported include thought-provoking ideas, innovative methodology, performative writing, and global ethics and justice mindedness.

National demographic changes and current educational policies are in conflict. The consequences of this conflict, if not resolved, will be long-lasting and detrimental. Our nation is rapidly becoming more diverse-ethnically, racially, and linguistically. Recent educational trends, however, signal a move away from responsible actions that would honor and address the increasingly diverse populations in our public schools. As teacher educators, we seek to understand the public dialogue pertinent to this conflict, to facilitate the education of "culturally relevant" teachers (Ladson-Billings, 1992), and to investigate whether there is merit in a specific "social perspective taking" activity we conducted in our university courses.Newly released Census 2000 data documents "explosive" growth in Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, Asian, and American Indian populations in the U.S. (Armas, 2001). According to the USA Today "Diversity Index," ethnic minority populations are up 23% as compared to 1990 Census data. Some argue that these numbers are probably underestimated (El Nasser & Overberg, 2001). These population trends have been mentioned by University of Michigan demographer William Frey as a "celebration of our diversity that's always been at the core of our society" (Armas, 2001, p. 2).Alternatively, recent educational trends and policies seem to ignore or dismiss the increased ethnic and racial diversity present in our nation's classrooms. A recent study of multicultural education conducted in a large Midwestern school district finds that "the multicultural education reform movement is in peril" (Bohn & Sleeter, 2000, p. 156). Why, with the earlier noted "explosive" growth in diverse racial and ethnic populations in this country, would multicultural education and attempts to honor and meet the needs of these diverse populations be in "peril?" Consider the analysis provided by Bohn and Sleeter: