Artifact one, from theory to practice, developing my theoretical and philosophical approach and positioning my proposal is a revised material I originally submitted as a theory paper for my advanced qualitative research methodology course. The artifact speaks broadly about ontology and epistemology and focuses on critical realism. This section is a reflection on the artifact. It discusses critical realism (figure 1) as a philosophical worldview and a theory. It explains how I improved the original paper and demonstrates how I will integrate critical realism into my dissertation.

​

Roy Bhaskar, a scientist, introduced the critical realist worldview in 1978 from the naive realist worldview. According to naive realists, social reality is objective, independent of the human mind, logical, and just as we perceive it. Thus, they believe that true knowledge is discoverable, and those who disagree are illogical and biased (Guba & Lincoln, 1994; Kankam, 2019). Just as Roy Bhaskar disagreed with these beliefs, he disagreed with the supremacy of single worldviews. He argued that naïve realism or any single worldview was insufficient to understand social reality or conduct research. He insisted on mixing principles of different worldviews to form a new worldview. Critical realism is, therefore, a mixture of worldviews. Accordingly, critical realists have a liberal epistemology. They use multiple techniques from different worldviews to gather and communicate information about social reality. They believe that "an objective reality or truth exists but can never be interpreted fully" (Mayoh & Onwuegbuzie, 2015, p. 94). They further argue that different worldviews are needed to understand social reality, and researchers must distinguish between the observed world, actual world, and real-world (Walsh & Evans, 2014). Artifact one (revised paper) discusses the primary concept of critical realism. It distinguished between the "empirical" world, "actual" world, and "real" world (Walsh & Evans, 2014, p. 2). The paper explained the empirical - "what can be observed," the actual - "what is known but cannot always be seen," and the real - "hidden but necessary precondition for the actual and empirical" (Walsh & Evans, 2014, p. 2). I would use these concepts to examine the components of my proposed dissertation's theoretical framework (artifact two). I would apply the concepts to explore: (a) communication of expectancies and success criteria, (b) eliciting and collecting information, (c) interpretation of information/ judgment, (d) provision of feedback, and (e) regulation of learning (Panayiotis & James, 2014).

​

I strengthen artifact one by building on the literature, revising my arguments, explaining terminologies, and improving sentences. In particular, I built on the literature by including Thayer-Bacon's (2016) "fishing metaphor" illustration of ontology and epistemology and Guba and Lincoln's (1994) basic beliefs (metaphysics) of alternative inquiry paradigms. Also, I included Moon and Blackman's (2014) social science research guide on ontology and Walsh and Evans' (2014) critical realism: An important theoretical perspective for midwifery research. In the original paper, I discussed ontology and epistemology broadly and narrowed on critical realism. I further argued critical realism from a positivist background, so my literature was more positivist-oriented and did not touch on other primary concepts of critical realism. The revised paper addresses this challenge. Some terminologies in the original paper were not explained and could confuse readers. For example, the revised paper explained broad critical examination, reductionism, and determinism. In addition, sentences have been improved. Some adverbial conjunctions have been removed, and others have been modified to make the paper easy to read and understand.

​

The section reflected artifact one that discusses critical realism as a theory and philosophical worldview. Mayoh and Onwuegbuzie (2015) argued that critical realist beliefs cut across different worldviews and allow for mixing methodologies and ideologies from those worldviews in the same research project. In their work on principles for conducting critical realist case study research in information systems, Wynn and Williams (2012) emphasized that critical realism-based research could improve research and theorization significantly. When I write the proposal for my dissertation, it is perceptible that I must broaden my understanding of multiple worldviews, qualitative methodologies, and my mastery of quantitative methodologies to benefit fully from critical realism. 

​

​

Figure 1

Diagram of Critical Realist Ontology 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Note: Ontology of critical realism adapted from Critical realism: An important theoretical perspective for midwifery research. Midwifery, by Walsh, D., & Evans, K., 2014. Elsevier, p. e2. 

​

​