TELLING IT STRAIGHT - ISSUES IN ASSESSING NARRATIVE RESEARCH

In recent years, there have been deep disputes about the nature of res earch in education and the social sciences. The broad naturalistic app roach - that social science should, in key respects, resemble the natu ral sciences - has been opposed by hermeneuticists or interpretivists. Recently, the latter have been joined by those who argue for narrativ e research on the broad grounds that humans make sense of their own li ves, and those of others, in narrative or ''storied'' terms (Bruner, 1 986,1990). The criteria for judging a good narrative are argued to inc lude plausibility, evocativeness, presence of an engaging plot, and th e ability to generate playful exploration. It is argued here that thes e criteria are inadequate. Often, although not in all cases, a narrati ve must be true to be considered acceptable. Some important distinctio ns are drawn that often are glossed over in the pronarrative literatur e.