Week 1 Reflection: Qualitative Research and AI-Enabled Student Wellness

• 

What I Learned This Week

This week's synchronous session refreshed core concepts of qualitative research design, including paradigms, epistemology, and the researcher's role as an instrument of inquiry, framed through my topic: AI enabled CBT and mindfulness interventions in online higher education.

Revisiting these foundations reminded me that qualitative research is not simply "softer" quantitative work; it is a distinct way of knowing, grounded in the assumption that reality is constructed through human interaction and interpretation.

I have practiced how to describe my epistemological stance, which I place within (radical) social constructivism, following Duffy and Cunningham (1996), who argue that learning and knowledge are actively constructed rather than passively accepted. Through this practice, I have moved from a vague sense, "I guess I believe knowledge is subjective," to a more precise, citable philosophical position. This position will inform how I study students' experiences with AI enabled CBT and mindfulness tools.

What Was Challenging and Why

The most confusing part of the assignment was determining the Epistemology, Ontology, and Methodology and connecting each neatly to a specific qualitative tradition (e.g., constructivist grounded theory versus interpretive phenomenology) suitable for studying AI enabled CBT and mindfulness interventions.

I initially came from an insurance and financial advisory background, where facts are truth and truth can be verified. Every policy either lapses or does not lapse. This adjustment demands a significant cognitive adaptation.

I also found it difficult to separate my personal worldview from the academic framing expected in a Statement of Philosophical Bias because the two overlap but are not identical, especially when a project involves trying to justify why a constructivist lens fits a topic such as the impacts of AI technology.

As I continue developing as a doctoral researcher, I am learning to balance confidence in my professional expertise with openness to perspectives that differ from my own. This process requires me to become more comfortable with uncertainty, reflection, and the idea that knowledge can be shaped by individuals’ lived experiences and the contexts in which those experiences occur.

Meaning is provisional, always situated and always attuned, one that is advanced by honest and ongoing engagement with translation, instead of something that ought to be settled once and for all. This implies that how students depict their experiences with AI enabled CBT and mindfulness tools matters a lot in how their encounters are interpreted.

Connection to My Research Agenda

(1) What research is to me, and its purpose

Research is a meticulous process that assesses and makes reliable and insightful conclusions about how people learn and understand things.

(2) My interpretation of research and its purpose

Its aim isn't just to produce general knowledge. It is to inform practice, for example, the ways online students utilize AI enhanced CBT and mindfulness meditation.

(3) My main research focus and setting

My research focuses on AI-enabled CBT and mindfulness tools in online higher education, with online higher-education students as the unit of analysis. I chose this topic to better understand how these tools, when used in online classrooms, relate to students’ motivation, psychological well-being, self-regulated learning, and resilience.

Bringing It Together

Tying these threads together, this week's readings and discussions made it clear that my constructivist stance, while trying to encompass all the philosophies included under this label, plays a significant role in setting up my interview protocol, examining students' accounts of their experiences with CBT and mindfulness tools, and explaining why I am choosing this methodology throughout my dissertation.

Reference:

Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170-198). Macmillan.