DESIGNING QUALITATIVE STUDIES

Chapter 2

“Flexible Structure”

An issue that must be addressed early in the design process: Tension between flexibility and structure

Novice researchers need to begin their work with a solid plan… But be open and receptive to developmental changes as

the study is being implemented Basic elements that need to be addressed in a

qualitative research design: Place of theory, research questions, contexts, participants,

data collection strategies, data analysis procedures, and the nature of anticipated findings

Theory

Wolcott (1995): “Theory is supposed to help researchers of any persuasion clarify what they are up to and to help them to explain to others what they are up to.”

Methodological TheorySubstantive Theory

Methodological Theory

1st step: Place proposed study in a research paradigm and identify what kind of study is being planned Addresses researcher’s answers to ontological and

epistemological questions2nd step: Identify what kind of qualitative

research is to be done within the chosen paradigm

Substantive Theory

Theory that is used to describe and explain the phenomena to be investigated or the substance of the study

Necessary to articulate during design phase, but still important to consider alternate theoretical explanations as the study progresses

Some researchers worry that looking at other studies will bias the ways they look and the what they interpret what they find But this knowledge will help a researcher know what in the

field takes to be known, what is possible, and what needs further exploration

Research Questions

Give direction to study, limit the scope of investigation, and provide a device for evaluating progress and satisfactory completion The only component that ties all of the other elements of a design Carving out a piece of territory for exploration

Asking if a research questions have been answered provides a way to judge if enough has been done

Research questions will look different depending on the paradigm Hatch suggests one overarching research question with

subquestions that remain general in nature but offer more specific direction

Should be: open-ended, few in number, and stated in straightforward language

Contexts

A physical setting in which social action occurs, a set of participants and their relationships to one another, and the activities in which participants are involved

Graue and Walsh (1995): “A context is a culturally and historically situated place and time.”

Are not static entities that can be controlled or manipulated (like in quantitative research) They are complex, dynamic and nested within larger

cultural, political, and historical frameworks that must be considered as studies are planned

Contexts: Considerations

Deciding where to do study is a key decision, and making a plan for how to negotiate access and entry is an important element in a qualitative research design Need to be concerned that the study will provide data

that make it possible to answer research questions Other concerns: accessibility, feasibility, and familiarity

Kind of research planned is another important consideration Frames the generation of questions and influences

context selection decision

Contexts: Research Designs

Research designs should include: Step-by-step plans for finding out the rules and

regulations of the institutions involved; Identifying the names and/or positions of key

gatekeepers; Specifying who will be contacted, when, and how; Detailing what gatekeepers will be told about the

study; and articulating how formal permission will be

acquired

Contexts: Gaining Access

Large school districts will often have an office that is responsible for granting formal permission Permission usually contingent on approval of a school-

level administratorInitial contacts with research participants or

gatekeepers set the tone for the rest of the studyMay be beneficial to make informal contact with

building principals, teachers, and parents to assess the likelihood that they will agree to participate or allow access

Contexts: Research Bargains

Be ready and able to explain to potential gatekeepersSpecify the roles and responsibilities of the

researcher and each participant What the researcher will be doing, when and for how long; What will happen to the data of the study and indicate if and

when the participants will have access to the data and/or results

Will have elements similar with informed consent forms but less formal and more flexible

Can use general statements of purpose but… Ethical necessity to signal that you are a researcher studying

something with identifiable boundaries

Contexts: Studying Own Contexts

Hatch discourages Too difficult for educators to pull back from their

insider perspectives and see things with the eyes of a researcher “Familiarity breeds inattention”

You’re there to capture what insiders take for granted

Participants

Qualitative researchers try to understand the perspectives of their participants or informants

Must be willing to allow researchers to watch them acting in their natural environments and/or talk with them about their actions and intentions

No direct relationship between number of participants and the quality of a study Questions of number have to do with research

questions and levels of analysis

Participants According to Paradigm

Postpositivists See themselves as data gathering instruments Need close relationships with informants Analysis accomplished by researcher alone

Constructivists Participants are coconstructors of the knowledge generated by

studies Often help decide how research questions might be modified;

What other participants might be involved; How richer data might be collected; and how analyses might be framed

Usual for them to have a say in how the final product will look

Participants According to Paradigm

Critical/Feminist Help participants recognize and challenge the

oppressive conditions under which they live Select participants who understand the

transformative intent of critical or feminist workPoststructuralist

No particular relationship with participants Tentativeness about the ability to know the lived

experiences of participants and reluctance to try to represent lives in text make relations with participants ambiguous

Participants: Rules of Thumb

Kind of research approach selected will affect participant selection criteria within all paradigms

The fewer the participants, the more time spent with each one Kvale (1996): “Interview as many subjects as

necessary to find out what you need to know.”The fewer the number of participants, the

more important it is to include multiple data sources

Participants: Sampling

Participant selection also determined by the context and unit of analysis

Homogenous samples Participants share common characteristics Useful for studying subgroups in depth

Maximum variation samples Opposite of homogenous, based on differences in

characteristics Useful in studies seeking to find central themes

Participants: Sampling

Intensity sampling Finds participants who manifest intense forms of the

phenomena of interest Useful in studies looking to understand the

development and expression of such phenomenaConvenience sampling

Readymade sample that is both convenient and available

Most common sampling strategy, but least desirable Loses integrity and ability to make a solid contribution

Participants: Relationships

Important to think through and anticipate relationships Will take time and energy Things will not always go smoothly Building and maintaining rapport is important

Participants are ultimate gatekeepers Whether and to what extent the researcher will have

access to the desired information Must help participants “learn how to be studied”

Encouraged to write up a research bargain

Participants: Research Bargains

Should include descriptions of the roles and responsibilities of researcher and participants

First think through what kind of relationship is desirable depending on: Paradigm; Kind of study; And research questions asked

Describe what study will involve and what will be expected of participants What they will be doing, when, and for how long What they should do to prepare, what to do when with researcher, and what

they can tell others In language that is easily and appropriately understood Need to establish a system for participants to let researcher

know if they have questions or feel uncomfortable

Data Collection Strategies

Questions of data collection should be asked all along the design process

Specify What data will be collected; How and when data will be collected; And why the data will be collected

Rationale should come from paradigm, research questions, contexts, and participants

Language that includes “at least” so many hours of observation, so many interviews, or so much artifact data

Data Analyses Procedures

Most mysterious and most difficult part Comes easier with experience

Just saying data will be analyzed qualitatively or inductively is not enough Need more details about when and how analysis will

be accomplished Readers of design proposals want to have confidence

that researchers know what they’re doing Don’t want to waste time or money

Data Analyses Procedures

Choice of procedure will depend on previous design decisions

Most qualitative studies will not fit into a specific model Better to say “I will adapt…” or “I will apply the principles…”

of certain procedures rather than saying “I will use…” Because each study is unique, procedures need to be spelled

out in straightforward termsNeed to specify what researcher expects to do,

when, and how When will be answered:

Analysis will begin after data collected, begin with the first data collected, or that it will occur at set stages throughout

Data Analyses Procedures

Rule of Thumb: the more open the research questions, the more important to have analysis built into the data collection process

Answering how is more difficult Based on organizing data analysis in ways that answer

research questions and follow logic of qualitative design

Require careful reading and rereading of the data Identify certain procedures to be followed Specify some method for dealing with

counterevidence or discrepant cases

Data Analyses Procedures

Should be included in research design:1. Identify topic areas to be analyzed 2. Read the data, marking entries related to topics3. Read entries by topic, recording main ideas in entries on a

summary sheet4. Look for patterns, categories, relationships within topic

areas5. Read data, coding entries according to patterns identified6. Search for nonexamples of your patterns

1. Decide if your patterns are supported by the data7. Look for relationships among the patterns identified8. Write your patterns as one-sentence generalizations 9. Select data excerpts to support your generalizations

Data Analyses Procedures

Computer programs Can help with data analyses but no program can do

the “mindwork” necessary to interpret and analyze data Identifying specific program to organize data fine; saying

that it will do analysis is notConclusion

Important to have a plan for data analysis before gathering data

Nature of Anticipated Findings

Anticipate the form findings will take; the nature of the findings Form will flow directly from the kind of research

approach that is appliedHaving a basic idea gives researchers a

frame of reference for thinking about what they are doing during each step of the process

Nature of Anticipated Findings

Organizing and presenting qualitative data (3 methods) Description

Data speaks for itself Goal is to provide accounts that represent as close as

possible what is going on in particular contexts Analysis

Transforming data by way of searching for relationships and key factors that can be supported by evidence in the data Careful, systematic methods Careful documentation grounded in the data

Products: generalizations that represent essential features or relationships

Nature of Anticipated Findings

Interpretation Understanding and explanation are the goals

Moving deeper than description or analysis Here the researcher inserts his or her own thinking into the data

transformation processParadigm Emphasis

Postpositivists Mostly analysis

Constructivits All three, working with participants as coconstructors

Critical/Feminist Mostly interpretation based on political perspectives

Poststructuralists Everything, including reality, is an interpretation

Institutional Review

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) Review research projects to be sure they are designed

in ways that protect research participants from harm Made up of experienced researchers

With knowledge of legal risks Meet regularly to approve, reject, or ask for

modification of applications Either “short forms” and/or “expedited review

procedures” for projects that appear to offer little to no risk Contrast to “full review”

Institutional Review

Elements of a full review Identification of Project Project Objectives Description of Research Participants Methods and Procedures Specific Risks and Protection Measures Benefits Methods of Obtaining Informed Consent Qualifications of Investigator(s) Facilities and Equipment Responsibility of the Principal/Co-Principal

Investigator

1. Identification of Project

Identifies Who will be doing the project Who will be advising the researcher The type of project proposed The title of project Starting and estimated ending date If any external agencies are involved in funding

Most of this info established by filling in blank forms

Faculty member must be approved as advisor, principal investigator (PI), or co-principal investigator (Co-PI)

2. Project Objectives

A narrative describing rationale, goals and objectives, and anticipated significance of the research

Use language easily understood by individuals on the IRB from different disciplines

3. Description of Research Participants

Clear description: Who the participants will be How many How to gain access & recruiting methods And criteria for selecting

If using groups whose ability to voluntarily consent questioned, must provide rationale (i.e. children, prisoners, mentally handicapped)

If providing an incentive, must provide rationaleSafeguards described so no individual feels

coerced into participating

4. Methods and Procedures

Describe exactly what will be done in terms of data collection and analysis

An abstracted version of research proposal with emphasis on exactly how participants will be affected by such procedures Anticipate any potential risk

5. Specific Risks and Protection Measures

Describe: The nature and amount of potential risk Precautions used to lessen risks

And effectiveness of precautions Means of assuring confidentiality

Storage and disposal of data Who will have access to the data

Must provide rationale

6. Benefits

Whenever risks are evident, must be justified by benefits Benefits to participants and/or society

Careful not to inflate benefits Payments are incentives, not benefits Claim research collection therapeutic to participants,

when may not be Developing close relationships with participants and

claiming that it will benefit both personally and professionally is presumptuous

7. Methods of Informed Consent

Elements in document need to be part of the information that participants receive prior to giving their official consent Describe to IRB exact methods for obtaining consent

Copies includedParticipants given the opportunity to consider

whether or not to consent and minimize the possibility of coercion

Capable adults give “consent” Children and others incapable give “assent”

Language must be understandable to participants See page 64 for all elements required in consent form

8. Qualifications of Investigator(s)

IRBs need assurance that the researcher knows what they are doing Usually why dissertation advisors appointed as

principal or co-principal investigators The more vulnerable the participant group, the more

important for the researcher has appropriate experience and expertise

9. Facilities and Equipment

Describe & Provide: Facilities and equipment to be used An evaluation of their adequacy for the intended

project Letters of permission from the organization supplying

the facilities Written permission from appropriate school

representatives

10. Responsibility of the Principal/Co-Principal Investigator

Sample from the University of Tennessee: Approval obtained from IRB before introducing any

change into the research project Development of any unexpected risks must be

immediately reported to IRB An annual review and progress report must be

submitted when requested by the IRB Signed informed consent documents must be kept

during the study and for at least three years after at a location approved by IRB

Ethics

Researchers require a considerable amount of time from participants and to reveal a lot about themselves; if not careful, researchers give little back Reciprocal arrangements specify what the researcher will be

contributing to the bargain Labor-related contributions Expertise-related contributions

Plans for leaving must be developed Leave participants in a vulnerable place

Children especially Explain at the beginning what will be expected of the

relationship at the end of the study

Ethics

Make sure teachers do not feel coerced into participating May be reluctant to say no people they perceive as “experts” in

their field, perceive themselves as subordinate May think that refusal looks like they have something to hide

Illegal Activity Or unsafe behavior, practices that place individuals at risk, etc. By law, child abuse must be reported

This information must be stated directly in informed consent documents

If discriminating is occurring, nature of study may change, but what would be more preferable: completing study as planned or regretting that you didn’t try to help?

Text taken directly from:

Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing Qualitative Research in Education Settings. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press