chapter 4 qualitative research paper sample pdf

• Chapter 4: Home
• Qualtrics Survey Tool
• Statistics Help This link opens in a new window
• Statistics and APA Format This link opens in a new window

Analysis and Coding Example: Qualitative Data

• Trustworthiness of Qualitative Data
• Hypothesis Testing This link opens in a new window

Jump to DSE Guide

The following is an example of how to engage in a three step analytic process of coding, categorizing, and identifying themes within the data presented. Note that different researchers would come up with different results based on their specific research questions, literature review findings, and theoretical perspective.

There are many ways cited in the literature to analyze qualitative data. The specific analytic plan in this exercise involved a constant comparative (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) approach that included a three-step process of open coding, categorizing, and synthesizing themes. The constant comparative process involved thinking about how these comments were interrelated. Intertwined within this three step process, this example engages in content analysis techniques as described by Patton (1987) through which coherent and salient themes and patterns are identified throughout the data. This is reflected in the congruencies and incongruencies reflected in the memos and relational matrix.

Step 1: Open Coding

Codes for the qualitative data are created through a line by line analysis of the comments. Codes would be based on the research questions, literature review, and theoretical perspective articulated. Numbering the lines is helpful so that the researcher can make notes regarding which comments they might like to quote in their report.

It is also useful to include memos to remind yourself of what you were thinking and allow you to reflect on the initial interpretations as you engage in the next two analytic steps. In addition, memos will be a reminder of issues that need to be addressed if there is an opportunity for follow up data collection. This technique allows the researcher time to reflect on how his/her biases might affect the analysis. Using different colored text for memos makes it easy to differentiate thoughts from the data.

Many novice researchers forgo this step.  Rather, they move right into arranging the entire statements into the various categories that have been pre-identified. There are two problems with the process. First, since the categories have been listed open coding, it is unclear from where the categories have been derived. Rather, when a researcher uses the open coding process, he/she look at each line of text individually and without consideration for the others. This process of breaking the pieces down and then putting them back together through analysis ensures that the researcher consider all for the data equally and limits the bias that might introduced. In addition, if a researcher is coding interviews or other significant amounts of qualitative data it will likely become overwhelming as the researcher tries to organize and remember from which context each piece of data came.

Step 2: Categorizing

To categorize the codes developed in Step 1 , list the codes and group them by similarity.  Then, identify an appropriate label for each group. The following table reflects the result of this activity.

Step 3: Identification of Themes

In this step, review the categories as well as the memos to determine the themes that emerge.   In the discussion below, three themes emerged from the synthesis of the categories. Relevant quotes from the data are included that exemplify the essence of the themes.These can be used in the discussion of findings. The relational matrix demonstrates the pattern of thinking of the researcher as they engaged in this step in the analysis. This is similar to an axial coding strategy.

Note that this set of data is limited and leaves some questions in mind. In a well-developed study, this would just be a part of the data collected and there would be other data sets and/or opportunities to clarify/verify some of the interpretations made below.  In addition, since there is no literature review or theoretical statement, there are no reference points from which to draw interferences in the data. Some assumptions were made for the purposes of this demonstration in these areas.

T h eme 1:  Professional Standing

Individual participants have articulated issues related to their own professional position. They are concerned about what and when they will teach, their performance, and the respect/prestige that they have within the school. For example, they are concerned about both their physical environment and the steps that they have to take to ensure that they have the up to date tools that they need. They are also concerned that their efforts are being acknowledged, sometimes in relation to their peers and their beliefs that they are more effective.

Selected quotes:

• Some teachers are carrying the weight for other teachers. (demonstrates that they think that some of their peers are not qualified.)
• We need objective observations and feedback from the principal (demonstrates that they are looking for acknowledgement for their efforts.  Or this could be interpreted as a belief that their peers who are less qualified should be acknowledged).
• There is a lack of support for individual teachers

Theme 2:  Group Dynamics and Collegiality

Rationale: There are groups or clicks that have formed. This seems to be the basis for some of the conflict.  This conflict is closely related to the status and professional standing themes. This theme however, has more to do with the group issues while the first theme is an individual perspective. Some teachers and/or subjects are seen as more prestigious than others.  Some of this is related to longevity. This creates jealously and inhibits collegiality. This affects peer-interaction, instruction, and communication.

• Grade level teams work against each other rather than together.
• Each team of teachers has stereotypes about the other teams.
• There is a division between the old and new teachers

Theme 3:  Leadership Issues

Rationale: There seems to be a lack of leadership and shared understanding of the general direction in which the school will go. This is also reflected in a lack of two way communications.  There doesn’t seem to be information being offered by the leadership of the school, nor does there seem to be an opportunity for individuals to share their thoughts, let alone decision making. There seems to be a lack of intervention in the conflict from leadership.

• Decisions are made on inaccurate information.
• We need consistent decisions about school rules

Glaser, B.G., & Strauss, A.  (1967).   The discovery of grounded theory:  Strategies for qualitative research . Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Patton, M. Q.  (1987).   How to use qualitative methods in evaluation .  Newbury Park, CA:  Sage Publications.

• << Previous: Statistics and APA Format
• Next: Trustworthiness of Qualitative Data >>
• Last Updated: Apr 19, 2024 3:09 PM
• URL: https://resources.nu.edu/c.php?g=1007180

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS 4.1 Qualitative Data Source

Related Papers

Physiotherapy

Corinne Dalelio , Christina Selby

This chapter makes an argument for using qualitative methods for assessing students’ knowledge at the program level in order to observe their abilities and application of knowledge as demonstrated in an actual learning environment. A model for using focus groups to evaluate achievement of higher level learning outcomes is presented, drawing on a case study based on assessment of students in the communication major at Coastal Carolina University. Specifically, six focus groups with 8-12 students in each were conducted. Guided discussion, following presentations of an electronic and a print-based message led to a high level of student engagement. Case study findings showed that although students demonstrated proficiency in understanding basic communication principles and immediate implications of each message, students were less able to demonstrate higher-level critical evaluation by identifying the messages’ longer-term societal implications. This model provides an opportunity for assessors in different academic contexts to identify specific weaknesses in their students’ learning processes and to adjust curricula accordingly.

Sıdıka Gizir

English for Specific Purposes World Journal, Issue 2(18) Vol. 7, pp. 1-14, 2008.

Ourania Katsara

This article reports on the findings of a survey on students’ views of the ESP course in University of Ioannina. Four focus group interviews were conducted, each consisting of 5 students. These interviews were carried out in order to further explore in depth data gathered in the two previous stages of the research. The finding indicated that there is a consistency over time on certain issues identified in previous interpretation of in-depth interviews and content analysis of essays. The evidence shows that there are problems regarding policies of foreign language teaching in the state sector and culture specific attitudes concerning English language learning. It is apparent that more adequate and descriptive information on the ESP course is required both to students and to academic staff of university departments. Co-operation among all appears to facilitate an effort to make the ESP course useful and worth attending in University. Keywords Focus group Interviews, Qualitative analysis, English for Specific Purposes, Greek students, needs analysis, motivation

Peter Gibbings

Benefits of collecting student feedback on courses, programs, learning experiences, and their perceptions of teaching quality, are well documented in literature. In the higher education system, this feedback is generally collected via student evaluation surveys. During the past few years, the Faculty of Engineering and Surveying (FoES), one of five faculties at USQ, has identified problems of small response rates, possible bias, general questions over data validity, relevance and wording of survey questions, and systems problems such as timeliness of official reports. Due to these problems, the data may not be reliable and the views of those who respond may not be representative of the overall student cohort. It is therefore risky to base management decisions on student satisfaction, teaching quality, and course quality on these data. Clearly, a more robust and reliable method of gathering feedback from students was needed that would provide more confidence in the data. For various ...

Monica Stitt-Bergh

ABSTRACT To help us act on general education assessment results and create improvement plans, we included student focus groups in our assessment procedures. The presenter highlights results including (a) course elements that students stated would help them meet outcomes in written communication, symbolic reasoning, and global and multicultural perspectives; (b) how students used general education knowledge and skills learned during the first two years to complete third-year assignments; and (c) how we used these results to engage faculty in constructive conversations that led to curricular changes. The presentation also features focus-group formats with activities such as “course timelines” and concept maps. EXTENDED ABSTRACT Using assessment results to improve student learning is a necessary but difficult task. To help us take action and create improvement plans, we included student focus groups as part of our general education assessment procedures. We wanted to add student voices to general education assessment in order to explore why learning was or was not happening and identify ways to improve. First, we wanted students to describe which assignments, pedagogical approaches, class size, etc., helped them achieve the general education learning outcomes. Second, we wanted to know if students perceived the first-year general education curriculum as foundational to subsequent courses, particularly courses in their major. To answer these questions, in 2010 we started a longitudinal study of learning in the general education program that included an annual focus group. We invited all first-year, first-time students (N=1,956) in fall 2010 to participate. Out of 356 volunteers, we used stratified random sampling to select 251 who closely matched the fall 2010 freshman class on these characteristics: age, high school GPA, college entrance scores, ethnicity, gender, and residency. All participants complete six online surveys each year and in addition, half of the participants submit coursework/exams from their general education courses each semester and attend an annual focus group. In spring 2012, 83 students participated in one of 10 focus groups, and 70 students (estimated) participated in eight focus groups in spring 2013. Our first-year general education curriculum includes a course on written communication (e.g., English 100), a symbolic reasoning course (e.g., Math 100), and two global and multicultural perspectives courses (e.g., History 151, Anthropology 151). The goals of the first-year general education curriculum are that students have skills and knowledge that are fundamental to undertaking higher education and necessary for living and working in diverse communities. With these goals, the general education outcomes, and use of assessment results in mind, we developed research questions for the annual focus groups: 1. What course structures (e.g., assignments, class size) would help students meet the learning outcomes related to written communication (WC), symbolic reasoning (SR), and global and multicultural perspectives (GMP)? [2012] 2. What WC, SR, and GMP knowledge and skills learned during the first two years do third-year students identify as being valuable? [2013] 3. Are students using WC, SR, and GMP knowledge and skills learned during the first two years to complete assignments or meet professor expectations in their third year? [2013] Course Structures That Encouraged Learning Related to the First-year Outcomes. Near the end of their second year (spring 2012), participants attended a focus group session in which they designed a first-year general education course aimed at helping students achieve the learning outcomes. The participants saw clear differences among the three areas: WC, SR, and GMP. For example, while their ideal WC and SR courses were limited to 15-20 students, the ideal GMP course enrollment was either a 50-student lecture or a large lecture plus a small-enrollment recitation section. Participants had mixed perceptions of the effectiveness of peer review in writing courses but were positive that peer-to-peer learning was effective in SR courses. Participants were able to describe the current and future value of the WC and SR outcomes, but the majority found little value in the GMP outcomes. Valuable WC, SR, and GMP Knowledge and Skills Learned During the First Two Years. Near the end of their third year (spring 2013), participants attended a focus group session in which they identified valuable WC, SR, and GMP knowledge and skills learned during the first two years. Preliminary results indicated that learning about doing research, using the library, and citing sources were most valued. Knowledge and Skills Learned During the First Two Years Used to Complete Assignments in the Third Year. In the third-year focus group (spring 2013), participants also described if and how they were using the WC, SR, and GMP knowledge and skills learned during their first two years to complete assignments or meet professor expectations in their third year. Preliminary results were as follows: first-year WC knowledge and skills had the strongest connections to third-year assignments across all majors. Regarding SR and GMP, the student’s major influenced student responses. Only students in business, science, and engineering programs reported using SR knowledge and skills. While most students felt GMP was not useful for third-year courses, more students now believed GMP would be useful after graduation. Use of Results. Our results serve as an entry into conversations with faculty about how to create a first-year experience that subsequent years build upon. We have and continue to present results to faculty committees that are responsible for the general education curriculum and faculty in departments that teach the general education courses. The use of results has varied. For example, the Anthropology Department restructured its GMP course from a large lecture only to a lecture plus small recitation sections. The General Education Committee has taken the findings into consideration as it debates policy decisions about whether students should be required to complete the GMP requirement during the first year or allowed to complete it at any time during their academic career. Learning Outcomes. Attendees will leave knowing 1. Course structures (e.g., assignments, class size) that students believed would help them meet the learning outcomes related to written communication (WC), symbolic reasoning (SR), and global and multicultural perspectives (GMP); 2. Knowledge and skills related to WC, SR, and GMP that third-year students identified as valuable; 3. How students used WC, SR, and GMP knowledge and skills learned during their first two years to complete assignments in their third year; and 4. How we use this information to engage faculty in constructive discussions about improving teaching and learning in the general education program. "

Journal of Southeast Asian American Education and Advancement

Hanum Tyagita

Wayne Wright , Sovicheth Boun

Readers are free to copy, display, and distribute this article, as long as the work is attributed to the author (s) and the Journal of Southeast Asian American Education & Advancement, it is distributed for noncommercial purposes only, and no alteration or transformation is made in the work. More details of this Creative Commons license are available at http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/. All other uses must be approved by the author (s) or JSAAEA.

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024