Writing a Qualitative Study

The task of "composing or writing the narrative report" as Creswell calls it, acts as the cohesive or connective tissue holding the pieces of a study together. The so-called "narrative" nature of the report is an intrinsic property of qualitative research and lies in almost polar contrast to the report writing in quantitative research. While the quantitative report strives to objectively explain the data, the qualitative report endeavors to reflectively and reflexively expose it.

The major criteria discussed here (for the author to decide on many stylistic choices) are the (target) audience, type of encoding, and quotes. It seems to me that former criterion there influences decisions on the latter two,

Within each of the five approaches, there is a fundamental difference in the function of writing, While Narrative approach inherently uses most narrative technique, grounded theory would likely stay away farthest from it.

Data Analysis and Representation

As with data validation, analysis of data in qualitative research and its subsequent representation is distinctly different from its quantitative counterpart. Of course, this differential concept needs to have been realized and taken into account earlier when determining the nature and method of data collection-and consequently the nature of the data itself. While much of the classification of data is already in place during the data collection process in quantitative research, qualitative research requires the post-collection process of coding and organization of the codes regarding significance, frequency, and comparison and contrast.
In terms of Grounded Theory approach, the coding is derived primarily from the written transcripts of interviews. This may been done by color coding, notes in margins, or word frequency (clouds). Once the data has been organized in a way that explains or helps tointerpret it, it may be helpful to create a visual aid to assist in understanding, explaining, or clarifying the theory, Graphs, flow charts, pie charts, and diagrams are the most common visual devices used for this purpose.

Validation- Chapter 10

Determining what validation for qualitative research is is the heart of the issue in this chapter; and upon reflection is really not as contentious as it was presented at the start of the chapter. If we view validation of data as double-checking, corroboration, verifying, then it is as "easy" to do as quantitative or statistical validation. In fact, it should be easier. Since the data validation process precedes conclusion, which should be validated as well, we are not evaluating the interpretation of data, but the accuracy of the information gathered. While Wolcott doesn't find much purpose for validation (Creswell, pg 295), I feel there is importance in ensuring that (what I call) qualitative added-value factors are present in the data (lucid transferable terminology, assurance of meaning, trustworthiness, thick description, etc.). I don't agree with the concept that that validation is against the spirit of qualitative research, as is implied in Wolcott, but I agree that the nit-picking of models of many of the others is more about semantics and reflexive personal interpretations than about the broader spirit of qualitative research.
For me, the questions raised about data validation specifically for Grounded Theory approach provide a good guide as to how to manage this aspect/phase of my own project.
The most relevant issue for me seems to be about making certain that differences in interviewee's verbiage=the equivalent phenomenon. This will require member checking and peer review as the most effective method.

Phenomenology

I am finding the more I look at the examples of the various approaches to Qualitative Research. the more I am understanding some of the various formats and flexibility within such areas as Lit Review, methods, and modelling from prior frameworks.....As Anderson and Spencer do here (on pg 269), one can look carefully at a prior models from the approach methodology (in this case they choose Merlau-Ponty, Streubert and Carpenter, and Colaizzi), and attempt to design one's study similarly, esp. when one, such as myself, is trying to create a project like this for the first time. While I obviously anticipate that my own thesis project (Grounded Theory) will entail much more writing than the Phenomenological Approach given here, though obviously not always the case, there is obvious room for expansion a phenomenologically-approached qualitative to be more elaborate, compendious, or intricate, depending on the phenomenon, design, or methods of data collection and analysis.
As compared to a case study, this approach looks at varying examples of the same phenomenon.
A case study examines a particular case from as many angles as possible. If we were to do a phenomenological study examining modern terrorist attacks on US property, we would examine the US Cole incident, the underground bombings in NYC, the Oklahoma City bombings, the African Embassy Bombings, as well the WTC 9/11 attacks. A case study would focus on one of these and look at not only unique time-related data, but would also need to place one of these incidents in context of all the others before and after.
As compared to the Grounded theory, there is analysis of all the data in the phenomenological approach without necessarily drawing or testing a new theoretical framework or explanation. In the example here (starting on page 271), rather than a "theory" the authors evolve "themes" from the coded data which stand as testimony to the input analysis.

The Iceland Volcano:A Case Study of The Perspectives on Extreme Natural Events (ENE's)in the Modern World

Historical Reactions to Analogous Events in the Prehistorical and Historical Past:
Books and Articles documenting human reaction to past events
Study of artifacts in Museum(s) of Natural History and other extreme event collections
Myths evolving from ENE's ( Books by Joseph Campbell, C. Levi-Strauss, Mircea Eliade, CG Jung)



Technology Coverage and The Media:
24 hour coverage:
CNN Footage
Al-Jazeera Footage
New York Times Articles
Web Coverage from News Bureaus
Twitter Reaction
Social Networking Information (Facebook)
YouTube Videos

Scientific Reaction:
Scientific Journals and Periodicals
Expert Interviews with Seismologists, Volcanologists, and Meteorologistics (forEnvironmental Etymology and Impact of the Event)
Videos using Heat and Chemical Sensitive Scanning
Scientific Studies of Animal Behavior and ENEs

Sociological, Societal, and Psychological Effects:
Study of Behavioral Journals (for stress and fear effects)
Hospital Records for Psychological Trauma experienced pre-and poat-ENEs
Newspaper articles and e-articles from near and far locations from the epicenter

Religious and Philosophical Perspectives:
Interviews with Religious Leaders
Books by Environmental Philosophers (Gregory Bateson, et. al)

Business and Political Perspectives:
Business Week, Newsweek, The Wall Street Journal
Studies of pre-and post- EPE business Statistics

(You've Got A) Case Study

From reading Appendix F, there were a number of insights I garnered from the work on Campus violence. Amongst other things, I was able to follow Creswells, et als.'s setting of parameters and clarification of how their study fit within the technical parameters of qualitative research. It was a bit more elaborate than my introduction is likely to be, but it at it set some kind of model framework. I was also impressed with the clarification of the "need" for the study, something I've been wrestling to explain, as well as the explanantion of ethics. I did feel there was a little less self-reflexion than in other studies. Overall, I felt like case study might be defined as "situational ethnography".......But instead of studying a "group" case it's a "situational" case with the multiple groups and sources as the "wild cards." I didn't have that sense going into the reading, but I came out with that sense. I have a feeling, with enough time and the right subject, I really might enjoy doing this approach to research some time in the future.

(Finely) Grounded Theory

I've been looking at the Grounded Theory approach to Qualitative Research for about 5 months now, since Eric R brought it to my attention. Given my subject matter and the way I am looking into Shame and its impact on ESL education (investigative methods), Grounded theory seems to make the most sense, with Phenomenology a distant second choice. The idea of when and how to introduce the theory has been (and to some degree still is) what I am trying to evolve an understanding of. Between the appendixed Study in Creswell, a supplemental book Eric lent me, and various articles I've borrowed and read, the "standard" is slowly becoming clearer. What I am now also dealing with is adjunctive data that has been brought to my by my interviewees; ideas and data that expand, support, or contradict my original suppositions. arguments, and assumptions. I am learning how experienced researchers "deal with" surprises and corollaries to their research. The idea of seeking "Theoretical Sampling" as opposed to the more standard Quantitative "Random Sampling" is a whole new process. (I was an NP Tester for a Health Project using random sampling from 1999-2004). Especially with the semi-structured interview format most prevalent in GT approach. There is also a reiterative process where different aspects of the theory can be reviewed and re-tested for greater refinement, sophistication, or inticacy. Understanding "Formal Theory" is what I am really looking at now.

Interviewing Doing

As part of my Thesis project/process, I did 6 interviews this week (since last Friday night), four with Native English-raised and educated teachers of English in Korea and two with Native Korean raised and educated teachers of English. Last week I did three interviews with Native Korean raised and educated teachers only. And by next Monday I will one more English-raised and one more Korean-raised interview. The interviews, as what might be called somewhat typical for the Grounded Theory approach, were conducted with a selected phenomenon-experiencing group. The questions were semi-structured, with more structure generally coming at the beginning and end. When I got what felt like leads to different experiences, observations, and attitudes, I encouraged pursuit of those with such comments as "please tell me more about....." The interviews have thus far (with 9 of 11 completed) taken from 17-40 minutes. I have used microcasettes and standard cassettes to record the interviews (Koreans and Waygookin beware, I could not find new microcassettes anywhere)......Establishing rapport was not a problem, nor was the assurance of ethical questioning and the use of the data.
What has been most interesting about the process is the different tangents and stories on which the (so-called) informants have taken me. (I always thought an informant was a "snitch")
These bits of information could potentially lead to other deeper, more specific studies based on the theory which I am proposing here. I will need to assess at the end of my interviews and coding whether I will need to "re-interview" anyone, using tangential issues which later interviewees brought to light.

Interviewology: Questioning questions

"To be.....or not to be. That's not really a question" Francois Truffaut

A fascinating little (well not so little, and rather dense) overview of the interviewing process. Philosophically, the whole process (hole process) of interviewing has the potential for so many
pitfalls in every stage from the creation of the questions, to the appropriateness for the target group, to the answers from the target group to the assessment of the collected interview data or answers via quantitative or qualitative coding assessments, that we must be careful to, at very least, be concerned about accuracy. At very most, we should acknowledge as many of the pitfalls as possible. In short we must question ourselves at each stage. It is probably a good idea to get a peer review or "second set of eyes" to look at questions from a different (hence less subjective than just one's own) point of view. I see interviews as beyond conversations in that they are intentionally purposeful. And end when the purpose the purpose is complete. And some how recorded and reviewed for the intended pupose. While conversations can have purposes (all in some ways do actually).....but the intention from the beginning is made clear, either explicitly or implicitly. When you walk in for a job interview, even if you are not told to do so, you are to attempt "professional behavior."
By the way if one is doing a an "ethnographic autobiography, " does one need to be sure to have an interview ready to keep oneself on task or appropriately un-subjective for the task at hand? Does one "question oneself" in this instance? That was just one question I didn't see addressed.

The Pause that Refreshes

This is a bit of a time to reflect on where I am with my thinking. planning, reading and writing on the thesis paper. I need to complete the proposals for Woosong and the KOTESOL funding ASAP. I have an adequate enough plan of where I am heading, have- at least- a basic bibliography and framework.
I got my feet wet this week by doing 4 semi-structured interviews....They went fairly well....I was amazed at the fact that there were issues and explanation the interviewees brought up which opened new possibilities. I also continued to discuss the particulars of grounded research with Eric. I need to look into periodicals and articles by other topic subject headings: Avoidance, reluctance, etc, in the literature.
Beyond the field notes (this week's homework) and the readings, I feel like I got a bunch done. The research process is certainly proceeding forward....if not in a particularly linear traditional path.
I look forward to writing the proposals, interviewing more subjects (mostly waygookin next week) and digging into more literature.

Week 6 Field Notes.....

(Goldarnit.....I wish this site had Comic Sans font)
I took field notes Tuesday April 6, 2010 from 9:15-10:30 pm at Pan Dorothy Coffee Shop
From past experience (daily observation), I had noticed that this venue reaches its business peak between 7-11 pm. I wanted to observe the demographic make-up of a typical in-semester, middle-of-the-week evening "peak" crowd. There were three observations I was intentionally making: Korean University students vs. non-Koreans/other-aged Koreans, those working at their tables vs. those socializing, the number of computers in use. I was able to observe the number of Koreans by listening to conversations or asking, those who were working by open schoolbooks or computers in use. And computers just by counting. I took a count of all three items every 15 minutes from 9:15-10:30.
9:15-53 people total

Korean U Students 49
Other people 4
Working 50
Socializing 3
Computers 8


9:30-47 people total

KUS- 45
OP-2
W-45
S-2
C-8

9:45-46 people total
KUS- 44
OP- 2
W-41
S-5
C-7

10:00-42 people
KUS-40
OP-2
W-24
S-8
C-7

10:15-44 people total
KUS-44
OP-0
W-39
S-5
C-7

10:30-42 people total
KUS-42
OP-0
W-34
S-8
C-7

Other noted factors: The number of notebook computers remained relatively unchanged, as did the cluster groups of students who were around them working together. There were very few students who, during this time changed from working to socializing modality. During this time I saw no "older than 30" Koreans. There were only 2 native English teachers from 9:3o onward, and 4 total at 9:15.

It may a result of the student-centered dominance of this shop during these hours that discourages older Koreans, older teachers, or parents with kids from coming at this time.

Chapter 5 Week 5

To see or not to see...That is the question. For the purposes of my present Thesis, seeing examples of all five papers didn't add a tremedous amount to the current direction or format in writing my paper, because, in my vision, I am a bit far afield from the Grounded Theory example paper, especially in the methodology. However, I learned a bit in the self-description and the reasoning behind classifications. That was helpful not so much for my current project, but for thinking about future writing and presentation projects and what is involved in each approach. Probably the most mystifying to me at this point in time is the case study, so my tendency would be to look at more examples of the Case Study Approach....and think of how I would use that particular qualitative approach.

Week4 Chapter 3 Random Thoughts

The design of my paper is something I've been wrestling with, contemplating, and just playing around withn for the last couple of weeks now. Although the major components of my paper ("Defining 'Relevant' Shame," "Examining Student Silence," "Personal Observations and Native Teachers'Observations") have already been established, and are in place sequentially, other components aren't aren't as yet. Literature "review," for instance in my study is a questionable label, since a great majority of the research comes from investigating literature; it also forms the dual bases for my "connective theory/phenomenon." So looking at the models and examples in this chapter gave me some ideas for the layout of the paper.
The results of the interviews which I intend to give will hopefully serve corroborate or validate my initial theory rather than exist for the basis of field data collection. The questions must not only have the rigor of of adhering to the topic and their role in the paper, but also need to be unbiased as possible and avoidant of leading the interview subjects.
Beyond that, this chapter reminded me of the ethical components not only of the interviews-creating a waiver-form with assurance of anonymity and fair compensation for the interviewees' time, but also the ethical implications of the entire thesis. Such questions as.....How does this paper serve the Korean students and the foreign teachers teaching them? And does it contribute to the literature of the education researchers who are attempting to understand the educational process better?

Research Roulette

And the...chosen.....approach ...........is..................

Grounded Research

For my research paper "The Phenomenon of Shame and Korean EFL Student Classroom Silence" (Formerly " The Phenomenon of Shame and its Impact on ESL Learning in Korea"), the Grounded Research approach seems to fit best. The ultimate goal of the research is develop a theory. That is to explore- mostly through literature and observation, but also with a few interviews of qualified subjects-the link of an ESL teaching challenge (classroom silence) to ingrained indigenous cultural phenomenon (Losing Face). While there is a great deal of research literature on both subjects.....there has been no explicit attempt to look at the connection. It is my intent to explore the role and/or validity of the connection.
From the explanation given of the Grounded Research approach by Cresswell, my research methods will differ in that they won't primarily rely on collecting research data from the field, but will instead come from research literature studies of the two phenomena (Losing Face, Student Science) and will use observations/ interviews with specialized "experts" who are familiar with both phenomena on experiential and professional levels, as an attempt to corroborate only.
In this regard the research methods seem to be more closely aligned with those of the Phenomenological approach. Because both these phenomena need to to be understood thoroughly to support the alleged theoretical connection. But the goal is not to explore and examine. It is to "triangulate" these two presently unconnected phenomenological lines.
It must be stated also that both Losing Face and Korean EFL Students' silence are phenomena endemic to South Korea and are therefore must be understood from an inherently Ethnographic point of view as well. But ultimately there is an " intervener"....the Foreign ESL Teacher or the demand for mandatory for English language teaching from abroad. So this again has a phenomenological flavor, both in terms of the connection between the two cultures and the "times" in which this phenomenon occurs.
Yet, again, Grounded Theory approach will win out for categorization.....because of the intended goal, even if the methods are Phenomenological and the phenomena Ethnographically
significant.

Chapter 4

Although we have already touched on the Five types of qualitative research, it is worth revisiting these dimensions again. Even in minor discussion of these in class last week, many questions came to me regarding these types; not only regarding my current-upcoming research paper, but also for future papers, investigations, and queries. At the most general, these classifications made me think...."What constitutes a qualitative research study?" More specifically, "Can a Narrative approach be autobiographical?" "If so, is that really research?"
"Or egotism?" Would it be "realer" research if someone had another research write your story?
Or does that get closer to case study? And in those cases, the interviewee's must reveal a particular bent. Does that make it a more "ethnographic" study? And is it possible to do a qualitative research study without have an ethnographic implication-either implicit or explicit?
Much of the determination of what type/types of study one is doing is determined by the degree to which emphasizes an aspect, the conclusions one draws, the focus of implication, or the design of the research project.

Chapter 2 Lenses

This chapter looks at the Philosophical, Paradigmatic, and Interpretive Frameworks being used in one's studies. In other words, really what lenses are we using previous to the study, during the study, and in evaluating the study. It is also valuable to do this in terms of recognizing what one's "default" lenses are; and looking at whether we are using are default lenses are, or whether we are attempting to expand beyond our normal framework(s).
Looking at the "framework" perspective is valuable in that it helps us sort out to "some" degree the subjectivity/objectivity of our framework approaches. In other words, the more we use our "default" framework, the more subjectivity will likely be involved.
In looking at my own proposed thesis resarch study, I find default lens in myself, in that the study is philosophical in nature. But doing external investigation also supports this philosophy is an attempt to "subjectify" the philosphy. and ultimately stating practical uses of this philosophy creates a "pragmatic lens."

Week 1 Pgs.1-14
The introduction to this book actually provided more food for thought than I had imagined. This is particular in the case of my thesis advisor asking me if I intended to write a "Grounded Theory" type of qualitative research thesis paper. Deductively, and also as advice, I thought that choice would be most judicious at the time.
But as I begin to research, envision, and format my vision, the type of research has actually become blurrier. This has become a question again more deeply as I evaluated the criteria from this week's reading. As I begin to explore the psychological dimension we call "shame," it is becoming evident that there is a deep need for a phenomenological investigation and assessment. As I explore the "Korean psyche" or East Asian cognitive worldview, it is also apparent that there is also a great need for ethnographic research. Employing interviews from native Korean teachers with psychological education also involves narrative elements. But in final format, these interviews will be used only in an incidental or supporting/contrasting role.
Ultimately, I will need to incorporate these many elements and, by deciding the purpose or intent of the research, determine which class/type of research my paper will fall into most comfortably. This will also determine the form of the paper, and questions of enquiry to be utilized.But,as the author himself notes, very rarely does a paper "purely" fall into one category . There are almost always elements borrowed from other types of research integrated.
Another question I had is if there needs to be a discussion of the type of qualitative reasearch is intended within the text of the paper itself. If so, does it generally ocur within the introduction or literature review? If this a "Grounded Research" Paper, is it worth mentioning what "Methodological" implications are opened?
Finally, there is the question of the reflexive component within the paper. I will need to evaluate when I where I should place this in order for it to be most effective and appropriate.