This Powerpoint offers a broad overview of qualitative research for readers that is intended to provide a succinct and yet, informative introduction.

1. Introduction to Qualitative
Research
Dr. Sherick Hughes, Associate Professor
Founder and Director
Interpretive Research Suite & Carter Qualitative Thought Lab
Founder & Co-Director
Graduate Certificate in Qualitative Studies
School of Education
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
http://quallab.web.unc.edu

2. Agenda
(See McCaslin & Scott, 2003, p. 449

3. Brainstorming Your
Phenomenon of Interest

4. 5 Questions Method, McCaslin & Scott (2003, p. 450)
Five-Questions for brainstorming qualitative designs Associated Tradition
 1. If I could discover the meaning of one Narrative Inquiry
person’s lived experience, I would ask Biography
______________ (individual) about __________. Life History
 2. If I could discover the shared lived experiences of Phenomenology
one quality or phenomenon in others, I would want
to know about______________________.
 3. If I could experience a different culture by Ethnography
living/ observing it, I would choose to experience
____________.
 4. If I could discover what actually occurred and Case Study
was experienced in a single lived event, that event
would be _______________________________.
 5. If I could discover a theory for a single phenomenon Grounded Theory
of living as shared by others, I would choose to discover
the theory of________.

5. People
-Lost People
-Lost Organizations
Passion
-Communication
-Writing
-Training
-Strategic Planning
Pain
-Lost feeling from parents divorce
-Lost feeling from unemployment
-Lost feeling from failed
relationships
= PURPOSE
[OF YOUR QUALITATIVE STUDY]
Finding the Purpose of YOUR Qualitative Study
(See Drakeford, 2010, p. 28)
PEOPLE + PASSION = PURPOSE *The line represents the
PAIN continual Peace Process

6. Locating Your “Grand Tour” Questions More
Commonly Known as 1-to-3
Central Research Questions
Linking
Phenomenon of Interest Qualitative Approach
Education-Related
Theory/Practice/Policy
Specific Population(s) of Interest
Native American Indian (People of
the First Nations)
African Americans/Black Americans
K-12/Undergraduates/
International Students
Males/Females/LGBTQQI
Latinos/Chicanos/”Undocumented”
Immigrants
Purpose
People
Passion
Peace Process
Pain

7. Qualitative Ph.D. Design Issues: Triangulation vs.
Assemblage
Triangulation
*Note: Ultimate Goal is for More than 3 Data
Points and Linking Data Collection to the
Central Research Question(s)
Document
Analysis
Interviews:
Individual
and Focus
Groups
Observations

8. Design Issues: The Challenge of Qualitative
Sampling and the Notion of Saturation
 (See Mason, 2010, paragraphs 9-13)
 Ethnography and ethnoscience: MORSE (1994, p.225) 30-50 interviews
for both; BERNARD (2000, p.178) states that most studies are based on
samples between 30-60 interviews for ethnoscience;
 grounded theory methodology: CRESWELL (1998, p.64) 20-30; MORSE
(1994, p.225) 30-50 interviews.
 phenomenology: CRESWELL (1998, p.64) five to 25; MORSE (1994,
p.225) at least six;
 all qualitative research: BERTAUX (1981, p.35) fifteen is the smallest
acceptable sample (adapted from GUEST et al., 2006). [10]

9. Mason (2010) Study of Qualitative Ph.D. Studies
troubles sample size and the issue of saturation
 The most popular approaches used in PhD studies for this analysis were: case study, grounded
theory methodology, content analysis, discourse analysis, action research, life history,
phenomenology, symbolic interactionism, and hermeneutics (paragraph 37)
 Sixty per cent of the ethnographic studies found fell within the range of 30-50 suggested by
MORSE (1994) and BERNARD (2000). No ethnoscience studies were found that fitted the
inclusion criteria.
 Just under half (49%) of the studies in this analysis fell within CRESWELL's (1998) suggested
range of 20-30 for grounded theory studies: while just over a third (37%) fell within the range of
30-50 suggested by MORSE.
 All of the phenomenological studies identified had at least six participants, as suggested by
MORSE: while just over two thirds identified (68%) fell within CRESWELL's suggested range of
five to 25.
 Eighty per cent of the total proportion of qualitative studies met BERTAUX's (1981)
guidelineof 15 being the smallest number of participants for a qualitative study irrespective of
the methodology: while just under half (45%) met CHARMAZ's (2006) guidelines for qualitative
samples, with up to 25 participants being "adequate" (p.114). A third of the studies (33% or 186)
used sample sizes of 20 or under (GREEN & THOROGOOD, 2009 [2004]). Finally, 85% met
RITCHIE et al.'s (2003) assertion that qualitative samples "often lie under 50" (p.84). [41]

10.  Can we be unobtrusive observers?
 OBSERVE WITH 5 AND 6TH SENSES
 Challenge of Writing descriptive and not evaluative
statements
 Avoid “yes” or “no” answer questions
 YOU PRACTICE OBSERVING FOR 5 MINUTES
Issues with Planning Ahead FOR OBSERVATIONS

11.  Approximately 3 hours of transcription for every 1
hour of raw interview data (audio)
 Avoid “yes” or “no” answer questions
 YOU PRACTICE WRITING 5 QUESTIONS IN GROUPS
Issues with Planning Ahead and Writing the Interview
Protocol Questions

12.  Plan for no more than 5 questions per contact MOMENT (or visit
or sitting)
 2 to 2.5 hours of interviewing considered “in-depth” SO YOU
MAY NEED LIKELY MORE THAN ONE CONTACT MOMENT
 AVOID LOOKING AT YOUR PAPER (PRACTICE IN MOVIE
THEATER)
 AVOID LOOKING TOWARD TAPE RECORDER
 PRE-PARING TO MAKE ACCOMODATIONS FOR CULTURAL,
LINGUISTIC, SOCIAL CLASS, AGE, RACIAL, POLITICAL
AFFILIATION, RE-SCHEDULING, SOCIAL SPACE, GEOGRAPHIC
SPACE, TECHNOLOGY, FOLLOW-UP, LINKS TO OTHERS
 YOU PRACTICE INTERVIEWING EACH OTHER IN GROUPS
Issues with Planning Ahead FOR INTERVIEWING

13.  UNIVERSITY IRB (MAY BE EXEMPT FROM FULL
REVIEW) AND STUDY SITE IRB (MAY NOT EXEMPT
FROM FULL REVIEW)
ADDITIONAL MAJOR DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR
IRB:
 ENTRY
 ROLE(S)
 Member-Checking (IRB EVEN looks for it now)
 RECIPROCITY
IRB APPROVAL AND ADDITIONAL
CONSIDERATIONS

14. Qualitative Data Coding and
Analysis Plans
Sociological and Axial Coding
Etic Analysis
Coding In Vivo; [by Hand (See Coffey & Atkinson)
vs. NVivo, Atlas.ti, DeDoose] Constant Comparison
Raw Data Transcription (e.g., Transana,
Dragon Dictate)

15.  Narrative
 Critical, Self Reflexive
 Naming Relevant Issues, beyond typical “Limitations”
 Crises of Representation and Crises of Praxis
Writing for Qualitative Research:
Interpretation

16.  Marilyn Lichtman
 Qualitative Research in Education: A User’s Guide
 Third Edition (2013)
 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
Ten Critical Elements of Qualitative
Research

17.  Purpose of Qualitative Research: To Explore,
Describe, Understand, and Interpret human
phenomena, human interaction, or human discourse
 Qualitative Researchers tend to ask “Why” and
“How” Questions
1. Description, Understanding and
Interpretation of Human Behavior

18.  Qualitative Research is thought to be fluid and ever
changing
 Sociologists at The Chicago School in the early 20th century
tended to go on “field trips” to study the culture of
“others” to today’s study of internet cultures
 Interviews can be unstructured
 Do not always begin with a detailed and “concrete” plan
(ex. May rely upon “key informant” participants to identify
others who might be studied)
 Questions and procedural protocol may evolve (note IRB)
2. Dynamic

19.  6 Most applied approaches to Qualitative Research
 Grounded theory
 Ethnography (Including autoethnography)
 Case Study
 Narrative Inquiry
 Phenomenology
 Symbolic Interactionism
 Involves organizing thick, rich, descriptive data and
evidence-based interpretations that can be considered
credible and legitimate
3. No Single Way of Doing Something

20.  Scaffolding (one thing leads to another)
 (Caveat) “in deductive approaches you would do a
considerable amount of planning and write a proposal
for research rather than conduct research” (p. 19)
 (Caveat) Alludes to the importance of pilot study data
in qualitative research
 Begin by gathering considerable amount of data
 Analyze data: find many examples of a particular
thing to identify a central issue (concept or theme)
 Find some data that is disconfirming (“outliers”)
 Collect and simultaneously look at data to move to
more data-driven, general statements or ideas
4. Inductive Thinking

21.  Studying situation in its entirety rather than
identifying specific variables
 Want to study how something is and understand it no
breaking down components into separate variables
5. Holistic

22.  Interviews can be conducted at home, office or worship
and leisure spaces of participants
 Observations can occur in classrooms, homes school-yards
or parent-teacher meetings, school board meetings, etc.
 Natural settings also desirable when collecting data like
photos, videos or pictures created by the participants (ex.
Family portraits, drawings by children; research notes
during and/or soon after the observation are important
natural setting data)
 (Caveat) Back to point on Assemblage
6. Variety of Data in Natural Settings

23.  Researcher constructs reality
 Researcher moves back and forth between data collected
and data analyzed (constant comparison method drawn
from grounded theory)
 Research interprets and makes sense of the data
 (Caveat) Bias of researcher is present always and should be
named
 Bracketing, Member-checks, triangulation are traditional
attempts to reduce bias Perhaps, most useful to see them
as additional data to check how you name your biases
7. Role of the researcher

24.  In-depth interview at least 2.5 hours per participant
 Can study individual(s) in-depth
 Can study small groups, classrooms, cultural groups,
etc. (goal is long-term and multiple visits, if not
moving to the setting as with the “field trips”
8. In-Depth Study

25.  Thick description (Geertz, 1973)
 Interviews, observations, document analysis, archival data,
video footage, photos, etc. however, Interviews and
Observations tend to be the major source of data
 Themes are developed from the data generated from them
 Qualitative Research is characterized by a writing style that
is less technical (and formal?) than is used in more
traditional research—Written in 1st person or “active
voice”
9. Words, Themes and Writing

26.  Order of research and procedures are not fixed
 Multiple beginning points
10. Nonlinear