Qualitative methods - Essay Example

Qualitative Methods al Affiliation Qualitative Methods METHODS ASSIGNMENT PLANNER A. Methodology The most preferred methodology forthis research study was hermeneutic phenomenology (Henriksson, 2012, p. 125). The decision to use hermeneutic phenomenology was informed by the works of Max van Manen (1997) (De Gagne & Walters, 2010, p. 360). It can be defined as a “research methodology aimed at producing rich textual descriptions of the experiencing of selected phenomena in the lifeworld of individuals that are able to connect with the experience of all of us collectively” (Kafle, 2013, p. 190). I explored the life, classroom and work experiences of students pursuing medical and recorded them. B. Data collection Individual interviews were conducted with the respondents and lasted for a time range of between thirty minutes and one hour.

In depth interviews were used because they provided the opportunity for the researchers to understand the experiences of participants and dig deeper in discussing these experiences (De Gagne & Walters, 2010, p. 360). Four interviews were tape recorded and tape recorded to facilitate transcription. The research used a semi-structured interview format to gather information from participants. The rationale for choosing the structure was to ensure that respondents narrated their experiences without being confined to specific answers.

Participants in the interview were strictly be students pursuing health-related programs in the university. There were four participants of which two were male and the remaining two were female. C. Recruitment The researcher accessed the participants by visiting Central Queensland University and presenting invitations (Sadler, Lee, Lim & Fullerton, 2010, p. 370). This convenience sampling, A purposeful selection method was used with the aim of identifying participants that could illuminate the experiences of students pursuing health-related programs in the university (Dineen & Soltis, 2011, p. 10) while pursuing part- or full-time work.

The rationale for choosing a purposeful selection method was because the research was dealing with a small population. Students pursuing health-related programs were chosen as participants because research studies reveal they pursue the most challenging courses in university (Dineen & Soltis, 2011, p. 10). D. Ethics To ensure informed consent, the researcher provided potential participants with information sheets. The information sheets outlined the aims of the research and the entire research process (Singh, 2012, p. 411). Participants were provided with the sheets and were allowed to raise questions about the research (Olson, 2010, p. 109). They were also given autonomy (Lev, Miller & Emanuel, 2010, p. 109). Prior to data collection, every participant provided a written consent.

There was also confidentiality through the use of pseudonyms (Pittaway, Bartolomei & Hugman, 2010, p. 240). The current research study acknowledged the personal biases of the researcher dealt with them as follows:a. Having a complete understanding of all the data analysis techniques used in the research b. Ensuring that every participant has an equal chance of being selected for the study Generalisability It would be difficult to generalize the findings of the current research study because it included a small sample population.

However, such a situation should not discredit this research because the use of in-depth interviews acts as a pilot study that promotes future research studies with larger cohorts. The population consisted of four participants because it was a convenient option for the researcher. It is less expensive to use a small sample population than using a large sample population (Delmar, 2010, p. 120). E. Reliability and validity To ensure validity, the research study used field-tested instruments, such as College Student Survey (CSS), that have demonstrated high scores of validity as well as reliability (Long & Johnson, 2000, p. 35). The research established reliability by borrowing from existing instruments such as College Student Survey and reacting to new instruments of measurement such as the College Student Experiences Questionnaire (Golafshani, 2003, p. 600). F.

Reflexivity The researcher maintained a journal for all the processes and procedures used during the initial stages of research planning (Hibbert, Coupland & MacIntosh, 2010, p. 50). Fortunately, the researchers only made changes in the initial stages of the research thus minor changes were made. However, these changes did not change data (Bott, 2010, p. 164). References Bott, E. (2010). Favourites and others: reflexivity and the shaping of subjectivities and data in qualitative research.

 Qualitative research, 10(2), 159-173.De Gagne, J. C., & Walters, K. J. (2010). The lived experience of online educators: Hermeneutic phenomenology. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 6(2), 357-366.Delmar, C. (2010). ” Generalisability” as Recognition: Reflections on a Foundational Problem in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Studies, 1(2), 115-128.Dineen, B. R., & Soltis, S. M. (2011). Recruitment: A review of research and emerging directions.Finfgeld‐Connett, D. (2010). Generalisability and transferability of meta‐synthesis research findings.

 Journal of advanced nursing, 66(2), 246-254.Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The qualitative report, 8(4), 597-607.Henriksson, C. (2012). Hermeneutic phenomenology and pedagogical practice. In Hermeneutic Phenomenology in Education (pp. 119-137). SensePublishers.Hibbert, P., Coupland, C., & MacIntosh, R. (2010). Reflexivity: Recursion and relationality in organizational research processes. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 5(1), 47-62.Kafle, N. P. (2013). Hermeneutic phenomenological research method simplified.

Bodhi: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 5(1), 181-200.Lev, O., Miller, F. G., & Emanuel, E. J. (2010). The ethics of research on enhancement interventions. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 20(2), 101-113.Long, T., & Johnson, M. (2000). Rigour, reliability and validity in qualitative research. Clinical effectiveness in nursing, 4(1), 30-37.Olson, E. (2010). “What Kind of Catholic Are You?” Reflexivity, Religion and Activism in the Peruvian Andes. Fieldwork in Religion, 3(2), 103-121.

Pittaway, E., Bartolomei, L., & Hugman, R. (2010). ‘Stop stealing our stories’: The ethics of research with vulnerable groups. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 2(2), 229-251.Sadler, G. R., Lee, H. C., Lim, R. S. H., & Fullerton, J. (2010). Recruitment of hard‐to‐reach population subgroups via adaptations of the snowball sampling strategy. Nursing & health sciences, 12(3), 369-374.Singh, S. (2012). Ethics in research. Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, and Leprology, 78(4), 411.