1. Qualitative Data Analysis: An introduction Carol Grbich Chapter 25: Evaluating Qualitative Research Evaluating Qualitative Research

2. Evaluation of qualitative studies Clarification What is the research question/s? What is the research question/s? What are the aims of the research? What are the aims of the research? What did the researcher seek to investigate? What did the researcher seek to investigate?Justification Why is a qualitative approach the best option to answer this question? Why is a qualitative approach the best option to answer this question? Why was the particular qualitative research design chosen? Why was the particular qualitative research design chosen?

3. Evaluation of qualitative studies (2) Process Has ethics approval been obtained? Has ethics approval been obtained? Have the techniques of data collection been clearly documented? Have the techniques of data collection been clearly documented? How were participants/settings accessed? How were participants/settings accessed? What sampling techniques have been used to answer the research question? What sampling techniques have been used to answer the research question? Who was interviewed/observed? how often? and for how long? Who was interviewed/observed? how often? and for how long? What interview questions were asked? What interview questions were asked? What was the purpose of any observation/s? What was the purpose of any observation/s? Which existing documents were accessed? And how were they assessed? Which existing documents were accessed? And how were they assessed? How was collected data managed? How was collected data managed? Are the forms of data analysis completely transparent? Are the forms of data analysis completely transparent? What were the major outcomes of the analytical process in terms of findings? What were the major outcomes of the analytical process in terms of findings?

4. Evaluation of qualitative studies (3) Representativeness Have all the results been reported? Have all the results been reported? Has an holistic answer to the research question been achieved? Has an holistic answer to the research question been achieved?Interpretation Has a more conceptual discussion of the results and linkage to existing theory/ new theory/models of practice been developed to explain the relevance of findings to a targeted audience or discipline? Has a more conceptual discussion of the results and linkage to existing theory/ new theory/models of practice been developed to explain the relevance of findings to a targeted audience or discipline?

5. Evaluation of qualitative studies (4) Reflexivity Has a clear statement of the impact of the researcher’s views upon the data and the methods chosen been included? Has a clear statement of the impact of the researcher’s views upon the data and the methods chosen been included?Transferability Has a critical evaluation of the application of findings to other similar contexts been made? Has a critical evaluation of the application of findings to other similar contexts been made? How do results match/contradict others on this topic? How do results match/contradict others on this topic? Has the relevance of these findings to current knowledge, policy, and practice or to current research been discussed? Has the relevance of these findings to current knowledge, policy, and practice or to current research been discussed?

6. Extra evaluative criteria for newer ethnographic approaches Researcher position subjectivity subjectivity experiences of the researcher? experiences of the researcher? researcher exposure (past influences, beliefs, values and experiences as well as their responses in all situations) researcher exposure (past influences, beliefs, values and experiences as well as their responses in all situations) centred or decentred focus? centred or decentred focus? participants’ views, voices, emotions and feelings – are these adequately displayed? participants’ views, voices, emotions and feelings – are these adequately displayed? how much ;shaping’ has the researcher been involved in ? how much ;shaping’ has the researcher been involved in ?

7. Extra evaluative criteria for newer ethnographic approaches (2) Process : Design mini narratives mini narratives multiple methods multiple methods juxtaposition juxtaposition Seeking previously marginalized voices. Seeking previously marginalized voices. Process : Data display Complexity, double coding, irony, paradox, discourses, discursive practices and deconstruction. Complexity, double coding, irony, paradox, discourses, discursive practices and deconstruction. multifaceted realities multifaceted realities complex individuals. complex individuals. transitory entities. transitory entities.

8. Extra evaluative criteria for newer ethnographic approaches (3 ) Truth many voices and multifaceted individuals many voices and multifaceted individuals many approaches many approaches Language, discourse and discursive practices obscure truth and require analysis and deconstruction Language, discourse and discursive practices obscure truth and require analysis and deconstruction The Reader The role of the researcher is to take the reader as close to the experiences under study as possible with minimal or no researcher interpretation so the reader can share these experiences. The role of the researcher is to take the reader as close to the experiences under study as possible with minimal or no researcher interpretation so the reader can share these experiences.