EDRE 6524: QUAL 2
E. G. Creamer, VA Tech
Spring 2016
COURSE SYLLABUS
EDRE 6524: Qualitative Research Methods II – Spring 2016
Instructor
Dr. Elizabeth G. Creamer
Professor
Educational Research & Evaluation
Department of Educational
Leadership and Policy Studies
Virginia Tech
[email protected]
Office Hours: By appointment (in phone
or person) OR
TUESDAY, 1:00-3:00
Office Location:
1750 Kraft Drive
Corporate Research Center
Room 2103
Office Phone: 540-231-8441
Cell: 540-449-9256
Course Pre-requisites
Do not enroll for this course unless you have taken QUAL 1 or the equivalent.
Seriously, you will struggle without it!
Course Description
This course pursues issues raised in the first semester course, EDRE 6614:
Introduction to Qualitative Research. Like the first semester course, this course
has a large “how to” or hands-on component. The first qualitative course focused
on interviewing as a strategy for data collection and basic, descriptive coding.
This class focuses on observation as a data collection strategy and theoretical or
conceptual coding. The activities in the course will help you to have a much
clearer sense about the steps to developing a conceptual framework from
qualitative data. This is critical to being prepared to do a dissertation using
qualitative analytical strategies.
My teaching philosophy is that learning is best achieved through doing and
collaboration. Each class session generally follows a similar format with the first
half devoted to reviewing and discussing the readings. The second portion of the
class involves the “hands on” portion where we will practice/experience the
different steps in analyzing qualitative data and producing a grounded theory.
1
EDRE 6524: QUAL 2
E. G. Creamer, VA Tech
Spring 2016
Course Objectives
The main objectives of this class are for students to learn to
(1) distinguish low- from high-quality articles claiming to utilize a
grounded theory methodology and
(2) follow a systematic set of strategies to develop a context-based
grounded theory.
Upon completion of the course, students will be able to:
1. Understand the assumptions and steps associated with
developing a grounded theory and its application to a realworld problem.
2. Define key terms associated with the GT method.
3. Write conceptually rich field notes and memos.
4. Systematically apply a set of criteria to evaluate the quality of
the methods used in grounded theory publications.
5. Distinguish appropriate and inappropriate applications of the
GT label.
6. Use features of the qualitative software, NVIVO, to advance a
conceptual framework.
7. Develop and systematically apply open, focused, and
theoretical coding to qualitative data.
9. Draw a figure to depict steps in the process of developing a
grounding theory.
Course Requirements (see detailed information below and calendar for due
dates)
GRADE DISTRIBUTION
10%
100
Attendance & Participation.
15%
30%
150
300
Reading discussion questions
GT Research Article Critiques (2). See Grading Rubric at
the end of the syllabus and section of the syllabus about
them. A revision to one review may be submitted (see
separate due date in the calendar)
35%
350
Group Project – Constructing a Grounded Theory
Part 1: One fieldnote from GWH with open coding (50
2
EDRE 6524: QUAL 2
E. G. Creamer, VA Tech
Spring 2016
10%
100
pts)
Part 2: One fieldnote from GWH with category coding
(50 pts)
Part 3: One fieldnote from AF with categorical coding
(50 pts)
Part 4: Category Memo (100 pts)
Part 5: Special Assignment (100 points)
Final Vocabulary quiz
ATTENDANCE AND PARTICIPATION GRADE
Although I fully appreciate the life is full of unanticipated complications, I am
not particularly tolerant about absences. I expect you to notify me prior to class if
you are missing class, for whatever reason.
I do not distinguish between excused and unexcused absences. Multiple tardies
(or early departures) will reduce your participation grade.
Except in very unusual circumstances, more than 2 absences will
result in the lowering of the final grade.
Participation grade. I value active involvement. Two issues weigh in this
grade. First is the issue of coming to class on-time and prepared with
assignments. The second is the quality of your participation in terms of the
knowledge you show of the reading in your questions and comments.
LATE ASSIGNMENTS
All assignments are due at the start of class on the day assigned with hard copy
to class and electronic copy to the appropriate folder in CANVAS.
GT CRITIQUES (on average 4-5 pages, double spaced with reference list. 5
pages maximum). See grading rubric in CANVAS
The two principal goals of this class is, one, for you to learn HOW to generate a
conceptual or theoretical framework and, secondly, for you to have a strategy to
systematically assess the quality of an article purporting to use grounded theory
as a method.
I have a very well defined template for these papers. Each critiques requires that
you identify three evaluation criteria that apply specifically to distinguish a
grounded theory study. One of the criterion is about the theory produced and if
3
EDRE 6524: QUAL 2
E. G. Creamer, VA Tech
Spring 2016
it is about a process; the second is about use of key steps in the GT process
including memoing and theoretical sampling; and the third is about the
model/figure produced.
Exemplars about how to format the reviews are provided in a folder in Files
folder in CANVAS.
There is a folder in FILES in CANVAS with some GT articles. Your selection of
articles is up to you, but be sure that you pick articles that say it's a grounded
theory study in either the title or abstract.
In addition to Charmaz, be sure to reference articles assigned as class reading.
Read the grading rubric carefully before you begin writing the paper.
GROUP PROJECT TO DEVELOP A GROUNDED THEORY
For the first time, at the suggestion of students in my class last spring, we will be
completing the main project for the class in a group. The project is to develop a
grounded theory about how a counselor promotes the well-being of his/her
client. We will be accomplishing this by using writing fieldnotes from observing
two videos that deal with client-patient interactions (Good Will Hunting, Antoine
Fischer)
To complete the project, there are some assignments that every member of the
group will complete. Every member of the group will play an additional, distinct
role and produce a memo that will be shared and revised by the rest of the
group.
Assignments completed by everyone (final submitted to your DROPBOX folder)
1. One fieldnote from GWH with open and categorical coding (excludes silence
scene).
2. One fieldnote from AF with categorical coding
2. One memo about the properties of a category that is either a strategy or
outcome and that ends with propositions/hypothesis (needs to be dived up so
that all categories and outcomes are covered)
The special roles and assignments are as follows:
1. DOUBTER. Negative Case Memo that describes how the strategies, outcomes,
conditions, and context are different from and similar to GWH.
2. TABULATOR. Draft 1 and Draft 2 of the intensity matrix. Draft 1 is for GWH.
Draft 2 is up-dated to add the same type of information for AF.
4
EDRE 6524: QUAL 2
E. G. Creamer, VA Tech
Spring 2016
3. THEORETICIAN. Detailed analytical memo that answers the research
questions in the syllabus by providing a Hachtmann style summary of the GT
produced from the analysis of the first video and a preliminary figure depicting
the GT. The closer will up-date this following the analysis of data from the second
video.
4. CLOSER. The closer serves as a spokesperson for the group. He/she up-dates
the work of the theoretician with the second video and presents the final model
and supporting information to the class.
POLICY ABOUT INCOMPLETES OR NO-GRADES (NG)
Twice in my entire graduate teaching career, I have had a student who has
stopped attending class or missed a large number of classes. If no graded work
has been returned, a NG is possible in this circumstance.
An incomplete grade is sometimes appropriate in the case of a student who has
completed all but the final assignment(s) and encounters personal or family
circumstance that makes it extremely difficult to complete the remaining work in
a conscientious manner. In this case, it is important to meet with me to work out
the details of an agreement. In most circumstances, I expect the work to be
completed within one semester. Otherwise, the incomplete grade stands as is.
Honor Code/Avoiding Plagiarism
As is stated in the APA manual, it is a professional and ethical violation to use
the words or ideas of others, including when paraphrased, without proper
attribution.
It is rare in a graduate level course, but any cases of plagiarism will be referred to
the Honor Court.
Students are obligated to report any suspected case of plagiarism, particularly if
it involves his/her own work.
5
EDRE 6524: QUAL 2
E. G. Creamer, VA Tech
Spring 2016
CLASS PROJECT
GROUNDED THEORY PURPOSE STATEMENT AND RESEARCH
QUESTIONS
The purpose of this qualitative grounded theory observational research was to
develop a theoretical model to explain what strategies used during the
therapeutic process promoted an improvement in the well-being of the client and
why theses strategies were effective in the context depicted in two fictional
media depictions, Good Will Hunting and Antoine Fisher.
Well-being is defined as a state of being that is characterized by being happy or
contented, emotionally and physically healthy, and economically sufficient.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1. (strategies) What strategies are used by the
therapist during the therapeutic session?
2. (causal mechanism). Why did the therapeutic
process prove effective in the specific context in
improving client well being?
3. (client outcomes) How does the client's behavior
during interactions with the counselor change
over the course of the one-on-one therapeutic
sessions depicted in the videos?
4. (conditions) What intervening conditions
impacted the causal mechanism and the
outcomes of the therapeutic sessions?
6
EDRE 6524: QUAL 2
E. G. Creamer, VA Tech
Spring 2016
Required Reading
Books
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (second edition). Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research (4th edition). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE
Movies (purchase for multiple viewings)
Good Will Hunting
Antoine Fisher
Articles & Chapters (all available in Files in CANVAS)
Barber, J. (2012). Integration of learning: A grounded theory analysis of college
students' learning. American Educational Research Journal, 49 (3), 590-617.
DOI:103102/0002831212437854
Bowen, G. A. (2006). Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. International
Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5 (3), 12-23.
Buckely, C. A., & Waring, M. J. (2013). Using diagrams to support the research
process: Examples from grounded theory. Qualitative Research, 13(2), 148172.
Charmaz, K. (2003). Chapter 8: Grounded Theory – Objectivist and constructivist
methods. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Qualitative Inquiry (pp.
249-291. SAGE. Thousand Oaks: CA: SAGE Publications.
Constas, M. A. (1992). Qualitative analysis as a public event: The documentation
of category development procedures. American Educational Research
Journal, 29 (2), 253-266.
Hachtmann, F. (2012). The process of general education reform from a faculty
perspectives: A grounded theory approach. The Journal of General
Education, 64 (1), 16-38. (contains a very nice example of a summary
statement of a GT)
Higginbottom, G. (2014). The roots and development of constructivist grounded
theory. Nurse Researcher, 21, 5, 8-13.
7
EDRE 6524: QUAL 2
E. G. Creamer, VA Tech
Spring 2016
Kelle, U. (2007). Chapter 9: The development of categories: Different approaches
in grounded theory. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE
Handbook of Grounded Theory (pp. 191-228). SAGE. Thousand Oaks, CA.
Lempert, L. B. (2007). Chapter 12: Asking questions of the data: Memo writing in
the grounded theory tradition. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The
SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory (pp. 245-264). SAGE. Thousand Oaks,
CA.
Maxwell, J. A. (2004). Causal explanation, qualitative research, and scientific
inquiry in education. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 3-11.
Morrow, S. L., & Smith, M. L. (1995). Constructions of survival and coping of
women who have survived childhood sexual abuse. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 42 (1), 24-233. (Great model for GT figure).
Tufford, L., & Newman, P. (2010). Bracketing in qualitative research. Qualitative
Social Work, 11(1), 80-96.
8