Qualitative Research Practice in Health PG (9583.4)
|Available teaching periods||Delivery mode||Location|
|View teaching periods|| On-Campus
| UC - Canberra, Bruce
|0.125||3||Faculty Of Health|
|Discipline||Study level||HECS Bands|
|Faculty Of Health||Post Graduate Level|| Band 2 2013-2020 (Expires 31 Dec 2020)
Band 2 2021 (Commenced After 1 Jan 2021)
Band 3 2021 (Commenced Before 1 Jan 2021)
Learning outcomesOn successful completion of this unit, students will be able to:
1. Critically analyse the ontological and epistemological theories underpinning qualitative research;
2. Critically evaluate relevant common qualitative methodologies and their application;
3. Reflect on ways to evaluate and assure validity and trustworthiness of qualitative research;
4. Engage in critical reflection and evaluation of ethical issues in qualitative research; and
5. Apply specific theories in practical application of qualitative data analysis, using a range of tools or software and reflect on strengths and weaknesses of those tools.
Graduate attributes1. UC graduates are professional - communicate effectively
1. UC graduates are professional - display initiative and drive, and use their organisation skills to plan and manage their workload
1. UC graduates are professional - use creativity, critical thinking, analysis and research skills to solve theoretical and real-world problems
1. UC graduates are professional - employ up-to-date and relevant knowledge and skills
1. UC graduates are professional - take pride in their professional and personal integrity
2. UC graduates are global citizens - behave ethically and sustainably in their professional and personal lives
2. UC graduates are global citizens - understand issues in their profession from the perspective of other cultures
3. UC graduates are lifelong learners - adapt to complexity, ambiguity and change by being flexible and keen to engage with new ideas
3. UC graduates are lifelong learners - be self-aware
Assumed knowledgeBeing a postgraduate level course, it is expected that students who enrol for this course would have critical reasoning and writing abilities expected at this level. No other prior knowledge is expected of a student enrolling for this course.
|Year||Location||Teaching period||Teaching start date||Delivery mode||Unit convener|
|2021||UC - Canberra, Bruce||Semester 1||08 February 2021||On-Campus||Mr Sunil George|
|2021||UC - Canberra, Bruce||Semester 2||02 August 2021||Online||Dr Petra Buergelt|
|2022||UC - Canberra, Bruce||Semester 1||07 February 2022||On-Campus||Mr Sunil George|
|2022||UC - Canberra, Bruce||Semester 2||01 August 2022||Online||Mr Sunil George|
For Unit readings and resources in the University of Canberra Library
Link to search page for Unit Readings (print materials)
Link to search page for eReserve (electronic materials)
Holloway, I. and Wheeler, S. (2013) Qualitative research in nursing and healthcare. (3rd ed). Retrieved from http://www.eblib.com.
Minichiello, V., Sullivan, G., Greenwood, K. and Axford, R. (2004) (eds) Research Methods for Nursing and Health Science (2nd Ed). Pearson Education Australia, Frenchs Forest.
Day 1: Session 1 Nature and scope of qualitative research in health
Holloway, I. (2013a). Qualitative Research in Nursing and Healthcare [electronic resource] / (S. Wheeler, Ed.; 3rd ed.). Wiley.
Tourigny, S. C. (1998). Some New Dying Trick: African American Youths "Choosing" HIV/AIDS. Qualitative Health Research, 8(2), 149–167. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973239800800202
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (M. Q. Patton, M. Q. Patton, & M. Q. Patton, Eds.; 3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Liamputtong, P. (2013). Qualitative research methods / (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Day 1: Practical
Inger Mewburn. (n.d.). Using a spider diagram to make research questions. https://sites.google.com/site/twblacklinemasters/using-a-spider-diagram-to-make-research-questions
Day 1: Session 2 Ontology, epistemology, methodology
Lincoln, Y. S. (Ed.). (2011). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. In S. A. L. and E. G. G. Yvonna S Lincoln, The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 97–128). Sage.
Fryer, T. (2020). A short guide to ontology and epistemology: why everyone should be a critical realist. Tom Fryer. https://tfryer.com/ontology-guide
Robert Mankoff. (1620, Spring). Epistemology, you crazy bastard. http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/cartoonists/2013/08/epistemology-you-crazy-bastard.html#slide_ss_0=1
Day 1: Session 3 Qualitative research paradigms
Grant, B. M., & Giddings, L. S. (2002). Making sense of methodologies: A paradigm framework for the novice researcher. Contemporary Nurse, 13(1), 10–28. https://doi.org/10.5172/conu.13.1.10
Day 1 Session 4 & 5 Qualitative research designs (methodologies)
Holloway, I. (2013b). Qualitative Research in Nursing and Healthcare [electronic resource] / (S. Wheeler, Ed.; 3rd ed.). Wiley.
Valerie Janesick. (1994). The dance of qualitative research design: metaphor, methodolatry and meaning. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research / (pp. 209–219). Sage Publications.
Day 2: Session 6 Sampling strategies
Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). Sample Size in Qualitative Interview Studies: Guided by Information Power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How Many Interviews Are Enough? An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Guest, G., Namey, E., & Mckenna, K. (2017). How Many Focus Groups Are Enough? Building an Evidence Base for Nonprobability Sample Sizes [Review of How Many Focus Groups Are Enough? Building an Evidence Base for Nonprobability Sample Sizes]. Field Methods, 29(1), 3–22. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X16639015
Llewellyn, G., & Minichiello, V. (2004). Sampling in qualitative research. In V. Minichiello (Ed.), Handbook of research methods for nursing and health science (2nd ed., pp. 210–241). Prentice Hall Health.
Day 2: Sessions 7,8 & 9 Data collection
O.Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J., & Mukherjee, N. (2018). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12860
McGrath, C., Palmgren, P. J., & Liljedahl, M. (2018). Twelve tips for conducting qualitative research interviews. Medical Teacher, 41(9), 1002–1006. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2018.1497149
Partington, G. (2001). Qualitative research interviews: Identifying problems in technique. Issues in Educational Research, 11(2), 32–44.
Wolfinger, N. H. (2016). On writing fieldnotes: collection strategies and background expectancies. Qualitative Research¿: QR, 2(1), 85–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794102002001640
Archibald, M. M., Ambagtsheer, R. C., Casey, M. G., & Lawless, M. (2019). Using Zoom Videoconferencing for Qualitative Data Collection: Perceptions and Experiences of Researchers and Participants. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 160940691987459–. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919874596
Day 2: Session 10- Transcription and data management
Davidson, C. (2009). Transcription: Imperatives for Qualitative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(2), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690900800206
¿Bailey, J. (2008). First steps in qualitative data analysis: transcribing. Family Practice, 25(2), 127–131. https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/cmn003
Day3: Session 11 Rigour in qualitative research
Noble, H., & Smith, J. (2015). Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. Evidence-Based Nursing, 18(2), 34–35. https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2015-102054
Mays, N. (2000a). Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.), 320(7226), 50–52. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50
Mays, N. (2000b). Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research. BMJ. British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.), 320(7226), 50–52. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.320.7226.50
Mays, Nicholas, & Pope, C. (1995). Qualitative Research: Rigour and qualitative research. BMJ, 311(6997), 109–112. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.311.6997.109
Kitto, S. C., Chesters, J., & Grbich, C. (2008). Quality in qualitative research. Medical Journal of Australia, 188(4), 243–246. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2008.tb01595.x
Day 3: Session 12 Data analysis
Holloway, I., & Wheeler, S. (2013). Qualitative research in nursing and healthcare. [Refer to relevant chapters discussing data analysis ]
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. [Refer to pages 262-266]
John, W. S., & Johnson, P. (2000). The Pros and Cons of Data Analysis Software for Qualitative Research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 32(4), 393–397. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2000.00393.x
MacMillan, K., & Koenig, T. (2004). The Wow Factor: Preconceptions and Expectations for Data Analysis Software in Qualitative Research. Social Science Computer Review, 22(2), 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439303262625
Day 3: Session13 Data analysis
Waite, D. (2011). A Simple Card Trick: Teaching Qualitative Data Analysis Using a Deck of Playing Cards. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(10), 982–985. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800411425154
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Attride-Stirling, J. (2016). Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qualitative Research¿: QR, 1(3), 385–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/146879410100100307
Birks, M., Chapman, Y., & Francis, K. (2008). Memoing in qualitative research: Probing data and processes. Journal of Research in Nursing, 13(1), 68–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987107081254
Wilkinson, S. (2011). Analysing focus group data. In D. Silverman, Qualitative research: issues of theory, method and practice (3rd ed., pp. 168–184). SAGE.
Rapley, T. (2011). Some pragmatics of data analysis. In D. Silverman, Qualitative research: issues of theory, method and practice (3rd ed., pp. 273–290). SAGE.
Day 3: Session 14 Writing up
Colyar, J. (2009). Becoming Writing, Becoming Writers. Qualitative Inquiry, 15(2), 421–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800408318280
Sandelowski, M. (1998). Writing a good read: Strategies for re¿presenting qualitative data. Research in Nursing & Health, 21(4), 375–382. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-240X(199808)21:4<375::AID-NUR9>3.0.CO;2-C
Assignment 1: Readings
Papadimitriou, C. (2008). Becoming en¿wheeled: the situated accomplishment of re¿embodiment as a wheelchair user after spinal cord injury. Disability & Society, 23(7), 691–704. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590802469420
Charmaz, K. (2006). Measuring pursuits, marking self: Meaning construction in chronic illness. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 1(1), 27–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482620500534488
Massey, P. D., Miller, A., Saggers, S., Durrheim, D. N., Speare, R., Taylor, K., Pearce, G., Odo, T., Broome, J., Judd, J., Kelly, J., Blackley, M., & Clough, A. (2011). Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and the development of pandemic influenza containment strategies: Community voices and community control. Health Policy, 103(2), 184–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.07.004
Humphrey, S. L., & Economou, D. (2015). Peeling the onion – A textual model of critical analysis. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 17, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.01.004
Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 19(6), 349–357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
Ethics in qualitative research
Dickson-Swift, V., James, E. L., Kippen, S., & Liamputtong, P. (2008). Risk to Researchers in Qualitative Research on Sensitive Topics: Issues and Strategies. Qualitative Health Research, 18(1), 133–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732307309007
Kaiser, K. (2009). Protecting Respondent Confidentiality in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Health Research, 19(11), 1632–1641. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732309350879
Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2016). Ethics, Reflexivity, and "Ethically Important Moments" in Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10(2), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800403262360
NHMRC. (n.d.). National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research. https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/national-statement-ethical-conduct-human-research-2007-updated-2018
Reeves, S., Albert, M., Kuper, A., Hodges, B. D., Scott Reeves, Mathieu Albert, Ayelet Kuper, & Brian David Hodges. (2008). Qualitative Research: Why Use Theories in Qualitative Research? BMJ: British Medical Journal, 337(7670), 631–634. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.a949
Rashid, M., Hodgson, C. S., & Luig, T. (2019). Ten tips for conducting focused ethnography in medical education research. Medical Education Online, 24(1), 1624133–1624133. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2019.1624133
Montgomery, P., & Bailey, P. H. (2007). Field Notes and Theoretical Memos in Grounded Theory. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 29(1), 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193945906292557
Sage Research Methods: http://srmo.sagepub.com/
Submission of assessment items
Use of text matching software
Moderation of assessment items:
All assessment items, including exams, are internally reviewed and moderated before they are published in unit outlines, listed on canvas, or printed out for the final exam period. This review of assessment items is performed by another academic within the same field who has a good understanding of the subject matter and is be done as part of the unit curriculum review.
Moderation of marking:
There is a random selection of assessment items that are moderated in a unit, including all failed assignments (excluding exams). The moderation of passing assessment items is based on a sample chosen randomly, on a percentage basis at different grade levels or the full range of submitted items to develop a common view about performance.
Being an online unit, it is important that you recognise the indendence of your learning, and the focus and commitment to stay up with the learning steps. If this is becoming difficult for any reason, please do get in touch with your unit convenor as soon as possible.
Tips to succesfully complete the unit:
- plan specific time to study
- manage your time wisely
- get in touch when you are having difficulties, first the discussion page on canvas, and then your unit convenor.
There is a discussion page on the canvas site where you can post questions and queries and read the discussions with other students. You are strongly encouraged to make use of it.
Do not leave it till the last moment before an assignment is due to contact your unit convenor if you are in difficulty. Be aware of census dates and the last date for withdrawal from units without failing, in case you need to bail out. Please see 6d for further information.
You are expected to actively contribute to the online forum discussions on Canvas, contributing you own opinions, responding to and/or asking questions of others, and being up-to-date on readings (see assessment information).
Required IT skills
This unit involves using Canvas as an online learning platform.
Work placement, internships or practicums