International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship 2014; 11(1): 129–136
Research Article Lee SmithBattle*
Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles in an Introductory Methods Course Abstract: The exponential growth of qualitative research (QR) has coincided with methodological innovations, the proliferation of qualitative textbooks and journals, and the greater availability of qualitative methods courses. In spite of these advances, the pedagogy for teaching qualitative methods has received little attention. This paper provides a philosophical foundation for teaching QR with active learning strategies and shows how active learning is fully integrated into a one-semester course. The course initiates students into qualitative dispositions and skills as students develop study aims and procedures; enter the field to gather data; analyze the full set of student-generated data; and write results in a final report. Conducting a study in one semester is challenging but has proven feasible and disabuses students of the view that QR is simple, unscientific, or non-rigorous. Student reflections on course assignments are integrated into the paper. The strengths and limitations of this pedagogical approach are also described. Keywords: qualitative research, teaching/learning strategies, doctoral education, active learning DOI 10.1515/ijnes-2014-0025
Almost a decade ago, Jan Morse (2005), a nurse and editor of Qualitative Health Research, suggested that students learn qualitative research (QR) by reading textbooks, attending a peer support group, participating in a supervised project; through formal instruction; or from a mentor. The teaching-learning landscape has certainly expanded over the last decade with the rise in published qualitative studies and the proliferation of qualitative methods courses and textbooks, many written by nurse scholars. In spite of these advances, relatively little attention has been given to the teaching practices that cultivate students’ habits of thinking and the practical and *Corresponding author: Lee SmithBattle, School of Nursing, Saint Louis University, 3525 Caroline Ave., St. Louis, MI 63104, USA, E-mail: [email protected]
ethical skills associated with QR. Noteworthy exceptions exist outside of nursing. For example, Eisenhart and Jurow (2011) described a two-semester course in Education, and Hurworth (2008) described QR courses offered across disciplines in England and Australia. While instructors interviewed by Hurworth endorsed student participation in bona fide studies, large class sizes and university schedules often precluded students’ full participation. These and other instructors have filled the breach with innovative class exercises, including field trips, and use of poetry, popular film, or a deck of cards to teach qualitative skills (Raingruber, 2009; Saldana, 2009; Waite, 2011, 2014). These developments are a welcome sign of the growing interest among faculty and journal editors in disseminating articles on teaching and learning QR. This paper contributes to this trend by providing a philosophical foundation for active learning strategies, followed by a case study of an introductory methods course in which students conduct a small-scale study on family meals. After providing some background on the course, I detail how the study unfolds over the semester to create a platform for learning many research skills, such as defining a sample and developing interview guides, to collecting and analyzing data, and writing a research report. The course assignments are described, and students’ comments from their written assignments and course evaluations are included with all identifying information removed.
Making a case for active learning Ryle’s (1949) distinction between knowing-that and knowing-how is a fruitful one for considering experiential or active learning strategies, especially when learning a practice is involved. Learning to become a nurse and how to conduct human research are such practices. Using examples from nursing practice, knowing-that refers to theoretical or scientific knowledge of the following sort: I know that hypertension is a condition marked by increased pressure in the arteries. Practical know-how
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
130
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
refers to the kind of knowing that reflects skill: I know how to take a blood pressure and interpret findings. Knowing the science of hypertension, while essential for clinical practice, is not sufficient for skillfully taking a blood pressure and interpreting results. Skillful practice (know-how) requires taking many blood pressures with many patients with various conditions and interpreting the science of hypertension for a patient’s specific condition and situation. Because skillful practice is sensitive to timing and oriented to the particulars of a case in a given context, nursing skills cannot be formalized in abstract terms. In similar ways, abstract theories on qualitative interviewing cannot substitute for, or capture, the craftsmanship that characterizes a good qualitative interview. In a culture that idolizes science, educators may privilege knowing-that at the expense of the practical know-how that is relevant to a discipline (Schön, 1983). Classroom teaching devoted exclusively to the transmission of theoretical knowledge from teacher to student assumes that students apply scientific evidence in a straightforward manner to complex, ambiguous clinical situations. The strict application of this kind of knowledge overlooks the complexity of clinical situations, the nature of professional judgment, and the judicious use of scientific knowledge in a given field (Benner, Tanner, & Chesla, 1996; Schön, 1983). Doctoral students often begin their programs steeped in epistemological assumptions about knowledge that are at odds with qualitative dispositions and sensibilities (Dunne, 1993).They may be unfamiliar with the “logic” of QR and may underappreciate how practices (such as nursing, teaching, or mothering) are distorted when objectified and reduced to decontextualized variables. The version of science that separates the subjective from the objective, the body from the mind, and the person from the world followed Descartes’ (1960) quest to secure foundations for truth and certainty. He eliminated all doubt by separating knowledge from action, elevating rational and representational knowledge as “true” knowledge with his famous phrase, “I think, therefore I am.” Heidegger (1962) challenged the Cartesian bias that the world is independent of our experience, language, relationships, and actions. In Being and Time (1962), he turned to questions of being (ontology) versus thinking (epistemology) to retrieve the practical knowhow that is implicit in everyday activities. According to Heidegger, most of our activity is not guided by conscious thought or reason but by meanings that are embodied and sedimented in our everyday skills and practices. Before we are Cartesian subjects relating to the world as rational agents, we are absorbed in action, coping
skillfully with what needs to be done. Our actions are attuned to an already intelligible and meaningful world which preexists any separations between subject–object, body–mind, and person–world. Merleau-Ponty (1962) extended Heidegger’s thought by articulating how perception is inherently embodied and intertwined with the world: our primary way of relating to and knowing the world is more a matter of “I do” or “I can” than “I think” (Leder, 1990). We learn the dispositions, habits, and practical know-how of a practice by participating in its defining activities (Benner, Sutphen, Leonard, & Day, 2010; Dreyfus, 2004). Skills that are initially awkward and require great effort and conscious thought eventually yield to smooth and refined action, the “I can” that is sedimented in the skillful body. Therefore, the QR course is organized so that students are guided to act in a researcher-like way by doing what qualitative researchers do, i.e. develop study aims, an interview guide, and sampling criteria; collect and analyze qualitative data; reflect on own biases; and write up study results. In the process of doing, students begin to absorb the ways of seeing, thinking, and acting that belong to the QR tradition.
Studying family meals I have taught this course in a PhD nursing program in a Midwestern university in the United States since 2005. Consistent with course objectives, students are introduced to the intersubjective views of reality that underpin QR, and the practical and ethical issues in conducting qualitative studies. The course is required of nursing doctoral students; students from other disciplines also enroll in the course. Students rarely have prior research experience or much exposure to QR. Because a 14-week semester provides a short time frame to plan and conduct a full study, I select family meals as the topic for investigation without student input for the following reasons: gathering data on family meals poses minimal risk to participants (and novice researchers); recruiting families does not present major challenges; and family meals lend themselves to qualitative interviews and participant observation with adults and children. Because of the ubiquity of family meals, students find the topic to be meaningful and intriguing. Their personal experience with meals in their families of origin or with their own children provides numerous opportunities for reflecting on the personal, cultural,
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
and disciplinary assumptions they bring to the study and how their assumptions shape data collection and analysis. Because of growing interest in family meals, excellent articles are available to provide students with sufficient background on the topic. Although Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval is not required for studies that are conducted strictly for educational purposes, I obtained IRB approval before offering the course in spring 2013 so that I could report the teaching-learning process and students could consider publishing their findings. Students were not involved in developing the IRB protocol since approval was required before the course began. They were required to pass a certification exam that reviewed the ethics and practices for protecting human research subjects before they could participate in the study. Once completed, they were added to the IRB protocol as team members. In spring 2013, nine doctoral students enrolled in the course: four from Nursing, four from Counseling and Family Therapy, and one from Health Ethics. One student participated in class remotely via web-based videoconferencing. Five were international students. I refer to this semester’s course to show how active learning is thoroughly integrated via class discussions, course assignments, and study procedures.
Preparing students to enter the field To prepare students for the course and the study, I send an email a month before the semester begins with instructions to review the syllabus on the course webpage. The syllabus details the course, the study, and the
Table 1
131
expectations that students will recruit a family, conduct an interview on family meals with an adult family member, and observe a family meal with all available family members. Written assignments are also described. The class meets weekly in three-hour sessions to discuss readings and student assignments. Practice simulations, mini-lectures, and student presentations are also included over the semester. Required readings are supplemented with video presentations by nationally recognized researchers presenting on areas of their expertise. I present mini-lectures on topics not addressed in video presentations (e.g. sampling, ethics) while student presentations are designed to reinforce learning. Because the course is structured by assignments linked to study procedures, some content is frontloaded in the class schedule so that students are ready to begin data collection after week 3 (see Table 1). In the first class period, I present a mini-lecture on the philosophical assumptions of QR and how the intersubjective notions of truth and knowledge that ground QR are implicated in flexible research designs and an open and reflexive orientation to data collection and analysis. I then facilitate a discussion on family meals based on required readings so that students can formulate study aims. Students also refine the sampling plan that I submitted earlier as part of the IRB protocol. The initial parameters included families with at least one child; families could be acquaintances of the student-researchers but not friends or family members. Families known to have extensive problems (e.g. violence, alcohol, or substance abuse) were excluded. These criteria limit the potential risks to confidentiality (e.g. reporting abuse) while giving students opportunities to develop skills in obtaining
Class sessions
Class session
Topic
Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class
Introduction to Qualitative Research We will develop aims, sampling criteria, and an interview guide for the study. Interviewing and Transcribing Students will discuss their pilot interview and revise the interview guide in class. The Ethnographic Tradition We will practice writing field notes and revise the interview guide, based on pilot data. Generating Qualitative Data II The Tradition of Grounded Theory; Determining Sample Size The Phenomenological Tradition First reflection paper due Historical Research and Longitudinal Research Ethics in Qualitative Research Developing a Qualitative Study, and Metasynthesis Second reflection paper due Analysis of Qualitative Data; Writing and Presentation Strategies Mixed Methods Quality and Rigor in Qualitative Research We will discuss preliminary analysis of data The Utility of Qualitative Research for Practice and Policy Wrap Up We will discuss student progress on writing study results. We will watch Kitchen Stories if time permits
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
132
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
participants’ assent and consent and collecting interview and observational data. After grappling with defining a family for the purpose of the study, students agreed upon the following additional inclusion criteria: participants self-define as a family; the family includes at least one co-residing adult and child between the age of 2 and 18; family members share at least two meals per week; and the family speaks English. With the study aims and sampling criteria established, students develop a demographic form for describing the sample and a semi-structured interview guide for interviewing an adult family member. Students generate an initial list of questions and then review the list for language and sequencing. I use the guide to conduct a mock interview with a student volunteer. Students leave the first class prepared to pilot the interview guide with a family member or friend before the next class. They are not required to transcribe this interview but are asked to take notes to strengthen the guide’s language, flow, completeness, and participants’ comprehension. The second class is devoted to interviewing and begins with viewing a video presentation and discussing assigned articles on interviewing and transcribing. We discuss key differences between conducting a qualitative interview and a clinical interview. This exercise helps students to consider the power to define what counts as legitimate questions and answers for clinical and research purposes, and the skills that are methodologically crucial for uncovering human experiences and practices. Following this background, we discuss students’ pilot interviews and refine the interview guide. Students typically modify the language and sequencing of questions and add useful probes, such as “How does the meal change when a family member can’t attend?” The next class on ethnography includes a video presentation by a nurse anthropologist who describes the history of ethnography and ethnographic practices with examples from her research. Assigned readings introduce students to salient issues and cue them to consider how they will situate themselves in the family meal: Should they actively participate in the meal, like an invited dinner guest, or should they observe the family as unobtrusive neutral observers? Should they bring a hostess gift or offer to bring food? As students raise these questions, I ask them to consider how decisions may shape family interactions and observations. I also ask them to consider the assumptions regarding the nature of reality, truth, and objectivity that often lurk behind their questions. Students are also concerned about how and when they will write field notes. Is it acceptable, they ask, to write field notes during the meal? How will they remember
important details if they record their observations after leaving the home? Knowing that students’ requests for clear and precise guidelines reflect their lack of research experience, I point to examples from the assigned readings or from my own experience to illuminate how researchers think and act in response to these issues. To simulate practice in writing field notes, we watch several video segments of family meals from different cultures and time periods. After each 3–5 min segment, students record their observations and then report items from their field notes in a round robin fashion until all comments have been shared. While this exercise cannot simulate a “live” participant observation, the discussion uncovers important lessons in our proclivity to overlook the obvious; to view situations from our personal, family, and disciplinary perspectives; and the impossibility of bracketing all our assumptions. Students often overlook, for example, the most basic features of the family or setting (e.g. race/ethnicity, historical period) and may interpret family interactions on the basis of their discipline’s ways of categorizing human behavior. Their field notes are typically written from an objective stance with their visceral reactions to the segments missing entirely. Sanitized field notes provide an opportunity to discuss the need to reflect on our assumptions and emotional responses to participants. For example, one dinner segment depicts a father of the 1950s glaring from behind a newspaper as his wife serves dinner and introduces a game to cajole their youngest son to eat. This brief vignette generates rich discussions on students’ emotional responses to the segment and their assumptions regarding gender roles and family interactions. Students thereby learn that including their reactions and impressions in field notes may help to uncover blind spots and assumptions upon further reflection and analysis. This dialogue also impresses upon students the QR imperative to remain open, curious, and reflective in the pursuit of “making the familiar more familiar…, making the familiar strange, and/or by revealing what is hidden” (Sandelowski, 1995, p. 372). At the end of the third class, armed with some knowledge of interviewing and participant observation, with the interview guide finalized, and families recruited and ready to participate, students enter the field to interview an adult and observe a meal after obtaining consent and assent from participants. As students collect data in the field, we turn to other topics in class. Because data collection for this study is limited to face-to-face interviews and observations, students are introduced in Class 4 to additional approaches for generating qualitative data. Assigned readings address the use of photos,
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
diaries, videos, puppets, and drawings for collecting qualitative data. The next several classes address grounded theory, phenomenology, historical research, and metasynthesis. Prior to each class, students view video presentations on each approach; class time is devoted to discussing exemplary studies to help students grasp the similarities and differences between approaches. Sampling and ethics in QR are also covered. As students collect data, the final classes address data analysis, mixed methods, quality and rigor in QR, and the utility of QR for health care practice and policy. The latter two classes reinforce earlier discussions regarding the intersubjective nature of truth and reality and the researcher as instrument. Influential studies, such as Kayser-Jones’ (2002) research on malnutrition in nursing homes, impress students with the power of qualitative findings to open up new lines of inquiry and to shape policy and practice.
Gaining skills and practical know-how Although most students have extensive experience in interviewing and observing patients and families, they are typically humbled by course assignments, self-conscious about their lack of skills, and concerned about how they handled situations. Students address these and related issues in class and in two reflection papers designed to help them synthesize the philosophical assumptions of QR with the practical and ethical aspects of doing QR. In the first paper on interviewing, students describe the processes of developing study aims and the interview guide, and recruiting, obtaining consent, and interviewing an adult. Students also identify their assumptions about family meals and reflect on their strengths and weaknesses in conducting the interview; they provide evidence for their self-evaluations in the interview transcript and field note, with both attached to their paper. Their reflections highlight the many challenges experienced by novice researchers (Roulston, deMarrais, & Lewis, 2003). As one student wrote: recruiting, scheduling, and conducting a research interview is much more complicated than it first seems. I too experienced: unexpected participant behaviors, the consequences of my own actions and subjectivities, difficulty phrasing and negotiating questions, and dealing with sensitive issues in a meaningful way.
The nurses and therapists in the class expect that their clinical interviewing skills will translate directly into qualitative interviewing. They are surprised to find how
133
clumsy, uncertain, and anxious they typically feel, as highlighted by one student: During the interview I found it difficult to manage all the things I was thinking in my head. How did I sound asking the questions? Listening to her answers? Thinking about how to respond in a researcher-like way. What is the next question? Am I too choppy? Am I too conversational? Then I would remember that I was to be listening to what she was saying, but then I would think about how was I going to transcribe this. It took several questions into the interview before I felt more at ease managing all those extra thoughts. It became conversational. Almost too conversational. I felt like I wanted to answer the questions rather than listen to someone else answer them. This is something I need to work on.
Although the interview guide helps students avoid slipping into familiar therapeutic roles, they notice that strict adherence to the guide limits the necessary dialogue and openness to the participant’s experience. One student admitted with some embarrassment that she acted like a “census worker” who dutifully completes all fields on the form. Students also learn how their ability to listen attentively is compromised when their childhood memories of mealtimes surface in response to participants’ comments. One student acknowledged that her relationship to food required that she “guard” herself against having her “food obsession” interfere with her capacity to listen. All these concerns encouraged reflection: This is much harder than I expected. I had flashbacks to the editorial by Sandelowski (2005) describing the doctoral student thinking interviewing was a basic skill and anyone could do it. As an [experienced] nurse I have developed strong communication skills. Therefore, I expected an easy transition to interviewing. Was I wrong!
Students are required to read several articles on transcription before transcribing their interviews. While transcribing is onerous and time consuming, students comment in their papers on the value of “seeing things I had failed to notice during the interview.” They notice their tendency to interject their personal beliefs or to probe areas that are irrelevant to study aims. The second reflection paper focuses on students’ participant observation of a family meal. Students are required to describe the process of situating themselves in the meal; they also identify their strengths and weaknesses in observing the meal and recording field notes, which they attach to the paper. Students readily acknowledge their awkwardness about how to act during the meal, a concern that is heightened for international students with little experience of American family life. One international student dealt with her awkwardness this
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
134
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
way, “I worried about what I should do and how I should situate myself in the meal. Finally I decided to follow the family in terms of how to act and participate.” An American student noted that she began the observation of the meal as a neutral observer but changed course to engage with the family. As she wrote in her field note: “Forget about observation and just be yourself.” To her surprise, she learned much more by actively participating in the family meal, a lesson that is beautifully reinforced by the Norwegian film Kitchen Stories (Hamer, 2003) which we watch in the last class when time permits. Both reflection papers encourage students to acknowledge that each researcher brings his or her prior understandings and prejudices to the study. For students whose prior academic experience demanded writing conventions that are consistent with objectivity, adopting a more reflective and evocative writing style is challenging, and for the following student, refreshing: I never considered reflection papers academic or scholarly. Ironically, the reason I wanted to learn qualitative research was because it seems to allow for more introspection on the part of the researcher. Moreover, when I read qualitative research it speaks to the audience … first through the heart and then into the brain….For years I have been led (or led myself) to believe that my own writing from the heart is just rhetoric and not good analysis. Bringing my entire self into the qualitative project has been a real struggle, especially in writing…. I now realize that the process of learning to engage my own self in writing and allowing myself to embody the experience is not as quick as cutting loose the rusty iron shackles. Perhaps that is because the muscles required to describe the world around me as I subjectively encounter it have atrophied over the years and now need a good workout routine.
Making sense of data As students complete data collection, they upload their transcripts, field notes, and demographic data to the course page on a password-protected website with all identifying information of participants removed. With data now available, students confront the messiness of analysis, and the various approaches for tagging, naming, and coding textual data. To prepare for this phase, students read several articles and participate in a coding exercise using data from one of my studies. Students come to the next class ready to discuss their preliminary coding of two sets of interviews and field notes from the study. Students describe how they highlighted and coded segments of text and created tables or text files to track and document their preliminary analysis. Because coding at this point is based on limited data, they return to the
full data set to refine and expand upon their initial analysis, to be reported in the final paper. This final assignment requires that students select a qualitative tradition and write a research report, following the conventions of a publishable paper. Because the final research report is submitted after the last class session, students emailed questions as they analyzed the complete data set. Questions included: “How do I know if my analysis is correct?” And “How will I know when my analysis is complete?” One student echoed these concerns in an email to classmates: I have been working [on my final paper] for a week and I have [wondered], am I doing this right? It is a new way of approaching thinking and writing and to be honest, it is really uncomfortable. I feel at times like I am “reading into the data,” but then thought to myself, “it is supposed to be inductive.” When I stepped back, I realize we do this sort of churning naturally, but we have not often been given the format to learn to do it as scholarship. I don’t know about others, but at times the word “scholarly” writing can throw a monkey wrench in how I am thinking about producing a paper.
Discussion Although qualitative methods courses are available in many doctoral programs across disciplines (Eisenhart & Jurow, 2011; Hurworth, 2008), little attention has been given to how educators teach and students learn QR. Hurworth’s (2008) case studies of qualitative methods courses in the UK and Australia document faculty interest in using active learning strategies and the many challenges in having students complete a full study in a one-semester course. The course described here provides a complete experiential package for learning qualitative skills. Involving students in a qualitative study has proven feasible and effective in developing skills and sensibilities that cannot be formed by lectures and class exercises alone. Participating in the study also disabuses students of the naïve position that QR is simple, unsystematic, and unscientific (Sandelowski, 2005). In the process of collecting and making sense of qualitative data, students integrate the “logic” of QR learned in classroom discussions with practical and ethical experiences from the field. Students also experience the value of a team of researchers to strengthen the quality of a study. They become increasingly aware through discussions and assignments of the epistemological privilege that invalidates intersubjective truths. One student likened the process of learning QR to “learning to swim through jello” in an email to the class:
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
[The instructor] is giving us the experience so we can truly learn to do it. She is saying “learn by doing, not by thinking.” In essence, we are becoming what we are learning and trying to achieve. Whether we do it “right” or “well” this time is not as important as just swimming through the ocean of jello. When we come out, we will be more adjusted to the process for our future research. Right now I am trying to trust the process even though it is new and uncomfortable….Brilliant pedagogy, but painful process on the nerves! ! !
Developing students’ qualitative muscles requires a carefully planned research project so that class discussions, assigned readings, study procedures, and written assignments foster a dialogue between the philosophical, practical, and ethical aspects of QR. I reassure students that learning to do QR is nerve-wracking partly because we swim in the epistemological biases built into the scientific method and partly because they are novice researchers. Linking the philosophical assumptions of QR to practical experiences in the field is designed to help them sediment a range of skills that seasoned researchers take for granted. While conducting a study in one semester is challenging, students consistently evaluate the organization of the course and the progression in educational goals as excellent. Students also value the emphasis on experiential learning. As one student wrote on her course evaluation: “We really had to get our hands and brains dirty, try it, mess up, and slog our way through. [It’s the] only way to learn.” Another added: “Assignments are structured so that even without a tandem practicum course, we engaged in real field work (scaled down of course) and were introduced to handson skills like coding. The instructor provided an ideal balance of traditions, and theory and practice in the design of this course.” Student evaluations further suggest that writing is difficult for most of them and that extensive feedback is greatly appreciated as they struggle with writing conventions that silence their own voice and the voices of patients and caregivers. While family meals has proven to be a feasible research topic of interest to student-researchers from different disciplines, students do not gain skills in defining a research topic or in developing a qualitative proposal. A one-semester course limits the number of qualitative approaches that can be covered and restricts data collection to one interview and participant observation. This limitation is somewhat tempered by encouraging students to compare and contrast their interviews and field notes with those of their classmates to reflect on what they did well and how they might improve these skills. Students watch a video presentation on qualitative software packages but they have no practice in their use. A
135
major conundrum stems from establishing study aims before students select the methodological approach for their final paper. I discuss this problem openly with students and use it as an opportunity to highlight how the researchers’ selection of a qualitative tradition should cohere with study aims, sampling decisions, and methods of data collection and analysis. I forewarn students that I expect them to address this issue in their final paper. Because the sample size for the study is determined by the number of students, student enrollment is an important consideration for class projects such as this. A class size of eight to ten students generates sufficient data for a small-scale project. When class size is less than eight students, I provide data from a bank of studentgenerated data from prior years so that students will have eight to ten sets of data to analyze. This option requires that study aims and interview guides remain fairly similar from year to year. For large classes, students could be formed into smaller groups to share data among the group.
Conclusions Doctoral students have many more opportunities to learn QR than students even a short decade ago. While active learning strategies and student involvement in studies are endorsed by qualitative instructors, these approaches are difficult, but not impossible, to fully integrate into a one-semester course. I’ve sequenced course activities and assignments so that students are carefully guided through a series of class discussions, exercises, and study procedures to develop the sensibilities and practical skills of listening, reflecting, and writing common to the QR tradition. I expect that the practical know-how that students gain from the course by flexing new “muscles” and “swimming through jello” will be refined and improved as they conduct future studies that advance the science and practice of nursing.
References Benner, P., Sutphen, M., Leonard, V. W., & Day, L. (2010). Educating nurses: A call for radical transformation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Benner, P., Tanner, C. A., & Chesla, C. A. (1996). Expertise in nursing practice: Caring, clinical judgment, and ethics. New York, NY: Springer.
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
136
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
Descartes, R. (1960). Meditation I, II, and III (J. Veitch, R. H. M. Elwes & G. Montgomery, Trans.). In R. Descartes, B. de Spinoza, & G. Wilhelm (Eds.), The rationalists: Descartes: Discourse on method and meditations; Spinoza: Ethics; Leibniz: Monadology and discourse on metaphysics. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company. Dreyfus, H. L. (2004). What could be more intelligible than everyday intelligibility? Reinterpreting division I of being and time in the light of division II. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 24 (3), 265–274. doi:10.1177/0270467604264993 Dunne, J. (1993). Back to the rough ground: Practical judgment and the lure of technique. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame. Eisenhart, M., & Jurow, A. S. (2011). Teaching qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 699–714). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hamer, B. (Writer). (2003). Kitchen stories (Norwegian: Salmer fra kjøkkenet). In J. Bergmark & B. Hamer (Producers).Norway, Sweden. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & R. E., Trans.). New York, NY: Harper & Row. (Original work published 1935). Hurworth, R. H. (2008). Teaching qualitative research: Cases and issues. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Kayser-Jones, J. (2002). Malnutrition, dehydration, and starvation in the midst of plenty: The political impact of qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 12, 1391–1405. doi:10.1177/ 1049732302238750 Leder, D. (1990). The absent body. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1945). Morse, J. M. (2005). Editorial: Fostering qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 287–288. doi:10.1177/ 1049732304273031 Raingruber, B. (2009). Assigning poetry reading as a way of introducing students to qualitative data analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65, 1753–1761. doi:10.1111/j.13652648.2009.05025.x Roulston, K., deMarrais, K., & Lewis, J. B. (2003). Learning to interview in the social sciences. Qualitative Inquiry, 9, 643–668. doi:10.1177/1077800403252736 Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. London: Hutchinson. Saldana, J. (2009). Popular film as an instructional strategy in qualitative research methods courses. Qualitative Inquiry, 15, 247–261. doi:10.1177/1077800408318323 Sandelowski, M. (1995). Qualitative analysis: What it is and how to begin. Research in Nursing and Health, 18, 371–375. doi:10.1002/nur.4770180411 Sandelowski, M. (2005). I speak English, don’t I? Research in Nursing and Health, 28, 185–186. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books. Waite, D. (2011). A simple card trick: Teaching qualitative data analysis using a deck of playing cards. Qualitative Inquiry, 17, 982–985. doi:10.1177/1077800411425154 Waite, D. (2014). Teaching the unteachable: Some issues of qualitative research pedagogy. Qualitative Inquiry, 20, 267–281. doi:10:1177/1077800413489526
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
Research Article Lee SmithBattle*
Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles in an Introductory Methods Course Abstract: The exponential growth of qualitative research (QR) has coincided with methodological innovations, the proliferation of qualitative textbooks and journals, and the greater availability of qualitative methods courses. In spite of these advances, the pedagogy for teaching qualitative methods has received little attention. This paper provides a philosophical foundation for teaching QR with active learning strategies and shows how active learning is fully integrated into a one-semester course. The course initiates students into qualitative dispositions and skills as students develop study aims and procedures; enter the field to gather data; analyze the full set of student-generated data; and write results in a final report. Conducting a study in one semester is challenging but has proven feasible and disabuses students of the view that QR is simple, unscientific, or non-rigorous. Student reflections on course assignments are integrated into the paper. The strengths and limitations of this pedagogical approach are also described. Keywords: qualitative research, teaching/learning strategies, doctoral education, active learning DOI 10.1515/ijnes-2014-0025
Almost a decade ago, Jan Morse (2005), a nurse and editor of Qualitative Health Research, suggested that students learn qualitative research (QR) by reading textbooks, attending a peer support group, participating in a supervised project; through formal instruction; or from a mentor. The teaching-learning landscape has certainly expanded over the last decade with the rise in published qualitative studies and the proliferation of qualitative methods courses and textbooks, many written by nurse scholars. In spite of these advances, relatively little attention has been given to the teaching practices that cultivate students’ habits of thinking and the practical and *Corresponding author: Lee SmithBattle, School of Nursing, Saint Louis University, 3525 Caroline Ave., St. Louis, MI 63104, USA, E-mail: [email protected]
ethical skills associated with QR. Noteworthy exceptions exist outside of nursing. For example, Eisenhart and Jurow (2011) described a two-semester course in Education, and Hurworth (2008) described QR courses offered across disciplines in England and Australia. While instructors interviewed by Hurworth endorsed student participation in bona fide studies, large class sizes and university schedules often precluded students’ full participation. These and other instructors have filled the breach with innovative class exercises, including field trips, and use of poetry, popular film, or a deck of cards to teach qualitative skills (Raingruber, 2009; Saldana, 2009; Waite, 2011, 2014). These developments are a welcome sign of the growing interest among faculty and journal editors in disseminating articles on teaching and learning QR. This paper contributes to this trend by providing a philosophical foundation for active learning strategies, followed by a case study of an introductory methods course in which students conduct a small-scale study on family meals. After providing some background on the course, I detail how the study unfolds over the semester to create a platform for learning many research skills, such as defining a sample and developing interview guides, to collecting and analyzing data, and writing a research report. The course assignments are described, and students’ comments from their written assignments and course evaluations are included with all identifying information removed.
Making a case for active learning Ryle’s (1949) distinction between knowing-that and knowing-how is a fruitful one for considering experiential or active learning strategies, especially when learning a practice is involved. Learning to become a nurse and how to conduct human research are such practices. Using examples from nursing practice, knowing-that refers to theoretical or scientific knowledge of the following sort: I know that hypertension is a condition marked by increased pressure in the arteries. Practical know-how
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
130
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
refers to the kind of knowing that reflects skill: I know how to take a blood pressure and interpret findings. Knowing the science of hypertension, while essential for clinical practice, is not sufficient for skillfully taking a blood pressure and interpreting results. Skillful practice (know-how) requires taking many blood pressures with many patients with various conditions and interpreting the science of hypertension for a patient’s specific condition and situation. Because skillful practice is sensitive to timing and oriented to the particulars of a case in a given context, nursing skills cannot be formalized in abstract terms. In similar ways, abstract theories on qualitative interviewing cannot substitute for, or capture, the craftsmanship that characterizes a good qualitative interview. In a culture that idolizes science, educators may privilege knowing-that at the expense of the practical know-how that is relevant to a discipline (Schön, 1983). Classroom teaching devoted exclusively to the transmission of theoretical knowledge from teacher to student assumes that students apply scientific evidence in a straightforward manner to complex, ambiguous clinical situations. The strict application of this kind of knowledge overlooks the complexity of clinical situations, the nature of professional judgment, and the judicious use of scientific knowledge in a given field (Benner, Tanner, & Chesla, 1996; Schön, 1983). Doctoral students often begin their programs steeped in epistemological assumptions about knowledge that are at odds with qualitative dispositions and sensibilities (Dunne, 1993).They may be unfamiliar with the “logic” of QR and may underappreciate how practices (such as nursing, teaching, or mothering) are distorted when objectified and reduced to decontextualized variables. The version of science that separates the subjective from the objective, the body from the mind, and the person from the world followed Descartes’ (1960) quest to secure foundations for truth and certainty. He eliminated all doubt by separating knowledge from action, elevating rational and representational knowledge as “true” knowledge with his famous phrase, “I think, therefore I am.” Heidegger (1962) challenged the Cartesian bias that the world is independent of our experience, language, relationships, and actions. In Being and Time (1962), he turned to questions of being (ontology) versus thinking (epistemology) to retrieve the practical knowhow that is implicit in everyday activities. According to Heidegger, most of our activity is not guided by conscious thought or reason but by meanings that are embodied and sedimented in our everyday skills and practices. Before we are Cartesian subjects relating to the world as rational agents, we are absorbed in action, coping
skillfully with what needs to be done. Our actions are attuned to an already intelligible and meaningful world which preexists any separations between subject–object, body–mind, and person–world. Merleau-Ponty (1962) extended Heidegger’s thought by articulating how perception is inherently embodied and intertwined with the world: our primary way of relating to and knowing the world is more a matter of “I do” or “I can” than “I think” (Leder, 1990). We learn the dispositions, habits, and practical know-how of a practice by participating in its defining activities (Benner, Sutphen, Leonard, & Day, 2010; Dreyfus, 2004). Skills that are initially awkward and require great effort and conscious thought eventually yield to smooth and refined action, the “I can” that is sedimented in the skillful body. Therefore, the QR course is organized so that students are guided to act in a researcher-like way by doing what qualitative researchers do, i.e. develop study aims, an interview guide, and sampling criteria; collect and analyze qualitative data; reflect on own biases; and write up study results. In the process of doing, students begin to absorb the ways of seeing, thinking, and acting that belong to the QR tradition.
Studying family meals I have taught this course in a PhD nursing program in a Midwestern university in the United States since 2005. Consistent with course objectives, students are introduced to the intersubjective views of reality that underpin QR, and the practical and ethical issues in conducting qualitative studies. The course is required of nursing doctoral students; students from other disciplines also enroll in the course. Students rarely have prior research experience or much exposure to QR. Because a 14-week semester provides a short time frame to plan and conduct a full study, I select family meals as the topic for investigation without student input for the following reasons: gathering data on family meals poses minimal risk to participants (and novice researchers); recruiting families does not present major challenges; and family meals lend themselves to qualitative interviews and participant observation with adults and children. Because of the ubiquity of family meals, students find the topic to be meaningful and intriguing. Their personal experience with meals in their families of origin or with their own children provides numerous opportunities for reflecting on the personal, cultural,
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
and disciplinary assumptions they bring to the study and how their assumptions shape data collection and analysis. Because of growing interest in family meals, excellent articles are available to provide students with sufficient background on the topic. Although Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval is not required for studies that are conducted strictly for educational purposes, I obtained IRB approval before offering the course in spring 2013 so that I could report the teaching-learning process and students could consider publishing their findings. Students were not involved in developing the IRB protocol since approval was required before the course began. They were required to pass a certification exam that reviewed the ethics and practices for protecting human research subjects before they could participate in the study. Once completed, they were added to the IRB protocol as team members. In spring 2013, nine doctoral students enrolled in the course: four from Nursing, four from Counseling and Family Therapy, and one from Health Ethics. One student participated in class remotely via web-based videoconferencing. Five were international students. I refer to this semester’s course to show how active learning is thoroughly integrated via class discussions, course assignments, and study procedures.
Preparing students to enter the field To prepare students for the course and the study, I send an email a month before the semester begins with instructions to review the syllabus on the course webpage. The syllabus details the course, the study, and the
Table 1
131
expectations that students will recruit a family, conduct an interview on family meals with an adult family member, and observe a family meal with all available family members. Written assignments are also described. The class meets weekly in three-hour sessions to discuss readings and student assignments. Practice simulations, mini-lectures, and student presentations are also included over the semester. Required readings are supplemented with video presentations by nationally recognized researchers presenting on areas of their expertise. I present mini-lectures on topics not addressed in video presentations (e.g. sampling, ethics) while student presentations are designed to reinforce learning. Because the course is structured by assignments linked to study procedures, some content is frontloaded in the class schedule so that students are ready to begin data collection after week 3 (see Table 1). In the first class period, I present a mini-lecture on the philosophical assumptions of QR and how the intersubjective notions of truth and knowledge that ground QR are implicated in flexible research designs and an open and reflexive orientation to data collection and analysis. I then facilitate a discussion on family meals based on required readings so that students can formulate study aims. Students also refine the sampling plan that I submitted earlier as part of the IRB protocol. The initial parameters included families with at least one child; families could be acquaintances of the student-researchers but not friends or family members. Families known to have extensive problems (e.g. violence, alcohol, or substance abuse) were excluded. These criteria limit the potential risks to confidentiality (e.g. reporting abuse) while giving students opportunities to develop skills in obtaining
Class sessions
Class session
Topic
Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class
Introduction to Qualitative Research We will develop aims, sampling criteria, and an interview guide for the study. Interviewing and Transcribing Students will discuss their pilot interview and revise the interview guide in class. The Ethnographic Tradition We will practice writing field notes and revise the interview guide, based on pilot data. Generating Qualitative Data II The Tradition of Grounded Theory; Determining Sample Size The Phenomenological Tradition First reflection paper due Historical Research and Longitudinal Research Ethics in Qualitative Research Developing a Qualitative Study, and Metasynthesis Second reflection paper due Analysis of Qualitative Data; Writing and Presentation Strategies Mixed Methods Quality and Rigor in Qualitative Research We will discuss preliminary analysis of data The Utility of Qualitative Research for Practice and Policy Wrap Up We will discuss student progress on writing study results. We will watch Kitchen Stories if time permits
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
132
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
participants’ assent and consent and collecting interview and observational data. After grappling with defining a family for the purpose of the study, students agreed upon the following additional inclusion criteria: participants self-define as a family; the family includes at least one co-residing adult and child between the age of 2 and 18; family members share at least two meals per week; and the family speaks English. With the study aims and sampling criteria established, students develop a demographic form for describing the sample and a semi-structured interview guide for interviewing an adult family member. Students generate an initial list of questions and then review the list for language and sequencing. I use the guide to conduct a mock interview with a student volunteer. Students leave the first class prepared to pilot the interview guide with a family member or friend before the next class. They are not required to transcribe this interview but are asked to take notes to strengthen the guide’s language, flow, completeness, and participants’ comprehension. The second class is devoted to interviewing and begins with viewing a video presentation and discussing assigned articles on interviewing and transcribing. We discuss key differences between conducting a qualitative interview and a clinical interview. This exercise helps students to consider the power to define what counts as legitimate questions and answers for clinical and research purposes, and the skills that are methodologically crucial for uncovering human experiences and practices. Following this background, we discuss students’ pilot interviews and refine the interview guide. Students typically modify the language and sequencing of questions and add useful probes, such as “How does the meal change when a family member can’t attend?” The next class on ethnography includes a video presentation by a nurse anthropologist who describes the history of ethnography and ethnographic practices with examples from her research. Assigned readings introduce students to salient issues and cue them to consider how they will situate themselves in the family meal: Should they actively participate in the meal, like an invited dinner guest, or should they observe the family as unobtrusive neutral observers? Should they bring a hostess gift or offer to bring food? As students raise these questions, I ask them to consider how decisions may shape family interactions and observations. I also ask them to consider the assumptions regarding the nature of reality, truth, and objectivity that often lurk behind their questions. Students are also concerned about how and when they will write field notes. Is it acceptable, they ask, to write field notes during the meal? How will they remember
important details if they record their observations after leaving the home? Knowing that students’ requests for clear and precise guidelines reflect their lack of research experience, I point to examples from the assigned readings or from my own experience to illuminate how researchers think and act in response to these issues. To simulate practice in writing field notes, we watch several video segments of family meals from different cultures and time periods. After each 3–5 min segment, students record their observations and then report items from their field notes in a round robin fashion until all comments have been shared. While this exercise cannot simulate a “live” participant observation, the discussion uncovers important lessons in our proclivity to overlook the obvious; to view situations from our personal, family, and disciplinary perspectives; and the impossibility of bracketing all our assumptions. Students often overlook, for example, the most basic features of the family or setting (e.g. race/ethnicity, historical period) and may interpret family interactions on the basis of their discipline’s ways of categorizing human behavior. Their field notes are typically written from an objective stance with their visceral reactions to the segments missing entirely. Sanitized field notes provide an opportunity to discuss the need to reflect on our assumptions and emotional responses to participants. For example, one dinner segment depicts a father of the 1950s glaring from behind a newspaper as his wife serves dinner and introduces a game to cajole their youngest son to eat. This brief vignette generates rich discussions on students’ emotional responses to the segment and their assumptions regarding gender roles and family interactions. Students thereby learn that including their reactions and impressions in field notes may help to uncover blind spots and assumptions upon further reflection and analysis. This dialogue also impresses upon students the QR imperative to remain open, curious, and reflective in the pursuit of “making the familiar more familiar…, making the familiar strange, and/or by revealing what is hidden” (Sandelowski, 1995, p. 372). At the end of the third class, armed with some knowledge of interviewing and participant observation, with the interview guide finalized, and families recruited and ready to participate, students enter the field to interview an adult and observe a meal after obtaining consent and assent from participants. As students collect data in the field, we turn to other topics in class. Because data collection for this study is limited to face-to-face interviews and observations, students are introduced in Class 4 to additional approaches for generating qualitative data. Assigned readings address the use of photos,
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
diaries, videos, puppets, and drawings for collecting qualitative data. The next several classes address grounded theory, phenomenology, historical research, and metasynthesis. Prior to each class, students view video presentations on each approach; class time is devoted to discussing exemplary studies to help students grasp the similarities and differences between approaches. Sampling and ethics in QR are also covered. As students collect data, the final classes address data analysis, mixed methods, quality and rigor in QR, and the utility of QR for health care practice and policy. The latter two classes reinforce earlier discussions regarding the intersubjective nature of truth and reality and the researcher as instrument. Influential studies, such as Kayser-Jones’ (2002) research on malnutrition in nursing homes, impress students with the power of qualitative findings to open up new lines of inquiry and to shape policy and practice.
Gaining skills and practical know-how Although most students have extensive experience in interviewing and observing patients and families, they are typically humbled by course assignments, self-conscious about their lack of skills, and concerned about how they handled situations. Students address these and related issues in class and in two reflection papers designed to help them synthesize the philosophical assumptions of QR with the practical and ethical aspects of doing QR. In the first paper on interviewing, students describe the processes of developing study aims and the interview guide, and recruiting, obtaining consent, and interviewing an adult. Students also identify their assumptions about family meals and reflect on their strengths and weaknesses in conducting the interview; they provide evidence for their self-evaluations in the interview transcript and field note, with both attached to their paper. Their reflections highlight the many challenges experienced by novice researchers (Roulston, deMarrais, & Lewis, 2003). As one student wrote: recruiting, scheduling, and conducting a research interview is much more complicated than it first seems. I too experienced: unexpected participant behaviors, the consequences of my own actions and subjectivities, difficulty phrasing and negotiating questions, and dealing with sensitive issues in a meaningful way.
The nurses and therapists in the class expect that their clinical interviewing skills will translate directly into qualitative interviewing. They are surprised to find how
133
clumsy, uncertain, and anxious they typically feel, as highlighted by one student: During the interview I found it difficult to manage all the things I was thinking in my head. How did I sound asking the questions? Listening to her answers? Thinking about how to respond in a researcher-like way. What is the next question? Am I too choppy? Am I too conversational? Then I would remember that I was to be listening to what she was saying, but then I would think about how was I going to transcribe this. It took several questions into the interview before I felt more at ease managing all those extra thoughts. It became conversational. Almost too conversational. I felt like I wanted to answer the questions rather than listen to someone else answer them. This is something I need to work on.
Although the interview guide helps students avoid slipping into familiar therapeutic roles, they notice that strict adherence to the guide limits the necessary dialogue and openness to the participant’s experience. One student admitted with some embarrassment that she acted like a “census worker” who dutifully completes all fields on the form. Students also learn how their ability to listen attentively is compromised when their childhood memories of mealtimes surface in response to participants’ comments. One student acknowledged that her relationship to food required that she “guard” herself against having her “food obsession” interfere with her capacity to listen. All these concerns encouraged reflection: This is much harder than I expected. I had flashbacks to the editorial by Sandelowski (2005) describing the doctoral student thinking interviewing was a basic skill and anyone could do it. As an [experienced] nurse I have developed strong communication skills. Therefore, I expected an easy transition to interviewing. Was I wrong!
Students are required to read several articles on transcription before transcribing their interviews. While transcribing is onerous and time consuming, students comment in their papers on the value of “seeing things I had failed to notice during the interview.” They notice their tendency to interject their personal beliefs or to probe areas that are irrelevant to study aims. The second reflection paper focuses on students’ participant observation of a family meal. Students are required to describe the process of situating themselves in the meal; they also identify their strengths and weaknesses in observing the meal and recording field notes, which they attach to the paper. Students readily acknowledge their awkwardness about how to act during the meal, a concern that is heightened for international students with little experience of American family life. One international student dealt with her awkwardness this
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
134
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
way, “I worried about what I should do and how I should situate myself in the meal. Finally I decided to follow the family in terms of how to act and participate.” An American student noted that she began the observation of the meal as a neutral observer but changed course to engage with the family. As she wrote in her field note: “Forget about observation and just be yourself.” To her surprise, she learned much more by actively participating in the family meal, a lesson that is beautifully reinforced by the Norwegian film Kitchen Stories (Hamer, 2003) which we watch in the last class when time permits. Both reflection papers encourage students to acknowledge that each researcher brings his or her prior understandings and prejudices to the study. For students whose prior academic experience demanded writing conventions that are consistent with objectivity, adopting a more reflective and evocative writing style is challenging, and for the following student, refreshing: I never considered reflection papers academic or scholarly. Ironically, the reason I wanted to learn qualitative research was because it seems to allow for more introspection on the part of the researcher. Moreover, when I read qualitative research it speaks to the audience … first through the heart and then into the brain….For years I have been led (or led myself) to believe that my own writing from the heart is just rhetoric and not good analysis. Bringing my entire self into the qualitative project has been a real struggle, especially in writing…. I now realize that the process of learning to engage my own self in writing and allowing myself to embody the experience is not as quick as cutting loose the rusty iron shackles. Perhaps that is because the muscles required to describe the world around me as I subjectively encounter it have atrophied over the years and now need a good workout routine.
Making sense of data As students complete data collection, they upload their transcripts, field notes, and demographic data to the course page on a password-protected website with all identifying information of participants removed. With data now available, students confront the messiness of analysis, and the various approaches for tagging, naming, and coding textual data. To prepare for this phase, students read several articles and participate in a coding exercise using data from one of my studies. Students come to the next class ready to discuss their preliminary coding of two sets of interviews and field notes from the study. Students describe how they highlighted and coded segments of text and created tables or text files to track and document their preliminary analysis. Because coding at this point is based on limited data, they return to the
full data set to refine and expand upon their initial analysis, to be reported in the final paper. This final assignment requires that students select a qualitative tradition and write a research report, following the conventions of a publishable paper. Because the final research report is submitted after the last class session, students emailed questions as they analyzed the complete data set. Questions included: “How do I know if my analysis is correct?” And “How will I know when my analysis is complete?” One student echoed these concerns in an email to classmates: I have been working [on my final paper] for a week and I have [wondered], am I doing this right? It is a new way of approaching thinking and writing and to be honest, it is really uncomfortable. I feel at times like I am “reading into the data,” but then thought to myself, “it is supposed to be inductive.” When I stepped back, I realize we do this sort of churning naturally, but we have not often been given the format to learn to do it as scholarship. I don’t know about others, but at times the word “scholarly” writing can throw a monkey wrench in how I am thinking about producing a paper.
Discussion Although qualitative methods courses are available in many doctoral programs across disciplines (Eisenhart & Jurow, 2011; Hurworth, 2008), little attention has been given to how educators teach and students learn QR. Hurworth’s (2008) case studies of qualitative methods courses in the UK and Australia document faculty interest in using active learning strategies and the many challenges in having students complete a full study in a one-semester course. The course described here provides a complete experiential package for learning qualitative skills. Involving students in a qualitative study has proven feasible and effective in developing skills and sensibilities that cannot be formed by lectures and class exercises alone. Participating in the study also disabuses students of the naïve position that QR is simple, unsystematic, and unscientific (Sandelowski, 2005). In the process of collecting and making sense of qualitative data, students integrate the “logic” of QR learned in classroom discussions with practical and ethical experiences from the field. Students also experience the value of a team of researchers to strengthen the quality of a study. They become increasingly aware through discussions and assignments of the epistemological privilege that invalidates intersubjective truths. One student likened the process of learning QR to “learning to swim through jello” in an email to the class:
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
[The instructor] is giving us the experience so we can truly learn to do it. She is saying “learn by doing, not by thinking.” In essence, we are becoming what we are learning and trying to achieve. Whether we do it “right” or “well” this time is not as important as just swimming through the ocean of jello. When we come out, we will be more adjusted to the process for our future research. Right now I am trying to trust the process even though it is new and uncomfortable….Brilliant pedagogy, but painful process on the nerves! ! !
Developing students’ qualitative muscles requires a carefully planned research project so that class discussions, assigned readings, study procedures, and written assignments foster a dialogue between the philosophical, practical, and ethical aspects of QR. I reassure students that learning to do QR is nerve-wracking partly because we swim in the epistemological biases built into the scientific method and partly because they are novice researchers. Linking the philosophical assumptions of QR to practical experiences in the field is designed to help them sediment a range of skills that seasoned researchers take for granted. While conducting a study in one semester is challenging, students consistently evaluate the organization of the course and the progression in educational goals as excellent. Students also value the emphasis on experiential learning. As one student wrote on her course evaluation: “We really had to get our hands and brains dirty, try it, mess up, and slog our way through. [It’s the] only way to learn.” Another added: “Assignments are structured so that even without a tandem practicum course, we engaged in real field work (scaled down of course) and were introduced to handson skills like coding. The instructor provided an ideal balance of traditions, and theory and practice in the design of this course.” Student evaluations further suggest that writing is difficult for most of them and that extensive feedback is greatly appreciated as they struggle with writing conventions that silence their own voice and the voices of patients and caregivers. While family meals has proven to be a feasible research topic of interest to student-researchers from different disciplines, students do not gain skills in defining a research topic or in developing a qualitative proposal. A one-semester course limits the number of qualitative approaches that can be covered and restricts data collection to one interview and participant observation. This limitation is somewhat tempered by encouraging students to compare and contrast their interviews and field notes with those of their classmates to reflect on what they did well and how they might improve these skills. Students watch a video presentation on qualitative software packages but they have no practice in their use. A
135
major conundrum stems from establishing study aims before students select the methodological approach for their final paper. I discuss this problem openly with students and use it as an opportunity to highlight how the researchers’ selection of a qualitative tradition should cohere with study aims, sampling decisions, and methods of data collection and analysis. I forewarn students that I expect them to address this issue in their final paper. Because the sample size for the study is determined by the number of students, student enrollment is an important consideration for class projects such as this. A class size of eight to ten students generates sufficient data for a small-scale project. When class size is less than eight students, I provide data from a bank of studentgenerated data from prior years so that students will have eight to ten sets of data to analyze. This option requires that study aims and interview guides remain fairly similar from year to year. For large classes, students could be formed into smaller groups to share data among the group.
Conclusions Doctoral students have many more opportunities to learn QR than students even a short decade ago. While active learning strategies and student involvement in studies are endorsed by qualitative instructors, these approaches are difficult, but not impossible, to fully integrate into a one-semester course. I’ve sequenced course activities and assignments so that students are carefully guided through a series of class discussions, exercises, and study procedures to develop the sensibilities and practical skills of listening, reflecting, and writing common to the QR tradition. I expect that the practical know-how that students gain from the course by flexing new “muscles” and “swimming through jello” will be refined and improved as they conduct future studies that advance the science and practice of nursing.
References Benner, P., Sutphen, M., Leonard, V. W., & Day, L. (2010). Educating nurses: A call for radical transformation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Benner, P., Tanner, C. A., & Chesla, C. A. (1996). Expertise in nursing practice: Caring, clinical judgment, and ethics. New York, NY: Springer.
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
136
L. SmithBattle: Developing Students’ Qualitative Muscles
Descartes, R. (1960). Meditation I, II, and III (J. Veitch, R. H. M. Elwes & G. Montgomery, Trans.). In R. Descartes, B. de Spinoza, & G. Wilhelm (Eds.), The rationalists: Descartes: Discourse on method and meditations; Spinoza: Ethics; Leibniz: Monadology and discourse on metaphysics. Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Company. Dreyfus, H. L. (2004). What could be more intelligible than everyday intelligibility? Reinterpreting division I of being and time in the light of division II. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 24 (3), 265–274. doi:10.1177/0270467604264993 Dunne, J. (1993). Back to the rough ground: Practical judgment and the lure of technique. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame. Eisenhart, M., & Jurow, A. S. (2011). Teaching qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 699–714). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hamer, B. (Writer). (2003). Kitchen stories (Norwegian: Salmer fra kjøkkenet). In J. Bergmark & B. Hamer (Producers).Norway, Sweden. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & R. E., Trans.). New York, NY: Harper & Row. (Original work published 1935). Hurworth, R. H. (2008). Teaching qualitative research: Cases and issues. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers. Kayser-Jones, J. (2002). Malnutrition, dehydration, and starvation in the midst of plenty: The political impact of qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Health Research, 12, 1391–1405. doi:10.1177/ 1049732302238750 Leder, D. (1990). The absent body. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith, Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1945). Morse, J. M. (2005). Editorial: Fostering qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 287–288. doi:10.1177/ 1049732304273031 Raingruber, B. (2009). Assigning poetry reading as a way of introducing students to qualitative data analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 65, 1753–1761. doi:10.1111/j.13652648.2009.05025.x Roulston, K., deMarrais, K., & Lewis, J. B. (2003). Learning to interview in the social sciences. Qualitative Inquiry, 9, 643–668. doi:10.1177/1077800403252736 Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. London: Hutchinson. Saldana, J. (2009). Popular film as an instructional strategy in qualitative research methods courses. Qualitative Inquiry, 15, 247–261. doi:10.1177/1077800408318323 Sandelowski, M. (1995). Qualitative analysis: What it is and how to begin. Research in Nursing and Health, 18, 371–375. doi:10.1002/nur.4770180411 Sandelowski, M. (2005). I speak English, don’t I? Research in Nursing and Health, 28, 185–186. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books. Waite, D. (2011). A simple card trick: Teaching qualitative data analysis using a deck of playing cards. Qualitative Inquiry, 17, 982–985. doi:10.1177/1077800411425154 Waite, D. (2014). Teaching the unteachable: Some issues of qualitative research pedagogy. Qualitative Inquiry, 20, 267–281. doi:10:1177/1077800413489526
Brought to you by | Northern Arizona University Authenticated Download Date | 5/25/15 6:53 PM
