CHAPTER FOUR:

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS/TOOLS

Just like in quantitative research methods, qualitative research needs also a design on how to gather or
collect data. These designs will be discussed in detail in this module. Each research design varies
from each other because they have their corresponding attributes. The students should be very keen in
identifying the similarities and/or differences and how they will be able to make use of them in the
field.

1. OBSERVATION
The following guidelines must be considered in the observation method:
1. Observation must be specific, not just looking around for general impressions.
2. Observation is scientific rather than haphazard or opportunistic.
3. Observation must be as objective and free from bias as possible.
4. The observer must be in good position to conduct scientific observation and he must have
adequate sense organs.
5. Observation must comply with the usual criteria for validity and reliability.

In general, there are two main categories of observation used in social research:
structured/unstructured and participant/nonparticipant.
Observation may be structured when the equipment as well as the human factor is controlled. It is
unstructured when it records down the behavior as it occurs and when so many aspects of behavior are
observed even though these aspects are not relevant to one’s purpose. The investigator may play any
one of several roles in observation – a visiting stranger, an attentive listener or a participant observer.
In participant observation, the observer works his/her way into the group he/she is to observe so that as
a regular member, he/she is no longer regarded as an outsider. In non-participant observation, the
observer may be known to the group being observed, but his observation is made as inconspicuous as
possible.

Types of Observation Approaches

1. Participant Observation

Participant observation is one of the most common methods for qualitative data collection. It requires
that the researcher become a participant in the culture or context being observed. The literature on
participant observation discusses how to enter the context, the role of the researcher as a participant,
the collection and storage of field notes and the analysis of field data.

Participant observation often requires months or years of intensive work because the researcher needs
to become accepted as natural part of the culture in order to assure that the observations are of the
natural phenomenon. In participant observation, the researcher becomes, or is, part of the group that is
being investigated. Participant observation has its roots in ethnographic studies (study of man and

1
races) where researchers would live in tribal villages, attempting to understand the customs and
practices of that culture. It has a very extensive literature, particularly in sociology (development,
nature and laws of human society) and anthropology (physiological and psychological study of man).
Participant observation systematically seeks out and organizes data concerning what is being studied
based on a social science theory and methodology rather than focusing on achieving a situationally
defined goal. It keeps detailed records of what occurs, including those things characteristically taken
for granted. It periodically detaches self from the situation to review records from the neutral position
of a social scientist. Participant observation constantly monitors observations and records for evidence
of personal bias or prejudice.

Participant observation is a qualitative method frequently used in social science research. It is based on
a long tradition of ethnographic study in anthropology. In participant observation, the observer
becomes "part" of the environment, or the cultural context. The method usually involves the
researcher's spending considerable time "in the field," as anthropologists do. Anthropologists typically
spend a year or more in a cultural setting in order to really understand the culture in depth, even when
they begin the study with a broad overall research question. The hallmark of participant observation is
interaction among the researcher and the participants. The main subjects take part in the study to
varying degrees, but the researcher interacts with them continually. For instance, the study may
involve periodic interviews interspersed with observations so that the researcher can question the
subjects and verify perceptions and patterns. These interviews may themselves take many forms, as
noted in an upcoming section. For example, a researcher may begin by conducting open-ended
unstructured interviews with several teachers to begin to formulate the research questions. This may be
followed by a set of structured interviews with a few other teachers, based on results of the first series,
forming a sort of oral questionnaire. Results of these interviews may then determine what will initially
be recorded during observations. Later, after patterns begin to appear in the observational data, the
researcher may conduct interviews asking the teachers about these patterns and why they think they are
occurring, or if indeed those are categories of information. Similarly, a researcher might conduct
videotaped observations of a set of teachers, analyze the tapes to begin to make taxonomies of
behaviors, and then conduct interviews with the teachers, perhaps while they view the tapes together,
to determine how the teachers themselves categorize these behaviors. Thus, the researcher becomes a
long-term participant in the research setting.

It is reasonable that fine educational technology research can be conducted using participant
observation techniques, with somewhat limited research questions. Not every phenomenon can
possibly be recorded. Most qualitative observational studies rely on the researcher's writing down what
occurs in the form of extensive field notes. The researcher then analyzes these notes soon after
observations are carried out, noting patterns of behaviors and events and phenomena to investigate in
further observations. Still, the researcher is the instrument in most participant observations and, being
human, cannot observe and record everything. Therefore, in most social research studies, the
investigator determines ahead of time what will be observed and recorded, guided but not limited by
the research questions.

2
Spradley's (1980) book details how to conduct participant observations. He discusses the variety of
roles the observer might take, noting that the observer becomes to varying degrees an "insider," in line
with what Pelto and Pelto (1978) call the emic view. Spradley suggests that the research site and
setting, of course, be selected to best answer the research questions, but with an eye toward simplicity,
accessibility, possibility of remaining relatively unobtrusive, permissibleness, assurance that the
activities of interest will occur frequently, and degree to which the researcher can truly become a
participant.

The stages of participant observation, from an anthropological perspective, have been delineated by
Bernard (1988). He describes the excitement, and sometimes fear, of the initial contact period; the next
stage, which is often a type of shock as one gets to know the culture in more detail; a period of intense
data collection he identifies with discovering the obvious, followed by the need for a real break; a stage
in which the study becomes more focused; followed by exhaustion, a break and frantic activity; and
finally, carefully taking leave of the field setting.

Borg and Gall (1979) discuss the types of questions one might address using participant observation
techniques. These include such questions as who the participants are; what are their typical and
atypical patterns of behavior; and where, when, how, and why the phenomena occur. In short,
participant observation is often successfully used to describe what is happening in a context and why it
happens. These are questions that cannot be answered in the standard experiment.

2. Non-Participant or Direct Observation (Passive Participation)

In this type of observation, the researcher is present at the scene of action but does not interact or
participate. The researcher finds an observation post and assumes the role of a bystander or spectator.
The observer does not normally question or communicate with the people being observed. Direct
observation is distinguished from participant observation in a number of ways. First, a direct observer
does not typically try to become a participant in the context. However, the direct observer does strive
to be as unobtrusive as possible so as not to bias the observations. Second, direct observation suggests
a more detached perspective. The researcher is watching rather than taking part. Consequently,
technology can be a useful part of direct observation. For instance, one can videotape the phenomenon
or observe from behind one-way mirrors. Third, direct observation tends to be more focused than
participant observation. The researcher is observing certain sampled situations or people rather than
trying to become immersed in the entire context. Finally, direct observation tends not to take as long
as participant observation. For instance, one might observe child-mother interactions under specific
circumstances in a laboratory setting from behind a one-way mirror, looking especially for the
nonverbal cues being used.

As with participant observation, nonparticipant observers may or may not use structured observation
forms, but are often more likely to. In this type of study, often several trained observers make brief
sampled observations over periods of time, and observation forms help to ensure consistency of the
data being recorded.

3
Nonparticipant observation is often used to study focused aspects of a setting, in order to answer
specific questions within a study. This method can yield extensive detailed data, over many subjects
and settings, if desired, in order to search for patterns, or to test hypotheses developed as a result of
using other methods, such as interviews. It can thus be a powerful tool in triangulation. Observational
data may be coded into categories, frequencies tabulated, and relationships analyzed, yielding
quantitative reports of results.

Guidelines for conducting nonparticipant observation are provided by Goetz and LeCompte (1984),
among others. They recommend that researchers strive to be as unobtrusive and unbiased as possible.
They suggest verification of data by using multiple observers. The units of analysis, thus data to be
recorded, should be specified before beginning; recording methods should be developed; strategies for
selection and sampling of units should be determined; and finally all processes should be tested and
refined, before the study has to begun.

Nonparticipant observations may be used in studies that are primarily quantitative experimental studies
in order to answer focused research questions about what learners do while participating in studies. For
instance, a researcher may be interested in what types of choices learners make while they proceed
through a lesson. This use of observations to answer a few research questions within experimental
studies is exemplified in a series of studies of cooperative learning and learner control in television or
computer-delivered instruction by Klein, Sullivan, Savenye, and their colleagues.

Balanced Participant

This type of observation allows the researcher to maintain a balance between being an insider and
being an outsider. The researcher observes and participates in some activities, but does not participate
fully in all activities.

Total Participant

In this type of observation, the researcher is a natural participant. This is the highest level of
involvement and usually comes about when the researcher studies something in which he is already a
natural participant.

Structured Observation

In structured observation, the researcher specifies in detail what is to be observed and how the
measurements are to be recorded. It is appropriate when the problem is clearly defined and the
information needed is specified.

Unstructured Observation

In unstructured observation, the researcher monitors all aspects of the phenomenon that seem relevant.
It is appropriate when the problem has yet to be formulated precisely and flexibility is needed in

4
observation to identify key components of the problem and to develop hypotheses. The potential for
bias is high. Observation findings should be treated as hypotheses to be tested rather than as conclusive
findings.

Disguised Observation

In disguised observation, respondents are unaware of the fact that they are being observed and thus
behave naturally. Disguise is achieved, for example, by hiding, or using hidden equipment or people
disguised as shoppers.

Elements Needed in Observation

The elements in a social setting of the observation approach to data collection are:
1. The Participant
Who are the participants, how are they related to one another, and how many are they? Teenage culture
along relationship between opposite sexes within the Ethiopian context may be studied by non-
participant observation in an unstructured way.

2. The Setting
A social situation may occur in different settings – a drugstore, a busy street intersection, a factory
lunchroom, a nursery school etc. What kind of behavior does the setting encourage, permit, discourage
or prevent?
Participants may belong to a school the setting of which may be co-educational for one group and
exclusive for another.

3. The Purpose
What purpose has brought the participants together? How do they seem to pursue this purpose? The
main purpose is to identify the style of relationship for each group. Comparisons may be made
between the two groups with reference to their relationships assuming that the two groups come from
different educational settings. Varied life styles and values may be exhibited.

4. The Social Behavior

What are the activities of the participants, how do they do them and with whom and with what do they
do with them? What was the stimulus that initiated it? Toward what/whom is the behavior
directed? What is the form of activity? What are the qualities of behavior – its intensity, persistence,
unusualness, appropriateness, duration, affectivity and mannerism? What behavior does it evoke from
others?
The range of varied social behavior as elicited in the natural setting may be identified.

5. Frequency and Duration

When did the situation occur? How long did it last? Is it a recurring type of situation? How
frequently does it occur? What are the occasions that give rise to it?
The social researcher must attend to the following standards in the use of observation:

5
 1. Observation is carefully planned, systematized and perceptive.
2. Observation is aware of the wholeness of what is observed.
3. Observation must be objective.
4. Observation separates facts from the interpretation of facts.
5. Observation can be checked and verified.
6. Observation is carefully and expertly recorded.

Critical Aspects of Observation

While observation is one of the most direct means of collecting social data, it is not without its pitfalls.
Certain aspects may prove critical such as interpretation of data, their validity and reliability. Human
elements that are emotionally loaded and past experiences of the observer may prove to be deleterious
to interpretation. There have been no scientific controls to emotion and past experience unless
observation is checked and verified.

To establish validity and reliability is another critical aspect of observation. Facts may be considered
valid and reliable but their interpretation is not so. Not unless observation is well-planned,
systematically and performed by a skilled observer can observation be made valid and reliable.
Here are some qualities of observers:
1. Alertness – mentally and physically
2. Good perception
3. Adequate sense organs
4. Ability to estimate
5. Ability to discriminate
6. Ability to record immediately
7. Freedom from preconceptions
8. Emotional disinterest

Advantages of Observation
1. Observation allows phenomenon to reveal itself through their operation or characteristics.
2. It is the most direct method of collecting data.
3. It is beneficial in situations involving people who are not able to verbalize.
4. It is valuable in situations which are inherently complex.
5. It is possible to record behavior as it occurs.

Disadvantages of Observation

1. It is impossible to predict the spontaneous occurrence of an event precisely enough to enable us

to be present to observe it.
2. Observer may be incompetent and inexperienced.

6
2. INTERVIEW

While the questionnaire can easily provide a well documented set of responses from the intended
respondents, it would be well to know who the respondent is, his facial expressions, his gestures and
other types of body language. These bodily responses may find more significant meaning to a
researcher which a questionnaire cannot record.

An interview is an oral type of questionnaire which is used to gather data from others in a direct
contact. It is not a separate tool but supplementary to other methods and techniques. It is expected
that the researcher should control his/her reactions. The purpose of the interview is to find out what
views people hold; their views should be unbiased by evaluative responses on the researcher’s part.
The researcher can choose an interview environment and conditions in which the participants feel
comfortable, secure and at ease enough to speak openly about their point of view. The researcher
should avoid presenting “yes” or “no” questions which tend to stifle detail. The researcher should be
flexible in his/her approach to the informants. Group interviews can be useful, particularly in initial
interviews. The researcher should consider to what degree the interview questioning is “recursive.”
As applied to interviewing, what has been said in an interview is used to determine or define further
questioning.

Interviewing is a technique that is primarily used to gain an understanding of the underlying reasons
and motivations for people’s attitudes, preferences or behavior. Interviews can be undertaken on a
personal one-to-one basis or in a group. They can be conducted at work, at home, in the street or in a
shopping centre, or some other agreed location.

In contrast with the relatively non-interactive, nonparticipant observation methods described earlier,
interviews represent a classic qualitative research method that is directly interactive. Interview
techniques, too, vary in how they may be classified, and again, most vary in certain dimensions along
continua, rather than being clearly dichotomous. For instance, Bernard (1988) describes interview
techniques as being structured or unstructured to various degrees. He describes the most informal type
of interviewing, followed by unstructured interviewing that has some focus. Next, Bernard mentions
semi-structured interviewing and finally structured interviews, typically involving what he calls an
interview schedule, which others call interview protocols, that is, sets of questions, or scripts. Fontana
and Frey (1994) expand this classification scheme by noting that interviews may be conducted
individually or in groups. Again, exemplifying modem trends in qualitative research, these authors add
that unstructured interviews now may include oral histories, and creative and postmodern interviewing,
the latter of which may include use of visual media and polyphonic interviewing, that is, almost
verbatim reporting of respondents' words, as well as gendered interviewing in response to feminist
concerns.

An interview is a form of conversation in which the purpose is for the researcher to gather data that
address the study's goals and questions. A researcher, particularly one who will be in the setting for a
considerable period of time or one doing participant observations, may choose to conduct a series of
7
relatively unstructured interviews that seem more like conversations with the respondents. Topics will
be discussed and explored in a somewhat loose but probing manner. The researcher may return
periodically to continue to interview the respondents in more depth, for instance to focus on questions
further or to triangulate with other data.

In contrast, structured interviews may be conducted in which the researcher follows a sort of script of
questions, asking the same questions, and in the same order, of all respondents. Goetz and LeCompte
(1984) consider these to be surveys, while other authors do not make this distinction, and some
consider surveys and questionnaires to be instruments respondents complete on their own without an
interview.

Guidelines for conducting interviews are relatively straightforward if one considers that both the
researcher, as data-gathering instrument, and the respondents are human beings with their various
strengths and foibles at communicating The cornerstone in interview is to be sure that one truly listens
to respondents and records what they say, rather than to the researcher's perceptions or interpretations.
This is a good rule of thumb in qualitative research in general. It is best to maintain the integrity of raw
data, using respondents' words, including quotes liberally. Most researchers, as a study progresses, also
maintain field notes that contain interpretations of patterns, to be refined and investigated on an
ongoing basis. Bogdan and Biklen (1992) summarize these ideas:

Good interviews are those in which the subjects are at ease and talk freely about their points of view.
Good interviews produce rich data filled with words that reveal the respondents' perspectives.

Bernard (1988) suggests letting the informant lead the conversation in unstructured interviews, and
asking probing questions that serve to focus the interview at natural points in the conversation. While
some advocate only taking notes during interviews, Bernard stresses that memory should not be relied
on, and tape recorders should be used to record exact words. This may be crucial later in identifying
subjects' points of view and later in writing reports.

Values of the Interview (Elifson, 1998 as cited by Reyes, 2004)

1. Interviewee may be able to give personal and confidential information which would not
ordinarily be put in writing.
2. It enables the investigator to follow up leads and to take advantage of small clues.
3. It allows an investigator to form an impression of the person who is giving the information, to
arrive at some judgment of the truth of the answers, and to “read between the lines”.
4. It provides an opportunity for “give and take” information which is used extensively in case
work.
5. Supplements other types/methods of data collection.

A successful interview may be attained by being organized which requires certain procedures:
1. Preparation, which includes a clear concept of what information is needed; sequencing the
questions and a written outline or a check list to prevent possibility that the interviewer will not
miss the needed data.
8
 2. Gaining entrance by making a courteous and friendly approach after which rapport must be
established.
3. Securing and recording information (the interview proper).
4. Closing the interview.

Advantages and disadvantages of using an interview

As a method for data gathering, the interview has some advantages over the questionnaire, and these
are: opportunity of direct feedback; depth of response wherein the interviewer can follow up leads;
responses are reinforced by physical gestures; and diagnose eventual problem.

The successful use of the method presupposes certain skills on the part of the interviewer to possess
such as patience, tact and diplomacy, good human relations and sensitivity to clues such as facial
expression. However, an interviewer should be warned not to show qualities that will result to failure
rather than success such as arguing, appearing erudite/knowledgeable, using big words, talking too
much and telling inappropriate stories.

The interview as a means for collecting data has limitations which are found inherent in either the
interviewer or the interviewee such as experience. Both interviewer and interviewee must possess
experience in the activity of interview. Through experience, the interviewer may acquire the skill in
gaining entrance, establishing rapport, sequencing questions to ask and recording only the most
significant responses. On the part of the interviewee, he/she must possess the skill in responding to
questions, giving direct and substantial answers. The next limitation in the use of the interview is
judgment. Interviewer and interviewee might have different mental sets about the subject matter for
the interview. There must be accessibility and willingness on the part of the interviewee to give out
information to attain a fruitful interview. Moreover, the interview entails time enough to obtain
rapport and information which may be found demanding on both interviewer and interviewee.

The interview is the most often-used technique for obtaining information from people. It is a “face-to-
face interpersonal role situation” in which the interviewer asks a person – an interviewee or respondent
– questions which are meant to obtain information pertinent to the research problem.

There are two broad types of interview: the structured or standardized and the unstructured or un-
standardized. In the structured or standardized interview, the questions, their sequence and their
wordings are fixed, that is, they have been carefully thought out and organized and must be strictly
followed. In this type of interview, the interviewer uses an interview schedule which is a research
instrument made up by a set of carefully prepared and logically ordered questions which the researcher
asks of the respondents and with adequate space in which the interviewer writes down the responses to
the questions.

The un-structured or non-standardized interview is flexible and open. While the questions asked are
determined by the research problem and objectives, their content, sequence and wordings are up to the

9
interviewer. If needed, he can modify, repeat and clarify or explain the questions and follow up the
responses with more questions or clarifications without deviating from the purposes of the interview.
Instead of an interview schedule, the unstructured interview makes use of an interview guide which is
a listing of topics or issues to be covered during the interview process. Here, the interviewer is given
the option to ask questions in the manner and order he chooses; he has less restrictions when it comes
to obtaining the data needed in his particular study.

In unstructured interview, the interviewer can rephrase or re-sequence the questions and similarly, the
respondent is free to respond in any manner he wants. The use of probe questions can satisfy an
unstructured interview. This also called an in-depth interview. The interviewer begins by asking a
general question. The interviewer then encourages the respondent to talk freely. The interviewer uses
an unstructured format, the subsequent direction of the interview being determined by the respondent’s
initial reply. The interviewer then probes for elaboration – ‘Why do you say that?’ or, ‘That’s
interesting, tell me more’ or, ‘Would you like to add anything else?’ being typical probes.

Unstructured interviewing involves direct interaction between the researcher and a respondent group. It
differs from traditional structured interviewing in several important ways. First, although the
researcher may have some initial guiding questions or core concepts to ask about, there is no formal
structured instrument or protocol. Second, the interviewer is free to move the conversation in any
direction of interest that may come up. Consequently, unstructured interviewing is particularly useful
for exploring a topic broadly. However, there is a price for this lack of structure. Because each
interview tends to be unique with no predetermined set of questions asked of all respondents, it is
usually more difficult to analyze unstructured interview data, especially when synthesizing across
respondents.

The interview can be done either individually or by group. It is individual interview if it is on a one-
to-one basis, that is, one person interviewing another person. It is group interview when it involves an
interviewer and a group of respondents of manageable size of five to ten members. In some cases, two
interviewers may work on one respondent. One interviewer asks questions while the other does the
recording of the answers. There is a saving of time in using this strategy but this advantage is offset by
the cost of paying two interviewers instead of just one.

The interview offers certain advantages. First, it can be used with almost all segments of the
population. Second, it usually yields a much better sample of the general population. Third, it has a
greater sensitivity to misunderstandings by respondents. Finally, it is the more appropriate technique
for revealing about complex, emotionally-laden subjects or for probing the sentiments that may
underlie an expressed opinions (Selltiz, et al., 1976). Added to these is the advantage of the
interviewer getting all the data right after the interview has been completed, thus, getting data from all
persons covered by the interview.

Semi-Structured Interview: The interview is focused by asking certain questions but with scope for
the respondent to express him or herself at length.

10
A not-too-recent development in the interview technique is the telephone interview. The major
advantages of this technique include low cost, rapid collection of data and relatively high response rate.
However, in an area or community where not all people have telephone or where only the upper-
middle-class to upper-class people have this kind of gadget in their home result of a study using the
telephone interview is likely to be biased. This will be so because the samples will not have
representations for families without telephone. Therefore, result of the study cannot be generalized to
the whole population. Another consideration is the fact that some persons or families who have
telephones are, for personal reasons, maintaining telephone numbers which are not listed in the
telephone directory. Recent trends reveal that the number of these people and families is increasing.

Key informant interview

Key informant interviews are qualitative in-depth interviews with people who know what is going on
in the community. The purpose of key informant interviews is to collect information from a wide range
of people—including community leaders, professionals, or residents—who have firsthand knowledge
about the community. These community experts, with their particular knowledge and understanding,
can provide insight on the nature of problems and give recommendations for solutions.

Key informant diversity is important. If you only interview people of a particular background or sector
you may end up with results that are one-sided or biased. Interviewing key informants from a wide
range of sectors allows you to look at varying perspectives and underlying issues or problems.

Focus Group Discussion (FGD)

A focus group is an interview conducted by a trained moderator in a non-structured and natural manner
with a small group of respondents. The moderator leads the discussion. The main purpose of focus
groups is to gain insights by listening to a group of people from the appropriate target talk about
specific issues of interest.

Focus groups are used by businesses and organizations to hear first-hand what their customers, staff,
suppliers or other parties think, using a range of methods to encourage conversation and debate. As in
any market research survey, this could involve exploring opinions around a new product, service, logo,
packaging, advertising campaign or marketing idea - really anything that will help the business or
initiative develop more proficiently as a result of knowing what the customer thinks.

For this method, the research brings together a small number of subjects to discuss the topic of interest.
The group size is kept deliberately small, so that its members do not feel intimidated but can express
opinions freely. Different moderators prefer different size sessions, but a focus group may comprise
anywhere between 6 to 10 people. A topic guide to aid discussion is usually prepared beforehand and
the researcher usually ‘chairs’ the group, to ensure that a range of aspects of the topic are explored.
The discussion is frequently tape-recorded, then, transcribed and analyzed.

Respondents (as they are known) are invited to take part on the basis that they meet certain criteria –
for example, fit a particular demographic, buy certain products, hold certain attitudes, and others. They

11
are interviewed by a professional qualitative research moderator who records the conversation and then
analyses the feedback, and the results are presented to their client in power point presentation and/or
written report form. A normal focus group lasts up to an hour and a half. Longer sessions are known
as extended focus groups and can take a more creative workshop style making full use of projective
and teamwork techniques.

The concept of methodological triangulation

Triangulation is a method used by qualitative researchers to check and establish validity in their studies
by analyzing a research question from multiple perspectives.

Validity, in qualitative research, refers to whether the findings of a study are true and certain—“true”
in the sense that research findings accurately reflect the situation, and “certain” in the sense that
research findings are supported by the evidence.

Methodological triangulation involves the use of multiple qualitative and/or quantitative methods to
study the program. For example, results from surveys, focus groups, and interviews could be compared
to see if similar results are being found. If the conclusions from each of the methods are the same, then
validity is established.

For example, suppose a researcher is conducting a case study of a Welfare-to-Work participant to

document changes in her life as a result of participating in the program over a one-year period. A
researcher would use interviewing, observation, document analysis, or any other feasible method to
assess the changes. A researcher could also survey the participant, her family members, and case
workers as a quantitative strategy. If the findings from all of the methods draw the same or similar
conclusions, then validity has been established. While this method is popular, it generally requires
more resources. Likewise, it requires more time to analyze the information yielded by the different
methods.

12
 CHAPTER FOUR: QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION

Qualitative analysis is the analysis of qualitative data such as text data from interview transcripts.
Unlike quantitative analysis, which is statistics driven and largely independent of the researcher,
qualitative analysis is heavily dependent on the researcher’s analytic and integrative skills and personal
knowledge of the social context where the data is collected. The emphasis in qualitative analysis is
“sense making” or understanding a phenomenon, rather than predicting or explaining. A creative and
investigative mindset is needed for qualitative analysis, based on an ethically enlightened and
participant-in-context attitude, and a set of analytic strategies.

Qualitative data are considered to be the "rough materials researchers collect from the world they are
studying; they are the particulars that form the basis of analysis" (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992). Words
often are the raw materials that qualitative researchers analyze, and much advice from researchers
discusses analyzing these words.

The aim of qualitative research is to analyze data in order to generate theory. Because the theory is
generated from the data itself, the theory thus generated is referred to as grounded theory. The
theory is grounded in the data (Strauss and Corbin, 1998). The process of generating theory from the
data is called coding. For example, in a three-level coding approach, it begins with bottom-up coding,
for example: start from text itself and proceeds to a top-down approach which links data from a
particular study to a target theory. We begin the bottom-up phase by reading the transcripts of sessions
and identifying segments of relevant text. For instance, words and phrases that are relevant to our
research in focus.

In the first level of coding, we can group relevant texts, for example: segments of text that express
more similar or same idea, into repeating ideas. After identifying the repeating ideas, these are
grouped in the second, more abstract level called themes. Themes represent more general ideas
implicit in repeating ideas. Each level of organization subsumes the level below it. That is, each
repeating idea is a cluster of segments of relevant text, and each theme is a cluster of repeating ideas.

After the themes are identified, the top-down phase begins. We link our themes to theoretical
constructs found in our original theoretical framework. The theoretical constructs are then organized
further into a theoretical narrative that tells the story of the subjective explanation of the participants.
This story, organized around the theoretical constructs, generates hypothesis (for example, a
hypothetical answer(s) clarification of our research focus.

APPROACHES TO ANALYZING QUALITATIVE DATA

Qualitative researchers choose their analysis methods not only by the research questions and types of
data collected but also based on the philosophical approach underlying the study. For example, Miles
and Huberman (1994) outline three overall approaches to analyzing qualitative data, namely: a)

13
interpretive approach; b) collaborative approach and c) ethnographic approach. An "interpretive"
approach would be phenomenological in nature or based on social interactionism. Researchers using
this approach would seek to present a holistic view of data rather than a condensed view. They might
seek to describe a picture of "what is." They would generally not choose to categorize data to reduce it.
Miles and Huberman note that the interpretive approach might be used by qualitative researchers in
semiotics, deconstructivism, aesthetic criticism, ethnomethodology, and hermeneutics.

A second approach described by these researchers is "collaborative social research," often used by
action researchers in partnerships composed of members of many, and sometimes opposing,
organizations.

The final approach to analyzing data described by Miles and Huberman is that of "social
anthropology," which relies primarily on ethnography. Researchers using this approach seek to
provide detailed, or rich, descriptions across multiple data sources. They seek regular patterns of
human behavior in data, usually sifting, coding, and sorting data as they are collected, and following
up analyses with ongoing observations and interviews to explore and refine these patterns, in what
Goetz and LeCompte call a recursive approach (1994). Researchers using a social anthropology
approach also tend to be concerned with developing and testing theory. Researchers who develop life
histories, work in grounded theory and ecological psychology, and develop narrative studies, applied
studies, and case studies often base their analyses on this social anthropology approach. Many of the
methods for, and views about, analyzing qualitative data can be seen to be based on the social
anthropology approach.

Methods used in analyzing qualitative data

Depending on the basic philosophical approach of the qualitative researcher, many methods exist for
analyzing data. Miles and Huberman state that qualitative data analysis consists of "three concurrent
flows of activity: data reduction, data display, and conclusion/verification"(1994). Most researchers
advocate that reducing and condensing data, and thereby beginning to seek meaning, should begin as
the study begins and continue throughout data collection.

A. Data Reduction

Goetz and LeCompte (1994) describe the conceptual basis for reducing and condensing data in this
ongoing style as the study progresses. The researcher theorizes as the study begins and builds and tests
theories based on observed patterns in data continually. Researchers compare, aggregate, contrast, sort,
and order data. These authors note that while large amounts of raw data are collected, the researcher
may examine in detail selected cases or negative cases to test theory. They describe analytic
procedures researchers use to determine what the data mean. These procedures involve looking for
patterns, links, and relationships. In contrast to experimental research, the qualitative researcher
engages in speculation while looking for meaning in data; this speculation will lead the researcher to

14
make new observations, conduct new interviews, and look more deeply for new patterns in this
"recursive" process.

Researchers may derive patterns in many ways. They may, for example, engage in what Goetz and
LeCompte call "analytic induction", reviewing data for categories of phenomena, defining sets of
relationships, developing hypotheses, collecting more data, and refining hypotheses accordingly. As
noted earlier, interpretivists would be unlikely to use this method. They would not tend to categorize,
but would scan for patterns in order to build a picture or tell a story to describe what is occurring.

Another method, constant comparison, would be relied on by those using a grounded-theory approach.
This method involves categorizing, or coding, data as they are collected, and continually examining
data for examples of similar cases and patterns. Data collection can cease when few or no new
categories of data are being encountered. Goetz and LeCompte contend that researchers using
constant-comparison code data look for patterns as do those using analytic induction, but the categories
are thus processed differently.

It should be noted that virtually all researchers who use an ethnographic approach advocate writing up
field notes immediately after leaving the research site each day. Observations not recorded will quickly
be forgotten. Researchers may not realize the importance of some small phenomenon early on, so these
details should be recorded each day. Most authors further recommend that researchers scan these data
daily, analyzing thoughtfully for patterns and relationships, and perhaps adding to or modifying data
collection procedures accordingly.

Field notes consist of observations and the researcher's interpretations. Bogdan and Biklen (1984) call
these two types of field notes contents the descriptive part and the reflective part. They state that the
descriptive part consists of detailed descriptions of the subjects and settings, the actual dialogue of
participants, descriptions of events and activities, as well as descriptions of the observer's behavior, to
enable determining how this may have influenced participants' behaviors. The reflective part of field
notes, they add, consists of the observer/researcher’s analysis. The researcher records speculations
about patterns and how data can be analyzed, thoughts about methods and ethical concerns, and even
ideas about his or her own state of mind at the time. These ' authors provide many pages of actual field
notes from studies done in elementary and secondary education classrooms, which the beginning
researcher will find helpful.

If researchers collect data using audiotape or videotape, written transcripts of language recorded are
often prepared. Later analysis can be done, but notes should still be recorded immediately after being
in the field. Such notes, for instance, will include observations about participants' nonverbal behaviors,
what was occurring in the immediate surroundings, or what activities participants were engaging in.
Even in the case of interviews, notes might include these descriptions, as well as what participants
were doing just prior to interviews. As noted in the discussion of data collection methods, audiotapes
and videotapes may be subjected to detailed microanalysis. Usually data are coded and counted, but,
due to the labor-intensive nature of this type of analysis, segments of these "streams of behavior" are
often systematically selected for analysis.

15
It is advisable to collect data in its raw, detailed form and then record patterns. This enables the
researcher later to analyze the original data in different ways, perhaps to answer deeper questions than
originally conceived. The researcher many weeks into data collection may realize, for example, that
some phenomena previously considered unimportant hold the keys to explaining participants' views
and actions. In addition, preserving the raw data allows other researchers to explore and verify the data
and the interpretations.

If researchers have collected documents from subjects, such as logs, journals, diaries, memos, and
letters, these can also be analyzed as raw data. Similarly, official documents of an organization can be
subjected to analysis.

Coding Data

Early in the study, the researcher will begin to scan recorded data and to develop categories of
phenomena. These categories are usually called codes. They enable the researcher to manage data by
labelling, storing, and retrieving it according to the codes. Of course, the codes created depend on the
study, setting, participants, and research questions, because the codes are the researchers' way of
beginning to get at the meaning of the data.

Miles and Huberman (1994) suggest that data can be coded descriptively or interpretively. Unlike
some authors, they suggest creating an initial "start list" of codes and refining these in the field.
Researchers using a strictly inductive approach might choose not to create any codes until some
observations and informal interviews were conducted from which codes could be induced.

Bogdan and Biklen (1992) recommend reading data over at least several times in order to begin to
develop a coding scheme. They describe coding data according to categories and details of settings;
types of situation observed; perspectives and views of subjects of all manner of phenomena and
objects; processes, activities, events, strategies, and methods observed; and social relationships. Goetz
and LeCompte (1984) describe coding to form a taxonomic analysis, a sort of outline of what is related
to what, and in what ways.

B. Data Display

Seeking the meaning in data is made easier by displaying data visually. Research data are displayed
using charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, matrices, and any other devices, such as drawings, that
researchers devise. Frequency tables are typically developed for categories of coded behaviors. In the
Reiser and Mory (1991) study, for example, teachers' planning behaviors were coded and tables of
behaviors presented.

Miles and Huberman (1994) hold that data display is a critical and often underutilized means of
analysis. They describe many forms of data display, illustrated with examples of actual data. They
recommend that researchers initially create categories of data, code data, and revise codes, as do other
authors. They note that increasingly qualitative research involves analyzing what they call within-case

16
data, for instance, from one classroom or one school, as well as "cross-case" data, from many
participants and many sites. Whereas in one case study, it may not be necessary to present visual
displays-narrative descriptions might suffice- studies involving data from many cases can greatly
benefit from visual displays. Miles and Huberman (1994) present many options. For example, for
within-case data they show context charts or checklist matrices, but they also discuss using a transcript
as a poem. They also illustrate time-ordered displays, role-ordered displays, and conceptually ordered
displays. For cross-case studies, these researchers mention some of the earlier displays for reviewing
and presenting data, along with case-ordered displays. They illustrate other displays for examining
cross-case data and provide extensive advice for creating matrix displays.

C. Drawing conclusion and verification

The most important phase of qualitative data analysis is simultaneously its most exciting and
potentially frightening: the during which you draw and verify conclusions. Data displays are one
excellent means to this end because they force you to engage in two essential activities: pattern
recognition and synthesis. Coding, of course, is a small step in the ongoing effort to do these things.

The data analysis is woven into interpreting results and writing up the study is indicated by the fact that
Miles and Huberman (1994) describe the third type of data analysis activity as drawing and verifying
conclusions. Similarly, Goetz and LeCompte (1984) include writing up the study in their chapter on
analysis and interpretation of data, describing the writing phase as developing an ethnographic
analysis, and integrating and interpreting the study.

WRITING QUALITATIVE RESEARCH REPORTS

The report of a qualitative study may take many forms. The best advice for the beginning researcher is
to recognize that it is not unusual for even experienced researchers to feel overwhelmed by the amount
of data to be analyzed and described. Most authors simply advise writers to "do it," or to "begin" to
write and refine, and write and refine again.

In writing up a qualitative study, researchers have many choices of presentation styles. Bogdan and
Biklen (1984) consider qualitative researchers fortunate in that there is not one accepted convention for
writing qualitative reports. For example, the qualitative report may take the form of a case study, as in
the Reiser and Mory (1991) study. In a case study, the report may include considerable quantification
and tables of enumerated data, or it may take a strictly narrative form. Recent studies have been
reported in more nontraditional forms, such as stories, plays, and poems showing what is happening for
these participants in that setting.

Fetterman (1989) explicates the nature of qualitative writing. As do many others, he stresses the use of
'thick description" and liberal use of verbatim quotations, that is, the participants' own words to
illustrate the reality of the setting and subjects. This serves as another reminder to the researcher to
record and preserve raw data in the participants' language with quotes. Fetterman adds that
ethnographies are usually written in what he calls the "ethnographic present", as if the reality is still
ongoing. However, in educational technology research in which innovations are often described, the

17
researcher may or may not choose to use this approach. Qualitative reports typically will be woven
around a theme or central message, and will include an introduction, core material, and conclusion
(Bogdan & Biklen, 1984). However, what constitutes the core of the report, of course, will vary
depending on the style of the writing.

The report and presentation are extremely important. First, because the results of the research are often
intangible (after the study has been completed and a decision is made) there is very little physical
evidence of the resources, such as time and effort that went into the project, the written report is
usually the only documentation of the project. Second, the written report and the oral presentation are
typically the only aspect of the study that the stakeholders are exposed to and consequently the overall
evaluation of the research project rests on how well this information is communicated. Third, since
the written research report and oral presentation are typically the responsibility of the funding agency,
the communication effectiveness and usefulness of the information provided plays a crucial role in
determining whether that particular funding agency will be used again in the future.

The language used in your report should be appropriate for qualitative methodology (for example,
avoid words like ‘experimenter’ and ‘subject’; refer to yourself as a ‘researcher’ or ‘co-researcher’ and
your interviewee as a ‘participant’). You may write in the first person (for example, ‘I’) but be careful
to ensure that you do not lapse into unsubstantiated assertion, that you make it very clear as to who you
are, that your assumptions and position are clearly stated and that any pre-existing relationships with
participants are clarified.

Generally speaking, a qualitative research report follows a similar format to an experimental lab report.
They both contain a title, abstract, introduction, method, results, discussion, reference section and
appendices. However, there are also a number of important differences in addition which are indicated
below:

A. Introduction

This should include a statement and justification of your research question. You should discuss why
your research has used qualitative methodology (for example, describe the approach you are using and
why it is the most appropriate method for answering your research question). However, your
introduction should not become a justification or rationale for qualitative methods per se. You need to
show how your present study is related to previous studies and previously identified phenomena. A
substantive but relevant literature review is, therefore, required. You should clarify whether your study
is guided by a theoretical position or is exploratory or descriptive. This will enable you to
acknowledge sources of bias within your research. Outline the most important characteristics of the
approach you have used (for example, case study approach, idiographic, phenomenological,
naturalistic inquiry, inductive analysis, active participation, and others). The reader should, by the end
of this section have a very clear idea of what you are intending to do, why you are doing it, how you
are doing it and why you have chosen this particular way to investigate it.

18
B. Methodology

The methodology section of a qualitative report might contain the following sub-headings:

1. Rationale and Approach. You need to say something here about how the nature of inquiry meant
that the study design should be of a particular style/nature. What implications does this have for who
your participants should be and what the research issues should be?

2. Study Design. You need to explain about how the requirement to use your particular project
sample, in which they are treated as experts upon their own experiences, necessitates a qualitative
approach which would allow access to people’s own experiences. What particular method(s) will be
used (for example, open-ended and semi-structured interviews)? Why?

3. Interviews. If interviews are going to be used, you need to say something about what interviews
actually are. For instance: the qualitative interview is not prescriptive, with an exhaustive list of pre-
conceived questions. Rather, such an interview is responsive to the interviewee. While an interview
protocol, a list of suggested areas of discussion derived partly from a previous research material and
preceding interviews is necessary, they should not dictate the direction of the interview. The
participant leads the way in the interview, while the interviewer carefully crafts questions grounded in
the participant’s discourse.

4. Participants. You will need to give a rationale for the selection of your sample. This might be a
subheading which precedes your ‘participants’ section called something like “sampling issues”.
Following this, information about your sample, or your participants, needs to be given. Who are your
participants going to be? What characteristics do your participants have (for example, age, gender and
particular characteristic which are important to your project, for example, occupation and others). For
instance, in recent research conducted by Craig Murray, the participant section read:

“In order to obtain participants for the face-to-face (FTF) interview, I made contact with the
Withington Disablement Services Centre (DSC). The DSC provides services for over 2,500 artificial
limb users in the Greater Manchester Area, with a further 600 from outside the region. Each year over
800 lower limbs and over 300 upper limbs are issued. Before the centre could provide contact with
potential participants my research had to be approved by the South Manchester Ethics Committee.
Following this, the centre acted as a contact to potential participants, by sending out letters of
introduction.

The obtainment of participants for the sample of the said study was in part purposive and due to
availability. Potential participants were contacted on the basis of two criteria for being involved in the
project: active users/wearers of prosthetics and adults. Letters of introduction were mailed to 40
people varying along such dimensions as age, sex, whether they wore a prosthetic due to an amputation
or congenital limb absence, whether their missing/absent limb was upper or lower limb, and the type of
prosthetic used. As a result of this first wave of letters I interviewed 8 people. A second wave of

19
letters was sent out by the DSC, in my name, to people who they believed would be willing to help in
such a research project. As a result of this second contact, I interviewed a further 6 people.

In total, I interviewed 14 participants face-to-face (FTF). Three of these were male, eleven female.
Nine participants had limb loss: three of these were male, six were female. Eight of these were
amputations of a lower limb, with one amputation of the left arm, below the elbow. Five of the
interviewees had congenital limb ‘absence’, four of whom were female. Three of these participants
had absence below the level of the elbow (one right, two left), one had absence about the elbow (right).
The fifth participant had a left fore-shortened lower limb. The ages of these participants ranged from
18-75.”

Ethical Issues: A detailed discussion on ethical issues should be presented by the researcher. This
sub-section includes discussions as to how the research was carried out with ethics.

5. Data Analysis. A detailed discussion on data analysis needs to be presented. In this sub-section, the
researcher is required to discuss how the data was analyzed.

Reliability and Validity: It is not only the quantitative research to consider reliability and validity.
The qualitative researcher should be cautioned on how reliable are the responses of the interviewee by
adopting other strategies like having some probe questions or even presenting the interview results to
colleagues for their assessment. The qualitative research can also be validated by expanding the criteria
in screening the interviewees or even the indicators to be included in the interview might also have to
be expanded for verification purposes.

GENERAL GUIDELINES

It is important to recognize that qualitative and quantitative research methods are based on very
different assumptions for approaching and looking at particular issues in your field of interest. Which
you use depends on the questions you want to investigate. Qualitative research recognizes the
importance of the social, cultural and historical context in which the research takes place.

Every person has a different style of writing. There is not really one right style for a report but there
are some basic principles for writing a research report clearly.

Preparing a research report involves other activities besides writing. In fact, writing is actually the last
step in the preparation process. Before writing can take place, the results of the research project must
be fully understood and thought must be given to what the report will say. Thus, preparing a research
report involves three steps: understanding, organizing and writing. The general guidelines that should
be followed for any report or research paper are as follows:

A. Consider the audience: The information resulting from the study is ultimately of importance to the
stakeholders who will use the results to make decisions. Thus, the report has to be understood by
them. The report should not be too technical and not too much jargon should be used. This is a

20
particular difficulty when reporting the results of statistical analysis where there is a high probability
that few, if any, of the target audience have a grasp of statistical concepts.

B. Be concise but precise: On the one hand, a written report should be complete in the sense that it
stands by itself and that no additional clarification is needed. On the other hand, the report must be
concise and must focus on the critical elements of the project and must exclude unimportant issues.
There is a great temptation, on the part of inexperienced researchers, to seek to convey all that they did
in order to obtain information and to complete the research. This is done almost as if the researcher is
afraid that the audience will not otherwise appreciate the time, effort and intellectual difficulties
involved. What the researcher has to come to realize is that he/she will be judged by the contribution
towards solving the issue on hand and not by the elegance or effort involved in the research
methodology.

C. Understanding the Results and Drawing Conclusions: The stakeholders who read the report are
expecting to see interpretive conclusions in the report. The researcher must, therefore, understand the
results and be able to interpret them. Simply reiterating facts will not do, and the researcher must ask
himself all the time “so what?”; what are the implications. If the researcher is comparing the client’s
product with that of a competitor, for example, and reports that 60 percent of the respondents preferred
brand A to brand B, then, this is a description of the results and not an interpretation of them. Such a
statement does not answer the “so what”? question.

OUTLINE OF A RESEARCH REPORT

The following outline can help you in writing the research report:

A. Preliminaries

 Title Page
The title page is the second page of a report for which a page number is assigned although it does not
have a number typed on it. It includes the title of the research, the name of the college or school or
department, Haramaya University, the degree for which the report is presented, the name of the
candidate and the month, year and place of submission. The name of advisor should be also provided
in this title page.

 Abstract

The summary of findings is perhaps the most important component of the written report, since many of
the stakeholders or the management team who are to receive a copy of the report will only read this
section. The summary of findings is usually bound separately and presented together with the report.

 Table of Contents

21
All of the headings and entries in the table of contents should correspond exactly in wording, fonts,
and cases with the headings or entries as they appear in the narrative of the report.

 List of Tables
 List of Figures

B. Introduction

The introduction should describe the background of the study and the details of the research problem.
Following that, automatically the broad aim of the research can be specified, which is then translated
into a number of specific objectives. Furthermore, the theories as bases (if any) should be described to
be able to bridge their significance in the study.

 Background of the Research Problem

 Objectives
 Theories as Bases

C. Methodology – Data Collection

In the methodology, the sampling methods and procedures are described, as well as the different
statistical methods that are to be used for data analysis. Finally, the sample needs to be described.

 Sample and Sampling Method

 Statistical or Qualitative Methods Used for Data Analysis
 Sample Description

D. Findings

 Results, Interpretations and Conclusions

Once the sample has been described, the main findings are to be presented in such a way that all
objectives of the study are to be achieved and the hypotheses to be generated. As mentioned earlier, it
is essential that the main findings are well interpreted and conclusions are drawn wherever possible.

22
 CHAPTER FIVE

WRITING SOCIAL RESEARCH PROPOSALS AND RESEARCH PAPERS

5.1. Meaning of research proposal

A research proposal is a document written by a researcher that provides a detailed description of the
proposed program. It is like an outline of the entire research process that gives a reader a summary of
the information discussed in a research. It is a written document outlining new research parameters for
investigating a topic.

Research proposals are written for various reasons, such as requesting a budget (grant) for the research
they describe, certification requirements for research (as from an institutional review board committee
if the experiment is to be done on human beings or animals protected by animal rights laws), as a task
in tertiary education (e.g., before performing research for a dissertation), or as a condition for
employment at a research institution (which usually requires sponsor-approved research
proposals).Research proposals are written in future tense and have different points of emphasis.

The goal of a research proposal is to present and justify a research idea you have and to present the
practical ways in which you think this research should be conducted. The forms and procedures for
such research are defined by the field of study, so guidelines for research proposals are generally more
exacting and less formal. Research proposals contain extensive literature reviews and must provide
persuasive evidence that there is a need for the research study being proposed. In addition to providing
rationale for the proposed research, a proposal describes detailed methodology for conducting the
research consistent with requirements of the professional or academic field and a statement on
anticipated outcomes and/or benefits derived from the study.

5.2. Elements of research proposals

A proposal should contain all the key elements involved in designing a complete research study, with
sufficient information that allows readers to assess the validity and usefulness of your proposed study.
Research proposals have sections describing the research background, significance, methods, and
references. The only elements missing from a research proposal are the results of the study and your
analysis of those results. Finally, an effective proposal is judged on the quality of your writing. It is,
therefore, important that your writing is coherent, clear, and compelling.

Regardless of the research problem you are investigating and the methodology you choose, all research
proposals must address the following questions:

1. What do you plan to accomplish? Be clear and succient in defining the research problem and
what it is you are proposing to research.

23
 2. Why do you want to do it? In addition to detailing your research design, you also must
conduct a thorough review of the literature and provide convincing evidence that it is a topic
worthy of study. Be sure to answer the "So what? question.
3. How are you going to do it? Be sure that what you propose is doable.

As with writing a traditional research paper, research proposals are generally organized the same way
throughout the social sciences. Most proposals are between ten and fifteen pages in length. However,
before you begin, read the assignment carefully and if anything seems unclear, ask your advisor
whether there are any specific requirements for organizing and writing the proposal.

A good place to begin is to ask yourself a series of questions:

 What do I want to study, and why?

 How is it significant within the subject areas covered in my class?
 What problems will it help solve?
 How does it build upon [and hopefully go beyond] research already conducted on my topic?
 What exactly should I plan to do, and can I get it done in the time available?

At the end, your research proposal should document your knowledge of the topic and highlight
enthusiasm for conducting the study.

In general, research proposal should include the following sections:

1. Introduction

Treat your introduction as the initial pitch of an idea. After reading the introduction, your readers
should not only have an understanding of what you want to do, but they should also be able to sense
your passion for the topic and be excited about its possible outcomes.

Think about your introduction as a narrative written in one to three paragraphs that succinctly answers
the following four questions:

1. What is the central research problem?

2. What methods should be used to analyze the research problem?
3. Why is this research important and why should someone reading the proposal care about the
outcomes from the study?

1.1. Background of the study

This section can be melded into your introduction or you can create a separate section to help with the
organization and flow of your proposal. This is where you explain the context of your research and
outline why it is important. Note that this section is not an essay going over everything you have
learned about the research problem; instead, you must choose what is relevant to help explain your

24
goals for the study. To that end, while there are no hard and fast rules, you should attempt to present
the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing.

1.2. Statement of the problem

In this section you need to state the research problem and give a more detailed explanation about the
purpose of the study than what you stated in the introduction. This section involves description of the
major issues or problems to be addressed by your research. In addition, include few previous studies to
support your argument(s). Hence, statement of the problem should indicate existing gap of knowledge
in the area.

1.3. Objectives of the study

This section deals with the purpose of the study. Research objectives are divided into general objective
and specific objectives.

1.3.1. General objective

The general objective of the study refers to the overall aim for why the researcher is conducting that
study.
1.3.2. Specific objectives
This section includes list of objectives that constitute/form the general objective. Objectives need to be
placed based on their flow or sequence.

1.4. Research questions

Research questions are questions prepared to meet the objectives of the study. The easiest way to write
research questions is to put the specific objectives in question form. The number and order/sequence of
research questions should match the number and order of specific objectives.

1.5. Significance of the study

In this section, the researcher is expected to state the importance of the study through different angles.
Beneficiaries/stakeholders of the research output need to be mentioned in terms of the level of benefit
they would get. There must be also a mention of importance of the study in adding to the existing body
of knowledge.

Significance of the study addresses the ‘so what’ of the study. It describes or explains the potential
value of the study and findings to your field of specialization. This section should identify the audience
for the study and how the results will be beneficial to them. Remember, research is conducted to add
to the existing knowledge base and/or solve a problem – how your particular research will do this
should be articulated in this section.

25
1.6. Scope and limitations of the study
1.6.1. Scope of the study
Scope deals with the coverage or boundary of the study in terms of the: (a) area or locality; (b) subjects
or population; (c) duration or period; and (d) issues which are explicitly stated in specific objectives of
the study.

1.6.2. Limitations of the study

Limitations of the study discuss issues or points that cannot be addressed by or included in the study.
So they are issues that the study lacks. Limitation is not about shortage of time, shortage of literature,
lack of money, lack of willingness from respondents etc. These are challenges to limitations. In
general, limitations are statements which alert the reader of the research report to certain conditions
which are beyond the control of the researcher. Stating the study limitations not only provides extra
credence to the study but provides the reader caution not to expect beyond what the study can and
promises to deliver, not withstanding certain constraints.

1.7. Definitions of concepts /terms

This section involves definition of salient terms/words in the proposal. Not all terms need definition.
There are two types of definitions: conceptual definition and operational definition.

Conceptual definition: The conceptual definition is the universal meaning that is attributed to a word
or group of words and which is understood by many people. It is abstract and most general in nature.
The usual source of conceptual definitions is the dictionary or encyclopedia which is the reference
book of everyday language.

Operational definition: The operational definition is the meaning of the concept or term as used in a
particular study. Unlike the conceptual definition, it is stated in concrete term such that it allows
measurement.

2. Review of related literature

A typical research proposal includes an extensive but focused literature review. Connected to the
background and significance of your study is a more deliberate review and synthesis of prior
studies related to the research problem under investigation. The purpose here is to place your
research within the larger whole of what is currently being explored, while demonstrating to your
readers that your work is original and innovative. Think about what questions other researchers have
asked, what methods they have used, and what is your understanding of their findings. Assess what
you believe is still missing, and state how previous research has failed to examine the issue that your
study addresses.

Since a literature review is information dense, it is crucial that this section is intelligently structured to
enable a reader to grasp the key arguments underpinning your study in relation to that of other

26
researchers. A good strategy is to break the literature into "conceptual categories" [themes] rather than
systematically describing materials one at a time.

To help frame your proposal's literature review, here are the "five C’s" of writing a literature
review:

1. Cite: keep the primary focus on the literature pertinent to your research problem.
2. Compare the various arguments, theories, methodologies, and findings expressed in the
literature: what do the authors agree on? Who applies similar approaches to analyzing the
research problem?
3. Contrast the various arguments, themes, methodologies, approaches and controversies
expressed in the literature: what are the major areas of disagreement, controversy, or debate?
4. Critique the literature: Which arguments are more persuasive, and why? Which approaches,
findings, methodologies seem most reliable, valid, or appropriate, and why? Pay attention to
the verbs you use to describe what an author says/does [e.g., …asserts, demonstrates, etc.].
5. Connect the literature to your own area of research and investigation: how does your own
work draw upon, depart from, or synthesize what has been said in the literature?

Framework of the study

Framework of the study is the last section in chapter two of a proposal. The use of the frameworks
mentioned below depends on the nature of the research and preference of the researcher.

Theoretical framework
A theory makes generalizations about observations and consists of an interrelated, coherent set of ideas
and models. The theoretical framework of the study is a structure that can hold or support a theory of a
research work. It presents the theory which explains why the problem under study exists. Thus, the
theoretical framework serves as a basis for conducting the research. The variables in the theory may or
may not be considered in the study. The theoretical framework allows the researcher to see how the
theory can be of help to the present study.

Conceptual framework of the study

Conceptual framework should be derived from the review of literature. A concept is an image or
symbolic representation of an abstract idea. Chinn and Kramer (1999) define a concept as a complex
mental formulation of experience. Hence, a conceptual framework is the researcher’s idea on how the
research problem will have to be explored. This is the researcher’s own position on the problem and
gives direction to the study.

A conceptual framework may be an adaptation of a model used in a previous study, with modifications
to suit the inquiry. Through the conceptual framework, the researcher can be able to show the
relationships of the different constructs that he/she wants to investigate.

27
Once the conceptual framework has been determined, the next for the researcher is to determine what
research methods to employ to best answer the research problem through the proposed framework.
The conceptual framework gives the direction of the research to be undertaken by the researcher – how
the variables are to be dealt with in the study.

The variables of the study

Variables are not only characteristics but conditions as well which the researcher manipulates, controls
or observes. Every study has variables as these are needed in the study.

Independent Variable: independent variable is a factor which is measured, manipulated, or selected

by the experimenter to determine its relationship to an observed phenomenon. In a research study,
independent variables are antecedent conditions that are presumed to affect a dependent variable. They
are either manipulated by the researcher or are observed by the researcher so that their values can be
related to that of the dependent variable. The independent variables are the presumed cause or
influence of the existence or non-existence or change in certain phenomena. They are the object of
manipulation or control by the researcher in an attempt to determine their relationship to observed
phenomena. In a study where one variable causes the other, the independent variable is the cause.

Dependent (Outcome) Variable: Dependent variable is a factor which is observed and measured to
determine the effect of the independent variable, i.e., that factor that appears, disappears, or varies as
the experimenter introduces, removes, or varies the independent variable. In a research study, the
dependent variable defines a principal focus of research interest. It is the consequent variable that is
presumably affected by one or more independent variables that are either manipulated by the
researcher or observed by the researcher. The dependent variables are the conditions or characteristics
which are influenced by the independent variables. The dependent variable is the focus of the
investigation; its behavior or status as influenced by the independent variables is the concern of the
investigator.

There are another type of variables which may affect the relationship between the independent
variables and the dependent variables. Such type of variables are called confounding variables. These
types of variables are of two types: a) Moderator or intervening variables and b) Extraneous variables.

Moderator or Intervening Variable: That factor which is measured, manipulated, or selected by the
experimenter to discover whether it modifies the relationship of the independent variable to an
observed phenomenon. It is a special type of independent variable. The moderator variables are also
called intervening variables because they intervene between the cause and the effect. They can alter
results of the study.

Extraneous Variable: Those factors which cannot be controlled. Extraneous variables are
independent variables that have not been controlled. They may or may not influence the results. These
variables are also called exogenous variables. One way to control an extraneous variable which might

28
influence the results is to make it a constant (keep everyone in the study alike on that characteristic). If
SES (socio-economic status) were thought to influence achievement, then restricting the study to one
SES level would eliminate SES as an extraneous variable.

3. Research Methods
Chapter three may also be called “Methods.” It describes precisely what will be done and how it will
be done, what data will be recorded, the proposed tools or instruments to be used in data collection and
the methods of analyzing the data.

In this section, the student should give clear, specific, appropriate and credible procedures that will be
followed to attain the proposed objectives of the study. The research design planned for use should be
clearly stated. The research methods should be appropriate to the problem area, i.e., the statement of
the problem, the objectives and the hypotheses. In selecting appropriate research methods and
techniques, the student should be able to answer the question: "Precisely how will I conduct the
proposed research.” The logistics of implementation should be viewed parallel to the choice of the
research design.

The method section of research proposals is far more detailed than those of scientific articles, allowing
profound understanding of the price and risks of the study and the plans for reducing them.

This section must be well-written and logically organized because you are not actually doing the
research. As a consequence, the reader will never have a study outcome from which to evaluate
whether your methodological choices were the correct ones. The objective here is to ensure that the
reader is convinced that your overall research methods of analysis will correctly address the research
problem. Your methods should be absolutely and unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

Describe the overall research design by building upon and drawing examples from your review of the
literature. Be specific about the methodological approaches you plan to undertake to collect
information, about the techniques you would use to analyze it, and about the tests of external validity
to which you commit yourself [i.e., the trustworthiness by which you can generalize from your study to
other people, places or times].

When describing the methods you will use, be sure to cover these issues:

 Specify the research operations you will undertake and the way you will interpret the results of
these operations in relation to your research problem. Don't just describe what you intend to
achieve from applying the methods you choose, but state how you will spend your time while
doing it.
 Keep in mind that a methodology is not just a list of research tasks; it is an argument as to why
these tasks add up to the best way to investigate the research problem. This is an important
point because the mere listing of tasks to perform does not demonstrate that they add up to the
best feasible approach.

29
  Be sure to anticipate and acknowledge any potential barriers and pitfalls in carrying out your
research design and explain how you plan to get around them.

3.1. Description of the study area

This section includes information about the study are such as distance from the capital city and nearby
town(s), geographic coordinates, climatic condition (temperature, rainfall) administrative structure,
population composition (sex, religion, ethnicity) , and general livelihood of the population of the study
area.

3.2. Research design

3.2.1. Type of research

This subsection involves description of the type of research the researcher will employ in the study.
There should be justification for using this type of study.

3.2.2. Sampling technique and sample size

Whether the researcher uses qualitative or quantitative research methods, this is a subsection where the
researcher indicates the sampling technique to be used in the study, sample size determination method,
source of sample, and why this method is selected among others. If the researcher uses both types of
research, sampling procedure and sample size for both types should be clearly indicated.

3.2.3. Methods of data collection

Methods of data collection include questionnaires, use of observation, focus group discussions, in-
depth interviews, and other similar methods. The description should outline the data to be collected in
the study, the methods of measurement and the units of analysis.

3.2.4. Data quality control

Where required, discuss how to check the data collection instruments, the plans for ensuring
confidentiality of data when appropriate, and describe the reliability and validity of instruments used in
the research.

3.2.5. Procedures in data analysis

The student should decide how the data generated will be analyzed. Descriptions of the data analytical
methods, techniques, tools and statistical methods that will be used in analyzing the data should be
provided.

3.2.6. Ethical considerations/Research ethics

As you carry out your research and begin to write your senior essay, you will be conscious of the rules
and regulations set down by your institution. However, there are other rules which all researchers,
whatever their subject, must follow rules of ethics and morality.

30
Why do we need ethical codes?

Research participants have moral and legal rights and it is important that as researchers we do not
violate these rights. Sometimes, enthusiasm for the research topic can lead researchers to pay less
attention to the experience of the research participant as they are so focused on answering their
research question. A code of research ethics is required to ensure that there are agreed standards of
acceptable behavior for researchers, which protect participants’ moral and legal rights.

Research ethics codes also ensure that there is good scientific practice in research. It is essential that
the public should be able to trust the results of research programs as these findings may impact
significantly on their lives. Having researchers conform to codes of research ethics protects against
scientific dishonesty and fraudulent results.

Basic ethical principles

1. Respect for Individuals: It involves acknowledging the autonomous of individuals and protecting
those with diminished autonomy.

a. Anonymity: Anonymity is often confused with confidentiality. In research, anonymity means

that the researcher will not collect any identifying information on the subjects participating in
the research study.

b. Confidentiality: Confidentiality is the assurance that a researcher provides to subjects that all
information about them and all answers they provide will remain in the hands of the
investigator and that no person outside the research process will have access to this
information.

c. Informed Consent: It is the process of educating potential research participants about the basic
purpose of the study, informing them that their participation is voluntary and obtaining their
written consent to participate in the study. Informed consent involves the researcher helping
potential participants to understand exactly what is being asked of them and what their
participation will entail.

2. Beneficence: The term beneficence refers to being charitable or acting with kindness. In research,
it is an obligation to do no harm and to maximize any benefits while minimizing possible harm. The
issue of beneficence relates to determining whether the benefits outweigh the risks for the participants
of the study. To minimize harm, we must identify the risks of the research on human participants.

3. Justice: The principle of justice finds its application in the moral requirement that fair procedures
and outcomes be used in the selection of research subjects. Justice is the fairness of distribution of
benefits and risks among all individuals. This principle can be formulated in four ways: to each

31
person an equal share, to each person according to individual need, to each person according to
individual effort and to each person according to merit.

4. Faking data: It is making up desired data or eliminating undesired data in research findings. One
example of faking data would be to duplicate or multiply the answers ten times and now have fifty
responses.

5. One final ethical issue encountered in research that is often overlooked is plagiarism. In its simple
form, plagiarism means taking credit for work that is not one’s own, either in whole or in part. The
rule of thumb is if you utilize another person’s work, you need to give him/her credit. If you quote that
person, then, his/her words are enclosed in quotation marks and proper citation is given. If you utilize
the person’s thoughts or main ideas but paraphrase what he/she writes, then, you need to cite the
person. Providing proper citations are more than a matter of ethical integrity in research – it is a form
of courtesy shown to other authors and researchers.

Cheating and Plagiarism

Cheating comes in various forms but essentially it means trying to gain an unfair advantage over
fellow students or attempting to deceive your advisor in coursework or during examinations. It also
includes falsifying data. This is when a student presents data which he/she claims was the result of a
piece of research but was actually invented or taken from somewhere else.
Plagiarism occurs when someone tries to pass off another’s work, thoughts or ideas as his/her own,
whether deliberately or unintentionally, without appropriate acknowledgment. Plagiarism can be:

1) Partial – where it relates to poor paraphrasing or the inclusion of several sentences of another’s
work without appropriate acknowledgment.

2) Complete – the substantial and unauthorized use of the work or ideas of another person without
acknowledgment of the source, including work bought from another person.

3) Self-plagiarism/duplication – copying work that was original, complete and submitted by the student
and is again resubmitted for another purpose without acknowledgment.

4) Collusion – where a student produces work with others without acknowledgment.

4. Work plan
This section focuses on the budgeting of time for the implementation of the research. The student
assigns time frames for the completion of various activities of the proposed research. The plan of
activities/work can be presented in the form of a table. Only major activities for accomplishing the
research activities and corresponding time frames should be included in the table.

5. Logistics and budget breakdown

32
The budget of a research proposal clearly describes the financial resources required to conduct the
project. This section should include both a narrative discussion requesting funds and reasons for funds
followed by a related set of tables. This involves first discussing and then listing the necessary and
required personnel, per diem days required to conduct research, travel, equipment, expendable supplies
and materials and any associated services for the research. Every budget item must be justified if funds
are to be expected to support the research.

6. References
As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used in composing your proposal.
The references section must include all works cited in the research proposal. All citations appearing in
the narrative of the proposal must be included in the references section and vice versa. In a standard
research proposal, the reference section can take two forms, so consult with your advisor about which
one is preferred.

1. References -- lists only the literature that you actually used or cited in your proposal.
2. Bibliography -- lists everything you used or cited in your proposal with additional citations of
any key sources relevant to understanding the research problem.

In either case, the reference section should testify to the fact that you did enough preparatory work to
make sure the research will complement and not duplicate the efforts of other researchers. Start a new
page and use the heading "References" or "Bibliography" at the top of the page. Cited works should
always use a standard format that follows the writing style advised by the discipline of your course
[i.e., American Psychologists Association (APA)]. This section normally does not count towards the
total length of your proposal.

33