Leedy And Ormrod 2010 Reviewed Standards From Experienced Qu
Leedyandormrod2010reviewedstandardsfromexperiencedqualitativ
Leedy and Ormrod (2010) reviewed standards from experienced qualitative researchers and compiled a list of general criteria to apply when evaluating a qualitative study: 1. Purposefulness: Does the research question(s) drive the research process and the methods to collect and analyze the data? 2. Explicitness of Assumptions and Biases: Does the researcher describe any assumptions, expectations, or biases that might influence how the data are collected, analyzed, and interpreted? 3. Rigor: Does the researcher use rigorous, precise, and thorough methods to collect, record, and analyze the data? Does the researcher take steps to remain objective throughout the study? 4. Open-mindedness: Is the researcher willing to modify interpretations when newly collected data do not support previously collected data? 5. Completeness: Does the researcher describe the phenomenon in all its complexity? Does the researcher spend sufficient time in the field examining the phenomenon, detail all aspects of the phenomenon (e.g., setting, behaviors, perceptions), and provide a holistic picture of the phenomenon? 6. Coherence: Do the data show consistent findings with the measurement used and across multiple measurement methods used? 7. Persuasiveness: Does the researcher provide logical arguments, and does the evidence support one interpretation of the data? 8. Consensus: Do other studies and researchers in the field agree with the interpretations and explanations? 9. Usefulness: Does the study provide useful implications for future research, a more thorough understanding of the phenomenon, or lead to interventions that could enhance the quality of life? (p. 187) In addition to these criteria, there are several factors to consider when evaluating the various sections of a research study or proposal. The next seven sections will discuss how to critically evaluate the literature review, the purpose statement, the sampling methods, the procedures, the instruments, the results, and the discussion section of a qualitative study. Evaluating the Literature Review Section
Paper For Above instruction
Introduction
Qualitative research is a pivotal approach in exploring complex phenomena within their natural contexts. Its emphasis on depth, richness, and contextual understanding requires rigorous evaluation to ensure validity and reliability. Leedy and Ormrod (2010) provide a comprehensive set of standards for assessing qualitative studies, emphasizing the importance of purposeful design, transparency, and coherence. This paper presents a detailed evaluative analysis based on these criteria, illustrating their application through a hypothetical qualitative research scenario focusing on the experiences of remote learners during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Evaluation of Purposefulness
A fundamental aspect of qualitative research is purposeful inquiry driven by specific research questions. These questions should guide every phase of the research process, from data collection to analysis. For instance, in a study examining remote learners' experiences, the research questions might explore the challenges faced, coping mechanisms employed, and perceived impacts on learning outcomes. If these questions align closely with the data collection methods—such as in-depth interviews or focus groups—they demonstrate purposeful design, aligning with Leedy and Ormrod’s (2010) first criterion. Purposefulness ensures that the study remains focused and relevant, facilitating meaningful insights.
Assessment of Explicitness of Assumptions and Biases
Transparency regarding the researcher’s assumptions and biases is critical in qualitative research to enhance credibility. Researchers should explicitly state their positionality, potential biases, and how these factors are mitigated. For example, a researcher studying remote learning might acknowledge preconceptions about technology's role in education. Such disclosure allows readers to interpret findings within the appropriate context and assess potential influences on data interpretation. This aligns with Leedy and Ormrod’s (2010) second criterion, ensuring that biases are managed and that the study maintains objectivity.
Evaluation of Rigor
Rigor involves meticulous data collection, analysis, and documentation. Utilizing multiple data sources (triangulation), member checking, and maintaining an audit trail are strategies to enhance rigor. For example, conducting interviews, observations, and document analyses on remote learning practices provides comprehensive data, reducing the risk of bias. These methods also foster confidence in the findings' accuracy and dependability, fulfilling Leedy and Ormrod’s (2010) third criterion related to rigorous methodology.
Open-mindedness and Flexibility in Data Interpretation
An essential quality of high-quality qualitative research is openness to modifying interpretations in light of new data. Researchers should describe how they remain adaptable, adjusting themes or conclusions as more evidence emerges. For instance, initial findings may suggest technology is the primary challenge for remote learners, but subsequent data could reveal socio-emotional factors are equally significant. Such responsiveness indicates the researcher's commitment to an authentic understanding, satisfying Leedy and Ormrod’s (2010) fourth criterion.
Assessing Completeness and Holistic Description
Completeness refers to capturing the phenomenon in its entirety. Researchers must spend adequate time in the field, exploring various aspects such as setting, participant perceptions, behaviors, and contextual factors. In the hypothetical scenario, this might involve prolonged engagement with students, teachers, and parents across multiple geographical regions. Providing detailed descriptions of the environment and perceptions ensures the phenomenon’s complexity is articulated, adhering to Leedy and Ormrod’s (2010) fifth criterion.
Ensuring Coherence and Consistency
Data coherence is demonstrated when findings are consistent across different measurement methods and with the data collected. Using triangulation—combining interviews, observations, and written reflections—can corroborate themes and increase confidence in results. If themes such as feelings of isolation or technological difficulties appear across multiple sources, the study exhibits coherence, aligning with criterion six.
Persuasiveness and Logical Argumentation
A persuasive qualitative study provides clear, logical links between data and interpretations. Techniques like thick description and illustrative quotations support arguments. For example, a participant’s narrative about struggling with online assessments strengthens the interpretation that assessment formats impact engagement. Well-structured reasoning justifies claims, fulfilling Leedy and Ormrod’s (2010) seventh criterion.
Consensus and Field Agreement
Assessing whether findings align with existing research enhances credibility. If multiple studies find that remote learners face similar challenges, the researcher’s interpretations gain support and validity. This comparative approach confirms the study’s contribution and situates it within the broader literature, consistent with the eighth criterion.
Usefulness and Practical Implications
Finally, the utility of the study is evaluated based on its contributions to understanding the phenomenon and informing practice. For instance, identifying specific barriers can guide policy or pedagogical strategies to improve remote learning experiences. Implications for future research or interventions that aim to enhance educational access embody the study's usefulness, in accordance with the ninth criterion.
Critical Evaluation of Study Sections
Beyond applying Leedy and Ormrod’s standards, critical appraisal involves examining individual sections of the research report:
Literature Review
A thorough literature review situates the study within existing knowledge, identifies gaps, and justifies the research purpose. It should synthesize current findings and demonstrate relevance. Weak reviews may lack recent sources or fail to establish the significance of the research.
Purpose Statement
The purpose statement must clearly articulate the research objectives, aligning with the research questions. Vague or overly broad aims undermine the study's focus.
Sampling Methods
Sampling should employ purposeful strategies to capture relevant perspectives, such as maximum variation sampling. It is essential that the sampling frame matches the research aims.
Procedures and Instruments
Procedures must be transparent and systematic. Instruments, such as interview guides, should be validated or pilot-tested to ensure reliability.
Results and Discussion
Results should logically follow from data analysis, and interpretations should be supported by evidence. The discussion should connect findings to existing literature and implications.
Conclusion
Applying Leedy and Ormrod’s (2010) standards enables comprehensive evaluation of qualitative research, ensuring validity, credibility, and usefulness. Critical analysis of individual study sections further enhances the assessment process, ultimately contributing to the advancement of qualitative methodology and knowledge.
References
- Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2010). Practical research: Planning and design (9th ed.). Pearson.
- Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications.
- Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Sage publications.
- Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage publications.
- Saldana, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
- Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2014). Designing qualitative research. Sage publications.
- Silverman, D. (2016). Qualitative research. Sage.
- Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Sage.
- Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Sage.
- Bloor, M., & Wood, F. (2006). Keywords in qualitative methods. Sage.