Hi Sue, the tomato stuff really worked. It's a bit similar to using my organiser. Except this time, i really set the timer on the work and not just have a to do list to tick off. I'll check for other ideas on the forum during the 5 minute break.Thanks to everyone.

I agree with Sue, 4,000 per week is quite tight. I used to feel guilty about not handing in a good work too, but found out that it is better to keep handing in the best work that you can do (even if it is less than the word count and quality that you expect) than to wait to produce the perfect work. As you continue handing in more work and getting more critique, your work will get better and better. I guess its the sacrifice that our supervisors have to go through. Keep working at it and dont give up. All the best

Hi, I've collected my data and done some analysis. I've been disseminating the results through writing papers and giving conference presentations.

My problem is that i occasionally procrastinate and not write much. I may spend the day, ticking off less priority stuff on my to do list. I've started using an organiser which has really helped. I'm thinking perhaps its because i still have up till about a year to submit. I need to write 70-100,000 words and don't want to have to wait to the last minute. Though I've written about 30000 words that still need to be edited.. I have 7 chapters and reckon that if i do 10000 per month then i should be fine. Does anyone have any tips?

Hi RuthN and all,

I'm happy that the thread is still active after being posted about a year ago.You did make a mistake though. I have been at one of Glaser's Grounded theory worksop and read his books extensively. The question was to decipher how it is different from the other methodologies that seem similar to it.

Although some authorities suggest that Glaser's version is aphilosphical, many authors believe that he approaches the research from an objective epistemological stand point. Hence the 'all is data' phrase. This suggests that the researcher is seperate from the data and the analysis based on the data alone. Ths is in contrast to the constructionist view that recognises the fact that the researchers's past studies, experiences and reading of the literature affect the analysis. The data is not seperate from the researcher. Instead, the researcher in collaboration with the participants construct data and meaning. I hence used the Charmazian constructionist version. Glaser also argues against extensive transcription, use of computer software in analysis and reading the literature before engaging in the research. I transcribed all my data using Nvivo8 and had to read the literature in order to find gaps to be filled, argue on the need for using GT instead of other methodologies and to pass through the ethics and project committees at the university. I think there are different variants of GT and that you have to argue on why you have used one and not the other.

Hi,

Does anyone knows what happens when the student nvivo8 expires? Can you still do analysis on data that you have imported the software before it expired?

Cheers,

K

Hello,

I think you are doing a hell of a lot for a phd and could break down if you dont prioritise. If you have 20 participants from intervies and 2 FGDS then why are you doing another statistical study. You may end up with a lot of data but no time to analyse and no real depth in the analysis. If you dont recruit enough participants for the quantitative part of your research, it may not be statistically significant (which could mean that the analysis you do may not be relevant). It may be easier to focus on the qualitative arm of the study and leave the quantitative for post doc. The interviews will take a lot of time to transcribe before you start thinking of doing doing the analysis and writing up. If you do have enough funding to get research assistants to help you with the second arm, that will also be feasible. You may want to discuss with your supervisor about reducing your teaching so you can focus on your research.At the end of the day you'll still get a phd with only a qualitative research though you have to argue why you have done that. All the best

K

Hello,

One advise will be to look at the viva positively. Look at it as a chance for your to shine in front of others who may not be knowledgable about what you've done. Here are some examples of viva questions. You'll need to think them through. Which methodology did you use? why did you use it instead of other methodologies etc. Best of luck. Think positive.

1. In one sentence, what is your thesis?
2. What are the main findings of your research?
3. Why are they important?
4. What is your most important finding?
5. What are the main contributions of your research?
6. Why are they important? What is the relevance of your research?
7. What is original about your work/ original contribution?
8. Why did you choose this research area?
9. What have you done that merits a PhD?
10. How would you describe your methodology and why did you decide to use this? What other methods did you consider? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the method you chose?
11. Why have you done it this way and what do you gain by your approach?
12. Were there any ethical implications relating to your research and how did you deal with them?
13. What are the strongest parts of your work?
14. What are the weakest parts of your work/ major limitations?
15. How did you evaluated your work intrinsically?
16. How far do you think you can generalise from your results?
17. Theoretical versus methodological?
18. What do your results mean?
19. Who are the main players in the research area?
20. How do your findings relate to the literature?
21. Looking back, what might you have done differently?
22. What are your plans for this research now?
23. Where will you publish your work?
24. What have you learned from the process of doing your PhD?


Hope this helps,

K

Hi,

You'll most likely need an introduction (although it does not necessarily need to be titled introduction, depending on what your research is all about). Depending on the research, your introduction may give an overview of the context of the research, why you've chosen to do the research, and a summary of the research that would make the reader want to read more. Your best bet would be to look at past PhD thesis from your department and see how their work has been structured. i hope this helps.

K

Hi Florence,

I was in a similar situation where i needed to hand in a 'perfect chapter' but caught the flu. I sent my supervisor an e-mail telling her that i could not submit by the deadline. I asked for an extension to submit at a later date which she agreed to. Most supervisors will agree. You may need to identify how long you'll need to rest and start writing again so that you dont need to ask for another extension after the extension. It would also be a good idea to take your annual leave at some point and travel to somewhere that you wont need to think about the PhD. Most institutions allow 6 weeks. I hope this helps.

Have a virual hug as well:-)

K

Hi Bug,

Thanks for your reply. Your comments will be useful for my methodology chapter (which i am currently writing) and also on the paper. However, my question is for a paper i am sending for a conference and journal publication (just focusing on the experience of using CAQDAS in qualitative research).

If you have particular questions on the epistemology, i can try to help. Different books use the different philosophical ideas differently (E.g, what is an epistemology in one text is a theoretical perspective in another and an ontology in another). Even different acamedicians have different interpretations on what the different philosophical ideas mean. The book i used mostly is Crotty's (1998) Foundations of social research. I'm using constructionism as my epistemological position in my research.

In the light of the clarification, if there is a new comment you'll like to make,that will be greatly appreciated. Thanks again.

Kind regards,

K

Hello,
Hello,

I have been to the field, collected about 30 interviews, fully transcribed them and done some grounded theory analysis using Nvivo8 software. I have written a paper on how i used the software to a journal. i have now been told to resubmit and ' reflect a bit more on the methodological issues in using software, as the current paper on the steps taken is too descriptive'. It sounds a bit vague. Perhaps because i've been in the field and not written academically for some time. Can someone pls give some tips on how to do this?

Cheers

K

Hi Ceruse,

i didnt ask for a protocol. Most likely you may be asked some general questions. Why do you want to do a phd? What is your motivation? ( to add to knowlwedge, prove its something you are passionate about) What strength will you bring to the PhD study( past experiences, qualitative skills, quantitative skills etc). What kind of research have you done in the past? what kind of analysis did you use? What is the latest interesting findinds or trend in the field you want to delve into? Its quite subjective but a discussion with your prospective director of studies about the research could help give you more ideas. All the best,

Koturu

Hi Ceruse,

i didnt ask for a protocol. Most likely you may be asked some general questions. Why do you want to do a phd? What is your motivation? ( to add to knowlwedge, prove its something you are passionate about) What strength will you bring to the PhD study( past experiences, qualitative skills, quantitative skills etc). What kind of research have you done in the past? what kind of analysis did you use? What is the latest interesting findinds or trend in the field you want to delve into? Its quite subjective but a discussion with your prospective director of studies about the research could help give you more ideas. All the best,

Koturu

======= Date Modified 30 Oct 2008 13:54:31 =======
Thanks A116 and all, This is partly in response to A116's comment about doing a literature review.I'm thinking of using the constructionist version of GT. Glaser and Strauss first designed the methodology in 1967 with the 'discovery of grounded theory'. Glaser prosposes that it is an objective method with the researcher playing a passive role in developing theory from the data. The themes are supposed to 'emerge' from the data.

Strauss later parted ways with Glaser and teamed up with Corbin. They co-authored the 'basics of qualitative research;techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. This provoked a verocious attack by Glaser who authored Basics of grounded theory analysis: emergence vs forcing. In His book he accuses Strauss and Corbin of developing a new methodology and forcing theory from the data through their prescription of the 'coding paradigm'. Student of strauss suggest that He espouses a symbolic interactionist approach in his version of GT analysis.

Charmaz, herself a student of both Glaser and Struass proposes a constructionist version of grounded theory in her book 'constructionist grounded theory' She suggests that the researcher in not passive but actively involved in constructing knowledge from the data. The data itself is a social construction of reality as percieved by the participants whose experiences are being studied.

In the constructionist version a preliminary literature review is permitted to increase knowledge base, identify gaps in the theoretical literature that the proposed research will filll and also pass through ethics and research committee requirements. With GT review of preliminary and secondary literature also constitute part of the data being analysed and continues even during data collection.


I think i ticked on the poll box by mistake. Does anyone know how to remove it? Thanks everyone for your comments

Thanks very much for the resources. I'm really wondering about the difference between GT and TA. I've read some of the books recommended. With Grounded Theory (GT) and inductive thematic analysis (TA) i think the researcher builds on themes grounded in the data.  I think GT is iterative as analysis and data collection is done concurrently and GT has the open, axial and selective coding which is not in TA. Also GT aims to develop theory from the data which TA does not claim to do. GT is also tied to symbolic interactionistic theoretical perspective while TA is not tied to any epistemology or theory. With phenomenology the researcher is looking for the essence or meaning of the data from the participants perspective but in GT one is using the participants experience to explain a basic social process. Phenomenology also has some roots with symbolic interactionism but epouses epoch, where the researcher brackets what he/she knows about the phenomenon and reveals only what the participants mean about the phenomenon being studied. In conversation analysis the researcher is interested in the communication dynamics between the interveiwer and the interviewee. I'm still trying to read what narrative analysis is all about. If you have different thoughts or additions, i'll be grateful to have them.