1

C
Chhaapptteerr 66:: G
GEEN
NEER
RIIC
CQQU
UAALLIITTA
ATTIIV
VEER
REES
SEEA
ARRC
CHH

CONTENTS

Chapter 1: Introduction to Qualitative Research

Chapter 2: Qualitative Data Collection Method
Chapter 3: Ethnography
Chapter 4: Case Study
Chapter 5: Action Research
Chapter 6: Generic Qualitative Research
Chapter 7: Qualitative Data Analysis - I
Chapter 8: Qualitative Data Analysis - II

CHAPTER LEARNING OUTCOMES

When you have completed this module, you will be able to:
 Define what is the generic qualitative method
 Identify the characteristics of the generic qualitative method
 Discuss the issue of ethics in qualitative research

CHAPTER OVERVIEW

 Preamble  Ethical consideration in

 What is generic qualitative qualitative research
method?
 Guidelines for the generic Key words
qualitative method Summary
References
 2

PREAMBLE

This chapter discusses the Generic Qualitative Method which is gaining popularity in
applied disciplines such as education, medicine, nursing an marketing. Unfortunately,
there is no definite guideline for the method and in this chapter a set of general
guidelines is proposed. Also discussed in this chapter is the issue of ethics focusing on
four main principles: respect for persons, justice, beneficence and respect for
communities.

WHAT IS THE GENERIC QUALITATIVE RESEARCH?

Many qualitative studies in education are NOT about culture as in

ethnographic studies, or attempting to improve educational practice as in action
research or intensive case studies of an individual or group of individuals. Neither is
there any attempt to develop a theory. These qualitative methods do not fit within an
established qualitative approach. Many terms have been used to describe this
qualitative method. Thorne (1997) used the term “noncategorical qualitative
research”, Sandelowski (2000) put forward the term “fundamental qualitative
method” while Merriam (1998) used the term “generic qualitative method”. We
will use the term generic qualitative method which is a method that “simply seeks to
discover and understand a phenomenon, a process or the perspectives and worldviews
of the people involved” (Merriam, 1998. p.11).

We have observed a growth in the number of qualitative studies

that have no guiding set of philosophic assumptions in the form
of one of the established qualitative methodologies. This lack of
allegiance to an established qualitative approach presents
many challenges for “generic qualitative” studies, one of
which is that the literature lacks debate about how to do a
generic study well. We encourage such debate and offer four
basic requirements as a point of departure: noting the
researchers‟ position, distinguishing method and methodology,
making explicit the approach to rigor, and identifying the
researchers‟ analytic lens

(source: Caelli, K., Ray, L., & Mill, J., 2003a. „Clear as mud‟:
Toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2. No. 2)

Generic Qualitative Research does not have a guiding set of philosophic

assumptions in the form of one established qualitative methodology. The Generic
Qualitative Method exhibits some or all of the characteristics of other methodologies
or approaches but makes no claim to any particular qualitative method. In other
words, the Generic Qualitative Method will use the techniques of ethnography, the
case study method, grounded theory and the techniques of action research, but does
not claim it is either ethnography, case study, grounded theory or action research.
 3

WHY THE NEED FOR THE GENERIC QUALITATIVE METHOD?

Caelli, Ray & Mill, (2003b) provide the following reasons for a generic qualitative
method:

 Even without giving a specific name, the generic qualitative method has
become quite common and is increasing in popularity. The researchers who
have used this method proposing their own guidelines leading to a variety of
ways of doing research.
 Second, graduate students do not have the luxury of time to carry out
intensive qualitative research such as ethnography. Also, many graduate
students do not have the time to develop an in-depth understanding of
qualitative methodological approaches.
 Third, there are a growing number of educational practitioners, clinical and
marketing researchers (i.e. applied disciplines), who have good applied
research questions that can only be addressed through a qualitative
approach. However, these researchers are rarely able (for various reasons)
to engage in a deeply theoretical and methodologically sophisticated
study, Furthermore, they require immediate answers to their questions to be
applied in their practice and work.
 Fourth, for many a generic approach is seen as a less demanding option.
 Fourth, an perhaps the most important, is the inability of qualitative
researchers who review research proposals and manuscripts are unable to
agree because of conflicting arguments on the qualitative approach or
methodology (unlike in quantitative research). In many instances this is put
the “poor” researcher (especially the beginner) in sticky situation.

GUIDELINES FOR THE GENERIC QUALITATIVE METHOD?

Unfortunately, guidelines for conducting research using the Generic

Qualitative Method has been lacking. However, this has not prevented researchers
from using such a methodology. It is not surprising that graduate students face many
problems, especially when their thesis or dissertation supervisors are themselves not
clear about the methodology of the Generic Qualitative Method. Interestingly, the
Generic Qualitative Method is common in fields such as education, medicine, nursing,
marketing and is a growing trend. Perhaps, the constraints of time and resources has
encouraged more researchers to use the Generic Qualitative Method. Also, because of
its flexibility and not having to subscribe to any particular methodology it is become a
preferred method in explaining various kinds of social phenomena in education
(Merriam, 1999). Examples of such phenomena are interactions in the classroom, the
playground, the hallways, the staff room, the principal‟s office, activities among
science, mathematics and social studies teachers using the textbook and so forth.
 4

The Generic Qualitative Method may appear to be a loose method

incorporating the use of interviews, observations and document analysis in data
collection. However, it does not mean that it is less rigorous. You have to clear about
the objectives of the study, you have to ensure that internal validity is maintained and
you values does not influence the interpretation of data.
As mentioned earlier, the Generic Qualitative Method may incorporate many
of the elements of ethnography, action research and the case study, but cannot be
considered to belong purely to any of these qualitative methods. The focus is on the
identification of patterns and categories with the aim of describing phenomena.
Besides description, the data is interpreted to explain phenomena but not with the
intention of building or developing theory. The following is a list of techniques that
may be employed in a Generic Qualitative Method depending on the objectives of the
study:
 To answer specific research questions or begins the study with rather
general or broad questions
 The researcher could be a passive observer or an active participant
 The methods of data collection could include either interviews,
observations or documents examination or a combination of the three.
 Semi-structured or unstructured interviews
 Various documents examined such as teaching materials, newsletters,
lesson plans, memos, circulars and many other kinds of written items.
 Content analysis may be used to analyse communication (oral or
written)
 Information is provided about the sample selected
 There is no specific length of data gathering but a rationale is given
for the time spent gathering data from observations/interviews
 Subjects could be interviewed individually or in focus groups
 The biases of the researcher are made explicit
 Entry or access to the setting is described in detail
 Fieldnotes are kept of all observations: jottings, description, analysis
and reflection.

The list of possible research techniques that may be adopted in a Generic

Qualitative Method is very much dependent on the objectives of the study and the
researcher‟s belief as to what is knowledge. What information will be needed to
explain the phenomenon examined? How can others be convinced that the findings of
the study are credible? The following are some examples of phenomena in education
that may be studied using the Generic Qualitative Method:

 Racial integration in the school canteen during recess in a primary

school
 Use of portfolios in assessing language of primary school children
 Interaction in the technology-based classroom using the internet to
teach economic
 Cognitive level of questions in an inquiry-based science classroom
 Teacher burnout and attitudes
 Being in an academically weak class for three years: Perceptions and
attitudes of three students
 Analysis of online collaboration in a biology class
 5

 Comparative analysis of staff meetings in two schools

CHECKLIST FOR THE GENERIC QUALITATIVE METHOD [an adaptation

of the Checklist by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, (2009,
& Spencer, Ritchie, Lewis and Dillon, 2003]

As mentioned earlier, the Generic Qualitative Method can adopt one or combine
several methods and without having to follow closely the procedures of any one
particular method. Given that there are as yet no clear guidelines as to how to adopt
the Generic Qualitative Method, the following Checklist is proposed which could be
used to guide the Generic Qualitative Method. The Guidelines have been framed to
encompass the variety of way in which qualitative research is conducted.

The examples given under each question in the checklist are intended to highlight some
of the key issues to be considered for that question – they are not intended to be
exhaustive. Please add any additional considerations in the comments box.

1. ARE YOU CONVINCED THAT A QUALITATIVE APPROACH

APPROPRIATE?
A qualitative approach can be judged to be appropriate when the research sets out to
investigate phenomena that are not easy to quantify or measure accurately, or where such
measurement would be arbitrary and inexact. If clear numerical measures could
reasonably have been put in place, then consider whether a quantitative approach may
have been more appropriate.
Examples of study where a qualitative approach is appropriate:
 personal experiences (of a particular counselling technique, treatment)
 personal values and beliefs (for example beliefs on corporal
punishment)
 interactions and relationships (for example, the quality of teacher-pupil
relationship)

2. ARE YOU CLEAR AS TO WHAT YOUR STUDY SEEKS TO DO?

For example:
 Is the purpose of the study clear – aims/objectives/research
question(s)?
 Is there adequate/appropriate reference to the literature?
 Are underpinning values/assumptions/theory discussed?

3. HOW DEFENSIBLE or RIGOROUS IS YOUR RESEARCH DESIGN or

METHODOLOGY?
For example:
 Is the design appropriate to the research question?
 Is a rationale given for using a qualitative approach?
 Are there clear accounts of the rationale/justification for the sampling,
data collection and data analysis techniques used?
 Is the selection of cases/sampling strategy theoretically justified?
 6

4. HOW WELL WAS THE DATA COLLECTION CARRIED OUT?

Were the methods of data collection used the most appropriate, given the aims
of the research? Was the data collection robust, and are there details of:
 how the data were collected?
 how the data were recorded and transcribed? (if verbal data)
 how the data were stored?
 what records were kept of the data collection?

5. IS THE ROLE OF THE

RESEARCHER CLEARLY
DESCRIBED?
For example:
 Has the relationship
between the researcher
and the participants
been adequately
considered?
 Did you describe how
the research was
explained and presented
to the participants?
6. DID YOU CLEARLY
DESCRIBED THE
CONTEXT?
For example:
 Are the characteristics of the participants and settings clearly defined?
 Were observations made in a sufficient variety of circumstances?
 Was context bias considered?
The „status‟ of the researcher can profoundly
affect the data. For example, a middle-aged
woman and an 18-year-old man are likely to
get different responses to questions about
sexual activity when interviewing a group of
teenage boys. It is important to consider age,
sex, ethnicity and „insider‟ status (such as
where the interviewer or researcher is part of
the group being researched or has the same
condition or illness). The researcher can also
profoundly influence the data by use of
questions, opinions, judgements and so on, so
it is important to know what the researcher‟s
position is in this regard, and how the
researcher introduced and talked about the
research with the participants.

7. WERE THE METHODS RELIABLE?

For example:
 Were data collected by more than one method?
 Is there justification for triangulation, or for not triangulating?
 Do the methods investigate what they claim to

8. IS THE DATA ANALYSIS SUFFICIENTLY RIGOROUS?

For example:
 Is the procedure explicit – is it clear how the data were analysed to
arrive at the results? (Sandelowski, 1986).
 How systematic is the analysis – is the procedure reliable/dependable?
 Is it clear how the themes and concepts were derived from the data?
 7

9. ARE THE DATA „RICH‟?

For example:
 How well are the contexts of
the data described?
 Has the diversity of
perspective and content been
explored?
 How well have the detail and
depth been demonstrated?
 Are responses compared and
contrasted across
groups/sites?
Qualitative researchers use the adjective
„rich‟ to describe data that are in-depth,
convincing, compelling and detailed
enough that the reader feels that they
have achieved some level of insight into
the research participants‟ experience. It is
also important to know the „context‟ of
the data – where they came from, what
prompted them, what they pertains to,
and so on.

10. IS THE ANALYSIS RELIABLE?

For example:
 Did more than one research theme and category evolve?
 If so, how were differences resolved?
 Did participants feed back on the data? (if possible and relevant)
 Were negative/discrepant results addressed or ignored?

11. ARE THE FINDINGS CONVINCING?

For example:
 Are the findings clearly
In qualitative research, the reader
presented? should find the results of the research
 Are the findings internally convincing or credible. This means
coherent? that the findings should be presented
 Are extracts from the original clearly and organised logically, they
data included? should not contradict themselves
 Are the data appropriately without explanation or consideration,
referenced? and they should be clear and
 Is the reporting clear and coherent.
coherent?

12. ARE THE FINDINGS RELEVANT TO THE AIMS OF THE STUDY?

13. ARE THE CONCLUSION ADEQUATE?

For example:
 How clear are the links between data, interpretation and conclusions?
 Are the conclusions plausible and coherent?
 Have alternative explanations been explored and discounted?
 Does this study enhance understanding of the research subject?
 Are the implications of the research clearly defined?
 Is there adequate discussion of any limitations encountered?
 8

14. HOW CLEAR AND COHERENT IS THE REPORTING OF ETHICAL

CONSIDERATIONS?
For example,
 Have ethical issues been taken into consideration?
 Are ethical issues discussed adequately – do they address consent and
anonymity?
 Have the consequences of the research been considered; for example,
raising expectations, changing behaviour?
 Was the study approved by an ethics committee?

ETHICAL GUIDELINES IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

a) WHY IS RESEARCH ETHICS IMPORTANT IN QUALITATIVE

RESEARCH?

Research ethics deals primarily with the interaction between researchers and
the people they study. Agreed-upon standards for research ethics help ensure that as
researchers we explicitly consider the needs and concerns of the people we study, that
appropriate procedures for the conduct of research takes place, and that a basis for
trust is established between researchers and study participants. Whenever we conduct
research on people, the well-being of research participants must be our top priority.
The research question is always of secondary importance. This means that if a choice
must be made between doing harm to a participant and doing harm to the research, it
is the research that is sacrificed. Fortunately, choices of that magnitude rarely need to
be made in qualitative research! But the principle must not be dismissed as irrelevant,
or we can find ourselves making decisions that eventually bring us to the point where
our work threatens to disrupt

b) WHAT ARE THE FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH ETHICS

PRINCIPLES?

THREE core principles, originally articulated in National Commission for the

Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioural Research., The Belmont
Report (1979) form the universally accepted basis for research ethics.
 Respect for persons requires a commitment to ensuring the autonomy
of research participants, and, where autonomy may be diminished, to
protect people from exploitation of their vulnerability. The dignity of
all research participants must be respected. Adherence to this principle
ensures that people will not be used simply as a means to achieve
research objectives.
 Beneficence requires a commitment to minimizing the risks associated
with research, including psychological and social risks, and
maximizing the benefits that accrue to research participants.
Researchers must articulate specific ways this will be achieved.
 Justice requires a commitment to ensuring a fair distribution of the
risks and benefits resulting from research. Those who take on the
 9

burdens of research participation should share in the benefits of the

knowledge gained. Or, to put it another way, the people who are
expected to benefit from the knowledge should be the ones who are
asked to participate.

In addition to these established principles, a fourth principle, respect for

communities, should be added. Respect for communities “confers on the researcher
an obligation to respect the values and interests of the community in research and,
wherever possible, to protect the community from harm. This is fundamental for
research when community-wide knowledge, values, and relationships are critical to
research success and may in turn be affected by the research process or its outcomes
(Weijer, Goldsand & Emanuel, 1999).

c) WHAT IS INFORMED CONSENT?

Informed consent is a mechanism for ensuring that people understand what it

means to participate in a particular research study so they can decide in a conscious,
deliberate way whether they want to participate. Informed consent is one of the most
important tools for ensuring respect for persons during research. Many people think
of informed consent primarily as a form, that is, a piece of paper that describes in
detail what the research is about, including the risks and benefits.
This form generally goes through ethics committee approval procedures,
includes legalistic language, and is signed by the participant, the researcher, and
possibly a witness. Such informed consent forms are appropriate for qualitative
research – when the risks faced by participants may be substantial. They may also be
necessary for minimal risk research when the foundation for trust between researchers
and participants is weak.
But forms are really only one part of an informed consent process. In some
cases, forms may not be the best way to ensure informed consent. There are also
situations where obtaining informed consent from individual participants may not be
feasible or necessary. For example, a researcher using participant observation to learn
about how transactions occur in a public market would find it very hard to get
everyone observed in that setting to sign a consent form and would probably create
unwarranted suspicion about her motives in the process of seeking such consent. Yet
if people see a stranger hanging around, watching, asking questions, and perhaps
taking discreet notes, they may be even more suspicious about why she is there. In
these situations, qualitative researchers must use other mechanisms to achieve the
goal of informed consent.

d) HOW DO WE ACHIEVE INFORMED CONSENT FOR

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH?

In general, informed consent procedures are based on national and

international research ethics guidelines; a review of such guidance is an important part
of ethics training. Research organizations and ethics committees often have their own
specific guidelines as well. The first task in achieving informed consent is to inform
people about the research in a way they can understand. This can be a multistep
process. For example, you may begin by approaching community leaders and
explaining the research to them. The leaders may then facilitate a community forum
where interested people can learn about the research and ask questions. You might
 10

distribute information sheets, advertisements, or brochures, or try to get local

newspapers or radio stations to do a report on the research. A community advisory
board might be set up. Or the researchers might spend a week or two just talking with
people one-on-one.
If the researchers will be spending a lot of time in the community setting, or if
the research is potentially controversial or sensitive, such efforts can go a long way
toward gaining trust as well as understanding. In some situations, it may be necessary
to obtain formal permission from community leaders or gatekeepers before research
can begin. In general, data collection activities that require more than casual
interaction with a person require individual informed consent from that person,
regardless of whether community-level permissions exist. Examples of such activities
include in-depth interviews and focus groups.

The person should be told:

 the purpose of the research
 what is expected of a research participant, including the amount of
time likely to be required for participation
 expected risks and benefits, including psychological and social
 the fact that participation is voluntary and that one can withdraw at
any time with no negative repercussions
 how confidentiality will be protected
 the name and contact information of the local lead investigator to
be contacted for questions or problems related to the research
 the name and contact information of an appropriate person to
contact with questions about one‟s rights as a research participant
(usually the chair of the local ethics committee overseeing the
research)

All this information must be provided in a language and at an educational

level that the participant can understand. Potential participants must be competent to
make a decision about being involved in study.
 11

REFERENCES

Caelli, K., Ray, L., & Mill, J. (2003a). „Clear as mud‟: Toward greater clarity in
generic qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(2).

Caelli, Ray, & Mill, J. (2003b). Clarity In Generic Research 21, International Journal
of Qualitative Methods 2 (2) Spring,

.Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research

(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Janesick, V. J. (2000). The choreography of qualitative research design. In N.K.

Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 379-399).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Koch, T., & Harrington, A. (1998). Reconceptualizing rigour: The case for reflexivity.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28, 882-890.

Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Lowenberg, J. S. (1993). Interpretive research methodology: Broadening the dialogue.

Advances in Nursing Science, 16(2), 57-69.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education.

San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mill, J. E., & Ogilvie, L. D. (2003) Establishing methodological rigor in international

qualitative research: A case study from Ghana. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41, 80-
88.

Sandelowski, M. (1986). The problem of rigor in qualitative research. Advances in

Nursing Science, 8(3), 27-37.

Sandelowski, M. (2000). Focus on research methods: Whatever happened to

qualitative description? Research in Nursing and Health, 23, 334-340.

Sandelowski, M. (2002). Focus on research methods: Combining qualitative and

quantitative sampling, data collection, and analysis techniques in mixed-method
studies. Research in Nursing and Health, 23, 246-255.

Spencer L. Ritchie J, Lewis J, Dillon L (2003) Quality in qualitative evaluation: a

framework for assessing research evidence

Thorne, S., Kirkham, S. R., & MacDonald-Emes, J. (1997). Interpretive description:

A noncategorical qualitative alternative for developing nursing knowledge. Research
in Nursing and Health, 20, 169-177.
 12

National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and

Behavioral Research. The Belmont Report. Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the
Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington, DC: National Institutes of
Health, 1979.

van Manen, M. (1998). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action
sensitive pedagogy. London, Canada: The Althouse Press.

Weijer C, Goldsand G, Emanuel EJ. Protecting communities in research: current

guidelines and limits of extrapolation. Nature Genetics 1999;23(3):275-80.

Wolcott, H.F. (2002). Writing up qualitative research…better. Qualitative Health

Research, 12, 91-103.

KEY WORDS

 Generic qualitative method  Ethics

 Non-categorical method  Justice
 Fundamental method  Beneficence
 Rigour  Respect for persons
 Theoretical basis  Respect for communities
 Clarity of objectives  Informed consent
 Data rich

SUMMARY

 Thorne used the term “non-categorical qualitative research”, Sandelowski put

forward the term “fundamental qualitative method” while Merriam used the
term “generic qualitative method”.

 The Generic Qualitative Method does not have a guiding set of philosophic
assumptions in the form of one established qualitative methodology, but
instead employs the techniques of data collection of other qualitative methods.
 13

 The generic qualitative method has become quite common and is increasing in
popularity.

 Unfortunately, guidelines for conducting research using the Generic

Qualitative Method has been lacking.

 The Generic Qualitative Method may incorporate many of the elements of

ethnography, action research and the case study, but cannot be considered to
belong purely to any of these qualitative methods.

 Research ethics deals primarily with the interaction between researchers and
the people they study.

 The Belmont Report (1979) form the universally accepted basis for research
ethics: Respect for persons, beneficence and justice.

 Respect for communities “confers on the researcher an obligation to respect

the values and interests of the community in research and, wherever possible,
to protect the community from harm.

 Informed consent is a mechanism for ensuring that people understand what it

means to participate in a particular research study so they can decide in a
conscious, deliberate way whether they want to participate.

--------0000--------