solved I’m working on a social science question and need support

I’m working on a social science question and need support to help me learn.

Research DesignFor your initial discussion post, address the following:Identify and share with your peers the type of research design (such as teacher research, experimental, case study, qualitative, quantitative, and so forth) that was used in your chosen study for the Action Research Project, drawing from your textbook readings for this unit to support your statements.Why might the researchers have chosen this research design for this study?Describe how the data was collected in your chosen study and how it was used.Text book: Action Research by Ernest Stringer5THINKReflection and AnalysisIn their day-to-day lives in work and community settings people act and behave according to well-established routines and recipes that have emerged from their socialization or professional development. In organizational and agency settings these taken-for-granted procedures and processes are usually incorporated into common practices based on particular ways of thinking about activities in that setting—care plans, lesson plans, interview procedures, meeting procedures, administrative arrangements, and the many other ways that people structure and organize their professional or community activities. These are often so deeply ingrained in people’s experience that they are not conscious that the very forms of organizing and implementing activity may themselves be part of the problem they wish to investigate.Action research processes are designed not to take these procedures for granted but to include them as necessarily part of the investigation. They need to “re-search,” look again, at things they have never seen as problematic, making them subject to investigation and analysis and ultimately as potentially in need of change. Rather than being assumed to be an immutable part of the context, the taken-for-granted becomes available for inspection and analysis. People need to be able to think about all aspects of the situation, to critically examine all features of the setting so they are able to fashion effective solutions to the problems they confront. The following processes therefore provide the means by which people can “re-theorize” the situation, to look past the taken-for-granted theories and explanations for events that are embedded in their everyday work, professional, and community lives.The purpose of the Think phase is to sift through the accumulating body of information that emerges from the Look phase—identifying significant features and elements that seem to have a significant influence on events. These are then organized into a framework of ideas or concepts that enables participants to better understand problematic features of the situation. These systematic processes of analysis provide the means for a deeper or more extended understanding of the situation that lead to a more effective and sustainable resolution of the problem or issue investigated.I sometimes work with people who indicate that “I’d like to be able to do that, but it’s too time consuming. I’m just too busy to do that.” In these circumstances they continue to implement practices that are a part of their professional “stock of knowledge,” experiencing frustration and irritation when, despite their best attempts to devise better ways of doing the job, they fail to accomplish their objectives. I’ve seen teachers who continue to be frustrated when children in their class continue to achieve poorly and remain “turned off” and fractious; social workers angry at clients who fail to achieve “targets” to which they have agreed; health professionals whose patients’ health continues to decline because they fail to make changes to a lifestyle that is the nominal cause of their problems; and so on. Often they are held in place by mandated requirements of their organization or agency to apply particular procedures to client, student, or patient problems. These cases emphasize the need to include all stakeholders at all levels of a system and all relevant aspects of the situation if effective resolution to problematic events is to be achieved.INTERPRETATION: DEVELOPING UNDERSTANDINGDenzin (1989) has written of the need to make the problematic, lived experience of ordinary people directly available to policy makers, welfare workers, and other service professionals, so that programs and services can be made more relevant to people’s lives. He suggests that an interpretive perspective identifies different definitions of the situation, the assumptions held by interested parties, and appropriate points of intervention:Research of this order can produce meaningful descriptions and interpretations of social process. It can offer explanations of how certain conditions came into existence and persist. Interpretive research can also furnish the basis for realistic proposals concerning the improvement or removal of certain events, or problems. (p. 23)The task of the research facilitator in this phase of the research process is to interpret and render understandable the problematic experiences being considered. Interpretation builds on description through conceptual frameworks—definitions and meaning—that enable participants to make better sense of their experiences. It uses experience-near concepts—terms people use to describe events in their day-to-day lives (rather than, e.g., theoretical concepts from the behavioral sciences)—to clarify and untangle meanings and to help people illuminate and organize their experiences. The researcher must provide the opportunity, in other words, for participants to understand their own experiences in terms that make sense to them.Interpretive activity exposes the conceptual structures and pragmatic working theories that people use to explain their conduct. The researcher’s task is to assist participants in revealing those taken-for-granted meanings and reformulating them into “constructions [that are] improved, matured, expanded, and elaborated” and that enhance their conscious experiencing of the world (Guba & Lincoln, 1989). These new ways of interpreting the situation are not intended as merely intellectualized, rational explanations; rather, they are real-life constructs-in-use that assist people in reshaping actions and behaviors that affect their lives.“Interpretation is a clarification of meaning. Understanding is the process of interpreting, knowing, and comprehending the meaning that is felt, intended, and expressed by another” (Denzin, 1989, p. 120). The purpose of interpretive work, therefore, is to help participants to “take the attitude of the other” (Mead, 1934), not in a superficial, mechanistic sense but in a way that enables them to understand empathetically the complex and deeply rooted forces that move their lives.In some instances, initial interpretive work provides the basis for immediate action. Some problems, however, are more intransigent and require extended processes of exploration, analysis, and theorizing. The form of analysis should be appropriate to the problem at hand. Complex or highly abstract theories, when applied to small, localized issues, are likely to drain people’s energy and inhibit action. Explanations and interpretations produced in action research processes should be framed in terms that participants use in their everyday lives, rather than those derived from the academic disciplines or professional practices. The use of experience-near concepts does not eliminate the need for rigorous inquiry. Restricted or cursory analyses that produce superficial solutions to deep-seated and complex problems are unlikely to be effective. Researchers and facilitators can ensure that explanatory frameworks are sufficiently rigorous to move people past stereotypical or simplistic interpretations of their situations, but these frameworks must be grounded in the reality of their everyday lives. They must acknowledge the experiences and perspectives of those to whom programs and services are directed, rather than of those who deliver those services.ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION PHASE I: DISTILLING THE DATATwo major processes provide the means to distill the data that emerge from the ongoing processes of investigation. The first is a categorizing and coding procedure that identifies units of meaning (experience, perception) within the data and organizes them into a set of categories that typify or summarize the experiences and perspectives of participants. The second data analysis process selects key experiences or transformational moments and “unpacks” them to identify the elements that compose them, thus illuminating the nature of those experiences. Researchers may use either or both of these techniques of data analysis as they seek to acquire clarity and understanding by distilling and organizing the information they have gathered.Categorizing and CodingThe major task of this procedure is to identify the significant features and elements that make up the experience and perception of the people involved in the study (stakeholders). All analysis is an act of interpretation, but the major aim in analysis is to identify information that clearly represents the perspective and experience of the stakeholding participants. Those involved in data analysis must “bracket” their own understandings, intuitions, or interpretations as much as possible and focus on the meanings inherent in the world of participants. This difficult task requires some practice and feedback to identify the ways in which we tend to view events through our own perspectives, and it points to the need to ground our analysis in participant terms, concepts, and meanings. This is tricky ground, especially when we come to coding procedures, where we must use a term or heading to represent the data within a category:Maria Hines, a member of a city neighborhood collective, is most explicit about her experience of analyzing data in a project in which she participated. With a slight frown she describes how “I never knew how difficult it was not to put my own words and meanings in. We had to really concentrate to make sure we used what people had actually said and not put it in our own words. It was hard.” (Stringer, 2004)To minimize the propensity to conceptualize events through their own interpretive lenses, researchers should, wherever possible, apply the verbatim principle, using terms and concepts drawn from the words of the participants themselves. By doing so they are more likely to capture the meanings inherent in people’s experience.Because stakeholders are likely to have different experiences and perspectives on any issue, analysis of each stakeholding group should initially be kept separate and more general categories developed at later stages of a project. Thus initial analysis will keep, for example, teacher, student, and parent perspectives separate to identify ways that these stakeholders see the situation. Even within these groups, however, there will be groups and individuals who describe and interpret events in different ways. Analysis should identify these diverse perspectives in ways that enable research participants to understand the elements their perspectives have in common and the ways in which they diverge. Likewise, city planners, businesspeople, and residents may have differing perceptions of a neighborhood development project that all need to be acknowledged and incorporated into planning procedures. Managers, professional staff, administrative staff, and customers or clients may differ in the way they describe their experience, affecting the way a business or agency operates.Procedures for this form of analysis involve Reviewing the data Unitizing the data Categorizing and coding Identifying themes Organizing a category system Developing a report frameworkReviewing the DataCommence this phase by first reviewing the issue on which the study is focused and any associated research questions. The purpose of analysis is to identify data (information) pertinent to these issues and questions. As data analysis continues, there may be considerable amounts of data that are either irrelevant or peripherally relevant, so that choices need to be made about which data to incorporate into processes of analysis.Researchers should first review transcripts or records of interviews, reading them to familiarize themselves with the contents and to get a feel for the views and ideas expressed. Other types of information will be incorporated in further cycles of analysis.Unitizing the DataAs people talk about their experience and perspective, their narrative is composed of a wide range of related and interconnected ideas, activities, and events. They will often change direction or focus on the many parts of the story that compose the interrelated aspects of everyday experience. The next phase is to identify the discrete ideas, concepts, events, and experiences incorporated into their description to isolate the elements of which their experience is composed.Using a photocopy of the original data, block out each separate item of information using a pencil to identify units of meaning. A unit of meaning may be a word, phrase, sentence, or sequence of sentences. You can then literally cut out each of these pieces and paste it onto a card, labeling the card to indicate the origin of that unit—the interview from which it was drawn. When pasting units onto a card, extra information may need to be added to make the meaning clear. For example, to the unit “Some parents refused to consider this,” researchers would need to add in brackets “starting a Parent Teacher Association.” The intent is to identify units of meaning—statements that have discrete meaning when isolated from other information.Categorizing and CodingOnce the data has been unitized, the units of meaning must be sorted into related groups or categories. The previous boxed example provides information about parent activities, experiences, and perspectives about a PTA. It provides the basis for a category that may be identified (coded) as “Parents’ perspectives on a PTA.” Information from other interviews could be added and the category resorted to identify different dimensions of their perspective. Each pile of cards, or category, could then be labeled to identify the particular dimension; for example, an initial set of categories based on the previously discussed data might be “Starting a PTA,” “Parents with good ideas,” or “Parents with interest and enthusiasm.” As data from other interviews are included, however, these categories might be seen as inappropriate and the code revised.As the data are analyzed, categories might emerge that enable a large number of activities to be included under a relatively small number of headings. For instance, analysis of interviews that focus on PTAs might reveal the following categories: “Organizing a PTA,” “The structure of a PTA,” “Parent activities,” “Improving the school,” and so on. This is a natural way of organizing information. Many people would include oranges, apples, pears, and peaches within a category called “fruit.” Likewise, shirts, shorts, slacks, and sweaters might be categorized as “clothing.”Identifying ThemesWhen the categories associated with each stakeholding group have been placed in a system of categories it may be possible to identify themes held in common across stakeholder groups. Within a school we may see that teachers, students, and parents are concerned about “results,” even though their concerns are expressed differently. Neighborhood stakeholders, similarly, may be concerned about the effect of a new roadway, though they may see that effect in either positive or negative ways. All perspectives would need to be incorporated under the overarching theme “Effect of a new roadway.”Research participants therefore need to identify themes—issues, experiences, or perspectives that people have in common—by comparing categories and subcategories across stakeholding groups.Organizing a Category SystemThe category system must then be recorded in some rational form, providing a clear picture of the categories and subcategories of information related to the topic investigated. A manager of a service agency engaged in a project to investigate the operations of one of the agency’s services. The analysis identified the key features emerging from analysis of interviews with agency staff, clients, and client parents and the elements comprising each of those features:(attached pic of the words)Developing a Report FrameworkThis type of category system provides a framework for reports or presentations that communicates the outcomes of this phase of the research to relevant stakeholders. Themes, categories, and subcategories provide the headings and subheadings for this purpose but may be preceded by an introduction that provides contextual information and the purpose of the report and followed by a conclusion that presents the outcomes of the investigation.Analyzing Key Experiences, Epiphanic Events, or Critical IncidentsThe purpose of this approach to analysis is to focus on events that seem to have a marked impact on the experience of major stakeholders. Denzin (1989) talks of moments of crisis, or turning-point experiences that have a significant impact on people. Such events may appear as moments of crisis, triumph, anger, confrontation, love, warmth, or despair that have a lasting impact on people. They may result in a “lightbulb” or “a-ha” experience that provides people with greater clarity about puzzling events or phenomena or leaves them with deep-seated feelings of alienation, distrust, anger, or hopelessness. Key experiences or epiphanic events, however, can be moments of joy and triumph, wonderful experiences that affect people’s lives in positive ways. Analysis of events where people overcome great obstacles to achieve something momentous, or when they work exceedingly hard to accomplish something important, can provide great insight into the underlying dynamics of people’s lives.The analysis of critical incidents has an extended history in the human service professions, for as Tripp (1993) indicates, this enables teachers to acquire the means to self-monitor their techniques and routines in order to increase the power of their professional judgment. Analysis of critical incidents now extends to a wide range of areas, including education, counseling (Juhnke & Kelly, 2005; Tyson, Perusse, & Whitledge, 2004), and management (Hinkin, 2005).As we interview people systematically over an extended period they are likely to focus on events that have special significance for them. By unpacking these events we can learn the features that make them so meaningful, and in the process we extend our understanding of the way the issues affect their lives. This may require ongoing cycles of investigation with participants to explore the significance of the identified events or incidents. This type of analysis requires researchers toReview the DataReview the data as suggested in the Categorizing and Coding section.Identify Key ExperiencesFor each participant, identify events or experiences that appear to be particularly significant or to have an especially meaningful impact on them.Identify Main Features of Each ExperienceFor each significant event or experience, identify the features that seem to be a major part of that experience.Identify the Elements That Compose the ExperienceFor each feature, identify the elements that compose the detailed aspects of that experience.Identify ThemesList experiences, features, and elements for each participant. Compare lists to identify experiences and features of experience common to groups of participants. List these as themes.Case Example: Facilitating WorkshopsThis example demonstrates how a piece of data can be analyzed and the category system used as the basis for a report on workshop facilitation. The analysis commences with a piece of raw data and identifies a key experience and its associated features and elements.Key ExperienceExperiencing an effective workshopFeatures and Elements(attached second picture)This example provides the key features of Anxiety, Careful Planning, Identifying Learning Tasks, Flexible Processes, and Accomplishing Purposes. The elements composing details of the first and last features are drawn from the previous data. A following interview revealed the elements composing Careful Planning and Flexible Processes. These features and elements provide the basis for a report that enables agency administration to understand how the team had presented an effective workshop.ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION PHASE II: ENRICHING THE ANALYSISThe first cycles of an action research process enable researchers to refine their focus of investigation and to understand the ways in which primary stakeholders experience and interpret emerging issues. In following cycles other information is incorporated that further clarifies or extends participants’ understanding by adding information from other stakeholders and data sources. In a school research process, the perspectives of parents might be added to those of students and teachers, and school or student records or the research literature might provide relevant information. In a health program, patient and health professional perspectives might be complemented by evidence-based information from the professional literature.The purpose for this activity is to provide the means for achieving a holistic analysis that incorporates all factors likely to have an impact on achieving an effective solution to the problem investigated. Thus the part that each major stakeholder plays will be taken into account, as well as the substantial information from policy and program documents and the research literature.