Please could such articles be sent on this email address as well? :-))
Thanks.
Pallavi
-----Original Message-----
From: Barrett John [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, July 07, 2000 2:05 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: Support for NOT using Qual software
I would also be interested in any articles.
Thanks
John Barrett
[log in to unmask]
>-----Original Message-----
>From: STEPHEN LEYBOURNE [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 07 July 2000 12:43
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Support for NOT using Qual software
>
>
>Hi....
>
>I am a PhD student at Cardiff Business School, in the 2nd year
>of my PhD.
> Whilst compiling the initial draft of my Methodology chapter
>I have come
>across a number of journal articles that are in favour of the use of
>NUD*ISTor similar programmes for the analysis of qualitative data.
>However, the nature of the PhD being as it is, I also need to
>consider the
>opposing view, and wondered whether members of this list were aware of
>journal articles or other publications that come down against
>the use of
>such software for the analysis of qualitative data.
>
>If anyone has any sources, I would be most grateful for them.
>Perhaps it
>would be better to Email them to me directly at:
>[log in to unmask], rather
>than 'cluttering up' the list with messages that are of little
>interest to most
>subscribers. I realise that this is a bit cheeky, but I have
>looked around the
>usual sources, and , quite naturally, most publications expound on
>researcher's good experiences of qualitative analysis software.
>
>thanks for your help......
>
>Steve Leybourne
>[log in to unmask]
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|