Clive,
and a damn fine book it is too if I may say so!
Rach (PhD student).
On Fri, 16 Mar 2001 09:01:02 +0000 Clive Seale
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I agree that the Murphy et al piece is a real tour de force. When that
> work was being commissioned I too put in a bid for the contract. When Liz
> Murphy got it instead of me, I wrote a book anyway. It is somewhat less
> oriented to the concerns of health researchers, more to social research
> in general. It is:
>
> Seale CF (1999) The quality of qualitative research. Sage.
>
> Clive Seale
>
>
>
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2001, Kath Checkland wrote:
>
> > I suggest you look at the wonderful literature review by Murphy et. al.,
> > produced fo r the Health Technology Assessment Programme. Go to their
> > website at www.hta.nhsweb.nhs.uk, and look for "Qualitative research methods
> > in health technology assessment: a review of the literature." on the
> > publications list. If you are in the NHS or an academic institution they
> > will send it to you free. it is huge (276 pages!) and is a complete tour de
> > force - they trace qualitative methods right back to the Ancient Greeks, go
> > into detail about all the epistemological and ontological questions
> > surrounding qualitative research, and devote a complete chapter to
> > qualitative methods in programme evaluation. The intended audience is NHS
> > commissioners of qualitative research - so it is very hot on what
> > constitutes "validity" in this context.
> >
> > Kath Checkland
> > GP and MA student
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Jacquie Fraser" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: 14 March 2001 17:45
> > Subject: Evaluation of qualitative research
> >
> >
> > > I'm about to teach an evaluation course in public health. When I taught
> > the
> > > course before we looked exclusively at quantitative research and used
> > threats to
> > > internal validity as the main basis of determining 'success' of a program.
> > This
> > > time I would like to include evaluation of qualitative research but I'm
> > not sure
> > > just how to go about it or maybe even if I'm asking the right questions.
> > Is
> > > 'success' in qualitative research primarily about theory generation? Is
> > it
> > > about two or more researchers looking at the same transcripts and pulling
> > out
> > > the same themes? Am I really trying to get at apples and oranges here,
> > > quantitative evaluation measuring program success in terms (for public
> > health)
> > > of behaviour change, qualitative research looking at data-gathering to
> > enhance
> > > program design and/or implementation but not program outcomes?
> > >
> > > I may be just getting to a place of thinking about this that many of you
> > have
> > > been for awhile now so I would appreciate your thoughts on this or ways to
> > > decipher my, as yet, fuzzy thinking.
> > >
> > > Books that I've examined so far do not explicitly address evaluation of
> > > qualitative research (some have discussed using qualitative methods to
> > enhance
> > > quantitative methods of assessment) so any resources would also be
> > appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance.
> > >
> > > Jacquie Fraser, PhD
> > > Department of Health Science
> > > Armstrong Atlantic State University
> > > Savannah, Georgia USA
> > >
> >
>
> Clive Seale
> Department of Sociology
> Goldsmiths College
> Lewisham Way
> London SE14 6NW
>
> Phone: 020 7919 7729 (direct)
> 020 7919 7707 (office)
>
> Fax: 020 7919 7713
----------------------------------------
Hopkin, Rachel2
Email: [log in to unmask]
"University of the West of England"
|