RESEARCH BRIEFS

Hott, 1994). However, we are still strug-gling to find more interesting and excitingways to enliven this very important topic forundergraduate nursing students.

A Field Trip forUndergraduateResearch Students

Students in undergraduate researchcourses struggle to learn the vast new ter-minology of research. They often have dif-ficulty visualizing themselves asresearchers. Undergraduate studentsrarely have the opportunity to meet orinteract with nurses who are actuallyinvolved in research (other than their pro-fessors). Thus, students can easily devel-op the perspective that research is an aca-demic endeavor, and not something that"real nurses" actually do. In order to dis-pel this myth, I attempted to emulate thefaculty noted above and introduce a cre-ative strategy in the introductoryresearch course at our small private col-lege in a rural New England community.As the professor of the research courseand a doctoral student, I am currentlyaffiliated with the Maine Center forOsteoporosis Research. The center is aregional referral site for a variety of clini-cal drug trials, prevention studies, andquality of life investigations. Theresearch center employs five registered

nurses as study coordinators andresearch associates. Students in the intro-ductoi^ research course were invited tothe research center for a tour and a meet-ing with the coordinator of clinical stud-ies. Additionally, they met several of thestudy coordinators and asked them ques-tions about their roles as nurses involvedin various t3rpes of research. Studentswere ahle to discuss the prohlems of sub-ject recruitment and retention, researchproposal development, and the myriad ofactivities that the nurses must coordinatewhen they are involved in a researchstudy. The field trip was scheduledtoward the end of the semester, after stu-dents had heen exposed to the researchprocess and completed several requiredclass projects. Therefore, students cameto the experience with the theoreticalknowledge of research terminology andstudy design and implementation.

The field trip to the research centerwas an excellent way to enliven the week-ly classroom routine of the introductorycourse. Students were ahle to see researchin a "real Ufe" context, and to actuallymeet nurses involved in various aspects ofnursing research. An unexpected advan-tage of the field trip was that students inthe class were able to see research as aviable option for their careers. They wereable to meet nurses in their own commu-nity who "did research" for a living. The

job market for nurses has changedremarkably in the past severad years. Newgraduates can no longer count on an entrylevel medical-surgical position to begintheir careers. As educators, we must helpstudents to broaden their ideas of what itmeans to be a nurse. We must help stu-dents realize that creative thinkers cjin doa variety of things as nurses. Nursingresearch is essential to build the science ofnursing. Nurses who build their careersthrough research should begin thisprocess as undergraduate students. Theuse of creative teaching strategies inintroductory research courses can help topromote a positive attitude toward nurs-ing research in the growing numbers ofbeginning practitioners.

References

Blenner, J.L. (1991). Researcher for a day: Asimulation game. Nurse Educator, 76(2), 32-34.

Kirchhoff, K.T. (1991). The use of field tripsin teaching nursing research. Journal ofNursing Education, 30(2), 89-90.

Neidich, B. (1990). A method to facilitate stu-dent interest in research: Chart review. Journalof Nursing Education, 29(3), 139-140.

Notter, L.E., & Hott, J. (1994). Essentials ofnursing research (5th ed.). New York, NY: Springer.

Waddell, D.L. (1994). Creative strategies ofteaching nursing research. Nurse Educator,19(5), 5-6.

Wagnild, G.M. (1992). Research quest: Aresearch teaching method. Journal of NursingEducation, 31(9), 425-426.

Essential Elements in a Qualitative Dissertation ProposalMelinda M. Swenson PhD, RN, CS

ABSTRACTThis article clarifies the requirements

of a qualitative research proposal, specif-ically a qualitative doctoral dissertation.The recommendations will he useful tograduate students and faculty members

Dr. Swenson is Associate Professor, IndianaUniversity School of Nursing, Indianapolis, Indiana.

This article is based on materials developed byEgon G. Guba (1987) and used with permission.The author acknowledges Dr. Guba';s influenceon this work.

Address reprint requests to Melinda M.Swenson, PhD, RN, CS, Associate Professor,Indiana University School of Nursing, 1111 MiddleDrive NU312, Indianapolis, IN 46202.

who are writing a qualitative proposal forthe first time or who are critiquing one. Asummary of assumptions of non-tradi-tional research paradigms as they applyto inquiry design, a suggestion of the con-tents of the first three chapters of a qual-itative dissertation (usually included in adissertation proposal), and suggestionsfor ensuring rigor in the design and con-duct of the dissertation research areincluded.

The constructivist/interpretivist dis-sertation is distinguishahle from theconventionail (hypothetico-deductive)

dissertation in that it relies on qualitative

methods (2dthough not exclusively) hut alsoin its adherence to the hasic assumptions ofalternative inquiry paradigms.* AdoptingEiltemative atssumptions means that theessential elements associated with conven-tional inquiry are literedly inappropriatewithin the qualitative framework. In a qual-itative** proposal, the following conditionsare acceptahle: 1 ) the precise nature of theprohlem investigated is fluid, only incom-

"Examples of some usually qualitative para-

digms include grounded theory, phenomenology,

critical social theory, hermeneutics, some histori-

ography and ethnography, and naturalistic inquiry.

188 Journal of Nursing Education

RESEARCH BRIEFS

pletely determined at the beginning of thestudy, and subject to change as the inquiryproceeds; 2) the design cannot be fiilly spec-ified in advance but develops over time; 3)data collection and data analysis occur vir-tually simultemeously; 4) sampUng is purpo-sive rather than random/representative; 5)theory (in the sense of pattern theory thatinterprets and explicates a particular case)is grounded in the data rather than specifieda priori; 6) instrumentation is more likely tobe human them paper-and-pencil; and 7)outcomes are not representations of an ulti-mate reality but are mental constructions,continuously subject to revision andchange—momentary consensus in the midstof continuous evolution.

However, the apparent looseness andfluidity of the qualitative approach shouldnot be mistaken for a lack of rigor.Researchers must take quality assuranceconsiderations into account when planninga qusJitative dissertation (discussed later).In simimary, the proposal for a qualitativedissertation differs msu-kedly from propos-als written for more conventional researchplans. The following elements representminimal requirements for a qualitative dis-sertation proposal.

Chapter One: Introduction

Qualitative studies, like conventionalstudies, must have a focus. The introductionsection provides boundaries for the inquiryand sets criteria for what is relevant.UsuEiUy, the focus is some state-of-affairs(phenomenon of concern) which is not wellunderstood but which might be explained orilluminated by the inquiry. Problems

**The term "qualitative" is used for convenience

Methods are just methods; using qualitative meth-

ods does not necessarily mean an inquiry is con-

ducted within a naturalistic, constructivistic, inter-

pretivistic. or phenomenological paradigm. In this

article, qualitative refers to the latter paradigms.

Research conducted within these alternative para-

digms usually, but not always, employs a variety of

qualitative methods. Qualitative methods may be

used in both traditional scientific paradigms and in

non-traditional, alternative paradigms. It is quite

possible to conduct an investigation with the con-

ventional paradigm which relies entirely on qualita-

tive methods Such a study cannot be construed as

constructivistic; proposers of such studies remain

bound by conventional proposal requirements.

amenable to study within qualitative para-digms are defined by each paradigm's para-meters; thus what are seen as problems con-ventionally may not be so definable qualita-tively, and vice versa. Moreover, unlike tbeCEise in conventional research in which theproblem does not change during tbe investi-gation, the qualitative problem may changeconsiderably fix)m start to finish of the study(since later insights may suggest that anearlier version of the problem definition berefined, eimended, or even disceirded).Nevertbeless tbe investigator needs to havea clear focus at the beginning of the study,and make provision for recording and docu-menting any subsequent changes, includingthe rationsde for modifications. The problemstatement also contains reference to the rel-evance of the concern to the discipline.Although dissertation committees oftenexpect to see a discussion of a conceptualfi-amework to guide the inquiry, a conceptu-al fi-amework or theory base is not appropri-ate in qualitative research. Instead, theresearcher may include a brief discussion oftbe philosophical approach to the research(e.g., Heideggerian hermeneutics,HusserUan phenomenology, symbolic inter-actionism, etc.) (Allen, Benner, &Diekelmann, 1986).

Chapter Two: PreliminaryReview of Related Literature

In qualitative inquiry, the hteraturereview provides a background for the phe-nomenon of concern. It is not intended to beexhaustive; indeed, most of the referencesto the literature will occur after data collec-tion and analysis. However, a preliminaryliterature search helps define the study andhelps the committee understand the initialperspective of the student. The literaturereview does not usually define a theorybase. The preliminary review may includethe usual scholarly references as well EISpopular literature, fiction, film and othermedia, artistic endeavors, and other non-conventional sources.

Chapter Three: Methods

Data CollectionThe meaning ascribed to data dei>ends

beavily on the context in which they arefound. The nature of the physical, social,and psychological context appropriate to aselected inquiry focus should be described

fully. The researcher must determinewhether the phenomenon of concern can beexplored adequately in the proposed con-text. Selection of respondents and otherdata sources in qualitative inquiry isaccomplished serially and contingently asthe study proceeds. The number of respon-dents usually is estimated, rather than pre-cisely predetermined. Early respondentsare selected to maximize the range of infor-mation obtained, while later respondentsare selected on the strength of their knowl-edge about emerging salient matters. Datacollection moves from an initially unstruc-tured format to a more structured one.

Determining Instrumentation

The investigator in a qualitative study isusually the primary instrument for datacollection. The investigator is obligated todescribe his or her qualifications for carry-ing out the proposed study, including anadequate and reflexive description of per-sonal motivations, beliefs, and relevantexperiences. The investigator must plan foradditional training to overcome smy noteddeficiencies. Such training might include,for example: 1 ) a plan to become acquaint-ed with the cultural context studied; 2) con-trolled practice of techniques, such as inter-viewing, under supervision; 3) extensivebackground reading; 4) review of audio orvideotaped segments of investigator behav-ior; and 5) a pilot study. This training taskshould be taken as seriously as the conven-tional investigator takes the task of refiningpaper-and-pendl instrumentation to someacceptable level of validity and reliability.

Planning for Data Collectionand Recording

Each type of data collection will posespecific requirements for recording.Interviews, for example, may be video- oraudiotaped, or the investigator may takenotes during the interviews. Each mode ofdata collection and recording has advan-tages and disadvantages, which the propos-er carefully considers and discusses, lead-ing to decisions about which mode(s) will beused in the study.

Planning for Data Analysis

Researchers collect data by a variety ofmeans, including interviews, observations.

April1996,Vol. 35, No. 4 189

RESEARCH BRIEFS

and documentary analyses, as well as bymore conventional means such as open-ended questionnaires. However the inquir-er manages it, data collection is virtuallysimultaneous with data analysis, a require-ment based on the serial and contingentnature of successive steps in the design. Theinitial analysis may also be the basis for fur-ther structured observation, directed docu-mentary search, or the formulation of ques-tionnaire guidelines. The qualitative pro-poser should display knowledge of thesecontingencies and discuss how they wiU bemanaged.

Data analysis aims first at delineatingemic (insider) constructions. Later theinquirer develops more informed andsophisticated 7om< constructions (interpre-tation based on mutually constructed ideasof researcher and respondents).Researchers should include a detaileddescription of the planned approach to dataanalysis, including anticipated use of com-puter software. Examples of commonlyused analysis methods include groundedtheory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967),hermeneutic analysis (Diekelmann, Allen,& Tanner, 1989), and phenomenology(Colaizzi, 1978; Giorgi, 1970).

Planning How to MeetCriteria for Evaluating theGoodness of a QualitativeInquiry

Lincoln and Guba (1985, 1986) andLincoln (1990) developed two classes ofquality criteria: 1) trustworthiness crite-ria, which parallel the traditional crite-ria of conventional inquiry (but are notsimilarly foundational); and 2) authen-ticity criteria, based directly on theassumptions of various alternative para-digms and bearing no relationship toconventional formulations. The proposershould indicate how rigor will be ensuredin the study. Minimal requirementsinclude, for trustworthiness: prolongedengagement, persistent observation,peer debriefing (Swenson, Bamberg,Lion, Minke, & Scott, 1993), and aninquiry audit. Authenticity criteria existwithin the hermeneutic process itself.The researcher plans for data analysisimmediately on receipt. The researcherthen provides these preliminary analy-ses to the very respondents who providedtbe data, soliciting the respondents' com-

ment, elaboration, correction, revision,and expansion. Bias is not a concern,since the subjective constructions of tbeinquirer are shared with respondents forchallenge and criticism. Fairness refersto the extent to which different construc-tions and their underlying value struc-tures are solicited and honored withinthe research process. Techniquesinclude: 1) soliciting within-group con-structions, using hermeneutic processesto resolve conflicts; and 2) open negotia-tion of recommendations for futureaction. Authenticity refers to the extentto which individual respondents' ownconstructions are improved, matured,expanded, and elaborated so that therespondent now possesses more informa-tion and is more sophisticated in its use.In addition to these criteria, theresearcher should outline ethical consid-erations, plans for confidentiality, andissues of access and potential exploita-tion. The researcher must include anexample of the proposed informed con-sent form.

Planning Inquiry Details

Many traditional research projects failbecause of overlooked logistical details, butthis observation is doubly true for qualita-tive studies. Qualitative inquiries occur innatural, local contexts over which the inves-tigator typically has httle if any control. Theproposer should think through (while notforgetting the implications of likely shifts infocus and design) the myriad details neces-sary to mount the project successfully. Suchdetails include time schedules, researchbudget, identification of a local liaison, com-ponents of a field kit of supplies and mate-rials, and arrangements for the varioustrustworthiness/authenticity techniquesemployed.

Planning theResearch Report

Case studies (one or more) represent thepreviously most common mode for reportinga qualitative, constructivistic inquiry.Currently, many qualitative inquiriesreport results in terms of thematic analysis.Regardless of the form of the researchreport, the proposer considers the mostappropriate form for the study and discuss-es it in detail.

Reference List

The proposer provides a preliminary listof references cited from the relevant litera-ture. Citations may be added to or deletedfixjm this bibliography as the study pro-gresses. Since the methodology of qualita-tive dissertations is not yet standardized(and probably should not be), the list of ref-erences includes relevant methodologicalsources.

The requirements for a particular dis-sertation may vary from these suggestedhere. The proposal is an essential part ofthe research undertaking, and consti-tutes a contract between the student andthe committee regarding the appearanceand inclusiveness of the final paper. Thestudent should consult with his or hercommittee, and particularly the disserta-tion director, to make a final determina-tion of the form which the proposalshould take.

References

Allen, D., Benner, P., & Diekelmann, N.L.(1986). Three paradigms for nursing research:Methodological implications. In P.L. Chinn (Ed.).Nursing research methodology: Issues and imple-mentation. Rockville, MD: Aspen.

Colaizzi, P.F. (1978). Psychological researchas the phenomenologist views it. In R. Vaileand &M. King (Eds.). Existential phenomenologicatalternatives for psychology. New York, f̂Y: OxfordUniversity Press.

Diekelmann, N., AUen, D., & Tanner, C.(1989). The National League for Nursing criteriafor appraisal of baccalaureate programs: A criti-cal hermeneutic analysis. New York NY: NationalLeague for Nursing.

Giorgi, A. (1970). Psychology as a human sci-ence: A phenomenologically based approach. NewYork, NY: Harper & Row.

Glaser, B. & Strauss, A. (1987). The discoveryof grounded theory. New York, NY: Aldine.

Guha, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth gen-eration evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Seige.

Lincoln, Y.S. (1990). The making of a con-structivist: A remembrance of transformationspast. In E.G. Guba (Ed.). The paradigm dialog.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

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

Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1986). But is itrigorous: Trustworthiness and authenticity innaturalistic evaluation. In D. Willisims (Ed.).Naturalistic evaluation: New directions in pro-gram evaluation (No. 30). San Francisco, CA:Jossey Bass.

Swenson, M.M., Bamberg, C.W., Lion, E.M.,Minke, K.M., & Scott, M.M. (1993).Experiencing the debriefer I auditor role in dis-sertation research. Manuscript submitted forpublication.

190 Journal of Nursing Education