Unraveling the Career Conundrum: Faculty Agency in collaborative Undergraduate nursing Programs

  • Published on
    25-Feb-2016

  • View
    37

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Unraveling the Career Conundrum: Faculty Agency in collaborative Undergraduate nursing Programs. Michele Drummond-Young NERU Pilot Project Funding 2008 SON, McMaster University. Introduction. Context Looming Faculty shortage Steady state of collaborative nursing programs - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript

<ul><li><p>Unraveling the Career Conundrum: Faculty Agency in collaborative Undergraduate nursing ProgramsMichele Drummond-YoungNERU Pilot Project Funding 2008SON, McMaster University</p></li><li><p>IntroductionContextLooming Faculty shortageSteady state of collaborative nursing programsComplexity of collaborative partnerships: disjunction among institutional expectations, CASN expectations, &amp; teaching &amp; career development LiteratureAt the outset to set the context &amp; purpose As an inductive process </p></li><li><p>Introduction contd</p><p>Agency</p><p>The power to enact on ones own behalfAbility to control events that affect your lifeExerting influence in spheres over which you have some control(Bandura, 1997)</p></li><li><p>Research Question</p><p>How do junior faculty &amp; mid careerists teaching in integrated collaborative partnerships manage the concurrent , dual expectations for teaching &amp; career development established by their employers, the collaborative program &amp; CAUSN?</p></li><li><p>ObjectivesTo develop an understanding of how junior faculty manage the the competing commitments of teaching &amp; career developmentTo understand these experiences within the constraints &amp; supports provided in the settingsTo develop a rich &amp; thick substantive explanatory theory to inform our understanding of junior faculty work life </p></li><li><p>Research DesignGrounded TheoryInterpretive Traditionwhat is theory?Emphasizes understanding rather than explanationPriority is to show patterns &amp; connections rather than linear reasoningconstructivist approachSees both data &amp; analysis as created from shared experiencesThe researchers intimacy with the experience is believed to enhance sensitivity to the meaning of the dataAcknowledges the researchers role as having an impact on the interpretation of the data &amp; construction of concepts(Bryant 2002; Charmaz, 2007)</p></li><li><p>Participants &amp; SettingNotification of the study to the 14 English language Collaborative Bacc. Nsg Programs in ONInclusion criteria:Full time, part time &amp; clinical faculty/professors with primary responsibility for teaching theory, science &amp;/or clinical courses in the undergraduate programHolding junior faculty (5 years or less) or mid careerist (5-15 years) positions Faculty who self select to respond to the demographic survey</p></li><li><p>Sampling StrategiesPurposive sample, data rich participantsInitial interview begin to identify preliminary codes that generate questions that guide the direction of the next interview (theoretical sampling)Sampling is responsive to the data rather than being predetermined at the outset. Theoretical sampling dictates &amp; directs the research design from the start.</p></li><li><p>Concurrent Data Collection &amp; AnalysisPrimary method in depth, 1:1, face-to-face interviews, 1hr 90 minutes (field notes)Interviews will be audio recorded &amp; transcribed verbatim Open-ended questions generated by prior analysis (theoretical sampling)Memos &amp; diagramsKeep track of cumulative thinking Force the analyst to work with concepts rather than raw data</p></li><li><p>Phases of Theory Development</p><p>Reflect on presuppositions, suspend a literature search until you have developed a rich &amp; thick story lineInitial rudimentary representation of thought will grow in complexity, density, clarity &amp; accuracy as the researcher engages with the dataUtilize constant comparison throughout the theory developmentReview former memos &amp; raw data, write summary memos as you gain theoretical sensitivity </p><p>(Corbin &amp; Strauss, 2008, Charmaz, 2007; Goulding, 2006))</p></li><li><p>Phases of Theory DevelopmentInductive approach introduction of literature to assist with abstracting the concepts, filling in categories &amp; checking for gaps in the logic</p><p>Member checkingTo validate or negate researchers interpretationMay need to go back to new or old sites</p><p>(Corbin &amp; Strauss, 2008; Charmaz, 2007; Goulding, 2006)</p><p>(Corbin &amp; Strauss, 2008, Charmaz, 2007; Goulding, 2006))</p></li><li><p>Limitations of Grounded TheoryPremature literature search imports perspectives into the early analysis &amp; distorts what the data is sayingContentious to some thesis committees &amp; ethical review boards since the methods of data collection are quite loose which makes the parameters of the study hard to predict at the outset.Premature closure not going beyond describing the data. Analysts must lift the ideas from the data &amp; explain them theoretically in order to provide meaning &amp; explanation for the behaviour. The concepts must be dimentionalized &amp; most salient facts identified, abstract concepts &amp; look for theoretical meaning.(Charmaz, 2008; Goulding, 2007)</p></li></ul>