Abstract
Conducting research as part of a PhD study offers students a unique opportunity to explore new methods and methodologies. Although we each based our PhD studies on a more traditional participatory action research (PAR) methodology, we also took the opportunity to experiment with a new data analysis method. Working from a critical social science paradigm (Fay, 1987) that translates into critical and collaborative research practice with an emancipatory intent, our scope of freedom as to how to process data, perform the analyses, then synthesise and report the results, became restricted.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Boog, B. (2007). Quality of action research: Reciprocal understanding of (scientific) researchers and participating researchers. In P. Ponte & B.H.J. Smit (Eds.), The quality of practitioner research: Reflections on the position of the researcher and the researched (pp. 65–76). Rotterdam: Sense.
Boomer, C., & McCormack, B. (2010). Creating the conditions for growth: A collaborative practice development programme for clinical nurse leaders. Journal of Nursing Management, 18, 633–644.
Fay, B. (1987). Critical social science: Liberation and its limits. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Gadamer, H.G. (1993). Truth and method. London: Sheed and Ward.
Habermas, J. (1981). The theory of communicative action. London: Beacon Press.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell Science.
Kitwood, T. (1997). Dementia reconsidered: The person comes first. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
McCormack, B., & Titchen, A. (2006). Critical creativity: Melding, exploding, blending. Educational Action Research: An International Journal, 14(2), 239–266.
Ricoeur, P. (1976). Interpretation theory: Discourse and the surplus of meaning. Fort Worth, Texas: The Texas Christian University Press.
Simons, H., & McCormack, B. (2007). Integrating arts-based inquiry in evaluation methodology: Challenges and opportunities. Qualitative Inquiry, 13(2), 292–311.
Snoek, A. (2008). Begrijp ik u goed? Dialoog en empathie in de methodologie. Verslag van het afscheidssymposium van Adri Smaling. Do I understand you well? Dialogue and empathy in methodology. Report of farewell ceremony of Adri Smaling at the University of Humanistics, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Kwalon, 39(3), 53–58.
van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Sense Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lieshout, F.v., Cardiff, S. (2011). Innovative Ways of Analysing Data With Practitioners as Co-Researchers. In: Higgs, J., Titchen, A., Horsfall, D., Bridges, D. (eds) Creative Spaces for Qualitative Researching. Practice, Education, Work and Society, vol 5. SensePublishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-761-5_22
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-761-5_22
Publisher Name: SensePublishers
Online ISBN: 978-94-6091-761-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)
