Advertisement

Early Childhood Education Journal

, Volume 45, Issue 1, pp 15–26 | Cite as

Writing and Publishing Qualitative Studies in Early Childhood Education

  • Olivia N. Saracho
Article

Abstract

When a study is published in a respected professional journal, it not only verifies that the research has been completed but also that it has been subjected to anonymous peer review. Published results from studies in early childhood education contribute to the field’s knowledge and provide direction to guide future early childhood education research studies. Early childhood education researchers have become confident in conducting qualitative studies to offer data-based results that can contribute to early childhood theory, research, policy, and practice. Qualitative studies can be written in several ways. Researchers use the purpose of the study, research questions, theoretical framework, and preferred writing style to select the appropriate format. This article provides a format that is simple and acceptable to encourage beginning and inexperienced researchers to write a publishable qualitative research report. It discusses several sections of an article including: title, abstract, introduction, purpose of the study, research questions, review of the literature, research methodology, informants, data collection methods, data analyses, data verification, results, discussion, and references. Each of these sections is discussed and illustrated with excerpts from manuscripts that were published previously by the author.

Keywords

Scholarly writing  Qualitative research Report writing Publication 

References

  1. American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, R. C., Hiebert, E. H., Scott, J. A., & Wilkinson, I. (1985). Becoming a nation of readers: The report of the Commission on Reading. Washington, DC: The National Institute of Education.Google Scholar
  3. Barnes, W. S., Snow, C. E., Hemphill, L., Chandler, J., & Goodman, I. F. (2000). Unfulfilled expectations: Home and school influences on literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Caputo, R. (2004). Advice for those wanting to publish quantitative research. Families in Society, 85, 401–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caulley, D. N. (2008). Making qualitative research reports less boring: The techniques of writing creative nonfiction. Qualitative Inquiry, 14(3), 424–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  7. Creswell, J. W., & Tashakkori, A. (2007). Developing publishable mixed methods manuscripts. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 107–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2011). Introduction: The discipline of practice. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 1–2). Los Angeles: Sage Publications; Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Derntl, M. (2011). Basics of research paper writing and publishing. Unpublished manuscript, RWTH Aachen University.Google Scholar
  10. Drisko, J. W. (2005). Writing up qualitative research. Families in Society: The Journal of Contemporary Social Services, 86(4), 589–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gephart, R. P, Jr. (2004). From the editors: Qualitative research and the Academy of Management Journal. Qualitative Research and the Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 452–462.Google Scholar
  12. Jalongo, M. R., & Saracho, O. N. (2016, in press). Writing for publication: Tools and transitions that support scholars’ success. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  13. Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Karther, D. (2002). Fathers with low literacy and their young children. The Reading Teacher, 56(2), 184–193.Google Scholar
  15. Lange, P. (2008). How to write a scientific paper for peer-reviewed journals. In T. F. Babor, K. Stenius, S. Savva, & J. O’Reilly (Eds.), Publishing addiction science: A guide for the perplexed (pp. 70–81). Brentwood, Essex: Multi-Science Publishing Company Ltd.Google Scholar
  16. Leech, N. L., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Combs, J. P. (2011). Writing publishable mixed research articles: Guidelines for emerging scholars in the health sciences and beyond. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 5(1), 7–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lincoln, Y. S., Lynham, S. A., & Guba, E. G. (2011). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging influences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 97–128). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Lohr, K. N. (2004). Rating the strength of scientific evidence: Relevance for quality improvement programs. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 16(1), 9–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marks, L., & Palkovitz, M. R. (2004). American fatherhood types: The good, the bad, and the uninterested. Fathering, 2(2), 113–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mintzberg, H. (1979). An emerging strategy of “direct” research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 580–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Modern Language Association. (2009). MLA handbook for writers of research papers. New York, NY: Modern Language Association.Google Scholar
  22. Ortiz, R. W. (2004). Hispanic/Latino fathers and children literacy development examining involvement practices from a sociocultural context. Journal of Latinos and Education, 3(3), 165–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ortiz, R., Stile, S., & Brown, C. (1999). Early literacy activities of fathers reading and writing and young children. Young Children, 54(5), 16–18.Google Scholar
  24. Parsons, J. A. (2008). Key informant. In P. J. Lavrakas (Ed.) Encyclopedia of survey research methods: A-M., (Vol. 1, p. 407). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Saracho, O. N. (1984). Perception of the teaching process in early childhood education through role analysis. Journal of the Association for the Study of Perception, International, 19(1), 26–39.Google Scholar
  26. Saracho, O. N. (1988a). An evaluation of an early childhood teacher education curriculum for preservice teachers. Early Child Development and Care, 38, 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Saracho, O. N. (1988b). A study of the roles of early childhood teachers. Early Child Development and Care, 38, 43–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Saracho, O. N. (1997). Introduction: A family literacy themed issue. Early Child Development and Care, 127–128, 1–2.Google Scholar
  29. Saracho, O. N. (2001). Exploring young children literacy development through play. Early Child Development and Care, 167(1), 103–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Saracho, O. N. (2002). Family literacy: Exploring family practices. Early Child Development and Care, 172(2), 113–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Saracho, O. N. (2004). Supporting literacy-related pPlay: Roles for teachers of young children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 31(3), 203–208.Google Scholar
  32. Saracho, O. N. (2008). A literacy program for fathers: A case study. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(4), 351–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Saracho, O. N. (2013). Writing research articles for publication in early childhood education. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(1), 45–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Saracho, O. N. (2014). Critical perspectives on research methodologies in early childhood education. In O. N. Saracho (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in early childhood education: Review of research methodologies (Vol. II, pp. 1–22). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  35. Saracho, O. N., & Spodek, B. (1998). A play foundation for family literacy. International Journal of Educational Research, 29, 41–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Saracho, O. N., & Spodek, B. (2009a). Educating the young mathematician: An historical perspective through the 19th century. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36, 297–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Saracho, O. N., & Spodek, B. (2009b). Educating the young mathematician: The 20th century and beyond. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36, 305–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Saracho, O. N., & Spodek, B. (2013). Introduction: A contemporary researchers vade mecum (redux). In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education of young children/3rd (pp. 1–15). New York: Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.Google Scholar
  39. Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  40. Steig, W. (1969). Sylvester and the Magic Pebble. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  41. Stevenson, R. B. (2004). Constructing knowledge of educational practices from case studies. Environmental Education Research, 10(1), 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tashakkori, A., & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Exploring the nature of research questions in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 207–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Teale, W. H., & Sulzby, E. (1986). Home background and young children’s literacy development. In W. H. Teale & E. Sulzby (Eds.), Emerging literacy: Writing and reading (pp. 173–206). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  44. University of Chicago Press. (2010). The Chicago Manual of Style. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  45. Van Maanen, J. (2011). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Originally published in 1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Word Press (no date). Research rundowns: Uncomplicated reviews of educational research methods. http://researchrundowns.wordpress.com/.
  47. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  48. Young, F. W., & Young, R. C. (1961). Key informant reliability in rural Mexican Villages. Human Organization, 20(3), 141–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Teaching, Learning, Policy and LeadershipUniversity of MarylandCollege ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations