Advertisement

Research Methods

  • Jon Yorke
  • Lesley Vidovich
Chapter
  • 567 Downloads
Part of the Policy Implications of Research in Education book series (PIRE, volume 7)

Abstract

Chapter 5 presents a detailed ‘map’ of the methods adopted to collect and analyse the data in this policy analysis research. The rationale for using qualitative methods is explained, highlighting the sensitivity to context and the support for in-depth, holistic analysis which was sought in this study. To investigate the research questions about relevant policy influences, texts, practices/effects and outcomes, both documents and interviews were used as data sources, and the strengths and weaknesses of each are examined. The complex sampling across ‘global’ (OECD), ‘national’ (Australia, UK and US) and ‘local’ (university) levels of the policy trajectory is tabulated, as is interview participant coding to provide an audit trail and protection of anonymity. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is the primary mechanism of data analysis because it highlights the interrogation of texts within their wider social and political contexts; a specific example of interrogation of a policy text using CDA is included. A discussion of ethical considerations closes this chapter.

Keyword

Elite interviews Critical discourse analysis (CDA) 

References

  1. Australian Government (2009). Transforming Australia’s higher education system. Canberra: Author.Google Scholar
  2. Australian Learning and Teaching Council (2010). Learning and Teaching Academic Standards project: Final report. Author. http://www.olt.gov.au/system/files/altc_standards.finalreport.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2016.
  3. Ball, S. J. (1993). What is policy? Texts, trajectories and toolboxes. Discourse, 13(2), 10–17. doi: 10.1080/0159630930130203.Google Scholar
  4. Ball, S. J. (1994). Education reform: A critical and post-structural approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bradley, D., Noonan, P., Nugent, H., & Scales, B. (2008). Review of Australian higher education: Final report. Canberra: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.Google Scholar
  6. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Cochran-Smith, M., & Fries, M. K. (2001). Sticks, stones, and ideology: The discourse of reform in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 30(8), 3–15. doi: 10.3102/0013189X030008003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cohen, L., & Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education (4th ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research methods in education (7th ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). The landscape of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse and text: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). London: Longman.Google Scholar
  13. Fanghanel, J. (2007). Local responses to institutional policy: A discursive approach to positioning. Studies in Higher Education, 32(2), 187–205. doi: 10.1080/03075070701267244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gillard, J. (2009). Universities Australia Conference – 4 March 2009 – speech. Ministers’ Media Centre. http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/80087/20100127-1030/www.deewr.gov.au/Ministers/Gillard/Media/Speeches/Pages/Article_090304_155721.html. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  15. Gubrium, J. F., Holstein, J. A., Marvasti, A. B., & McKinney, K. D. (2012). The SAGE handbook of interview research: The complexity of the craft. Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hammersley, M. (2007). The issue of quality in qualitative research. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 30(3), 287–305. doi: 10.1080/17437270701614782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Harvey, W. S. (2011). Strategies for conducting elite interviews. Qualitative Research, 11(4), 431–441. doi: 10.1177/1468794111404329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Higher Education Standards Panel (2013). Draft standards for course design and learning outcomes. Australian Government. https://docs.education.gov.au/node/37821. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  19. Hyatt, D. (2013a). The critical higher education policy discourse analysis framework. In J. Huisman & M. Tight (Eds.), Theory and method in higher education research (pp. 41–59). Bingley: Emerald Insight.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hyatt, D. (2013b). The critical policy discourse analysis frame: Helping doctoral students engage with the educational policy analysis. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(8), 833–845. doi: 10.1080/13562517.2013.795935.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kvale, S. (2007). Doing interviews. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lingard, B. (2010). Policy borrowing, policy learning: Testing times in Australian schooling. Critical Studies in Education, 51(2), 129–147. doi: 10.1080/17508481003731026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Northcote, M. T. (2012). Selecting criteria to evaluate qualitative research. Avondale College of Higher Education. http://research.avondale.edu.au/edu_papers/38. Accessed 12 May 2016.
  24. Odendahl, T., & Shaw, A. M. (2002). Interviewing elites. In J. F. Gubrium & J. A. Holstein (Eds.), Handbook of interview research: Context and method (pp. 299–316). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Palys, T. (2008). Purposive sampling. In L. Given (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 698–699). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Punch, K. F. (2005). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  27. Reid, I. (2009). The contradictory managerialism of university quality assurance. Journal of Education Policy, 24(5), 575–593. doi: 10.1080/02680930903131242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Rust, C., Price, M., & O’Donovan, B. (2003). Improving students’ learning by developing their understanding of assessment criteria and processes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 28(2), 147–164. doi: 10.1080/02602930301671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sellar, S., & Lingard, B. (2013). The OECD and global governance in education. Journal of Education Policy, 28(5), 710–725. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2013.779791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Selwyn, N. (2012). Researching the once-powerful in education: The value of retrospective elite interviewing in education policy research. Journal of Education Policy, 28(3), 339–352. doi: 10.1080/02680939.2012.728630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analyzing talk, text and interaction. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  33. Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 435–454). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Taylor, S. (2004). Researching educational policy and change in ‘new times’: Using critical discourse analysis. Journal of Education Policy, 19(4), 433–451. doi: 10.1080/0268093042000227483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Thompson-Whiteside, S. (2011). Understanding academic standards in context of the massification and internationalisation of Australian higher education. Melbourne: University of Melbourne, Centre for the Study of Higher Education.Google Scholar
  36. Vidovich, L. (2007). Removing policy from its pedestal: Some theoretical framings and practical possibilities. Educational Review, 59(3), 285–298. doi: 10.1080/00131910701427231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vidovich, L. (2013). Policy research in higher education: Theories and methods for globalising times? In J. Huisman & M. Tight (Eds.), Theory and method in higher education research (international perspectives on higher education research, volume 9) (pp. 21–39). Bingley: Emerald Insight.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vidovich, L., & Slee, R. (2001). Bringing universities to account? Exploring some global and local policy tensions. Journal of Education Policy, 16(5), 431–453. doi: 10.1080/02680930110071039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Winstanley, C. (2012). Alluring ideas: Cherry picking policy from around the world. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 46(4), 516–531. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9752.2012.00876.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative research from start to finish. New York: Guildford Press.Google Scholar
  41. Yin, R. K. (2014). Case study research: Design and methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  42. Zajda, J. (2014). Globalisation and neo-liberalism as educational policy in Australia. In D. Turner & H. Yolcu (Eds.), Neoliberal education reforms: A global analysis (pp. 164–183). Hoboken: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jon Yorke
    • 1
  • Lesley Vidovich
    • 2
  1. 1.Curtin UniversityBentleyAustralia
  2. 2.The University of Western AustraliaCrawleyAustralia

Personalised recommendations