Creswell 8, Data Analysis and Representation

Summary:

Creswell explores the intricacies of data coding for qualitative research. He presents five approaches to analysis and offers some comparison of the five (narrative research, phenomenological research, grounded theory, ethnography, and case study). 

The use of computer programs which aid in the process of qualitative coding is introduced by Creswell in this chapter. Positive and negative implications of computer coding are discussed as well as a brief introduction to four available programs.

Lastly visual templates of qualitative coding are presented to the reader.

Response:

This chapter provides a cursory overview of qualitative data analysis and representation. In less than 30 pages, the author anticipates a reader should have the ability to begin data analysis of a given study, yet the author admits that most qualitative research is somewhat ad hoc and is learned through involvement (p. 150).

It is my feeling that Creswell is correct that much of qualitative coding is dictated by the study, the information, and the researcher. This is a fancy way of saying each study, while holding some elemental pieces similar to other studies, will be unique.

Despite the reality of my crass assessment in the aforementioned paragraph, there is really no other way for one to learn such methodologies without having them presented. For this task Creswell rises to the occasion and gives a decent quick-and-dirty description. The true learning, however, is likely to occur by actually practicing the coding and having the codes verified by colleagues, professors, or through the use of member checking. 

Drawbacks:

Biggest drawback: How could anyone truly represent this kind of material in one chapter? One might consider an entire book on each approach!

One thing I feel is lacking in this chapter is an emphasis on shortcomings. Creswell does not adequately identify potential shortcomings in the approaches presented within this chapter. Quite possibly each has its unique problems, and no one approach stands as a golden standard among all researchers, however an emphasis on potential problems could be of benefit to the reader. I would the be able to better predict my potential problems and watch for them through the analysis phase of my projects. 

I guess I still remain skeptical of Creswell because he spends so much time citing himself. Thus I remain in my post-Creswellian phase.