Favourite blogs for Hafiz Hanif Research Journey

My favourites » All entries

September 29, 2015

ATLAS.ti vs NVivo vs MAXQDA

Follow-up to Choosing the right Data Analysis Software from CES PHD Support Group

There is a range of available software that has developed over the years and distinctions have been made between kinds of CAQDAS (text retrievers, code and retrieve, qualitative comparative analysis, theory building).

During my ersearch I noticed a pattern emerging when people are talking about the "best" software (whatever that means). There is a clear distinction between three major software options and the rest of the available options. So I decided to focus on these three instead.


The purpose of ATLAS.ti is to help researchers uncover and systematically analyze complex phenomena hidden in unstructured data (text, multimedia, geospatial). The program provides tools that let the user locate, code, and annotate findings in primary data material, to weigh and evaluate their importance, and to visualize the often complex relations between them.

Advantages of Atlas.ti

  • Supports multimedia files and PDFs
  • East Asian and Middle Eastern language support
  • Google Earth is embedded
  • Multiple ways of working in the system (high flexibility)
  • On-Board Transcription Engine
  • Visual model building and "mind mapping" using the Network Editor
  • Export to SPSS, HTML, CSV

Limitations of Atlas.ti

  • Managing the project requires care because of the external database system—changes need to be carefully saved.
  • Main working code list does not have a functioning hierarchical structure.
  • Query tool lacks the ability to integrate searchers for text with searches for coded data.


Tutorials on atlasti.com

Videos on Youtube


NVivo is a qualitative data analysis (QDA) computer software package produced by QSR International. It has been designed for qualitative researchers working with very rich text-based and/or multimedia information, where deep levels of analysis on small or large volumes of data are required.

NVivo uses an interface similar to Microsoft making it user-friendly, while it is easily accessible from any mobile device including an iPhone, iPad, tablet, and Android phone using EverNote. These features work well for various size projects and with single to multiple person teams. Online video tutorials and support manual are available for users who wish to view a demonstration or need assistance with understanding NVivo functions.

Advantages of NVivo

  • Available in several languages (English, French, German, Portuguese, Spanish and Simplified Chinese)
  • Allows simultaneous use and sharing of data among research team members
  • Supports data formats such as audio files, videos, digital photos, Word, PDF, spreadsheets, rich text, plain text and web and social media data
  • NCapture add-on imports data from social media sites (e.g. Facebook posts, LinkedIn comments, YouTube videos)
  • Interchange data with applications like Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Word, IBM SPSS Statistics, EndNote, Microsoft OneNote, SurveyMonkey and Evernote

Limitations of NVivo

  • Importing large datasets can take a large amount of time or may result in an error message
  • NVivo Mac has limited functionality (e.g. undo option not available for all actions)
  • Files from other programs, such as OneNote, not always imported accurately (i.e. missing data, change in layout).


Tutorials on qsrinternational.com

Videos on Youtube


MAXQDA is a software program designed for computer-assisted qualitative and mixed methods data, text and multimedia analysis in academic, scientific, and business institutions. It is the successor of winMAX, which was first made available in 1989. It is being developed and distributed by VERBI Software based in Berlin, Germany

Unlike most other CAQDAS, MAXQDA was not developed on the background of Grounded Theory. Instead the software is designed for both qualitative, quantitative research and (mixed methods research).

The emphasis on going beyond qualitative research can be observed in the extensive attributes function (called variables in the programme itself) and the ability of the programme to deal relatively quickly with larger numbers of interviews

Advantages of MAXQDA

  • Cloud-based, or does not require internet access
  • Excellent for mixed methods
  • Coding is made easy with drag and drop, color assignments, and weights
  • Several tutorials, user discussion boards, and support options are available via the MAXQDA product website.
  • All data is stored in one .mx5 (Windows) or .mx11 file (Mac)
  • Internal program media player
  • Import and coding of PDF and graphic files
  • Georeferencing
  • Powerful Multimedia Features – Analyze Audio and Video without Transcript
  • Literature Connection – Analyze Your Literature
  • Smart Publisher – Professional Report Generator
  • MAXQDA Mobile App – Extend the Possibilities for Your Research

Limitations of MAXQDA

  • Projects cannot be accessed simultaneously by multiple users. Rather team members must have access to the program, work separately, and then merge files together.


Tutorials on maxqda.com

Videos on Youtube

License comparison

Before you buy your student license make sure you have a look at this comparison in cost and features.

Software Atlas.ti Nvivo MAXQDA
Windows/Mac Windows and Mac OS X* Windows and Mac OS X Windows and Mac OS X
License duration 2 Years 1 Year 2 Years
Installation 1 2 2
Free trial period 30 Days 30 Days 30 Days
Promotions     Includes MAXDictio
Student License Cost $99 – PC+Mac/$69 – Mac 120 $** 115 $
Download Demo Link Link Link

* ATLAS.ti for Mac OS X requires OS version 10.8 ‘Mountain Lion’ or higher. Nvivo is less demanding and it requires Mac OS X 10.7.5 or higher and MAXQDA is the least demanding and it requires Mac OS X 10.7 or higher.

** As a student at Warwick University you get Nvivo license for free (read more here/ Login and Download here)

Further reading

A.Hariri's Blog post on Atlas.Ti 6 vs NVivo 9: A Comparison (a bit outdated but still insightful)

'Choosing a Qualitative Data Analysis Software Program' from the Medical Anthropology Wiki

'Choosing an appropriate CAQDAS package' from University of Surrey's CAQDAS Networking Project

September 25, 2015

Choosing the right Data Analysis Software

Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis (CAQDAS) is an term, introduced by Fielding and Lee in 1991, for software used to support research and analysis of qualitative (and sometimes quantitative) data. Before going into details about the different available software (in an upcoming blog post) here's what you need to know about CAQDAS.

Understanding the limits of the software

It is important to know what the software is capable of doing beforehand. Unrealistic expeditions can lead to disappointments.

Here’s a list of what the software can and cannot do (Source: Online Qualitative data analysis)

The software does..

  • Structure work: Enables access to all parts of your project immediately,
  • 'Closeness to data' interactivity: Instant access to source data files (e.g transcripts),
  • Explore data: Tools to search text for one word or a phrase,
  • Code and Retrieve Functionality: create codes and retrieve the coded sections of text,
  • Project Management and Data Organisation: Manage project and organise data,
  • Search and interrogating the database: Search for relationships between codes,
  • Writing tools: Memos, comments and annotations,
  • Output: Reports to view a hard copy or export to another package.

The software does not..

  • Do the analytical thinking for you (though it can do things that help you do that thinking),
  • Do the coding for you. In general, you need to decide what can be coded in what way. Some software supports automatic coding the results of text searches, but it is still important to check what has been automatically coded. One program, Qualrus, after you have coded a passage, makes suggestions about how else you might code it. The same warning applies here. It is up to you to decide if what is suggested by the program makes sense.
  • Reduce bias, improve reliability or, on its own, improve the quality of your analysis (though it does have functions that can be used to help improve the quality of analysis),
  • Tell you how to analyse your data. (No-one thinks a word-processor can write a report for them.)
  • Does not calculate statistics, though some programs will produce simple counts and percentages.

Next Guest, McQueen, & Namey (2012, p. 224) recommend this graph for deciding when to use qualitative software


Main talking points about CAQDAS

1. Size of dataset

A clear advantage of using a CAQDAS software is the ability to work work with larger datasets. However, large datasets can lead to a focus on breadth rather than depth Seidel (1991). This means there’s a chance of losing detailed insight into the social situation being investigated.


2. Quality

With a COQDAS It is easier to keep track of the material and manage the data (Tesch, 1990). One advantage of using a COQDAS is allowing a trail of analysis to be preserved which makes it easier to replicate the research (Conrad and Reinharz, 1984). Another is the ability to repeat the retrievals and searches on data in a consistent way. Which in turn allows retrospective checks (Fielding and Lee, 1998).

3. Creativity and Thinking

CAQDAS software can, at least, perform technical and clerical tasks quickly and efficiently (Tesch, 1991)

4. Efficiency in Data Management

using CAQDAS saves time and is more efficient (Tesch, 1990). However, this means that organising the database still requires a researcher to be systematic (Fielding and Lee, 1998).

5. Distance from data

Weitzman and Miles (1995) identified the importance to researchers of feeling close to the data they are analysing.

Proponents of manual methods might argue that although it is easier to move around the database than shuffle paper, it is easier to flip a page than scroll down, quicker to read from a printed page than from the screen, easier to annotate in a number of different ways.

Weitzman and Miles (1995) have argued that distance from the data could be reduced with improvements in the interface design.

6. Methodological approaches

Drass (1989) noted that many programs supported thematic approaches to analysis (particularly grounded theory) but were not suitable for certain methodologies that did not use themes.

Seale (2000) agrees that CAQDAS programs were not suitable for conversation analysis and discourse analysis.

7. Speed and superficiality

Fielding and Lee (1998) cautioned, is that computers facilitate quick and dirty research with the possibility of premature closure. Seale (2001) noted that many did very little more than a simple code and retrieve which then formed the basis of a thematic report.

8. Teamwork

CAQDAS software makes teamwork easier. However, this means that everyone should have a copy of the software and that, generally speaking, only one user can alter the data at a time (which is not necessarily true of all the latest software).

9. Coding

CAQDAS software does not lock the analytic procedure into a rigid coding schema and iterative processes of coding and recoding are natural parts of CAQDAS use

However, this could lead to an over-reliance on the ‘coding’ method (Coffey and Atkinson, 1996)

10. Quantitative data

Ragin and Becker (1989) argued that CAQDAS software would narrow the gap between quantitative and qualitative data

Tesch (1989) pointed out, is that many quantitative researchers think CAQDAS software is just about the quantification of qualitative data (for better or for worse).

11. Support and Awareness

Fielding and Lee (1998) pointed out that computer staff providing support for the programs often have a background in natural science and therefore found it difficult to relate to the CAQDAS software.


Debates about the software, Taylor, C., Lewins, A. & Gibbs, G.R., 2005.

CAQDAS Networking Project, University of Surrey


  • Coffey, A. and Atkinson, P. (1996) Making sense of Qualitative Data, London: Sage.
  • Conrad, P and Reinharz, S (1984) 'CAQDAS software and qualitative data: editors’ introductory essay',Qualitative Sociology, 7 (1/2): 3-15.
  • Drass, K. A. (1989) 'Text analysis and text-analysis software: a comparison of assumptions'. in Grant Blank, James L McCartney and Edward Brent (eds), New in Technology in Sociology: Practical Applications in Research and Work. New Brunswick: NJ: Transaction Publishers.
  • Fielding N.G. and Lee R.M. (1998) Computer Analysis and Qualitative Research, London SAGE.
  • Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., & Namey, E. E. (2012). Applied Thematic Analysis. Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA.
  • Ragin, C.C. and Becker, H.S. (1989) 'How the microcomputer is changing our analytic habits', In: G. Blank et al. (eds), New Technology in Sociology: Practical Applications in Research and Work. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
  • Seale, C (2000) Using CAQDAS software to Analyse Qualitative Data, In: David Silverman (ed) Doing Qualitative Research – A Practical Handbook. London: SAGE
  • Seidel (1991) 'Method and Madness in the Application of Computer Technology to Qualitative Data Analysis'. In Nigel G. Fielding and Raymond M. Lee (eds), Using Computers in Qualitative Research, London: Sage.
  • Tesch, R. (1990) Qualitative Research: Analysis Types and Software Tools. London and Philadelphia: Falmer Press.
  • Tesch, R. (1991) 'Software for qualitative researchers analysis needs and program capabilities', In Nigel G. Fielding and Raymond M. Lee (eds), Using Compluters in Qualitative Research, London: Sage.
  • Weitzman, E.A., & Miles, M.B. (1995). Computer Programs for Qualitative Data Analysis: A Software Source Book. Thousand Oaks: Sage

September 21, 2015

Lessons from Naturejobs Career Expo conference

Follow-up to Naturejobs Career Expo 2015 from CES PHD Support Group

Last week, I went to Naturejobs the Career Expo. Here are three lessons I took from the accompanying conference:

An excellent panel discussion

I attended an excellent panel discussion on “Careers in academia: the variety” with Chairperson : Anna Price, Queen Mary University of London; Speakers : Frances Ashcroft, University of Oxford; James Hadfield, CRI; Frederique Guesdon, University of London; Lisa Fox, Institute of Cancer Research.

Among the speakers was Dame Professor Frances Ashcroft from Oxford University who gave us an intimate peek at her life as a student then researcher and world-renowned public speaker.

After the discussion I asked Professor Ashcroft about publishing in prestigious journals. According to her, she managed to publish in Nature and in Science at the start of her academic career! I was naturally impressed. Especially when she was honest enough to say that she didn’t have much to publish about when she finished her PhD. In fact, she claimed that all her experiments were “a disaster” and that her results were contradicting her assumptions! So I asked her to explain how in the world was she able to publish in such highly esteemed journals when apparently her experiments were such failures? Here’s what she had to say.

How to get published

Prof. AshcroftThe secret to publishing is threefold, persistence, collaboration and timing. The most important amongst the three is persistence. Professor Ashcroft found herself lost after submitting her PhD. She knew she had to get published in the most prestigious journal she could gain access to but she didn’t have the proper results to do so. So she applied tor a postdoc position and focused her entire time to getting that first publication. During her postdoc she replicated her experiments and again the results weren’t ideal but that didn’t stop her, she collaborated with another postdoc in her field and managed to get a paper published out of this it. Once the first paper was published her second was significantly easier. Three decades later and she has some 400 publications in her name.

The secret to publishing is threefold; persistence, collaboration and timing

Professor Ashcroft is a Royal Society GlaxoSmithKline Research Professor at the University Laboratory of Physiology at the University of Oxford. She is a fellow of Trinity College, Oxford and is a director of the Oxford Centre for Gene Function. She is also a Fellow of the Royal Society and has numerous honours and awards to her name, the chief among which having been appointed a Dame Commander of the Order of the British Empire (DBE) 'for services to Medical Science and the Public Understanding of Science' in the 2015 Queen's Birthday Honours.

When answering me about the secret of her gaining access to world-renowned journals she admitted that a bit of luck and lot of hard work can go along way. She said that back in 1978 (when she had her PhD) it was relatively easier to get published in journals such as Nature, but that doesn't mean that everyone who submitted their paper were accepted. She still had to work hard and present her results in he best way she knew how.

Read more about Professor Ashcroft at University of Oxford, Department of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics

Photo is Professor Ashcroft courtesy of www.voicesfromoxford.org

From Academia to Industry

Jones during presentationI also attended the keynote speech which was about leaving academia into the industry. The speech was titles: “Escaping the Ivory Tower - how I left academia and got a proper job”. The speaker was Phill Jones, PhD.

According to nature.com:

Phill Jones is Head of Publisher Outreach at Digital Science. He has spent much of his current career working on projects intended to accelerate science through improved scholarly communication. He moved to his current position from ReadCube in 2014, where he worked as VP of Business Development. Prior to that he built the editorial department at Journal of Visualized Experiments (JoVE) as their first Editorial Director. Phill is a member of a number of publishing industry committees including the STM association early career publishing committee and tech trends executive board.

What Mr Jones was focusing on convening is that we as researchers get lost in our own research world and forget to think the next step after fishing our current project. Be it a PhD thesis, an MSc project, a research paper … etc, we need to learn to keep an eye on the job market or the “industry” as well as doing our research. His recommendations included advising graduate students to look for a job before starting the writing up of their theses.

Don’t get consumed by your research and keep an eye on the industry

Read more about Mr Jones at digital-science.com

keynote speech

September 19, 2015

Naturejobs Career Expo 2015

Writing about web page http://www.nature.com/naturejobs/career-expo/event/naturejobs-career-expo-london/


Yesterday I attended the Naturejobs the Career Expo,the UK’s largest annual career fair for young researchers.

An exceptional event in an exceptional venue

business_design_centre.jpgThe exposition is an annual showcase of global career opportunities. It takes place in a few cities around the world and I just experienced their 9th time exposition in London.

One their website, Nature, wrote about the exposition that it “offers young, talented researchers an excellent opportunity to meet a diverse selection of national and international employers from academic institutions and scientific industries, such as pharmaceutical organizations, digital technology companies, science publishing and more”.

Nature being a very prestigious scientific journal I was expecting a large number of presenters and an equally large number of attendees. Which was the case. Once we arrived we had to stay in a very long line for about 20 minutes just to gain access to the main hall. The exposition took place in the Business Design Centre (previously The Royal Agricultural Hall) one of London’s most popular conference and exhibition venues.

Along the exhibition there were a few workshops, a Keynote and a panel discussion. I attended the keynote, one workshop and the panel discussion.

Exhibitor highlights

dsc_0953.jpgAmong the many exhibitor I met yesterday. Here are my favourates:


With more than 700 jobs available each month, academics is the leading website for research careers in higher education and R&D. For researchers who are working or looking to work in Germany and other European countries, academics.com offers job opportunities in industry, research institutes and universities. Beyond its job listings, academics.com offers relevant advice for your doctorate or postdoc career, for example how to apply for a PHD at graduate school in Germany. The guide to prizes and scholarships can open up new funding opportunities for you. Each week academics.com will send you a job newsletter with opportunities that match your profile. Register for free and make sure not to miss any career opportunities. Visit academics.com.

Careers in Baden-Württemberg

There is no other region in Europe where science counts as such a vital part of the society. A share of 5.1 % of the GDP is invested in R&D and Baden-Württemberg also has the highest share of employees in R&D-intensive branches of industry (17 %). Moreover, with over 70 institutions of higher education and over 100 non-university research institutions Baden-Württemberg has one of the most diverse landscapes of higher education and research in Germany. The state boasts one quarter of the research capacities of major German research institutions such as 12 institutes of the Max Planck Society and 16 establishments of the Fraunhofer Society. Visit: bw-career.de

European Commission, EURAXESS – Researchers in Motion

EURAXESS — Researchers in Motion is a key initiative in supporting the European Union’s commitment to removing the barriers to free movement of knowledge within Europe, to strengthening cross-border mobility of researchers, students, scientists and academic staff, and to providing researchers with better careers structures.

EURAXESS is a pan-European unique initiative providing access to a complete range of information and support services for European and non-European researchers wishing to pursue research careers in Europe.

Composed of four complementary pillars (Jobs, Services, Rights and Links) EURAXESS offers access to the job market; assists researchers in advancing their careers in another European country and supports scientific organisations in their search for outstanding research talent. EURAXESS is a truly pan-European initiative, supported by 40 participating countries across Europe.

Visit: www.euraxess.org

me after leaving the Swiss boothGerman Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)

The German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) is one of the world’s largest funding organisations for the promotion of international academic exchange and scientific cooperation. Offering more than 250 funding programmes the DAAD awards individual scholarships to foreign and German students, student trainees and interns, graduates, academics and scientists. Visit: daad.org.uk

Max Planck Society

For more than 60 years, the Max Planck Society has stood for exceptional, results-oriented basic research in the life sciences, natural sciences and the humanities. Its 83 research institutes enjoy a strong reputation in Germany and abroad and have produced 17 Nobel Prize Laureates as well as 52 Leibniz Prize Recipients to date. Max Planck researchers continually advance into new dimensions of knowledge – they do this in fields that have not yet found their way into university curricula, or that require elaborate equipment, large-scale devices or special libraries. They publish around 13,000 articles in scientific journals per year, are networked around the world, train junior scientists, file patent applications, generate revenues through licenses, set up companies and create jobs. As of January 1, 2013, the workforce of the Max Planck Society consisted of more than 17.000 employees and more than 5,000 guest scientists.

IMPRS for Neural Circuits The common focus of the International Max Planck Research School (IMPRS) for Neural Circuits will be the understanding of neural circuits. This ambitious objective will require analyses at the molecular, cellular, multi-cellular, network and behavioral levels, with the full understanding that macroscopic phenomena can be scale-dependent, and that reductionism is not always sufficient as a method. IMPRS for Neural Circuits Faculty is coordinated by the Max Planck Institute (MPI) for Brain Research and also includes Frankfurt Neuroscientist from the MPI of Biophysics, the Goethe University and the university clinic, the Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies and the Ernst Strüngmann Institute. Offering, besides an excellent research environment, an educational program consisting of a large variety of different courses like modern topics and modern techniques in neuroscience, transferable skills and language courses. Besides this offer rotations, an exchange program and a PhD retreat. For more information. Visit: www.mpg.de/enandwww.imprs.brain.mpg.de

Open Research@npg

Nature Publishing Group has consistently been an early mover in embracing open access. The portfolio now has 70 journals with an open access option, ranging from multidisciplinary titles such as Nature Communications and Scientific Data to highly specialized titles such as the Nature Partner Journals series.

Open access models and open research policies have long been at the heart of Nature Publishing Group's business development and strategic thinking at Nature Publishing Group (NPG). Together with Palgrave Macmillan, offering authors and their funders the option to publish open access across all publication formats: journals and books. Visit:http://www.nature.com/openresearch

Researchers in Schools

Researchers in Schools (RIS) is an innovative teacher training programme that recruits PhD graduates and trains them to teach in state secondary schools. The programme offers a generous salary uplift for three years, meaning that participants receive an annual salary of up to £38,900 (London) from day one. As well as this salary uplift, the programme offers participants one day per week ‘off-timetable’ in which they receive bespoke CPD training, carry out their own academic research and deliver a range of subject enhancement activities within their school. Led by an award-winning educational charity – The Brilliant Club – the RIS Programme is designed to ensure that participants are equipped to deploy the expertise they have as PhD graduates to the benefit of pupils, schools and universities. Visit:www.researchersinschools.org

What I took from the exhibition

I have met a lot of people from all around Europe, including represents and/or employers from many universities, research centres and even embassies. It was a great networking opportunity where you learn to enhance you employability and maximize your career prospects. I also got a lot of goodies!

I will be writing about what I learnt form the workshops about publishing in prestigious journals and the Creative Commons (CC) license. I am currently waiting for one presenter to send me her slides. So keep an eye on the blog or on the Facebook page.

August 04, 2015

Research Paradigm or Worldview

Follow-up to What is axiology and how does it relate to ontology and epistemology? from CES PHD Support Group

Special guest

As you may know, our last meeting (on the 25th June) we had a special guest; Dr Michael Hammod who graciously agreed to join us for a discussion about research in general and the topic of research paradigm in specific.

This is a quick account of the key themes that were raised during that discussion:

The terminology

By now, I think you know that:

Epistemology means the study of knowledge and it comes from the Greek ἐπιστήμη, epistēmē, meaning "knowledge, understanding", and λόγος, logos, meaning, "study of").

Ontology means the study of reality, existence and being. From the Greek ὄν, on (gen. ὄντος, ontos), i.e. "being; that which is", which is the present participle of the verb εἰμί, eimi, i.e. "to be, I am", and -λογία, -logia, i.e. "science, study, theory"

Methodology means the study of methods applied in a field of study. From the French méthodologie. Surface etymology is method + -ology

A matter of disconnect or consistency

Sometimes, there is a disconnect between the way people write about these concepts and what they actually do. Which means that introducing these terms (specifically epistemology and ontology) causes confusion as much as it helps. This is especially true when the researcher spends a lot of time worrying about his/her epistemological and ontological frameworks.

Having said that, this is not a problem per se. But it could snowball and cause a set back in. so for now I will call it a complication.

Dr Hammond advises that researchers can counter this complication by trying to be consistent and not worry too much about the labels. Coming up with the label is a hard job to do especially that there is no consensus on what the terms actually mean. Take Case study for example, a classic example of a term that stands for many meanings.

But how does being consistent actually come to be in reality? Well if you self identify as an Interpretivist your questions would focus a lot about people’s perceptions and feelings. You can’t really be an Interpretivist and then question your data for an answer in the form of an ultimate truth.

Do not overthink it

cuttyCrotty talks about not bothering talking about ontology! He advises researchers to talk about epistemology. The reasoning for this is that there’s not much to add to your ontology that you can’t say under your epistemology. (see Michael J Crotty: The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process Paperback – 26 Aug 1998)

So for example: your hierarchical paradigm might look something like this

Ontology: Objectivism

Epistemology: Positivism

Methodology: Experimental methods

This is all very fine and dandy if you believe in objective facts. But when it comes to Interpretivism it gets more complicated. Say for example that your epistemology is Social Constructivism. First of all you have to beware that Social Constructivism means a lot of things to different people. It stands as a sociological theory and a theory of knowledge with major contributors including the likes of Vygotsky, Foucault, Wittgenstein and Habermas. Secondly figuring out the ontology that goes with that is a complicated dilemma.

A great tip

Dr. Hammond advises us to think about how the research questions reflect overarching ideas about the world. This is specifically correct for the research questions. Then try to be consistent with the question you ask and with your view of the world.

Practically speaking, theses are rarely if not never are torn apart over ontology and epistemology, so no need to over worry about it.

Is it Paradigm or Worldview

Finally, so far I have used the term “paradigm” and “research paradigm” to refer to what is essentially a worldview. It might as well be called the Worldview or Stance. This might be especially appropriate in social sciences. So, if you prefer to say my Research Stance or Worldview is this and that instead of Research Paradigm that’s fine. Personally, I will continue using the term “Paradigm” just to be consistent.

4th Group meeting recording

Writing about web page https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMIeoZOKBAo

I am sorry for being a little bit too late posting this. Although I did manage to post it on facebook in time.

Why so late

The reason for me not being able to post any updates in this blog is trifold; too busy with my data collection, llimited access to the internet and finally having other engagements for the last month.

Regardless, I have free internet (for the time being) and some time on my hand to update this blog. So here's the first of (hopefully) a cople more posts.

Meeting in a glance

We had this meeting back on the 25th June with special guest Dr Michael Hammond. We also had acouple attendees who jpint us for the first time. During the meeting we discussed a wide scope of topics ranging from Transcriptions (verbatim vs. edited) to conducting successful interviews, from Discourse analysis to Research paradigm and from The use of the Likert scale measures in surveys to dealing with different writing styles and how keeping a research diary is such a good practice. Towards the end of the meeting we also had a discussion about our future SSLC reps. Dr Hammond took the names of the candidates and promised to communicate the selection criteria and process either directly or through me.

The recording

You can listen to the audio recording here

Make sure to check out the video description (just underneath the title and the sharing buttons) for a detailed list of contents.

June 15, 2015

Ethical research and Qualitative Research

Follow-up to Researcher's paradigm: useful resources from CES PHD Support Group

A while back i was talking with Elaine and she suggested two great books that she found helpful for her research. She advised that I post about the two books for everyone to get the chance of reading

The Author

Both books are authored by David Silverman who is a Visiting Professor in the Business School, University of Technology, Sydney. Professor Silverman has a PhD on Organization theory. He pioneered a taught MA in Qualitative Research at Goldsmiths in 1985 and supervised around 30 successful PhD students. Since becoming Emeritus Professor in 1999, he has continued publishing methodology books. He has also run workshops for research students in Finland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, France, Sri Lanka and Tanzania.

The Books

  • The first book is Doing Qualitative Research. (2009, 3rd edition). Library link

silverman1There's a chapter about Ethical research that Elaine found very helpful. So, I borrowed the book and scanned the chapter for you (you're welcome!) You can download the scan here

Here's what the Library catalogue has to say about the book

Written in a lively, accessible style, Doing Qualitative Research provides a step-by-step guide to all the questions students ask when beginning their first research project. Silverman demonstrates how to learn the craft of qualitative research by applying knowledge about different methods to actual data. He provides practical advice on key issues such as defining 'originality' and narrowing down a topic, keeping a research diary and writing a research report, and presenting research to different audiences.

You can read the complete Table of contents here

  • The second book is Interpreting Qualitative Data, Fifth Edition (2015)

silverman2According to the publisher

Silverman walks the reader through the basics of gathering and analyzing qualitative data. The book offers beginners unrivalled hands-on guidance to help them get the best out of a research methods course or research project. This is the perfect companion for all those new to qualitative research.

Unfortunately this book is not yet available in the Library, however, we have an older version here

You can buy the books from Sage following these links:

  1. Doing Qualitative Research A Practical Handbook Fourth Edition http://www.uk.sagepub.com/books/Book239644
  2. Interpreting Qualitative Data Fifth Edition http://www.uk.sagepub.com/books/Book243263

June 06, 2015

Using NVivo in your research

Writing about web page http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/services/its/servicessupport/software/nvivo

Free software

qsrThankfully, Warwick University provides all its students and staff members with a free licence of NVivo, this is available for use on University and personally-owned machines.

NVivo itself is not free, far from it! A copy of NVivo 10 for Windows Full License is listed on the website for a whopping $2,345.00! Even with the best discount it will still cost $670.00. A student version (limited functionality) would still set you back $215.00.

nvivoSo, when you hit that download link from the IT Services' website, make sure you make the best use of the software.

But what exactly is NVivo?

NVivo is a platform for analysing forms of unstructured data. NVivo provides an data interrogation using search and query and visualization tools.

Introducing NVivo 10 for Windows Software

In case you’ve missed it, Esther provided an introduction to using NVivo in our last CES Support Group meeting. You can watch a video recording of Esther’s speech at the 50-minute mark in this video

Practical resources for researchers

Our friend Hessah was generous enough to provide us with these resources for using NVivo:

  • The University of Warwick User Guide: Nvivo Working with Data (Download)
  • The University of Warwick User Guide: Nvivo 10 Further Features (Download)
  • QSR International NVivo 10 Getting Started Guide (Download)
  • Video on getting started with NVivo10 (New Project & AutoCoding)

June 03, 2015

What is axiology and how does it relate to ontology and epistemology?

Follow-up to Researcher’s paradigm from CES PHD Support Group

axioAccording to Encyclopaedia Britannica

Axiology, (from Greek axios, “worthy”; logos, “science”), also called Theory Of Value, the philosophical study of goodness, orvalue, in the widest sense of these terms. Its significance lies (1) in the considerable expansion that it has given to the meaningof the term value and (2) in the unification that it has provided for the study of a variety of questions—economic, moral, aesthetic, and even logical—that had often been considered in relative isolation.

But how does axiology sit within other elements of the research paradigm? namely ontology and epistemology

In order for us to be able to understand the different meanings of each of these lovely terms, we need a historical prospective.

I was able to find references to four major eras of human understanding of reality and knowledge generation. We will call these eras of realism.

  1. Plato & Aristotle (Sanzio)The first era of realism is called the idealism period. This era existed at the time of Socrates. According to idealism, reality or ontology is spiritual, epistemology is about rethinking tried and true ideas, and axiology is about the absolute and the eternal. Socrates believed that man is a temporal being.
  2. The second era of realism was popularized by Aristotle. Here reality is both objective and measurable and not spiritual, epistemology is through the use of senses, while axiology is based on nature’s laws and thus could be acquired. The Aristotelian teachings of realism are referred to as essentialism.
  3. The third era was the first of two radical ages; pragmatism. Pragmatists were very strict about what they accepted and they rejected. Any factors of ontology, epistemology and axiology that were to be included in their work (or even considered) have to be found useful; otherwise, they were instantaneously dropped. A philosophy stemming from the pragmatism stance was Progressivism. Progressivism was proposed by our much beloved hero John Dewey. Dewey instructed public schools to teach only what is of interested to students. Everything that is not regarded as useful was thrown away.
  4. Finally, the fourth era and the second radical age is Existentialism, which was born after WW2. According to Existentialism, reality is subjective (very daring indeed!), epistemology is only a personal pursuit or quest loaded with choice and axiology was the expression of freedom.

So in short, ontology, epistemology and axiology used to mean different things in different times of history according to how people generally perceived the world and regarded knowledge as being created. Not very helpful? Here's somthing

Dr. Marcia Hills and Dr. Jennifer Mullett (from the University of Victoria, Canada) wrote a very useful account defining Paradigm, Ontology, Epistemology And Axiology. Here is what they had to say about these concepts and how they relate to research (these were directly copied from their article):

Defininitions of Paradigm, Ontology, Epistemology, Axiology and Methodology in research context

Participatory Paradigm

A paradigm is "a set of basic beliefs (or metaphysics) that deals with ultimates or first principles. It represents a worldview that defines, for its holder, the nature of the world, the individual’s place in it, and the range of possible relationships to that world and its parts, as , for example, cosmologies and theologies do" (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p. 105). Guba & Lincoln made a significant contribution in articulating four differing worldviews of research - positivist, post positivist, critical, and constructivist- based on their ontological, epistemological and methodological assumptions. Heron and Reason (1997) argue for a fifth worldview – a participatory paradigm. Community-based research is situated within this paradigm and also embraces the ideology and methodology of co-operative inquiry created by Heron & Reason (1988; 1994; 1996; 1997).

A participatory paradigm rests on the belief that reality is an interplay between the given cosmos, a primordial reality, and the mind. The mind "creatively participates with [the cosmos] and can only know it in terms of its constructs, whether affective, imaginal, conceptual or practical" (Heron, p.10) "Mind and the given cosmos are engaged in a creative dance, so that what emerges as reality is the fruit of an interaction of the given cosmos and the way the mind engages with it" (Heron & Reason, 1997 p. 279). As Skolimowski (1992) states; "we always partake of what we describe so our reality is a product of the dance between our individual and collective mind and "what is there", the amorphous primordial givenness of the universe. This participative worldview is at the heart of the inquiry methodologies that emphasize participation as a core strategy", (p.20).

Subjective–Objective Ontology

Ontology refers to the form and nature of reality and what can be known about it (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). In contrast to orthodox research that utilizes quantitative methods in its claim to be value free (but which is more accurately described as valuing objectivity), and many qualitative approaches that value subjectivity, community based research endorses a subjective-objective stance.

An subjective-objective ontology means that there is "underneath our literate abstraction, a deeply participatory relation to things and to the earth, a felt reciprocity" (Abram, 1996, p. 124). As Heron and Reason (1997) explain, this encounter is transactional and interactive. "To touch, see, or hear something or someone does not tell us either about our self all on its own or about a being out there all on its own. It tells us about a being in a state of interrelation and co-presence with us. Our subjectivity feels the participation of what is there and is illuminated by it", (p.279). So community-based research is interested in investigating people’s understandings and meanings as they experience them in the world.


Epistemology refers to the nature of the relationship between the knower and the what can be known. Guba & Lincoln (1994) claim that orthodox science, because of its belief in a "real" world that can be known, requires the knower to adopt a posture of objective detachment in order "to discover how things really are" (p.108). There is a presumption that the knower and the known are separate and independent entities that do not influence one another. There is a search for the "truth"; for the facts in objective and quantifiable terms which holds empirical data in the highest esteem.

In contrast, community-based research rests on an extended epistemology that endorses the primacy of practical knowing. In community-based research, the knower participates in the known and that evidence is generated in at least four interdependent ways – experiential, presentational, propositional, and practical (Heron & Reason, 1997; Heron, 1996).


In addition to considering the three defining characteristics of a research paradigm suggested by Guba and Lincoln –ontology, epistemology and methodology, - Heron and Reason argue that an inquiry paradigm also must consider a fourth factor –axiology.

Axiology deals with the nature of value and captures the value question of what is intrinsically worthwhile? The fourth defining characteristics of a research paradigm, axiology, puts in issue "values of being, about what human states are to be valued simply because of what they are" (Heron & Reason, 1997, p. 287). The participatory paradigm addresses this axiological question in terms of human flourishing. Human flourishing is viewed as a "process of social participation in which there is a mutually enabling balance, within and between people, of autonomy, co-operation and hierarchy. It is conceived as interdependent with the flourishing of the planet ecosystem" (Heron, 1996, p. 11). Human flourishing is valued as intrinsically worthwhile and participatory decision-making and is seen as a means to an end "which enables people to be involved in the making of decisions, in every social context, which affect their flourishing in any way" Heron, 1996, p. 11).


One methodology that is particularly well suited to community-based research is co-operative inquiry (Heron, 1996; Reason, 1994). Co-operative inquiry is a participatory action methodology that does research with people not on to or about them. This methodology engages people in a transformative process of change by cycling through several iterations of action and reflection. Co-operative inquiry consists of a series of logical steps including; identifying the issues/questions to be researched, developing an explicit model/framework for practice, putting the model into practice and recording what happens and, reflecting on the experience and making sense out of the whole venture (Reason, 1988). Therefore, evidence about what constitutes "best practice" is generated by people examining their practices in practice and reflecting on these practices.

You have read alot, here's a funny comic


  • Abram, D. (1996), The spell of the sensations. New York: Pantheon
  • Arif, M. (2007). Baldrige theory into practice: a generic model. International Journal of Educational Management, 21(2), 114–125.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
  • Guba E., & Lincoln, Y., (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y (Eds.) Handbook on qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage. 105-118.
  • Hills, M and Mullett, J., (2000). Community-Based Research: Creating Evidence-Based Practice for Health and Social Change. in Proceedings of the Qualitative Evidence-based Practice Conference, Coventry University - May 15-17 2000, Coventry, UK. http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001388.htm
  • Heron, J. (1996) Co-operative inquiry. London: Sage.
  • Heron, J. & Reason, P. (1997). A participatory inquiry paradigm. Qualitative Inquiry. 3 (3) 274-294.
  • Reason, P. (Ed). (1988) Human Inquiry in Action. London: Sage.
  • Reason, P. (Ed). (1994). Participation in Human Inquiry. London: Sage
  • Skolimowski, H. (1992). Living philosophy: Eco-philosophy as a tree of life. London: Arkana

What on earth is a case study?

Case study Research

I think it is fair to say that not every expert or author agrees on what case study research is, some regard it as a methodology while others regard it a research design. This simple fact brought confusion and some lively discussions to both of our two meetings.

I think it is fair to say that not every expert or author agrees on what case study research is, some regard it as a methodology while others regard it a research design. This simple fact brought confusion and some lively discussions to both of our two meetings.

Case study as method, methodology or research design

case_study__anatomy_folds_by_artistshospital.jpgNow, to set the record straight, I am not going to tell you that the answer is this or that, simply because there is no clear answer. So when you read the different points of view choose that answer which makes more sense to you and make sure you can defend this choice (to your supervisor and in your viva).

So, case study is reefed to as a research method, research methodology, genre and research design!

The most prevalent of those is regarding case study as methodology, authors such as Yin and Stake and Pollard regard case study as a methodology (or an approach to research).

Authors like Elliott & Lukeš regard case study as a research genre. What is meant by genre is a guiding principle for the research deign. So, for these people, case study refers to a higher level of abstraction. So bare with me:

If you were to imagine your research paradigm, with the your ontology on top dictating what is reality, followed by your epistemology or epistemological standpoint dictating how we know something and finally the methodology on bottom dictating how do we go about finding out something. Then, case study (as a genre) will belong in your epistemology rather than in you methodology.


All you need to know is that debate about the nature of case study is on going. So keep an eye out.


  • Hamilton, L., & Corbett-Whittier, C. (2012). Using Case Study in Education Research. Sage Publications Ltd.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Image credit: ArtistsHospital

June 01, 2015

On the generalizability of case study research

Writing about web page https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjoboJxaaiE


In our second meeting, we came across the discussion about the generalizability of case study research. Here is some or what was discussed and some extra resources that I found.

Why generalizability

screen_shot_2015-06-01_at_110232.pngThe strength of a single case study is the ability to go really deep into the intricate details and relationships of the case, the downside is being too specific and thus effecting the generalizability of the results. Of course generalizability is not the goal of case study research (as was mentioned in the discussion). So where does this leave us? Is our case study research in vain? Of course not, this is because (a) the close study of a certain case or as Yin says the “assessment of the prevalence of a phenomenon” could he inherently valuable maybe the phenomenon is one of a kind! And (b) although the results of our research are not necessarily generalizable, they can (and should be) transferable. Transferability of results refers to the situations where the results can be applied or relevant in another context. This is a more specific than generalizability, which mostly applied to quantitatively generated results using statistical tabulation of samples from a larger population.

Thanks to Michelle for mentioning that Yin talks about two kinds of generalizability; (1) statistical generalizability and (2) analytic generalizability. On the one hand, statistical generalization comes from a sample of the population, requiring an “interpretive second step from these characteristics to theory” (Yin) . On the other hand, an analytic generalization is a direct confrontation of the case study with an established theory.

My (very quick and brief) Internet search revealed that the first use of the term transferability in this meaning is attributed to Lincoln & Guba's Naturalistic Inquiry (1985).

Thinking bout generalizability and transferability

Each and every researcher should give their work a good amount of thinking about the transferable outcomes that wok could provide. Here the transferable element could be anything; the research conclusion obviously or a part of it, a section or sub section from the design phase, the research method especially for those who develop innovative research methods and so on. (Listen to our talk about this at the 35 minute mark -link above).

Read more:

12_generalizability.pdf: Moreau, Jean-Luc. "Generalizability" Encyclopedia of Case Study Research. 2009 Sage Publications.

2nd Group meeting summary

Writing about web page https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjoboJxaaiE

11219728_10153339058278540_601117441024260248_n.jpgIn brief

So last Wednesday we had our second meeting for the PhD support group, on the agenda of the meeting we had a discussion about the definition of case studies (including a talk about revealing contact details about your case study) generalizability of case study [link] research and using NVivo for qualitative data analysis.

The meeting was extra especial because we had our friend Anne join us from the U.S. over Skype, with the magical technological advances and tech wizardry and with Anne heroically waking up right in the middle of the night we were able to have our across-the-Atlantic meeting of the minds. Also to make our gathering that much better we were joined by Henry who is nearing the submission date of his thesis, and was generous enough to join us and share with us some great advices related to our discussion points (more on that later).

So what is the case in case study

So, the first item of business; definition of a case study, the idea here was to collaboratively figure out what defined the “case” part of each of our respective case studies. So, in turns we each presented our research topic and what outlined the boundaries of each case; for some of us a case was a subject institution like a school or a university; for others it was a person whom they had interviewed or were planning on interviewing; and interestingly for some of us a case was a collection of people within an organization like teachers, headmasters and teacher trainers.

Also, some of us are looking at multiple case studies (example Asima and myself) while other are looking at one case study (example Hessah and Hafiz).

Being careful with language

Asima made an important remark about being careful in using the language when talking about the research method and methodology. So terminology such as ‘case study’ comes loaded with meanings and related connotations and the researcher is actually borrowing aspects of case study design, aspects that are related to his or her research. Here the researcher is urged to tread lightly so to speak when talking about the design of their research. They should talk only about those related aspects and make a clear cut about what is it they are borrowing and what is it they are not. (Listen to Asima talk about this and her reflection on Yin’s case study book at the 9 minutes mark of the recording – link above).


May 30, 2015

2nd Group meeting recording

Writing about web page https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjoboJxaaiE

I am getting the hang of it! It seems that video editing is a skill with a smooth learning curve. This time around I had a video recording and an audio recording to work with. The video recording covers a part of the meeting where our friend Esther Jawing is talking about using NVivo for thematic analysis. The audio recording covers the whole meeting. Now, getting the two recording into iMovie was simple enough, creating a joint video was very easy. Except the audio recording quality dropped massively in the video file. Apparently the internal microphone of a smart phone is not as good as a dedicated professional audio recorder, who knew :)

So, I overlaid the dedicated audio recording over the video recording. Turned down the audio track from the video file and voila! a great sounding video. The tricky part was getting the two files to synchronize perfectly, which was not as easy as you would imagine. iMovie was not helpful in this are, which caused me to I struggle a little bit to get a convincing synch.

You can watch the final product here; seek to minute 49:35 to see how the video track and audio track work together.


The video contents are:

  1. Agenda
  2. Case studies: what are cases in each research
  3. Case study as a research design, approach and methodology
  4. Disclosing information about case study details
  5. Ontology, Epistemology & Axiology
  6. Using NVivo for thematic analysis

After finishing the editing, I was glad with how things turned out thinking to myself “this is a genius set up, people should use a similar handheld audio recorder to improve the audio quality of their videos!” I then realized that people have been doing this for ages. Just go to YouTube and search vloggers audio setup for their videos. Turns out that my handheld device was somehow popular on YouTube. On the right you can see a standard set up for capturing video with high-quality audio (credit: Better Family Photos).

I wish to thank Hafiz Hanif for providing the video file; probably video recording should be a standard in our future meetings. I think I will bring this up in a future meeting and see.

May 28, 2015

Researcher's paradigm: useful resources

Follow-up to Researcher’s paradigm from CES PHD Support Group

The nicest thing a fellow student could do is to share his/her resources. Especially when they give you the best of their resources, straight to the point, bite-sized and concise.

Well, this is exactly what our colleague Hessah did when she sent me a couple of book chapters on Researcher's paradigm and research philosophy. Her intension was to share these resources with other students (which I am gladly doing through this post).


So, here you will find some useful documents. I will be updating this blog post with more resources as soon as I come across any good ones.

Book Chapters

  • Rubin, H.J. & Rubin, I.S. 2012. Chapter 2. Research Philosophy and Qualitative Interviews. In: Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data Third Edition. SAGE Publications, Inc. pp. 13-24.


  • CreswellCreswell, J.W. & Plano Clark, V.L. 2011. Chapter 3. Choosing a Mixed Methods Research Design. In: Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (2nd Ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc, pp. 53-106.


Journal Articles

  • Mackenzie, N. & Knipe, S. 2006. Research dilemmas: Paradigms, methods and methodology. Issues In Educational Research, 16, 2006.


Other Documents

  • Flowers, P. 2009. Research Philosophies – Importance and Relevance. Research Philosophies – Importance and Relevance, 1, 2009.

flowers_2009.pdfnote: this is not a peer-reviewed article but is still useful

  • Alsalahi, S.M. 2015. Paradigmatic Standpoints of Master’s and Doctoral THESIS. Exeter University.

alsalahi_2015.pdfnote: this powerpoint document is in Arabic & English

I wish you find these useful. Special thanks to Hessah.

May 18, 2015

1st Group meeting recording

Writing about web page https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnE55FPS7yY

First recording upload to YouTube

It was not an easy job getting my first YouTube upload in this format! I created a dedicated YouTube channel for the group (link) and had to learn how to transform an audio recording into a video file (using iMovie) so YouTube will accept it. The reason that I wanted to upload the file to YouTube is that I could have cut into bite-size chunks so it's easier to jump through. The result is a nice looking file with a detailed description of its contents. Additionally, I learnt to use the annotations, which are very useful little things!

Video annotations

So, annotations are "clickable text overlays on YouTube videos". They are used by YouTubers to increase their view count and help engage more subscribers. You are advised to be inventive in using annotations. I remembered once seeing a video where the uploader made self-referring links in the video that allowed to jump from one point in time to another. After a bit of tweaking and trial and error, I was able to overlay a couple annotations that broke the file into four major parts. Pressing each one will allow the viewer to seek into a different part of the recording. I am generally happy with the result. I hope it's clear for first time viewers.

So, please have a look through and don't forget to check out the video description just underneath the title and the sharing buttons. Oh yeah, and share it if you feel like it. Link to video

The video description

For more details about the content of the video I added a detailed account of the recording contents. A time stamp and a title of the discussion is listed in chronological order. The time stamp is clickable and will make the video jump to the exact point of timw where the right topic is discussed. I’m genuinely impressed with how things worked out at the end. Alas, it was not an easy job! Uploading the recording took about an hour!! Adding the annotations took another hour, and don't get me started on the editing (the video rendering only took a whopping 5 hours on a 2.8 Intel Core i7 with 8 Gigs of ram)! Regardless, let's just hope there’s a learning curve here and let's hope next time it won't be this much time consuming. Because I intend to not quit on this project. Oh yeah, I to see this through.

Recording privacy

Although this recording is on YouTube it is somehow private. This will be good news for you if you were in the recording and are shy or unconformable being on YouTube. Because the recordings is "Unlisted". Making a video "unlisted" means only those who have the link to the video can view it. An unlisted video won’t appear in YouTube's search results (unless someone adds the unlisted video to a public playlist). You can share the video by simply sharing the link with the people who you’d like to have access to it.

May 17, 2015

Researcher’s paradigm

Researcher’s paradigm

paradigmResearcher’s paradigm is tricky concept. The problem starts with the term itself, with authors using various terms to refer to the same concept. The used terms include Researcher’s philosophy, philosophical worldview and Researcher’s framework.

Regardless, the paradigm is essentially an umbrella term that refers to the researcher’s ontology and epistemology.

According to Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, Ontology refers to the branch of philosophy that deals with the nature of existence. Epistemology on the other hand refers to the part of philosophy that deals with knowledge. Epistemology is a theory of knowledge, especially with regard to its methods, validity, and scope, and the distinction between justified belief and opinion.

To read more on the difference between ontology and epistemology check my entry to the ARM programme blog and make sure you download the attached PowerPoint file. Here http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/voices/entry/researchers_paradigm/

A great resource I found online is an article by Professor Ørjan Totland, I found on the Norwegian University of Science and Technology website. Here http://www.idi.ntnu.no/grupper/su/publ/html/totland/ch032.htm

Book suggestions

In our first meeting of the CESPHD support group, we had a lively discussion on the researcher’s paradigm. Thankfully, some great books were suggested. Here’s a detailed account of the suggested books:

A Practical Guide for Beginners1) An easy to read and great with real-life examples book is Braun & Clarke's Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. Library link

Book details:

Paperback: 400 pages

Publisher: SAGE Publications Ltd (28 Feb. 2013)

Language: English

ISBN-10: 1847875823

ISBN-13: 978-1847875822

2) An authority on Research is John W. Creswell who has many books, except they might be a bit dry. See all Creswell's books in the Library here

3) Another authority on Research is David Silverman whose books are also hard to approach. See all Silverman's books in the Library here

4) Another authoruty is Stephen Gorard, whos provides hugely critical review of other authors. This makes him a great resource for those who want a critical edge to their work. See all Gorard's book in the Library here

A Practical Guide for the Social Sciences5) A must-have book is Matthews & Ross's Research Methods: A Practical Guide for the Social Sciences See Library Link or View Online

Book details:

Paperback: 520 pages

Publisher: Longman; 1 edition (9 Jun. 2010)

Language: English

ISBN-10: 1405858508

ISBN-13: 978-1405858502

Feel free to suggest your own favourate books in the comments below

1st Group meeting summary

What a great first meeting we had! I genuinely enjoyed myself and had great discussions with other colleagues. The 75 minutes meeting was very smooth and productive. The 9 attendees discussed their research as well as the format and goal of the support group.

You can listen to the meeting's recording here and read about the YouTube video here

The summary of the discussions includesmeeting2.jpg

Introducing the Group and its goals, followed by a discussion on the formula and regularity of meetings.

Asima, who also provided us with a list of book recommendations, triggered a lively discussion on Ontology & Epistemology. The discussion is going to continue on our next meeting. Make sure you are present for that!

The book recommendations are further discussed here.

Another great discussion on Data Collection took place, with everybody chipping in. We all presented out data collection duration and how we managed our schedules.

Interview transcriptions were also discussed, with colleagues sharing their experiences in using transcribing software (namely NVivo). A coming up meeting will include detailed discussions and tips on using NVivio.

Self-reflection was also discussed and the matter of keeping a personal diary. Some suggested keeping track of your work, others suggested going back to your old material and reflect on it.

A closing discussion included the possibility of help from the department. The idea is that the department offered to provide us with workshop and one-on-one support on key research-related topics, such as using NVivo and SPSS. A group of students who are interested in such help can request formal support from the department. The CESPHD support group will help facilitate this request.

Looking forward to our next meeting! Make sure you are present so you don’t miss out.

May 12, 2015

Welcome to the CES PHD Support Group blog


It brings me great pleasure to announce forming a PHD support group. The group is called CESPHD and as the name suggests it is aimed at all PHD students at the Centre for Education Studies.

Goal of the group

As many of you have indicated on various occasions, there is a need for some sort of a group that allows students to discuss their research and help each others overcome the similar obstacles they are facing. Well, here's your chance, an informal group formed and managed by students. Thanks to everyone of you who expressed interest and helped with your valuable input (especially Asima, Hafiz, Sakinah & Natia)

The main goals of the group are:

  1. help students meet on a semi-regular basis in a friendly environment where they can talk openly about their research experience
  2. transfer research experience and share helpful tips
  3. capitalise on the collective thinking and allow feedback for those who would like to present their work to a fresh set of eyes

Additional benefits include (and are not limited to)

  1. Sharing tips on valuable papers and books
  2. Provide solutions to potential problems (brainstorming/focus group)
  3. Giving conference heads up
  4. A good place to just hang out and plan fun activities

The formula of the meeting

As mentioned above the meetings are biweekly and take place in the late morning. The meeting is open for everyone to show up and leave whenever they feel like it.

Please keep in mind that this is definitely not a formal thing and most definitely not mandatory.

In order for the meeting to be most fruitful you are encourage to:

  • Have a personal 'agenda' for the meeting; this is what you want to get out of the meeting. You personal agenda can be some piece of work you are working on and feel stuck and in need of fresh eyes to have a look at.
  • Don't expect everyone to show up so try and make use of as many people who are present on the day.
  • If you are not facing any problems with your research (in which case congratulations!! you are the 1 in a million) you are still welcome to take part and help other students. Who knows? you might just pick up the most useful piece of advice for your work (well... it's a possibility!
  • Be reasonable in your expectations, this is not a tutoring group or a workshop (although some members might be up for one-to-one tutorials according to their time and availability.

Looking forward to your participation both in the Group and online, please feel free to view, comment and post on this blog.