EDCO 747 Qualitative Methods of Research

WEEK 1 — FOUNDATIONS OF QUALITATIVE INQUIRY

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Introduction to qualitative research: philosophical underpinnings and epistemological assumptions
• Comparing qualitative and quantitative paradigms: ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology
• Postpositivism, constructivism, transformativism, and pragmatism as research worldviews
• Historical development of qualitative research across disciplines (education, social sciences, counseling)
• The role of the researcher: subjectivity, positionality, and reflexivity
• When qualitative research is appropriate: research questions best suited for interpretive inquiry
• Overview of major qualitative traditions: phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, case study, and narrative inquiry
• Introduction to Liberty University’s Christian worldview integration in qualitative research
• APA 7th edition formatting requirements for qualitative research manuscripts
• Navigating LUOA research resources: Jerry Falwell Library databases for qualitative literature

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Describe a research problem in your field of counseling or education for which a qualitative approach would be more appropriate than a quantitative one. What specific characteristics of the problem make it suitable for qualitative inquiry? How does your Christian worldview shape the way you approach this research question?

Discussion Question 2: Creswell and Poth (2018) identify five major qualitative research traditions. Based on your initial reading, which tradition most resonates with your research interests and why? What assumptions about knowledge and reality (ontological and epistemological) does your chosen tradition reflect?

Discussion Question 3: Reflexivity is a cornerstone of qualitative research. Write a brief researcher positionality statement (150-200 words) for a hypothetical study on a topic in your area of specialization. How might your background, experiences, and values influence your interpretation of data?

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Research Paradigm Reflection Paper
Type Written Assignment
Instructions Write a 3-4 page reflection paper comparing and contrasting quantitative and qualitative research paradigms. Address the following: (1) the philosophical assumptions (ontology, epistemology, axiology, rhetoric) underlying each paradigm; (2) the types of research questions best suited to each approach; (3) how a Christian worldview can be meaningfully integrated into qualitative inquiry; and (4) a personal reflection on which paradigm best aligns with your anticipated dissertation research and why. Use a minimum of 5 peer-reviewed sources published within the last 7 years.
Format APA 7th edition, 3-4 pages, minimum 5 peer-reviewed references
Due Date Sunday of Week 1, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 2 — PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH DESIGN

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Philosophical roots of phenomenology: Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, and van Manen
• Transcendental (Husserlian) vs. hermeneutic (Heideggerian) phenomenology: key distinctions
• The phenomenological reduction (epoche): bracketing researcher assumptions and biases
• Identifying an appropriate phenomenon of interest for phenomenological study
• Purposeful sampling in phenomenology: criterion-based selection and sample size considerations
• Moustakas’s (1994) modified van Kaam method: textural and structural description
• Colaizzi’s method: seven-step protocol for phenomenological data analysis
• Van Manen’s hermeneutic phenomenological method: lived experience and meaning
• Writing phenomenological descriptions: the essence of the experience (composite description)
• Trustworthiness in phenomenological research: bracketing interviews and member checking
• Integrating faith and phenomenology: exploring spiritual and lived experience in counseling research

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Moustakas (1994) emphasizes the importance of epoche (bracketing) in transcendental phenomenology. Describe a phenomenon relevant to counseling or education that you might study phenomenologically. Write a brief epoche statement identifying your assumptions, biases, and prior experiences related to this phenomenon. How does intentional bracketing strengthen the rigor of your inquiry?

Discussion Question 2: Compare and contrast Colaizzi’s method with Moustakas’s modified van Kaam method for phenomenological analysis. What are the key procedural differences? Under what circumstances might you choose one over the other for your dissertation research?

Discussion Question 3: Phenomenology is often described as studying the ‘lived experience’ of a phenomenon. How might a phenomenological study exploring the lived experience of spiritual transformation or faith-based counseling be designed? What ethical considerations arise when researching spiritual experiences?

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Phenomenological Research Proposal Outline
Type Written Assignment
Instructions Develop a 4-5 page detailed outline for a phenomenological research study on a topic of your choosing within counseling, education, or a related field. Your outline must include: (1) a statement of the phenomenon under investigation; (2) the research question(s) written in phenomenological language (‘What is the lived experience of…?’); (3) justification for the phenomenological approach; (4) selection of a specific phenomenological method (Moustakas, Colaizzi, or van Manen) with rationale; (5) proposed sampling strategy and participant criteria; (6) data collection procedures; (7) anticipated analysis steps; and (8) strategies for ensuring trustworthiness. Cite at least 6 peer-reviewed sources.
Format APA 7th edition, 4-5 pages, minimum 6 peer-reviewed references
Due Date Sunday of Week 2, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 3 — GROUNDED THEORY RESEARCH DESIGN

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Origins and philosophical foundations of grounded theory: Glaser and Strauss (1967)
• Symbolic interactionism as the sociological foundation of grounded theory
• Glaserian vs. Straussian grounded theory: methodological divergences
• Charmaz’s constructivist grounded theory: a third-generation approach
• The central purpose of grounded theory: generating substantive theory grounded in data
• Theoretical sampling and the constant comparative method
• Open coding, axial coding, and selective coding in Straussian grounded theory
• Initial coding, focused coding, and theoretical coding in constructivist grounded theory
• Theoretical saturation: when to stop data collection
• Memo writing as an analytic practice in grounded theory
• The conditional/consequential matrix and the paradigm model
• Presenting grounded theory findings: the emergent substantive theory
• Critiques of grounded theory and responses from the field

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Glaser and Strauss’s original grounded theory approach has been substantially modified by Strauss and Corbin and later by Charmaz. Analyze the key philosophical and procedural differences among these three approaches. If you were studying how counselors develop professional identity over time, which grounded theory approach would you select and why?

Discussion Question 2: Theoretical sampling is a distinguishing feature of grounded theory that differs fundamentally from purposeful sampling in other qualitative traditions. Explain the logic of theoretical sampling and how it guides the iterative process of data collection and analysis. How would you apply theoretical sampling to a study on how school counselors navigate ethical dilemmas?

Discussion Question 3: Grounded theory aims to generate theory, not merely describe experience. Identify a process or phenomenon in your field of specialization for which an existing theory is insufficient or absent. How could a grounded theory study contribute new theoretical understanding? How might you integrate a biblical or theological lens into theory generation?

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Grounded Theory Design Critique
Type Written Assignment
Instructions Locate and critically analyze a published grounded theory study in a peer-reviewed counseling or education journal within the last 7 years. Write a 4-5 page critique addressing: (1) the research problem and purpose; (2) the specific grounded theory approach used (Glaserian, Straussian, or constructivist) and whether the authors clearly identified it; (3) the sampling strategy and theoretical sampling procedures; (4) the coding procedures and memo writing; (5) evidence of theoretical saturation; (6) how the emergent theory is presented; and (7) the trustworthiness strategies employed. Conclude with an evaluation of the study’s strengths and limitations and what you would do differently. Cite the article and at least 5 additional peer-reviewed sources.
Format APA 7th edition, 4-5 pages, minimum 6 references total
Due Date Sunday of Week 3, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 4 — ETHNOGRAPHIC RESEARCH DESIGN

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Anthropological roots of ethnography: from cultural description to critical inquiry
• Types of ethnography: classical, focused, auto-ethnography, critical ethnography, and virtual/digital ethnography
• Defining the culture-sharing group: bounded units of analysis
• Entry, access, and the role of the gatekeeper in ethnographic research
• Participant observation: overt vs. covert roles, levels of participation, and field presence
• Ethnographic interviewing: key informant interviews, life history, and ethnographic questions (grand tour, mini-tour, example, experience)
• Field notes: types, formats, and best practices for descriptive and reflective notes
• Thick description: Geertz’s concept and its application in ethnographic writing
• Emic vs. etic perspectives: insider and outsider viewpoints in cultural analysis
• Cultural themes and patterns: moving from codes to cultural interpretations
• Critical ethnography: power, advocacy, and social justice in ethnographic inquiry
• Ethical challenges in ethnography: prolonged engagement, informed consent, and researcher impact on the culture

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Ethnographers must carefully negotiate their role within the culture they are studying. Describe the continuum of researcher participation from complete observer to complete participant. What are the ethical and methodological trade-offs at each position? If you were conducting an ethnographic study of a Christian counseling center, where on the participation continuum would you position yourself and why?

Discussion Question 2: Autoethnography represents a significant evolution in ethnographic research that centers the researcher’s own cultural experience as data. What are the methodological arguments for and against autoethnography as a rigorous research approach? Identify a topic in counselor education for which autoethnography would be uniquely suited and justify your answer.

Discussion Question 3: Critical ethnography explicitly challenges power structures and advocates for marginalized communities. How does this advocacy stance create both opportunities and ethical tensions for the researcher? How can a researcher with a Christian worldview authentically engage in critical ethnography without compromising either scholarly rigor or personal values?

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Ethnographic Observation Field Notes Exercise
Type Practical Exercise + Reflection Paper
Instructions Conduct a structured 60-90 minute naturalistic observation in a public or professional setting of your choosing (e.g., a school campus common area, a church community gathering, a workplace break room, a community center). Write detailed ethnographic field notes using both descriptive and reflective note formats. Then write a 3-4 page reflection paper that includes: (1) a description of the cultural-sharing group observed; (2) an analysis of the cultural patterns or themes you identified; (3) a reflection on your positionality and its potential influence on your observations; (4) an evaluation of what an extended ethnographic study of this group might reveal; and (5) the ethical considerations you navigated or would need to address in a full study. Attach your raw field notes as an appendix.
Format APA 7th edition, 3-4 page reflection + field notes appendix
Due Date Sunday of Week 4, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 5 — CASE STUDY RESEARCH DESIGN

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Yin’s (2018) case study methodology: definition, types, and applications
• Stake’s (1995) approach to case study research: intrinsic, instrumental, and collective cases
• Defining the case: the bounded unit of analysis and how boundaries shape inquiry
• Single case vs. multiple case designs: rationale, strengths, and limitations
• Embedded vs. holistic case designs
• Data sources in case study research: documents, archival records, interviews, direct observation, participant observation, and physical artifacts
• Triangulation of data sources: convergent evidence and the chain of evidence
• Case study analysis strategies: pattern matching, explanation building, time-series analysis, and cross-case synthesis
• Writing the case study report: narrative, tabular, and vignette formats
• Generalizability in case study research: analytic generalization vs. statistical generalization
• Case study in counseling and education research: applied examples and best practices

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Yin (2018) argues that case study is appropriate when ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions are being asked about a contemporary phenomenon over which the investigator has little control. Identify a ‘how’ or ‘why’ research question in your field and justify why a single or multiple case study design would be appropriate. What would constitute the bounded case in your study?

Discussion Question 2: A key strength of case study research is the use of multiple data sources to build a comprehensive picture of the case. However, managing large volumes of diverse data presents analytic challenges. How would you organize and analyze data from six different sources (e.g., interviews, observations, documents) in a case study examining a school counselor’s response to a campus crisis? What analytic strategy (pattern matching, explanation building, etc.) would you use?

Discussion Question 3: Critics sometimes dismiss case study research as lacking rigor because findings cannot be statistically generalized. How does Yin’s concept of ‘analytic generalization’ respond to this criticism? Provide an example from counseling or education research where analytic generalization from a case study would make a meaningful theoretical contribution.

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Case Study Research Design Plan
Type Written Assignment
Instructions Develop a detailed 5-6 page case study research design plan for a study in your area of specialization. Your plan must address: (1) a clearly articulated research problem and ‘how’ or ‘why’ research question; (2) justification for the case study approach over other qualitative traditions; (3) the type of case study (single vs. multiple, holistic vs. embedded) and rationale; (4) definition and bounding of the case(s); (5) a minimum of four data sources with collection procedures for each; (6) a data management plan; (7) an analytic strategy with step-by-step procedures; (8) trustworthiness strategies addressing credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability; and (9) relevant ethical considerations. Use a minimum of 6 peer-reviewed sources.
Format APA 7th edition, 5-6 pages, minimum 6 peer-reviewed references
Due Date Sunday of Week 5, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 6 — NARRATIVE INQUIRY & OTHER QUALITATIVE TRADITIONS

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Narrative inquiry: Clandinin and Connelly’s (2000) foundational framework
• The three-dimensional narrative inquiry space: temporality, sociality, and place
• Types of narrative research: biographical study, autobiography, life history, oral history, and narrative analysis
• Collecting narrative data: in-depth interviews, journal entries, letters, and autobiographical documents
• Restoring and restorying: the iterative process of narrative construction
• Analyzing narrative data: structural, thematic, dialogic/performance, and visual narrative analysis
• Participatory Action Research (PAR): community-based qualitative inquiry for social change
• Mixed methods and qualitative research: integration strategies and rationale
• Arts-based qualitative research: poetry, visual arts, and performance as inquiry
• Discourse analysis and conversation analysis as qualitative approaches
• Emerging qualitative traditions in counseling and education research
• Selecting among qualitative traditions: a decision framework for dissertation researchers

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Narrative inquiry centers the stories people tell as the primary unit of analysis. Clandinin and Connelly argue that humans are ‘storytelling organisms who, individually and socially, lead storied lives.’ How might a narrative inquiry study explore the professional journey of a first-generation college counselor? What narrative data collection strategies would you use, and how would the three-dimensional narrative inquiry space (temporality, sociality, place) shape your study?

Discussion Question 2: Participatory Action Research (PAR) blurs the traditional distinction between researcher and participant by involving community members as co-researchers. What are the epistemological and ethical implications of this approach? How might a school counselor use PAR to investigate and address systemic barriers affecting a marginalized student population? What challenges might arise in a dissertation context?

Discussion Question 3: After studying five major qualitative traditions (phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, case study, and narrative inquiry), develop your own decision framework for selecting among them. For your anticipated dissertation topic, which tradition would you select and why? What are the trade-offs of your choice relative to the alternatives?

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Qualitative Tradition Comparison Matrix & Selection Rationale
Type Written Assignment + Matrix
Instructions Create a comprehensive comparison matrix (table format) comparing all five major qualitative traditions studied thus far (phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, case study, narrative inquiry) across the following dimensions: (1) philosophical/disciplinary origins; (2) purpose of inquiry; (3) unit of analysis; (4) data collection methods; (5) analytic procedures; (6) output/product; (7) typical sample size; and (8) suitability for dissertation research. Then write a 3-4 page selection rationale paper in which you: (a) identify which tradition best fits your anticipated dissertation research, (b) justify your selection using criteria from the matrix and course readings, (c) explain how your Christian worldview is congruent with your chosen tradition, and (d) acknowledge the limitations of your selected approach. Use a minimum of 7 peer-reviewed sources.
Format APA 7th edition, matrix + 3-4 page paper, minimum 7 peer-reviewed references
Due Date Sunday of Week 6, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 7 — SAMPLING, DATA COLLECTION & QUALITATIVE INTERVIEWING

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Purposeful sampling strategies: criterion, maximum variation, snowball, typical case, extreme/deviant case, intensity, and confirming/disconfirming
• Sample size in qualitative research: tradition-specific guidelines and the principle of saturation
• Designing the qualitative interview: structured, semi-structured, and unstructured formats
• Developing an interview protocol: question types, probing strategies, and sequencing
• Conducting the qualitative interview: establishing rapport, active listening, and managing sensitive disclosures
• Focus group methodology: facilitation, dynamics, and appropriate use
• Observation as data collection: structured observation protocols and field note best practices
• Document analysis and archival data as qualitative evidence
• Audio/video recording, transcription standards, and verbatim accuracy
• Data management: organization, storage, security, and HIPAA/FERPA considerations
• Member checking during data collection: early-stage participant validation
• Ethical considerations in qualitative data collection: informed consent, confidentiality, and voluntary participation
• Managing emotional responses: debriefing participants and researcher self-care

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Maximum variation sampling and snowball sampling represent two very different logics for participant selection in qualitative research. Explain the rationale and appropriate use of each strategy. For a study exploring how licensed professional counselors experience compassion fatigue, which strategy would you employ and why? How many participants would you aim to recruit and what would guide your decision to stop?

Discussion Question 2: The qualitative interview is described by some methodologists as a ‘conversation with a purpose.’ What distinguishes a rigorous qualitative interview from an ordinary conversation? Develop three grand-tour questions and three follow-up probes for a semi-structured interview exploring the experiences of doctoral students navigating academic and spiritual identity formation. Justify the wording and sequencing of your questions.

Discussion Question 3: Qualitative researchers sometimes encounter unexpected emotional disclosures during interviews — participants may share trauma, grief, or crisis-level distress. As a counselor-researcher, you are uniquely positioned at the intersection of therapeutic and research roles. How do you navigate this dual role ethically? What protocols should be in place before beginning data collection, and how do your counseling skills both help and complicate your role as a researcher?

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Qualitative Interview Protocol Development & Pilot
Type Practical Assignment
Instructions Develop a complete semi-structured interview protocol for a hypothetical qualitative study in your area of specialization. The protocol must include: (1) a research purpose statement; (2) an opening script that explains the study purpose, confidentiality, and voluntary participation; (3) a minimum of 8 open-ended interview questions with at least 2 follow-up probes per question; (4) a demographic information sheet; and (5) a closing script with debriefing language. Then conduct a pilot interview with one peer or colleague (with their informed consent), audio record it, and write a 2-3 page reflection on: what worked well, what questions need revision, how your positionality influenced the interview, what you learned about the interview process, and any ethical moments you navigated. Attach the full protocol as Appendix A and a 1-page transcript excerpt as Appendix B.
Format APA 7th edition, 2-3 page reflection + appendices
Due Date Sunday of Week 7, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 8 — QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS I: CODING & CATEGORIZATION

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Introduction to qualitative data analysis: the interpretive process and avoiding premature closure
• Data preparation: transcription, organization, and initial read-through
• Saldana’s (2021) coding manual: a comprehensive framework for qualitative coding
• First-cycle coding methods: descriptive coding, in vivo coding, process coding, emotion coding, and values coding
• Holistic coding and provisional coding as initial organizational strategies
• Structural coding for interview and focus group data
• Second-cycle coding: pattern coding, focused coding, axial coding, and theoretical coding
• Moving from codes to categories: collapsing, splitting, and merging codes
• Developing themes from categories: the analytic leap from description to interpretation
• Code frequency, code co-occurrence, and analytical memos as analytic tools
• The role of negative cases and disconfirming evidence in qualitative analysis
• Inductive vs. deductive coding: grounded vs. a priori coding frameworks
• Using a codebook: development, documentation, and inter-rater reliability in qualitative research

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Saldana (2021) describes more than 30 coding methods in his coding manual. Explain the difference between first-cycle and second-cycle coding and why both are necessary for robust qualitative analysis. Select one first-cycle coding method and one second-cycle coding method that you would use for a phenomenological study on the experience of burnout among Christian counselors. Justify your choices.

Discussion Question 2: Qualitative data analysis involves making interpretive leaps from raw data to themes. How do you distinguish between a code, a category, and a theme? Use an example from counseling or education research to illustrate the progression from raw participant quotations to a fully developed theme. What analytic practices guard against superficial or premature theme development?

Discussion Question 3: Some qualitative methodologists advocate for using qualitative data analysis software (QDAS) such as NVivo or ATLAS.ti, while others prefer manual coding methods. What are the methodological arguments for and against using QDAS? Under what circumstances would you choose a software-assisted approach for your dissertation research, and what training would you need?

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Qualitative Coding Exercise
Type Practical Coding Assignment
Instructions Using the provided 8-10 page qualitative transcript excerpt (posted in Blackboard under Week 8 Resources), complete the following coding exercise: (1) conduct a thorough first read of the entire transcript and write a 1-page analytical memo capturing your initial impressions, hunches, and questions; (2) apply two different first-cycle coding methods (your choice, with justification) to the entire transcript, annotating directly in the document; (3) compile a preliminary codebook listing all codes with operational definitions and representative data examples; (4) develop a code-to-category map showing how your codes cluster into broader categories; and (5) write a 2-3 page analytic reflection discussing your coding decisions, how you handled ambiguous data, what negative cases you encountered, and what preliminary themes appear to be emerging. Submit all materials: annotated transcript, codebook, code-to-category map, and analytic reflection.
Format APA 7th edition for reflection section; all materials submitted as single PDF
Due Date Sunday of Week 8, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 9 — QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS II: THEMATIC & INTERPRETIVE ANALYSIS

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Thematic analysis (TA): Braun and Clarke’s (2006, 2022) updated reflexive thematic analysis framework
• Six phases of reflexive thematic analysis: familiarization, generating codes, constructing themes, reviewing themes, defining and naming themes, and producing the report
• Semantic vs. latent themes: surface description vs. interpretive analysis
• Essentialist vs. constructionist thematic analysis
• Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA): Smith, Flowers, and Larkin’s approach
• Discourse analysis: analyzing language, power, and meaning construction
• Constant comparative analysis across traditions
• Developing rich, analytic theme descriptions: moving beyond listing to interpretation
• Using participant quotes strategically: evidence, illustration, and not overwhelming the analysis
• Writing qualitative findings: narrative structure, subjectivity, and scholarly voice
• Representing multiple voices: polyphonic narrative in qualitative findings
• Reflexive memos as a record of analytic thinking throughout data analysis

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Braun and Clarke (2022) have revisited and substantially updated their thematic analysis framework, introducing the concept of ‘reflexive thematic analysis’ and moving away from earlier guidance that emphasized inter-rater reliability as a marker of rigor. What is the epistemological rationale for this shift? Do you agree that inter-rater reliability is inappropriate for constructivist thematic analysis? How does this debate connect to your understanding of qualitative rigor?

Discussion Question 2: A common weakness in qualitative findings sections is what Braun and Clarke call ‘thematic cataloguing’ — listing themes with supporting quotes but offering little interpretive analysis. Read the provided short qualitative findings excerpt (posted in Blackboard) and evaluate it against the standard of rich, interpretive thematic analysis. What is strong? What needs development? How would you rewrite one theme description to move it from description to interpretation?

Discussion Question 3: Interpretive Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) shares some features with reflexive thematic analysis but has distinct philosophical roots and analytic procedures. Compare these two approaches across: (1) philosophical underpinnings, (2) sample size expectations, (3) analytic process, and (4) the nature of the interpretive output. Which approach would be more appropriate for a dissertation exploring the meaning that counseling doctoral students assign to their calling to the profession?

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Thematic Analysis Findings Section Draft
Type Written Assignment
Instructions Using the coded data from your Week 8 coding exercise, develop a complete qualitative findings section using Braun and Clarke’s reflexive thematic analysis approach. Your findings section must: (1) present a minimum of 3 fully developed themes, each with a clear theme statement, a rich analytic description (not merely a summary of codes), strategically selected participant quotations with contextual framing, and interpretive commentary that goes beyond the data surface; (2) include a thematic map (visual diagram) showing the relationship among themes; (3) be written in a scholarly qualitative voice that balances participant voices with researcher interpretation; and (4) include a short analytic memo (1 page) describing your decision-making process in constructing and refining the themes. Total length: 5-6 pages of findings + thematic map + analytic memo.
Format APA 7th edition, 5-6 pages findings + thematic map + 1 page memo
Due Date Sunday of Week 9, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 10 — TRUSTWORTHINESS & RIGOR IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) criteria for trustworthiness: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability
• Credibility strategies: prolonged engagement, persistent observation, triangulation, peer debriefing, negative case analysis, referential adequacy, and member checking
• Transferability and thick description: the reader’s role in naturalistic generalization
• Dependability and confirmability: the audit trail and reflexive journal
• Reflexivity as a cornerstone of qualitative rigor: ongoing self-examination and transparency
• Triangulation strategies: data source, methodological, investigator, and theoretical triangulation
• Member checking: design, implementation, and handling participant disagreement
• Peer debriefing: selecting a debriefer and structuring productive debrief sessions
• Inter-rater reliability vs. inter-rater agreement in qualitative research: the ongoing debate
• Quality criteria specific to individual traditions (e.g., resonance in narrative inquiry, fit in grounded theory, fittingness in ethnography)
• Common threats to trustworthiness and how to address them in dissertation proposals
• APA standards for reporting qualitative research: JARS-Qual guidelines

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Member checking is widely cited as a credibility strategy in qualitative research, yet scholars disagree about its implementation and value. Lincoln and Guba (1985) originally described member checking as the most critical technique for establishing credibility, while more recent constructivist scholars question whether participants’ approval of researcher interpretations is epistemologically coherent. Take a position on the appropriate use of member checking in qualitative research and defend it using literature from the course.

Discussion Question 2: Triangulation is often misunderstood as a strategy for achieving a single ‘true’ account of a phenomenon by using multiple data sources. Explain why this positivist interpretation of triangulation is inconsistent with constructivist qualitative epistemology. How should qualitative researchers conceptualize and implement triangulation to strengthen the credibility of their findings without claiming objective truth?

Discussion Question 3: Your dissertation committee chair questions whether your qualitative study will be ‘rigorous enough’ compared to quantitative studies, implying that qualitative findings are merely subjective opinions. Drawing on Lincoln and Guba’s trustworthiness framework and JARS-Qual reporting standards, construct a scholarly argument for the rigor of your proposed qualitative study. What specific strategies will you implement, and how will you document them?

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Trustworthiness Strategy Plan for Dissertation Research
Type Written Assignment
Instructions Develop a comprehensive 4-5 page Trustworthiness Strategy Plan for your anticipated dissertation qualitative study (or a clearly specified hypothetical study). For each of Lincoln and Guba’s four criteria (credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability), identify and describe at least two specific, detailed strategies you will implement. For each strategy, explain: (a) exactly how you will carry it out; (b) at what stage of the research process; (c) how it will be documented; and (d) any limitations or challenges associated with it. Conclude with a 1-page reflexivity statement that honestly examines your positionality relative to the proposed study topic and how you will manage potential biases throughout the research process. Use a minimum of 7 peer-reviewed sources.
Format APA 7th edition, 4-5 pages + 1 page reflexivity statement, minimum 7 references
Due Date Sunday of Week 10, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 11 — RESEARCH ETHICS, IRB, & CHRISTIAN WORLDVIEW INTEGRATION

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• The Belmont Report: foundational ethical principles for human subjects research (respect, beneficence, justice)
• Federal regulations governing human subjects research: 45 CFR 46 (Common Rule) and the HIPAA Privacy Rule
• Liberty University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB): structure, review levels, and submission requirements
• Categories of IRB review: exempt, expedited, and full board review — determining the appropriate level
• Informed consent: required elements, special populations, and waiver of consent
• Confidentiality vs. anonymity: distinctions, data security, and limits of confidentiality
• Research with vulnerable populations: children, prisoners, pregnant women, and persons with diminished autonomy
• Dual roles in qualitative research: when the researcher is also a counselor, supervisor, or colleague
• Power dynamics in qualitative research relationships and researcher accountability
• Reciprocity in qualitative research: obligations to participants and communities
• Christian ethics and research integrity: honesty, stewardship of data, and care for participants
• Reporting research responsibly: addressing negative findings and avoiding selective reporting
• Research misconduct: fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism — prevention and consequences

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Liberty University requires all dissertation researchers to obtain IRB approval before beginning data collection. Review LU’s IRB submission guidelines (linked in course resources) and identify what level of IRB review (exempt, expedited, or full board) your anticipated qualitative dissertation study would require. Justify your determination by citing the specific federal regulation criteria that apply. What are the most complex ethical considerations you anticipate in your study?

Discussion Question 2: Qualitative researchers who are also practitioners (counselors, teachers, administrators) often face dual-role challenges when conducting research with populations they serve or supervise. What specific ethical risks arise from dual roles in qualitative research? How do the ACA Code of Ethics guidelines on research apply to counselor-researchers? Describe a scenario in which a dual role could compromise participant welfare or research integrity, and explain how you would address it.

Discussion Question 3: From a Christian worldview perspective, what does it mean to treat research participants with dignity, respect, and justice? How do biblical principles such as the Imago Dei, the Golden Rule, and the call to serve the vulnerable shape your approach to research ethics beyond what federal regulations require? Identify one area where you believe secular research ethics frameworks and a Christian ethical framework would produce different guidance for a qualitative researcher.

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Draft IRB Application & Ethical Analysis
Type Practical Assignment
Instructions Using Liberty University’s IRB application template (available on the LU IRB website), complete a full draft IRB application for your anticipated dissertation qualitative study (or a specified hypothetical study). The application must include all required sections: introduction and scientific background, research design and methods, participant recruitment procedures, informed consent procedures, confidentiality protections, data storage plan, and risk/benefit analysis. Additionally, write a 2-3 page Ethical Analysis paper (separate from the application) that: (1) identifies the IRB review level you are seeking and your legal/regulatory justification; (2) discusses the three most significant ethical challenges specific to your qualitative design; (3) explains how you will address dual-role issues if applicable; and (4) reflects on how your Christian worldview shapes your ethical commitments as a researcher beyond baseline regulatory compliance.
Format Completed LU IRB draft form + 2-3 page ethical analysis (APA 7th edition)
Due Date Sunday of Week 11, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 12 — WRITING QUALITATIVE RESEARCH: PROPOSALS & DISSERTATIONS

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Structure of a qualitative dissertation at Liberty University: chapters 1-5 requirements and expectations
• Writing Chapter 1: Introduction — background, problem statement, purpose statement, research questions, significance, and delimitations
• Crafting a qualitative purpose statement: template language for each major tradition
• Writing qualitative research questions: central questions and sub-questions by tradition
• Significance of the study: theoretical, practical, and social change contributions
• Writing Chapter 2: Literature Review — organizing, synthesizing, and critically evaluating the literature
• Identifying and addressing gaps in the literature: the problem-to-purpose alignment
• Writing Chapter 3: Methodology — tradition selection, sampling, data collection, analysis, and trustworthiness
• APA 7th edition requirements for qualitative manuscripts: person-first language, bias-free language, and reporting standards
• JARS-Qual (Journal Article Reporting Standards for Qualitative Research): elements and application
• Common writing pitfalls in qualitative dissertations: mixed paradigm language, thin methods, and weak analysis sections
• Responding to committee feedback: revision strategies and professional scholarly dialogue
• The dissertation defense: preparing to articulate and defend qualitative design decisions

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: The problem statement is the cornerstone of a dissertation proposal. Review the following two problem statement drafts (posted in Blackboard) and evaluate each against the criteria discussed in Creswell and Creswell (2023): Is the problem clearly stated? Is it grounded in the literature? Does it establish the need for a qualitative approach? Provide specific, actionable feedback for each draft and then write an improved version of the weaker of the two statements.

Discussion Question 2: The purpose statement in qualitative research must signal the research tradition, central phenomenon, participants, and setting. Using the templates provided in Creswell and Poth (2018), write a purpose statement for each of the five qualitative traditions (phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography, case study, narrative inquiry) for the same general topic: the professional development experiences of novice school counselors. Then analyze how the tradition shapes not only the language but the entire orienting framework of the study.

Discussion Question 3: Doctoral students in qualitative programs sometimes receive contradictory feedback from their dissertation committee members — one member values thick description while another pushes for parsimony; one emphasizes theoretical contribution while another prioritizes practitioner relevance. How do you navigate conflicting committee guidance while maintaining the integrity of your qualitative design? What resources and strategies would you use?

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Dissertation Proposal Chapter 1 Draft
Type Major Writing Assignment
Instructions Write a complete draft of Chapter 1 (Introduction) for your anticipated qualitative dissertation. Following Liberty University’s dissertation template and APA 7th edition guidelines, your Chapter 1 must include all required sections: (1) Background of the Problem (substantive literature-grounded context, minimum 1 page); (2) Problem Statement (clearly articulated gap, minimum 1 paragraph); (3) Purpose of the Study (tradition-specific purpose statement using Creswell’s template language); (4) Research Questions (one central question and 3-5 sub-questions appropriate to your tradition); (5) Significance of the Study (theoretical, empirical, and practical contributions); (6) Research Tradition (identification and brief justification); (7) Delimitations and Limitations; and (8) Definition of Terms. This is a developmental draft; substantive, scholarly feedback will be provided. Minimum 8-10 pages, minimum 10 peer-reviewed references.
Format APA 7th edition using LU Dissertation Template, 8-10 pages, minimum 10 references
Due Date Sunday of Week 12, 11:59 PM ET — Major Assignment

 
WEEK 13 — LITERATURE REVIEWS & THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• The purpose of the literature review in qualitative research: context, gap, and theoretical grounding
• Systematic vs. integrative vs. narrative literature reviews: distinguishing approaches
• Conducting a systematic database search: search strings, Boolean operators, and inclusion/exclusion criteria
• Managing literature: Zotero, EndNote, and RefWorks for doctoral researchers
• Critical synthesis vs. summary: moving beyond annotated bibliography to analytical engagement
• Organizing the literature review: thematic, chronological, conceptual, and methodological frameworks
• Identifying the theoretical or conceptual framework: what it is and what it is not
• Grounding qualitative research in theory: using theory as a lens vs. generating theory
• Common theoretical frameworks in counseling and education qualitative research: social constructivism, critical race theory, feminist theory, attachment theory, transformative learning theory
• Distinguishing theoretical framework from conceptual framework
• Integrating the framework throughout the dissertation: from Chapter 1 through Chapter 5
• Christian worldview as a meta-framework in counseling research: implications for theory selection and interpretation
• Writing the literature review chapter: flow, transitions, and scholarly voice

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: A theoretical framework is sometimes described as ‘the lens through which you view your study.’ How does the selection of a theoretical framework shape every aspect of a qualitative dissertation — from the research questions to the analysis to the interpretation of findings? Select a theoretical framework relevant to your research interest (e.g., constructivism, critical race theory, transformative learning theory) and describe how it would function as an organizing lens for a qualitative study.

Discussion Question 2: Researchers in Christian counseling programs sometimes struggle with how to integrate their biblical/theological perspective into their theoretical framework without compromising scholarly credibility. Is it methodologically appropriate to use a Christian worldview or a theological framework as the primary theoretical lens for a qualitative dissertation? How might this be done rigorously? What are the risks and how do you address them?

Discussion Question 3: Conducting a rigorous literature review requires more than gathering and summarizing sources — it demands critical analysis and synthesis. Explain the difference between a literature summary and a literature synthesis using a concrete example from your field. Develop a brief synthesis matrix for 5 peer-reviewed articles on a topic of your choice, demonstrating how the sources relate to, extend, contradict, and build upon each other.

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Annotated Bibliography & Theoretical Framework Paper
Type Written Assignment
Instructions Complete a two-part assignment: Part 1 — Annotated Bibliography: Identify 12 peer-reviewed sources directly relevant to your dissertation topic (or specified hypothetical topic) published within the last 7 years. For each source, write a substantive annotation of 150-200 words that summarizes the study’s purpose, methodology, key findings, and relevance to your research. Organize annotations alphabetically by author in APA 7th edition format. Part 2 — Theoretical Framework Paper (3-4 pages): Identify the theoretical or conceptual framework that will anchor your qualitative dissertation. Explain: (a) the origins and key tenets of the framework; (b) how it has been used in prior qualitative research in your field; (c) how it will guide your research questions, sampling decisions, data analysis, and interpretation; (d) how it aligns with or is informed by your Christian worldview; and (e) any critiques of the framework and how you will address them.
Format APA 7th edition, annotated bibliography + 3-4 page framework paper
Due Date Sunday of Week 13, 11:59 PM ET

 
WEEK 14 — QUALITATIVE METHODOLOGY CHAPTER (CHAPTER 3) WRITING

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Purpose and function of Chapter 3 in a qualitative dissertation
• Articulating the research tradition with philosophical precision and confidence
• Writing the role of the researcher section: positionality, subjectivity management, and reflexivity
• Participant selection: writing a rigorous purposeful sampling rationale
• Setting and site description: gaining access and portraying the research context
• Data collection procedures: operationalizing interviews, observations, and document analysis
• Instrumentation: interview protocol, observation guide, and justification
• Data analysis procedures: tradition-specific step-by-step analytic description
• Trustworthiness: writing the trustworthiness section with specificity and evidence
• Ethical considerations: beyond IRB approval — relational and procedural ethics
• Limitations of the study: honest, specific, and methodologically grounded
• Alignment across the dissertation: problem-purpose-questions-method coherence
• Common committee feedback on Chapter 3 and how to address it proactively
• Preparing for a Chapter 3 oral defense with your dissertation committee

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: The ‘Role of the Researcher’ section in Chapter 3 is one of the most personally challenging sections to write because it requires honest, scholarly self-examination. Review two examples of role of the researcher statements (posted in Blackboard) and evaluate their depth, transparency, and scholarly quality. What makes one more effective than the other? Draft your own role of the researcher statement for your anticipated dissertation study (minimum 300 words) and be prepared to share it in the discussion forum.

Discussion Question 2: Alignment across the dissertation — ensuring that the problem statement, purpose statement, research questions, and methodology are logically coherent — is a fundamental quality standard. Analyze the following dissertation alignment scenario (posted in Blackboard): A researcher states a constructivist worldview, uses phenomenological language in the purpose statement, but then describes coding procedures consistent with grounded theory. Identify all alignment problems and explain how you would correct them.

Discussion Question 3: Chapter 3 requires researchers to describe their data analysis procedures with enough specificity that another researcher could theoretically replicate the process. Write a draft data analysis section (approximately 400-500 words) for your chosen qualitative tradition that describes each analytic step in sequence, references the methodologist(s) whose approach you are following, and integrates at least two trustworthiness strategies within the analytic process.

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Dissertation Proposal Chapter 3 Draft
Type Major Writing Assignment
Instructions Write a complete draft of Chapter 3 (Research Methodology) for your qualitative dissertation proposal. Following Liberty University’s dissertation template and APA 7th edition guidelines, your Chapter 3 must include all required sections: (1) Overview of Research Design and Rationale (tradition identification and philosophical justification); (2) Role of the Researcher (positionality, prior experience, bracket/reflexivity strategy); (3) Participants (sampling strategy, participant criteria, recruitment procedures, sample size rationale); (4) Setting; (5) Data Collection Instruments and Procedures (interview protocol justification, observation or document procedures if applicable); (6) Data Analysis Procedures (step-by-step tradition-specific procedures with methodologist citations); (7) Trustworthiness (specific strategies for each Lincoln and Guba criterion); and (8) Ethical Considerations. Ensure alignment with your Chapter 1 draft. Minimum 10-12 pages, minimum 10 peer-reviewed references.
Format APA 7th edition using LU Dissertation Template, 10-12 pages, minimum 10 references
Due Date Sunday of Week 14, 11:59 PM ET — Major Assignment

 
WEEK 15 — INTEGRATION, DISSEMINATION & PROFESSIONAL SCHOLARLY IDENTITY

■ LECTURE NOTES & CORE CONTENT
• Synthesizing the qualitative research journey: from curiosity to scholarly contribution
• Writing Chapter 4: Presenting qualitative findings with scholarly voice and participant representation
• Writing Chapter 5: Discussion, implications, limitations, and recommendations
• Connecting findings to the theoretical framework and existing literature in Chapter 5
• Researcher reflexivity in Chapter 5: reflecting on how the study changed you
• Disseminating qualitative research: journals, conferences, and professional presentations
• Selecting appropriate journals for qualitative counseling and education research
• Peer review process: submitting, revising, and responding to reviewers
• Presenting qualitative research at conferences: poster and paper presentations
• Translating dissertation research into practice: implications for counselors and educators
• The scholarly identity of the doctoral graduate: from student to scholar-practitioner
• Continuing development in qualitative methodology: staying current with evolving standards
• Liberty University’s commitment to research for human flourishing and the common good
• Course synthesis: applying qualitative methods across the full research journey

■ WEEKLY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
Discussion Question 1: Reflect on your growth as a qualitative researcher over the duration of this course. Identify three specific conceptual or methodological shifts in your thinking — moments where your understanding of qualitative inquiry deepened, was challenged, or was fundamentally revised. How has engagement with qualitative epistemology influenced your view of knowledge, truth, and inquiry as a scholar with a Christian worldview?

Discussion Question 2: Qualitative research findings are sometimes criticized as ‘not generalizable’ and therefore of limited value to practitioners and policymakers. How would you make the case for the practical relevance and transferability of qualitative research findings to a school district administrator or a counseling clinic director who is skeptical of qualitative methods? What specific types of qualitative findings have the most direct implications for professional practice in your field?

Discussion Question 3: Identify a specific peer-reviewed journal in your field of specialization that regularly publishes qualitative research. Review its author guidelines and a recently published qualitative article. Write a scholarly response (approximately 400 words) evaluating: the journal’s fit for your anticipated dissertation research; the quality of the qualitative reporting in the article you reviewed; and your plan for preparing a manuscript from your dissertation for submission to this or a similar journal within two years of graduating.

■ WEEKLY ASSIGNMENT
Assignment Title Comprehensive Qualitative Research Portfolio & Scholarly Reflection
Type Capstone Assignment — Signature Assignment
Instructions Submit a comprehensive Qualitative Research Portfolio that integrates and demonstrates your competency development across the full course. The portfolio must include the following curated components: (1) Researcher Positionality & Reflexivity Statement (revised and expanded from earlier work, 2 pages): a sophisticated, scholarly statement of your positionality, worldview assumptions, and reflexivity practices; (2) Qualitative Tradition Analysis (2-3 pages): a final, synthesized argument for the qualitative tradition you will use in your dissertation with full methodological justification; (3) Chapter 1 Revised Draft: your revised and improved Chapter 1 incorporating all instructor feedback; (4) Chapter 3 Revised Draft: your revised and improved Chapter 3 incorporating all instructor feedback; (5) Trustworthiness Plan (revised): your updated, comprehensive plan; (6) Scholarly Reflection Paper (3-4 pages): an integrative reflection addressing — (a) the three most significant insights you gained about qualitative methodology; (b) how your Christian worldview shapes your approach to qualitative inquiry and scholarly identity; (c) your plan for completing your dissertation using the tradition and methods developed in this course; and (d) your 3-year plan for contributing to the qualitative research literature in your field. All sections must be APA 7th edition compliant. Minimum 12 peer-reviewed references across all components. This is the course signature assignment and is evaluated using the program’s Dissertation Readiness Rubric.
Format APA 7th edition, portfolio format, minimum 25-30 pages total across all components
Due Date Sunday of Week 15, 11:59 PM ET — Signature Assignment (no late submissions accepted)

 
Course Policies
Liberty University Academic Integrity Policy
All work submitted in EDCO 747 must be the original work of the student and must represent the student’s own scholarly thinking. Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, unauthorized collaboration, and any form of academic dishonesty are serious violations of Liberty University’s Honor Code and the ACA Code of Ethics. All papers will be submitted through SafeAssign for originality review. Any student found to have committed academic dishonesty will receive a grade of zero for the assignment, and the infraction will be reported to the Dean of Students. Repeat violations may result in dismissal from the doctoral program.
The use of artificial intelligence writing tools (e.g., ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot) to generate written content for assignments is prohibited. Students are encouraged to use AI tools for literature search assistance, grammar checking, and research brainstorming only, with full disclosure to the instructor. The intellectual work of doctoral research must be the student’s own.
Christian Worldview Integration
Liberty University’s mission requires the integration of a Christian worldview into all academic disciplines. In EDCO 747, students are expected to thoughtfully engage with how their faith commitments, biblical principles, and theological convictions intersect with the philosophical assumptions of qualitative inquiry. This integration should be substantive and scholarly, not formulaic. Students are encouraged to explore how qualitative research’s emphasis on human meaning-making, dignity, and lived experience resonates with — and at times challenges — a biblical understanding of persons, knowledge, and truth.
Doctoral Writing Standards
All written work must conform to APA 7th edition formatting. Doctoral-level writing is expected in all assignments: clear argumentation, precise scholarly language, appropriate citation of peer-reviewed sources, and a formal academic register. Avoid first-person narrative in formal academic papers unless the assignment specifically calls for reflection or positionality writing. All sources must be peer-reviewed and published within the last 7 years unless the assignment involves seminal texts.
Late Work Policy
Assignments are due by 11:59 PM Eastern Time on the specified due date. Late submissions will be penalized 10% per day up to five days after the due date. Assignments submitted more than five days late will receive a grade of zero unless prior arrangements have been made with the instructor. The Signature Assignment (Week 15 Portfolio) does not accept late submissions under any circumstances. Students experiencing extenuating circumstances should contact the instructor before the due date.
Discussion Board Participation
Students are required to post an initial, substantive response to each discussion prompt by Thursday of each week (minimum 300-400 words per prompt, engaging all parts of the question with scholarly support) and to post at least two substantive responses to classmates by the end of Sunday (minimum 150 words each, extending the scholarly dialogue with new citations or counterarguments). Responses that merely agree with or summarize a classmate’s post will not receive full credit. Quality of scholarly engagement and citation support are weighted heavily in discussion grading.
Disability Accommodations
Liberty University is committed to providing accommodations for students with documented disabilities. Students requiring academic accommodations must contact the Office of Disability Academic Support (ODAS) at the beginning of the semester and submit formal documentation. Once accommodations are approved and provided to the instructor, all reasonable accommodations will be implemented. Students are encouraged to communicate any accessibility concerns as early as possible.

EDCO 747: Qualitative Methods of Research — Liberty University
“The heart of the discerning acquires knowledge, for the ears of the wise seek it out.” — Proverbs 18:15 (NIV)