{"id":109,"date":"2009-03-10T08:40:49","date_gmt":"2009-03-10T16:40:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/?p=109"},"modified":"2009-03-10T08:40:49","modified_gmt":"2009-03-10T16:40:49","slug":"standards-for-systematic-qualitative-research","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/2009\/03\/standards-for-systematic-qualitative-research\/","title":{"rendered":"Standards for Systematic Qualitative Research"},"content":{"rendered":"

The NSF has just released the report from a 2005 workshop on Interdisciplinary Standards for Systematic Qualitative Research. The workshop brought together 24 scholars from cultural anthropology, law and social science, political science, and sociology to:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. articulate the standards used in their particular field to ensure rigor across the range of qualitative methodological approaches;<\/li>\n
  2. identify common criteria shared across the four disciplines for designing and evaluating research proposals and fostering multidisciplinary collaborations; and<\/li>\n
  3. develop an agenda for strengthening the tools, training, data, research design, and infrastructure for research using qualitative approaches.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    The report promises to be useful for both practitioners and reviewers of qualitative research. There’s a two-page section on design and evaluation standards for qualitative research, presented in an almost checklist format, including items like, “Well-designed research incorporates a detailed and theoretically informed justification for case selection and sampling procedure.”<\/p>\n

    While the report is 180 pages long, the appendices start on page 19, and there’s a good executive summary. The report is available as a PDF from the NSF Website<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    The NSF has just released the report from a 2005 workshop on Interdisciplinary Standards for Systematic Qualitative Research. The workshop brought together 24 scholars from cultural anthropology, law and social science, political science, and sociology to: articulate the standards used in their particular field to ensure rigor across the range of qualitative methodological approaches; identify common criteria shared across the four disciplines for designing and evaluating research proposals and fostering multidisciplinary collaborations; and develop an agenda for strengthening the tools,…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5],"tags":[7,6,8],"class_list":["post-109","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-research-methods","tag-evaluation","tag-nsf","tag-qualitative"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=109"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":110,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109\/revisions\/110"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=109"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=109"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/depts.washington.edu\/csclab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=109"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}