Examining foundations of qualitative research: A review of social work dissertations, 2008-2010

Journal of Social Work Education

Volumn 49, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 760-773

  Gringeri, Christina ^a   Barusch, Amanda ^a   Cambron, Christopher ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84882378672     PISSN: 10437797     EISSN: 21635811     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10437797.2013.812910     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Anastas, J. 2004. Quality in qualitative evaluation: Issues and possible answers. Research on Social Work Practice, 14 (1): 57-65.
2. Anastas, J., and, Congress, E. 1999. Philosophical issues in doctoral education in social work: A survey of doctoral program directors. Journal of Social Work Education, 35: 142-153.
3. Anastas, J., and, Kuerbis, A. 2009. Doctoral education in social work: What we know and what we need to know. Social Work, 54: 71-81.
4. Avis, M. 2005. " Is there an epistemology for qualitative research? ". In Qualitative research in healthcare, Edited by: Holloway, I. 1-15. Berkshire, UK: McGraw Hill, Open University Press.
5. Barusch, A., Gringeri, C., and, George, M. 2011. Rigor in qualitative social work research: A review of strategies used in published articles. Social Work Research, 35: 11-19.
6. Creswell, J. 2007. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
7. Denzin, N. (2002). Social work in the seventh moment. Qualitative Social Work, 12, 25-38. http://qsw.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/1/1/25
8. Dowling, M. 2006. Approaches to reflexivity in qualitative research. Nurse Researcher, 13 (3): 7-21.
9. Geertz, C. 1973. The interpretation of cultures, New York, NY: Basic Books.
10. Gringeri, C., Barusch, A., and, Cambron, C. 2013. Epistemology in qualitative social work research: A review of published articles, 2008-2010. Social Work Research, 37: 55-63.
11. Gringeri, C., Wahab, S., and, Anderson-Nathe, B. 2010. What makes it feminist? Mapping the landscape of feminist social work research. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 25: 390-405.
12. Group for the Advancement of Doctoral Education. (2003). Guidelines for quality in social work doctoral programs (Rev. ed.). http://www.gadephd.org/ documents/gadeguidelines.pdf
13. Guba, E. 1990. The paradigm dialog, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
14. Guba, E., and, Lincoln, Y. 2005. " Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences ". In The SAGE handbook of qualitative research, 3rd, Edited by: Denzin, N. and Lincoln, Y. 183-216. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
15. Hesse-Biber, S., and, Leavy, P. 2011. The practice of qualitative research, 2nd, Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
16. Kanuha, V. 2000. Being" native versus "going" native: Conducting social work research as an insider. Social Work, 45 (5): 439-447.
17. Khinduka, S. 2002. Musings on doctoral education in social work. Research on Social Work Practice, 12: 684-694.
18. Koch, T., and, Harrington, A. 1998. Reconceptualizing rigour: The case for reflexivity. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28 (4): 882-890.
19. Lincoln, Y. (1995). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 275-289. http://qix.sagepub.com/ cgi/content/abstract/1/3/275
20. Lincoln, Y., and, Guba, E. 1985. Naturalistic inquiry, Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
21. Lincoln, Y., Lynham, S. A., and, Guba, E. 2011. " Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited ". In The SAGE handbook of qualitative research, 4th, Edited by: Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S. 97-128. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
22. Marshall, C. 1990. " Criteria of goodness: Are they objective realities or judgment calls? ". In The paradigm dialog, Edited by: Guba, E. 188-197. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
23. Marshall, C., and, Rossman, G. 2006. Designing qualitative research, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
24. Mcvicar, A., and, Caan, W. 2005. Research capability in doctoral training: Evidence for increased diversity of skills in nursing research. Journal of Research in Nursing, 10 (6): 627-646.
25. Padgett, D. 2009. Qualitative and mixed methods in social work knowledge development. Social Work, 54: 101-105.
26. Pascale, C. 2010. Cartographies of knowledge: Exploring qualitative epistemologies, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
27. Reisch, M. 2002. The future of doctoral social work education in the United States: Questions, issues, and persistent dilemmas. Arete, 26 (2): 57-71.
28. Seale, C. (1999). Quality in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 5, 465-478. http://qix.sagepub.com/cgi/content/absttact/5/4/465
29. Seale, C. (2002). Quality issues in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Social Work, 12, 97-110. http://qsw.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/1/1/97
30. Takacs, D. 2003. How does your positionality bias your epistemology?. The NEA Higher Education Journal, Summer: 27-38.
31. Tucker, D. 2008. Interdisciplinarity in doctoral social work education: Does it make a difference?. Journal of Social Work Education, 44: 115-138.
32. Watt, D. 2007. On becoming a qualitative researcher: The value of reflexivity. The Qualitative Report, 12 (1): 82-101.