Search

This paper seeks to facilitate the use of grounded theory (GT) methodology by novice researchers and PhD students of public policy discipline. The GT is widely used in social sciences research. This methodology has different variations, while Strauss and Corbin's systematic approach is more pragmatic than others due to the introduction of a staged process known as axial coding. Regarding the fact that applying this method is largely dependent on the context of the research area, the main question is, what would be the elements of a systematic approach specifically customized for the public policy research domain? This paper is an analytical review of the research literature in 3 areas: variants of grounded theory approaches, soft systems models in social science, and public policy subsystem elements. This research suggests the use of 6 categories of context and discourse, content and ideas, participants, structure, policy process, and outputs and effects as a substitute for the three categories of Strauss and Corbin's axial coding paradigm of GT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Grounded theory (GT) has become an influential methodology for research inquiry which involves the texts of human communication and language use as its primary empirical focus of data collection and analysis. However, influential models of GT have been most typically applied to the process of interpreting nonformal and especially "unstructured" texts such as conversations, interviews, and online communications. By contrast, policy researchers have the rather different challenge of interpreting the innate contradictions, diverse imperatives, and often conflicting perspectives which inform the meanings of policy positions as well as documents across different contexts. Building upon the interdisciplinary implications of recent constructivist models of the methodology, this article investigates how an optimizing "knowledge-building" approach represents an exemplary model for using GT for policy document research purposes. It does so in relation to the case study of a project focused on emergent as well as contextual dilemmas of analyzing World Trade Organization e-commerce policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides a discussion on the question of validity in qualitative evaluation. Although validity in qualitative inquiry has been widely reflected upon in the methodological literature (and is still often subject of debate), the link with evaluation research is underexplored. Elaborating on epistemological and theoretical conceptualizations by Guba and Lincoln and Creswell and Miller, the article explores aspects of validity of qualitative research with the explicit objective of connecting them with aspects of evaluation in social policy. It argues that different purposes of qualitative evaluations can be linked with different scientific paradigms and perspectives, thus transcending unproductive paradigmatic divisions as well as providing a flexible yet rigorous validity framework for researchers and reviewers of qualitative evaluations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]