FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W85392313> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W85392313 abstract "Allegations by a resigning employee of intimidation, cover-up, behavior, legal violations, waste, and mismanagement were investigated at a major university, relying on confidential interviews aria a review of relevant documentation. The case study of this evaluation illustrates the advantages of a mix of qualitative and quantitative approaches in evaluation and audit. Confidential interviews with 16 health and safety professional staff members were charted to graphically illustrate staff concerns and were categorized for relevant issues. The external view of the evaluator was Juxtaposed against the Internal views of staff. Both internal and external ealuators found evidence of some waste and mismanagement. The external evaluator thought that there had been one instance in which the university acted unethically, but found no evidence of a cover-up; staff members recognized no examples of unethica' action, but some believed there might have been a cover-up. These apparent contradictions represented weaknesses in communication among all parties, rather than the lack of reality of the insiders' viewpoints. Combining quantitative and qualitative approaches enhanced the usefulness and accuracy of the evaluation. Three illustrative figures are provided. (SLD) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * from the original document. ***********.*********************************************************** U 3 OEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) RAts document haS been reproduced as received from tote person or organization originatrng rt Minor changes have Peen made to improve reproduction quality Points of view or opinions stated tn thiS docu meat do not necessarily represent oar OERI position or policy PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY -14911a FE17-4-.61194) TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER /ERIC) FROM QUALITATIVE TO QUANTITATIVE AND BACK AGAIN: PHILOSOPHICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL TRANSITIONS David M Fetterman School of Education and Internal Audit Departmer Stanford University Stanford, CA 94305 Presented at the American Evaluation Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA 1989 ©School of Education, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 1989. 2 BEST COPY AVIULMbLL From Qualitative to Quantitative and Back Again: Philosophical and Methodological Transitions I am a firm believer in the value of a good qualitative and quantitative mix in evaluation and audit. Combining approaches naturally enhances the process and outcome of a study. Moreover, it is doubtful that any study can be conducted well without using both qualitative and quantitative methods. Attempting to conduct a purely qualitative or quantitative evaluation is artificial and needlessly limits the use of potentially rich data sources. In addition, failure to maximize the full range of tools in the trade may weaken an argument and diminish an evaluator's credibility, resulting in a failure to convince a client of the utility of an evaluation finding, and seriously eroding the study's impact. Evaluators typically have a predisposition toward the use of qualitative or quantitative methods, based on their education and experience. However, the evaluator's predisposition and the dominance of an approach in a given study does not suggest exclusivity, lack of rigor, or the complete absence of any other approach. The nature of ' ! pr-blem and the audience determine the best way to present evaluation and audit findings -not the intrinsic value of any approach per se. This case is an example of a qualitative/quantitative mix from a highly publicized evaluation. The evaluation required some methodological dexterity: methodological shifts from qualitative to quantitative and back again were necessary to complete a meaningful and useful study. The study involved collecting confidential interviews, converting them into quantitative data, reporting the data in a quantitative (and qualitative) mode, and then assessing the quality of the quantitatively presented information. The philosophical positions underlying these methodological transitions from phenomenology to positivism and back again also come under discussion. The Case Study I was asked to evaluate allegations of intimidation, cover-up, behavior, legal violations, and waste and mismanagement at a major university. These allegations were made by a senior health and safety officer in his letter of resignation. This study relied primarily on confidential interviews and a review of relevant documentation. I reviewed thousands of sheets of information, ranging from electronic mail to newspaper l3 stories. I cross-checked information using a wide variety of sources. As I conducted interviews and reviewed documents, I discussed my tentative conclusions with those people directly affected. I subsequently wrote internal memoranda about specific subjects and again shared those memoranda with the employees they concerned, encouraging them to provide corrections or supplementary information. The heart of this discussion involves the confidential interviews I conducted with staff members at the university. I interviewed all sixteen health and safety professional staff members, and their responses provided a useful barometer with which to gauge how broadly these concerns were shared. Due to the sensitive nature of this evaluation, special precautions were taken to safeguard all information and to protect the confidentiality of concerned staff. Sensitive interviews were carefully coded to preserve anonymity. (See Fetterman 198E for details about the study.) The Insider's View These confidential interviews provided an insider's view or emic perspective about these allegations. The ex-employee felt so frustrated by what he perceived as the university's lack responsiveness to problems he identified that he seemed to feel that the failure to accept his recommendations and act on them in the time frame he hod recommended constituted unethical I asked each of the professional staff members in the department if they believed the university had engaged in any behavior. Despite the fact that I had invited them to define unethical behavior as broadly as they wished, none of them knew of any case or believed that there were any cases where the university had ncted unethically. (See Figure I.) The former employee had been instrumental in creating a computer data base in which department staff members can enter any health and safety problem they identify. In principle, after completing an inspection, a health and safety professional enters the data, including a description of the problem, its location, and its severity, as well as the university department believed to be responsible for correcting the condition. The entries are printed out and sent to the responsible department, and there is a field in each record for entering the date when the department corrects the problem. 24 Health and Safety Department Confidential Interviews Conversion of Percentages to Bar Chart" @default.
• W85392313 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W85392313 creator A5040222771 @default.
• W85392313 date "1989-10-01" @default.
• W85392313 modified "2023-09-24" @default.
• W85392313 title "From Qualitative to Quantitative and Back Again: Philosophical and Methodological Transitions." @default.
• W85392313 hasPublicationYear "1989" @default.
• W85392313 type Work @default.
• W85392313 sameAs 85392313 @default.
• W85392313 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W85392313 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W85392313 hasAuthorship W85392313A5040222771 @default.
• W85392313 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W85392313 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W85392313 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W85392313 hasConceptScore W85392313C111472728 @default.
• W85392313 hasConceptScore W85392313C138885662 @default.
• W85392313 hasConceptScore W85392313C144024400 @default.
• W85392313 hasLocation W853923131 @default.
• W85392313 hasOpenAccess W85392313 @default.
• W85392313 hasPrimaryLocation W853923131 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W118398292 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W1509775387 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W1586291495 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W1844689696 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W1965266362 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2001514670 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2015215238 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2067649198 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2117456426 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2130979995 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2169088764 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2285916758 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2412398824 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2597374212 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2906628723 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2942976679 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W643388607 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W88611752 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2098790568 @default.
• W85392313 hasRelatedWork W2784966844 @default.
• W85392313 isParatext "false" @default.
• W85392313 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W85392313 magId "85392313" @default.
• W85392313 workType "article" @default.