2.3 The qualitative dissertation: still hazy after all these years  (Page 9/14)

Committee Coordination Part Two: Orchestrating Feedback

The committee processes for qualitative dissertation writing face similar barriers and pitfalls as do quantitative dissertations, but, because qualitative studies are more emergent, they may be subject to increased shifts in committee member responses over time. Just as the dissertation study itself evolves over time as data are collected and codes or themes are identified, the committee members’relationship to the study, the student and other committee members can evolve. In addition, the previous examples show how shifts in committee membership over time exacerbate the need for shared information and decision making. Unlike studies that begin with hypotheses, the research questions associated with qualitative study design only guide the inquiry, leaving room for interpretation. Committee members who agree about data analysis in one meeting can easily rethink that agreement in the next one, which is several weeks or often months later. For that reason, recording the decisions of the committee is very important. I advise students to record notes (and in some potentially difficult situations I do this myself) and send them to all committee members, much like minutes of a meeting. Some students have asked to record my feedback and/or that of the committee. Even when the committee is collegial, questions can arise far into the dissertation process which cause committee members to rethink earlier positions. In some cases this is acceptable or even desirable, but often the qualitative dissertation is more of a journey with a general itinerary than a project with a specific blueprint. Staying true to the decisions made along the way can contribute to the trustworthiness of the analysis and findings. I have found myself as chair approaching the committee much like I would in gathering interview data: listening, recording, restating and ultimately member checking their responses. In this sense, the student creates waypoints that capture and reduce the data at various times during the journey. The committee begins to create a shared linguistic community (Young, 1990) that can help to overcome the obtuseness of the language of qualitative methods and to make“crisp”the shared understandings of the committee members

In addition to posing challenges for committee meetings, the qualitative dissertation may require extra attention to securing responses from committee members (Fauske, 2000). Ideally, all of the members will have expertise in qualitative methods, but often in my experience this is not the case. All faculty have expertise in and preferences for a particular kind of research method and cannot reasonably be expected to have in-depth expertise in all genres of qualitative method. This unevenness in expertise coupled with the nebulousness of the language of qualitative research (Bogdan&Biklen, 1982; Eisner&Peshkin, 1990; Lofland&Lofland, 1995; Ely, 1991), can create situations where students fair better with individual discussions or face to face meetings with each committee member prior to launching a meeting for a proposal or final defense. Students can synthesize the discussion with each faculty member. This can be particularly effective when the student needs affirmation of an incremental, or emergent, decision in the midst of the study when no formal meetings are typically scheduled. However, I also have called committee meetings when a decision can have major impact on how the study progresses. Some situations can call for additional committee feedback or a meeting of the entire committee. Occasionally, a question arises that merits the collection attention and expertise of the entire committee.