Reference no: EM132209924
Question: Just as in quantitative research, when researchers set out to design a qualitative research study, they are guided by its purpose, and their research questions align with their selected approach and the data that will be collected.
As you learned in previous weeks, alignment means that a research study possesses clear and logical connections among all of its various components. In addition to considering alignment, qualitative researchers must also consider the ethical implications of their design choice, including, for example, what their choice means for participant recruitment, procedures, and privacy.
For this Discussion, you will evaluate qualitative research questions in assigned journal articles in your discipline and consider the alignment of theory, problem, purpose, research questions, and design. You will also identify the type of qualitative research design the authors used and explain how it was implemented.
With these thoughts in mind, refer to the Journal Articles document for your assigned articles for this Discussion. If your last name starts with A through I, use Article A. If your last name starts with J through R, use Article B. If your last name starts with S through Z, use Article C.
Post a critique of the research study in which you:
• Evaluate the research questions using the Research Questions and Hypotheses Checklist as a guide
• Identify the type of qualitative research approach used and explain how the researchers implemented the design
• Analyze alignment among the theoretical or conceptual framework, problem, purpose, research questions, and design
Be sure to support your Main Issue Post and Response Post with reference to the week's Learning Resources and other scholarly evidence in APA Style.
Read a selection of your classmates' postings.
If your last name starts with S through Z, use Article C.
Article C: Arando, S., Gago, M., Jones, D. C., & Kato, T. (2015). Efficiency in employee-owned enterprises: An econometric case study of Mondragon. International Labor Review, 68(2), 398-425. doi: doi:10.1177/0019793914564966