I made an initial decision to undertake data gathering in two stages and to take a novel approach of using a questionnaire to both collect data as well as using the responses as a tool to support the second stage of data gathering. A questionnaire allows a broad initial approach to data gathering and my aim was to gather a breadth of ideas in the contemporary field of biomedical science and identify preliminary ideas for further exploration via focus groups and interviews. Questionnaires are appropriate for gathering data about abstract ideas or concepts that are otherwise difficult to quantify, such as opinions, attitudes and beliefs (Artino et al., 2014). They are also useful for collecting information about behaviours that are not directly observable by the researcher (e.g. time spent supporting training), assuming respondents are willing and able to report on these behaviours. The use of
questionnaires requires extensive preliminary work to identify and validate questions; checking that the questions are appropriate for the context in which they will be used (Rugg and Petre, 2007, p.142).
75
I initially struggled with the design of the questionnaire and development of the questions. My first draft questionnaire contained very specific questions requiring quite an in-depth response from participants. Taking a reflexive ‘step-back’ (Usher, 1996, p.38) from the questions it became obvious that they reflected my own
perceptions of issues around pre-registration training as well as current theories from the literature; gathering data to support theories rather than constructing theory from the data gathered (Hsiung, 2008; McNiff and Whitehead, 2011, p.22). I initially posed questions around approaches to reflective practice and the assessment of specific skill competencies vs. capability within the workplace. I piloted the questionnaire with two colleagues who support placement students during their studies. Feedback from these two colleagues was extremely supportive. They helped me to identify that the questions I posed were too directed, expecting too much in response and were more suited to an interview or focus group scenario rather than being a starting point to direct further data gathering. I realised that my approach reflected a scientific one of supporting or refuting a proposed hypothesis. Reflexivity helps to challenge our standpoints and to avoid obstacles that would impede the development of an enquiry (Usher, 1996, p. 39).
The aim primarily for this first stage was to gather perspectives from a range of stakeholders on the delivery of registration training to identify specific areas for further data gathering and analysis. Drawing from Vygotsky (1978), sociocultural theory places great emphasis on looking beyond the individual to interactions with others. It emphasizes the ways in which societal constructions and definitions are dynamic and change depending on those involved. Kelle (2005) also argues for the use of pre-existing literature as possible sources of ‘inspiration’, to develop ideas and acknowledge associations in line with the logic of abduction to allow the researcher
76
to focus attention on certain phenomenon, aspects or nuances. Extant texts and research literature should be viewed as invaluable sources allowing sensitisation to the field of study rather than as obstacles. Identifying the need to review and make use of existing literature places me in a better position to address my research questions; by identifying key themes emerging from ‘formal documents’ addressing BMS training provides a starting point for data gathering and for the initial process of abduction to commence. Therefore, I decided to ‘take a step backwards’ and the first stage of data gathering evolved into a review of documents to identify key
conversations in the field of BMS relating to pre-registration training and its current delivery. Professional publications and minutes from regional training meetings were accessed and coded to assist me in identifying key themes and categories to inform the questionnaire design as part of stage one as outlined in fig. 3.1 (Grounded Theory Journey). This approach draws upon Charmaz’s position where she states that ‘grounded theory necessitates being as open as possible to what is
happening….standpoints and starting points influence how I see the project data and
what I see in them’ (Charmaz, 2011b, p.170). In undertaking this initial stage
(document review and questionnaire) I reduce my own influence upon the initial direction of the enquiry; since I am an insider-researcher this additional dimension to data gathering assists in reducing the influence of my own lived experiences on the initial direction of data gathering. As I expand upon below it helped to identify
sensitising concepts to direct and support the second stage of data gathering; focus groups and interviews. The methods used in stage one are detailed below. I present the analysis of the data gathered from this stage in Chapter Four.
77
3.7.2 ‘Taking a step backwards’ -Analysis of documents
The Biomedical Scientist is a monthly journal published by the Institute of Biomedical
Science providing a source of information for those practising in the field of
biomedical science. The Biomedical Scientist is the major professional publication for
news and science articles. I searched the archive of the Education and Training section of the publication for the past 10 years looking for articles relating to pre- registration training, the registration training portfolio or the role of training in the clinical setting. My search criteria were relatively broad, hoping to encompass articles on any major issues or changes occurring in the profession or clinical laboratory environment that may have had an impact upon delivery of training. The aim of reviewing these publications was to identify ‘sensitizing concepts’ and
‘disciplinary perspectives’ to provide a place to start, supporting the development of ideas about processes that will define the data (Charmaz, 2006, p.17).
To identify articles of relevance from The BMS a search was undertaken from 2000- 2013 in the categories of General Science, History, Professional and Workforce,
Media and Publications, Quality, Miscellaneous, Careers, International, Careers, Instrument Training, Information Technology, IBMS, Education and Development and Management, which are pre-defined search categories on the journal website.
Subject specific categories were not searched since a quick review demonstrated that these concentrate on specific conditions, diseases or techniques related to these disciplines.
In addition to the published articles, I also reviewed minutes from meetings I attend as part of my professional role in the region for the training officers group
78
Employer Liaison committee. These meetings are attended by Training leads, Training officers, laboratory Managers and representatives from the local
Universities delivering BMS programmes. Information obtained from these sources was anonymised and represents information available to me within my role as course leader in supporting course development. The aim of reviewing the documents was to provide an insight into practices, perspectives and relevant
events. The minutes of the meetings represent comments made by and issues faced by practitioners involved in both the management and training of BMSs. They give a voice to current issues being faced by individuals working in laboratories in the region and provide an insight into the factors that influence training from an academic perspective too. The published articles represent a wider stakeholder group and publication of material is under the control of the professional body. It is essential to acknowledge the professional role and focus of such documents and they were coded to identify any important themes to be investigated further by subsequent methods of data gathering. Such documents can be regarded as ‘dominant and elite voices’ (Charmaz, 2014, p.53). By gathering data from these sources my aim was to capture any disconnect between the perceptions and focus of elite voices and those of the stakeholder groups involved in the programme at a local level in the region.
Coding of documents was used to identify similarities and differences in agendas and perceptions around the delivery and requirements of the BMS curriculum for further analysis. The review of such documents adds another dimension to my enquiry providing an accessible, usable and legitimate source or alternative and intriguing questions (Charmaz, 2014, p.45). I continued to return to, and reflect upon
79
these documents. I found that as I progressed through the enquiry returning to these documents helped me to develop greater awareness of underlying themes not
initially visible or ignored during my initial approach; interpreting and re-interpreting the data. This process of abduction permits new discoveries to be made and is a ‘means-of-inferencing’ allowing a deeper insight and new knowledge (Reichertz, 2012, p.216)