Dissertation Discussion

Please provide at least 150-word response to each student response below. Be sure to research/cite/reference sources in each discussion.

1st Post: When writing the dissertation, chapters four and five disclose results and conclusion. The similarities and contrast in the two chapters relies on the student being organized. Chapters four and five include an introduction to the structure. Chapter four introduces a summary of the research methodology, the purpose of the study, and the study question. Chapter five’s introduction summary differs slightly revealing the importance of the study and contributes enhancement to the reader’s understanding of the study subject. Chapter four discloses results only without opinions. The findings address the research question(s). With each question, the study discloses statistical findings, and potential effects five. Chapter four provides the analysis of findings, draws the results back to the purpose, hypotheses, problem statement, and research questions for the study (Hyatt and Roberts, 2019). 

Chapter five briefly summarizes the findings (not fully described as in chapter four) reiterating essential points from chapters one through three. Chapter five thoroughly addresses interpretation, overall analysis, and discusses themes of the findings. Chapter five discloses direct correlations to previous studies referencing chapter two. Chapter five conclusion stems from the origin of points written in chapter one study significance and application of advancing science. The researcher presents recommendations to further study in chapter five. The dissertation reveals the limitations of the study, evaluates strengths and weaknesses, and discloses to what extent the conclusions are reliable. The researcher writes proving a broad view of the methodology, research design, data analysis, and results (Hyatt and Roberts, 2019).

2nd Post: Roberts & Hyatt’s (2019), discussed not confusing results/findings with conclusions. Conclusions go beyond the facts with interpretations and analysis, while findings/results are the facts (Roberts & Hyatt, 2019). With the AQuA Qualitative form (2023), the results address the research question based on the data analysis. This information should be stated without opinions. The results can also include tables, graphs, and charts that can present the data. The results within this portion should also include data analysis procedures. If applicable, describe the procedures for analysis and explain how the codes turned into themes or categorical variables (“AQuA Qualitative Form”, 2023). Within the data analysis, ensuring that any sources of error or if there is sufficient data with the research design selected is imperative. This is also an opportunity to summarize the data and give an interpretation of the results and their potential impact (“AQuA Qualitative Form”, 2023). 

Chapter five: conclusions, goes in-depth about the findings for deeper interpretation. There are connections from the findings back to the theoretical foundations and literature review (“AQuA Qualitative Form”, 2023). The essential aspects of chapters 1-3 are discussed through a quick recap (“AQuA Qualitative Form”, 2023). Additionally, the theoretical implications, as well as the practical implications, are discussed. It is imperative to ensure there is a connection occurring. Suppose there is not a connection that should be discussed within this section too. The conclusion is also a space to discuss limitations, strengths, weaknesses, and recommendations (“AQuA Qualitative Form”, 2023). In simpler terms, more analysis is involved with the findings and how they can be impactful or not towards future reflections. 

Chapters four and five are essential to the dissertation and should not be overlooked. While both have similarities, there are differences between them. The AQuA Qualitative form (2023) is a great resource to utilize during the process. 

 

 3rd Post: Brittany McDaniel (2021) correctly follows chapters four and five when comparing them to the AQuA Qualitative Form (2023). Where there are facts needed, the author presents them in Chapter 4 with no opinions added, and when there is a need for connecting within Chapter 5, the author does that as well. 

The author breaks down the results in a narrative format in chapter four. McDaniel (2021), the procedural details of the study where approaches for validity and reliability were discussed. What needed to be identified were any sources of error or missing data and tables and charts included, which is what the form had for chapter four. McDaniel (2021) also addressed the research question with narrative analysis, describing the thematic analysis's coding and theming process. Chapter four for McDaniel (2021) presented facts and not opinions. 

For chapter five, McDaniel (2021) focused on correlating the findings to the well-being of residence-life live-in professionals. The author discussed the theoretical foundations, synthesized the themes found within the results, and indicated differences where applicable. McDaniel (2021) discussed theoretical and practical implications and related points from the literature review to the results. As a reader, I appreciated Chapter 5 of the presentation's transparency of the limitations and the obstacles that occurred. For context, this study took place during the pandemic. There was instrumentation the author wanted to collect data with but could not. It impacted the variety of interactions that could have happened in person versus virtually. Chapter 5, overall, gave a deeper interpretation of the analysis while connecting to the theoretical frameworks and literature review. 

 

4th Post: Nursing faculty experiences of virtual learning environments for teaching clinical reasoning dissertation written by Zacharzuk-Marciano, 2017 introduces the reader to the problem of diminishing clinical sites, instructors, integration of technology, and sicker patients impact on nursing education. The dissertation addresses research revelation on virtual environments impact on interactive ways affording diversity and opportunity to enhance student learning and accessibility. The dissertation addresses virtual leaning options to educate the students lacking clinical reasoning (Zacharzuk-Marciano, 2017).

            The dissertation refers to the purpose of the study to identify and describe teaching clinical reasoning through the experience of the nursing faculty. The dissertation author uses qualitative research methodology. The author’s literature review chapter describes the review of previous/current theories and frameworks to support the blueprint for how and why conducting the study matters. The dissertation disclosed the research design, data collection, instrumentation, and population in chapter three. Chapter four introduces the layout of chapter four, the summary of the study purpose, and re-introduces the research question/sub-questions. The author describes the sample and findings. The author depicts tables of data and written narratives of the findings. The author writes the data analysis procedure explain how transcripts and recordings are coded and categorized into themes/patterns. The author describes in-depth the analysis of each question in a narrative format and organized table (Zacharzuk-Marciano, 2017).   

            Chapter five discloses the conclusion and discussion. The introduction of chapter five briefly describes the literature review to the problem and the research purpose. The author uses past tense verbiage to explain what occurred in the research. The dissertation explains the research methodology and design how this refers to the problem/question through discussion of the findings. The author explains the relationship of the findings to the literature reviewed and the theoretical framework. Chapter five discusses in detail how the findings address the need for the study and further investigation. The study describes the implication of faculty experience teaching clinical reasoning and impacts on practice (science) going forward (Zacharzuk-Marciano, 2017).