Qualitative Data Analysis

Abstract

This prospectus focuses on doctoral persistence and the lived experience of students in doctoral programs. The researcher begins by introducing the topic of doctoral persistence. Doctoral persistence has been a much studied topic, but it was determined that gaps existed in current research. The researcher states the purpose of this study, its delimitations, and the problem being researched throughout this paper. The lived experience of doctoral persistence in students enrolled in a doctoral program was selected as the emphasis. Next, phenomenology was chosen and defined as the proper research design to complete the study. Researcher roles and validation strategies were defined in association to naming the research methodology. Then, the researcher transitions to the data collection methods and explains how emergent themes were derived from journals of 14 doctoral classmates, letters to prospective doctoral students, and two interviews of doctoral recipients. Those themes were compared and contrasted to one another, and previous research, to make interpretations and explain the lived experience of doctoral persistence for students enrolled in a doctoral program. These interpretations are made to improve and encourage the doctoral persistence of future doctoral students.

Qualitative Data Analysis

Qualitative research is an immersive process that encourages the researcher to engage and understand the studied participants. Doctoral degrees are the pinnacle of academia, but doctoral persistence remains a concerning issue for students and academic institutions. This paper will emphasize phenomenological research focusing on doctoral persistence.

Introduction

Issues with student retention have spanned decades; however, the majority of studies have focused primarily on undergraduate students (Falconer & Adragna, 2017). Doctoral students are lauded for their academic background, and past research suggests the many rewards of doctoral research; however, many doctoral students struggle with challenges presented by their doctoral program (Vekkaila, Pyhältö, & Lonka, 2013). Many students are working full time and struggling to complete their programs. The topic of doctoral persistence has emerged as an important issue for those students.

Issues in Doctoral Persistence

Enrollment in doctoral studies has been on the rise over the last two decades; unfortunately, unsustainable doctoral persistence is preventing many doctoral students from completing their programs (Litalien & Guay, 2015). Attrition rates at doctoral programs remain disconcertingly high, ranging from 40 to 70 percent dependent of program emphasis, with many online programs even higher (Rockinson-Szapkiw, Spaulding, & Spaulding, 2016). These high attrition rates are discouraging for aspiring doctoral students and detrimental to universities. Doctoral dropouts are crushing for both students and universities due to the financial and time sacrifices committed by each during the program. Doctoral students help push the research and creativity in their respective fields. Programs and universities will need to encourage doctoral persistence and retain these students to continue seeing improvement in a rapidly changing environment (Di Pierro, 2007). Over 43 percent of doctoral students admitted having thoughts of quitting their program in a survey of 669 students from different departments (Pyhältö, Toom, Stubb, & Lonka, 2012). This shows wavering persistence in students and reflects the high attrition rates of many programs. Studies often suggest factors encouraging doctoral persistence are the most common factors leading to attrition if they are not present. Student motivation, external motivation from family, peers, or advisors, student-faculty relationships, and program design were found to commonly attribute to doctoral persistence in students (Spaulding & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2012). However, some deficiencies exist in these studies and some variables are not taken into account. Many studies recite time management as a recurring theme, but not enough studies speak to the lived experiences of students when enrolled in a program.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this phenomenological study will be to describe the lived experience of doctoral persistence for doctoral students enrolled in a doctoral program at Liberty University. At this stage in the research, the lived experience of doctoral persistence will generally be defined as processes, procedures, and issues endured by doctoral students while completing their doctoral program.

Delimitations. The study was constrained to an eight week qualitative studies class at Liberty University. The data analysis points occurred throughout the semester from different classmates and various assignments. Primary research is limited to two interviews done by the researcher and a letter to a prospective doctoral student.

Research question. What is the lived experience of doctoral persistence for a student who is enrolled in a doctoral program? Phenomenological Design to Doctoral Persistence Phenomenological research is a qualitative research method that attempts to describe the common experience a group of individuals share resulting from some type of phenomenon (Creswell & Poth). Phenomenology seeks to explain what a human is experiencing. Another simple definition defines it as a way of illuminating the meaning of experiences or understanding the appearance of things in a person’s life (Smith, 2016). Researchers will record data from individual accounts and describe what was experienced and how the individual experienced it. Common examples of phenomenological experiences are insomnia, anger, or grief (Creswell & Poth, 2016). Phenomenology contains several common features. Each study will emphasize a phenomenon; this phenomenology seeks to explain the experience of doctoral students who work full-time while completing their doctoral degree. Studies often include three to fifteen participants with a shared experience (Creswell & Poth, 2016). This study will include a class of 14 participants and two interviewed participants. After researchers determine that a phenomenological approach is best for a research problem, researchers will identify philosophical assumptions and collect data from the participant through several interviews; then, they will pinpoint significant statements to develop a description to help report the phenomenon (Creswell & Poth, 2016). These significant statement are highlighted as emergent themes near the end of the study and sourced from the data collection procedures. When the researcher finishes the study, he/she hopes to add to or help understand the conscious experiences of the interviewed participants (Smith, 2016).

Using Phenomenology

Instead of focusing on individual biographies, phenomenology separates itself from other qualitative research designs by focusing on a person’s perception of an object or phenomenon (Wilson, 2015). It may be used best by individuals sharing experiences involving emotions, a specific behavior, thoughts, sensations, or memories (Walters, 2017). Phenomenological research methods better fit unstructured research questions that have little research or evidence (Goes, 2013). Phenomenology should be used when the researcher wants to develop useful information for future individuals experiencing a certain phenomenon (Wilson, 2015).

Role of the Researcher

The researcher was responsible for conducting a study focused on doctoral persistence and building his knowledge of it and qualitative study methods with each progressing week in the course. Data collection began with a literature review of doctoral persistence to define it and the problems facing it. Letters were written to prospective doctoral students to highlight lessons learned through the researcher’s Doctorate of Business Administration (DBA) program at Liberty University. Letters from other students in the course were reviewed to collect additional data. Finally, interviews were conducted with two Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) recipients to understand their lived experiences while completing their doctoral degree. The researcher must account for personal biases in the study. Prior to this doctoral program, the researcher had not been employed full-time while completing an undergraduate or graduate degree. He is currently enrolled as a second semester doctoral student at Liberty University. Therefore, a bias exists for the topic of doctoral persistence and its importance as a study. Time management is a strongly held value of the researcher, so biases may exist for time management as a reason for doctoral persistence or a common component in the lived experience of doctoral students.

Data Collection Procedures

Data collection was broken down by the procedure. Discussion board journals, letters to prospective students, and interviews were categorized and reviewed for themes. Codes from each category were found. Then, those codes and themes were expanded upon by the researcher based on the gained knowledge of doctoral persistence and qualitative studies from the course. Next, the themes and codes were compared to one another to find similarities and discrepancies. Finally, those themes were compared to the emergent themes of the literature review conducted at the beginning of the course.

Validation Strategies

The researcher will employ validation strategies from the researcher’s lens and reader’s lens to ensure the validity and reliability of the study. Researchers can provide validity to their research by triangulating themes and codes of studies done by other researchers (Creswell & Poth, 2018). Researcher biases were clarified already in the role of the researcher section which will help explain the interpretations made throughout the study. Per the reader’s or reviewer’s lens, the researcher will have an expert of the phenomenon review the research process. This will challenge the researcher by asking hard questions about his methods and interpretations (Creswell & Poth, 2018).

Anticipated Ethical Issues

Doctoral programs are known for their trials, which can result in an abundance of ethical issues that materialize through struggling doctoral persistence and components of the research process. It can be easy to compromise values to remain persistent in a program. Christians face an added challenge to persist through the position God placed them in and be an example to others. Researchers should not reveal information their participants do not want revealed. Additionally, they must articulate their stories and responses to interview questions accurately. Research will address these issues by applying a Christian worldview. Christians should keep their composure when they encounter a perplexing situation and resist faltering (Keller & Alsdorf, 2012). God declares in Jeremiah 29:11 that He has a plan for His followers, plans that provide hope and future and are not intended to harm. This should motivate students struggling with their persistence to endure their current program. Proverbs 12:26 tells that righteous

Christians are to guide their neighbors and not lead them astray. Christians have a moral responsibility to be good examples in all that they do.

Emergent Theme Analysis

Several themes emerged from the data collection procedures in the study. Themes, such as motivating factors and work load balance, were shared among the data sources. However, some themes that emerged were not shared with the emergent themes of the literature review at the beginning of the course. Themes from class discussion boards or journals, letters to prospective students, and doctoral persistence interviews offered valuable information to make interpretations and answer the research question.

Journal Themes

BUSI 715 at Michigan University required students to complete six discussion board forums or journals over the course of eight weeks. Each discussion board focused on different aspects of qualitative studies and the students’ knowledge of doctoral persistence. The journals began in week one with class introductions and student experiences with doctoral persistence; they concluded in week eight with each student’s proposal for their applied doctoral research project (ADRP). Doctoral persistence, doctoral motivation, and time management were the emergent themes. Doctoral persistence. Most students participating in the journals had little experience with doctoral persistence, and many were only in their second semester. It is reasonable to discern some had not heard of the term doctoral persistence. One student admitted, “I was not familiar with the term doctoral persistence at the time, but when I began the DBA program last fall, I experienced the difficulties associated with it.” Although students may have been unfamiliar with doctoral persistence, they were familiar with its concepts and complexities. Students admitted to struggling with doctoral persistence, and a third year student said, “Initially, I was incredibly overwhelmed and did not know if this was something I should be doing.” These students were just beginning to learn about doctoral persistence and experience its struggles. Doctoral motivation.

The course required students to develop a research question centered on doctoral persistence accompanied by five interview questions. The majority of the fourteen students opened their interviews with a question about doctoral motivation. Doctoral motivation is explained as the student’s inspiration for pursuing a doctoral degree. Students selected current or finished doctoral students for their hypothetical interview, and some even geared their questions toward doctoral faculty. Students assumed there was a connection between initial motivation to pursue a doctoral degree and persistence in the program. Time management. Although students were less familiar with doctoral persistence at the beginning of the course, they highlighted the importance of time management. In the early phases of the course, students defined time management as the ability to prioritize activities and allot time to the most pertinent ones. One student confirmed its importance by stating, “Priority management is the most important aspect and has helped me during the program.” Another student supported that sentiment by indicating, “Planning time to study, read, write and research is critical.”

Letters to Prospective Students

Fourteen students wrote letters to prospective doctoral students at Michigan University as part of their required assignments for BUSI 715. The letters detailed the challenges faced by students in their doctoral program, and they advised the prospective student on best practices for doctoral persistence. Each student came from a different background or expertise, but they had all experienced at least one semester of doctoral studies. Letters were reviewed for common themes, and time management, stable support systems, and motivating factors emerged as the most important dynamics for doctoral persistence. Time management. Doctoral programs require an immense time commitment. Time management was defined by several students as the time allocated to each important factor in their lives, such as family, friends, school, and jobs. Many students developed a system that enabled them to comfortably complete their weekly studies and dedicate time to other important things in their life. One student highlighted the importance of time management, “Time management has proven vital to program success. It will consume a lot of time, and you will sacrifice a lot of things.” Students warned of the potential pitfalls of mismanaging time in the program; one cautioned, “Unless you are at a point in your life where you are willing, and able, to put aside 30 to 40 hours per week on your DBA program for the next three to four years, then you might be setting yourself up to fail.” Stable support systems. Each student echoed the importance of having a strong support system. Stable support systems can be explained as family, peers, or institutional factors that encourage doctoral persistence in students. An abundance of examples were presented by students. When experiencing challenges, many students leaned on their faith in God. Other

students leaned on support from family and friends. “Having a great support system is essential when working on your doctoral program. It is important that your family and friends are supportive and helpful during the time you are working on your degree,” said one student. Michigan’s academic environment was applauded by many students because of supportive faculty and fellow students. Another student stated in his prospective letter, “The professors genuinely care about the students and are always willing to help if you are in need; additionally, I have never been in an environment where fellow students are so encouraging toward their peers’ success.” Motivating factors. Students repeatedly mentioned the importance of referencing their motivating factors. Those motivating factors are defined as the reason(s) a student enrolled in their doctoral program. That motivation could come intrinsically, as a goal or career advancement, or extrinsically, as a work requirement. The prospective letter of a student reinforced, “Whether a DBA is just a goal or for career advancement, remember why you sought the program, and use that to get you through the tough times.” However, issues can persist if those motivating factors are not personally driven. One student explained, “I have found in some research that starting a doctoral program based on the pressure from others may eventually hinder your persistence in the program.”

Doctoral Persistence Interviews

Data was collected for the phenomenological study by interviewing two experts on doctoral persistence. The interviews are focused on doctoral persistence and the factors that motivated the interviewed participants to apply for their program and encouraged them to persist throughout it. The first interview was held with an Assistant Professor that attained his Ph.D. in Education in 2016. The researcher was a student of the interviewee in both his undergraduate and graduate studies. The second interview was conducted with a retired Ph.D. and former educator that works regularly with the interviewer in his current profession. Both interviews were conducted in Charleston, WV over the phone. The researcher hoped the resulting answers would shed light on the lived experience of students while completing a doctoral program. Each question was designed to build on the previous one to help develop an understanding of each participant and compile the necessary data to answer to the research question. The five interview questions posed to the participants were

1. What is/was your occupation?

2. What inspired you to pursue a doctoral degree?

3. How did you balance work load and doctoral classwork?

4. How often did you work on program assignments?

5. How did your job affect your doctoral studies?

The two participants shared common experiences throughout their doctoral programs. Several themes emerged from the interviews. Although, the two had differing views and experiences regarding some of those themes; motivating factors, advisor involvement, and work load balance resonated throughout the interviews.

Motivating factors. Both participants had strong motivating factors that drove them to the completion of their programs. Participant one was motivated extrinsically to complete the program and become Assistant Professor at his university. When asked how his job affected his doctoral studies, he responded, “I had to complete my doctoral studies to keep my job. I was literally told, “You don’t finish, and you don’t keep your job.” That’s a pretty good motivator too.” Participant two referred to her strong intrinsic motivation to enroll and complete her Ph.D. program. She said, “It’s something I always wanted to do; that was just the piece that sort of got me in the end. It drove me to that goal, and I never looked back. I loved every minute of it.” The motivating factors emerged as the most important factors in doctoral persistence from the two interviews.

Advisor involvement. The two participants endured drastically different experiences with their advisor. However, both indicated the involvement of their advisors played a crucial role. Participant one struggled between his course work and dissertation phase; he affirmed nobody cared whether he succeeded or failed. Although participant one idolized his advisor, he admitted, “She didn’t care; she had a thousand other things going on.” Conversely, participant two had a very positive relationship with her advisor, citing him as one of the greatest encouraging factors to her doctoral persistence. Her advisor reinforced her by telling her, “I have no doubt you’re going to finish.” The two interview participants may have had different relationships with their advisors, but each underscored an advisor’s role to persistence in a doctoral program. Work load balance. Each interviewed participant mentioned the importance of balancing class work and the work load for their full-time job because of the challenge a doctoral program presents. Participant one said, “It was very hard…because you can quit at any point. You can get demoralized.” Participant two echoed the difficulty by repeatedly mentioning her challenging courses. Each was forced to carefully consider how they allotted their time to work and school. Participant one’s work schedule as a professor was developed around his class schedule. Interviewee two scheduled class work in a way that would not overwhelm her. She explained, “I always made sure I took two classes per semester, and I tried to make sure one of those were an online course so I wasn’t going to class as much.” Each interviewee underwent an adjustment phase because they had established careers and families already. They were forced to prioritize and put their classwork ahead of other important factors in their lives.

Collective Theme Comparison

Several emergent themes were reflected across all three data sources. Motivation and time management, or work load balance, was an emergent theme in discussion boards, letters to prospective students, and interviews. Doctoral work is hard and students can quit at any time because many other things consume their time or they lose motivation. However, students that were capable of finding a way to balance the workload between their classes and jobs found this time management skill crucial to seeing the experience through to its completion. Also, support systems or advisor relationship was a shared theme between two data sources. Certain relationships were present during the doctoral experience of students and it positively influenced their doctoral persistence. The emergent themes found in this study reflect many of the emergent themes found in previous doctoral persistence studies. Spaulding and Rockinson-Szapkiw (2012) found students’ professional or personal motivation, outside support of family members, friends, or academic advisors, and program characteristics were the most attributing factors for doctoral persistence. Carolyn Hart (2012) found online students shared many of the same characteristics with instructor communication, support from family and friends, time management, personal motivation, and the online community pointing to persistence. These sources echoed the motivation, support system and time management themes found in this study. However, this study offered more in-depth data on the motivating factors of students. The interviews better explain the role a student’s profession has on their doctoral persistence.

Although many themes in the literature review paralleled that of the study, the research question was posed because a gap was found in previous research. The findings of this study will help current and future doctoral students deal with the challenges of a doctoral program. Aspiring students can assess these lived experiences to determine if they are ready to pursue a doctoral degree. Because this study was constrained to an eight week period within the constructs of a BUSI 715 class, researchers could launch a larger study into the lived experiences of doctoral students.

Conclusion

This phenomenological study observed the lived experience of doctoral persistence for students that were enrolled in or had finished a doctoral program. Data was pulled from the coursework of current doctoral students focused on qualitative studies and doctoral persistence. Additional data was derived from an interview of two Ph.D. recipients on the topic of doctoral persistence. After an analysis of the emergent themes, the researcher can conclude that students enrolled in a doctoral program are forced to make life changes to properly manage time constraints, rely on a support system, and have a steadfast motivating factor to persist in their doctoral program. These themes were present throughout the doctoral experience of the two interviewed doctoral recipients, and they were confirmed through the coursework and early experiences of the DBA class. Further research should be done to assess the lived experiences of a larger group of doctoral students who are enrolled in or have completed a program. However, the defined experiences of these studied students will offer perspective into the struggle of balancing the responsibilities of doctoral class work and daily responsibilities.

References

Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among

five approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Di Pierro, M. (2007). Excellence in doctoral education: Defining best practices. College Student

Journal, 41(2), 368-369. Retrieved from

http://go.galegroup.com/ps/anonymous?id=GALE%7CA163679006&sid=googleScholar

&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=fulltext&issn=01463934&p=AONE&sw=w&authCount=1&is

AnonymousEntry=true

Falconer, A., & Adragna, S. (2017). Personality types and persistence in doctoral students: A

mixed-methods study. Psychology and Behavioral Science International Journal, 2(5), 1

9. doi:10.19080/pbsij.2017.02.555598

Goes, J. (2013, July 18). When and when not to use phenomenology. Retrieved from

http://www.dissertationrecipes.com/when-and-when-not-to-use-phenomenology/

Hart, C. (2012). Factors associated with student persistence in an online program of study: A

review of the literature. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 11(1), 19-42. Retrieved

from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/11.1.2.pdf

Keller, T., & Alsdorf, K. L. (2012). Every good endeavor: connecting your work to Gods work.

New York: Penguin Books.

Litalien, D., & Guay, F. (2015). Dropout intentions in PhD studies: A comprehensive model

based on interpersonal relationships and motivational resources. Contemporary

Educational Psychology, 41, 218-231. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2015.03.004

QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS 17

Pyhältö, K., Toom, A., Stubb, J., & Lonka, K. (2012). Challenges of becoming a scholar: A

study of doctoral students problems and well-being. ISRN Education, 2012, 1-12.

doi:10.5402/2012/934941

Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J., Spaulding, L. S., & Spaulding, M. T. (2016). Identifying significant

integration and institutional factors that predict online doctoral persistence. The Internet

and Higher Education, 31, 101-112. Retrieved from

http://rx9vh3hy4r.search.serialssolutions.com/?ctx_ver=Z39.88

2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF

8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ff

mt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Identifying significant

integration and institutional factors that predict online doctoral persistence&rft.jtitle=The

Internet and Higher Education&rft.au=Rockinson-Szapkiw%2C Amanda

J&rft.au=Spaulding%2C Lucinda S&rft.au=Spaulding%2C Maria T&rft.date=2016-10

01&rft.issn=1096-7516&rft.eissn=1873

5525&rft.volume=31&rft.spage=101&rft.epage=112&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016%2Fj.ihed

uc.2016.07.003&rft.externalDBID=n%2Fa&rft.externalDocID=10_1016_j_iheduc_2016

_07_003¶mdict=en-US

Smith, D. W. (2013). Phenomenology. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, (7). Retrieved from

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/phenomenology/.

Spaulding, L., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2012). Hearing their voices: Factors doctoral

candidates attribute to their persistence. International Journal of Doctoral Studies , 7,

199-219. Retrieved from http://ijds.org/Volume7/IJDSv7p199-219Spaulding334.pdf

QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS 18

Vekkaila, J., Pyhältö, K., & Lonka, K. (2013). Experiences of disengagement – A study of

doctoral students in the behavioral sciences. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 8,

61-81. doi:10.28945/1870

Walters, J. (2017). Phenomenological research guidelines. Retrieved from

https://www.capilanou.ca/psychology/student-resources/research

guidelines/Phenomenological-Research-Guidelines/

Wilson, A. (2015). A guide to phenomenological research. Nursing Standard, 29(34), 34.

Retrieved from https://search-proquest

com.ezproxy.liberty.edu/docview/1785221618?pq-origsite=summon&accountid=12085.