Focus group discussions were analysed for themes [46?8]. Our research team thoroughly read and reread the transcripts and met regularly to develop a systematic process of thematic analysis. We used investigator triangulation [49, 50] to create and agree upon the categorizations and coding schemes that led to our themes. Our themes appeared consistently in each of the four focus groups. Trustworthiness was established by member CV205-502 hydrochloride biological activity checking with participants to ensure authenticity. Several strategies were utilized to increase rigor [45, 51]. Stability was enhanced through the use of multiple focus groups in geographically different areas. Equivalence was achieved through the use of two experienced moderators with complementary styles to achieve “flow, texture and context” and to promote construct validity [51] (page 302). Credibility was strengthened through sustained engagement and observation over the course of four focus groups, researcher triangulation, debriefing as a research team, and member checking. Reflexivity, where researchers strive to understand their own experiences as well as the research question, in order to remain objective, neutral, and nonbiased, was supported through regular face-to-face and teleconference meetings. Transferability was enriched through dense sample description and rich description of the data. Confirmability was heightened through peer debriefing and maintaining our audit trail. Dependability was attained by recording a log of our plans, meetings, and ongoing interpretations. Using annotation and memo functions, NVIVO 9 [52] maintained a permanent record of our work. Tracking individual responses in addition to the group account [53] assisted us in avoiding the risk of analyzing data from only vocally dominant members of the groups. Field notes or “descriptions of participants, impressions related to the discussion (and) observations related to group dynamics”3. Research ApproachThis qualitative descriptive project was framed from a constructivist worldview [32?4] and Haas and Shaffir’s [4] sociological theory of professionalization. Haas and Shaffir theorized that legitimation is a central concept in healthcare professionals’ process of socialization. Participants were 27 Post LPN to BN students from a Canadian university who attended a practicum on an acute hospital unit. The main purpose of the research was to describe Post LPN to BN student nurses’ experiences with professional socialization as they transitioned into a more complex nursing role. A secondary purpose of the research was to begin to understand how university faculty can best support and facilitate these students’ professional socialization as they learn to become Registered Nurses (RNs). Data sources included four face-to-face digitally BLU-554 price recorded, transcribed focus group discussions which were analyzed for themes. Our rational for collecting and analyzing focus group data centered on our intention to invite our participants to converse and interact in ways that stimulated new insights. Focus group methodology, with its emphasis on group interaction [35?9] and goal of collaborative discussion [40, 41], allowed us to draw out participants’ views and to explore their ideas and conversational exchanges with one another in depth. Focus groups are a rich source of information [42] and a valid method of generating data within a constructionist epistemology where “knowledge is created in situated, [collective] encounters” [43] (page 496). They.Focus group discussions were analysed for themes [46?8]. Our research team thoroughly read and reread the transcripts and met regularly to develop a systematic process of thematic analysis. We used investigator triangulation [49, 50] to create and agree upon the categorizations and coding schemes that led to our themes. Our themes appeared consistently in each of the four focus groups. Trustworthiness was established by member checking with participants to ensure authenticity. Several strategies were utilized to increase rigor [45, 51]. Stability was enhanced through the use of multiple focus groups in geographically different areas. Equivalence was achieved through the use of two experienced moderators with complementary styles to achieve “flow, texture and context” and to promote construct validity [51] (page 302). Credibility was strengthened through sustained engagement and observation over the course of four focus groups, researcher triangulation, debriefing as a research team, and member checking. Reflexivity, where researchers strive to understand their own experiences as well as the research question, in order to remain objective, neutral, and nonbiased, was supported through regular face-to-face and teleconference meetings. Transferability was enriched through dense sample description and rich description of the data. Confirmability was heightened through peer debriefing and maintaining our audit trail. Dependability was attained by recording a log of our plans, meetings, and ongoing interpretations. Using annotation and memo functions, NVIVO 9 [52] maintained a permanent record of our work. Tracking individual responses in addition to the group account [53] assisted us in avoiding the risk of analyzing data from only vocally dominant members of the groups. Field notes or “descriptions of participants, impressions related to the discussion (and) observations related to group dynamics”3. Research ApproachThis qualitative descriptive project was framed from a constructivist worldview [32?4] and Haas and Shaffir’s [4] sociological theory of professionalization. Haas and Shaffir theorized that legitimation is a central concept in healthcare professionals’ process of socialization. Participants were 27 Post LPN to BN students from a Canadian university who attended a practicum on an acute hospital unit. The main purpose of the research was to describe Post LPN to BN student nurses’ experiences with professional socialization as they transitioned into a more complex nursing role. A secondary purpose of the research was to begin to understand how university faculty can best support and facilitate these students’ professional socialization as they learn to become Registered Nurses (RNs). Data sources included four face-to-face digitally recorded, transcribed focus group discussions which were analyzed for themes. Our rational for collecting and analyzing focus group data centered on our intention to invite our participants to converse and interact in ways that stimulated new insights. Focus group methodology, with its emphasis on group interaction [35?9] and goal of collaborative discussion [40, 41], allowed us to draw out participants’ views and to explore their ideas and conversational exchanges with one another in depth. Focus groups are a rich source of information [42] and a valid method of generating data within a constructionist epistemology where “knowledge is created in situated, [collective] encounters” [43] (page 496). They.
