Get documents about "QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS IN SOCIAL SCIENCES
Shared by: gjg20850
Categories
Tags
qualitative research, qualitative methods, qualitative research methods, social sciences, social science research, qualitative research methods for the social sciences, action research, research methods, social research, research design, new york, field research, sage publications, research project, qualitative data
-
Stats
- views:
- 645
- posted:
- 3/30/2010
- language:
- English
- pages:
- 57
Document Sample
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS
IN
SOCIAL SCIENCES
REPORT
ON
THREE-WEEK TRAINING WORKSHOP
AND
ONE-DAY SYMPOSIUM
MARCH 5-23, 2007
KATHMANDU, NEPAL
ORGANIZED BY:
Nepal German Academic Association (NEGAAS)
and
Dynamic Society Nepal (DSN)
FUNDED BY:
German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD), Germany
REPORT PREPARED BY:
Dr. Thaneswor GAUTAM
Mr. Bhakti P. SHARMA
Mr. Dila Ram GAUTAM
Mr. Bal Ram CHAPAGAIN
Mr. Rajesh JOSHI
KATHMANDU
Monday, 30 April 2007
THREE-WEEK TRAINING WORKSHOP FOLLOWED BY SYMPOSIUM ON
Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences (SOQRISS)
Kathmandu
March 5 - 23, 2007
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The highly focused and broadly participatory workshop on Qualitative Research Methods in
Social Sciences is expected to enhance the participants' knowledge and skills to carry out
independent qualitative research works on diverse issues in future. It has given sufficient
triggers to the participants to research into present situation of the country where many of the
groups are struggling to sustain their physical, economic and cultural survival. The
prevalence of “captive minds” of researchers as well as policy makers seems to be one of the
causes of such deteriorating situation of the country. It is hoped that the exposure to
qualitative research tools, techniques, methods, and approaches would enhance the potential
of participants to probe into socio-political context of the country.
In view of the need of a comprehensive program to promote research in social sciences,
Nepal German Academic Association (NEGAAS) and Dynamic Society Nepal (DSN)
organized a three-week workshop followed by a day long symposium. Individuals having
interest in carrying out social research were invited through public notification and circular.
Out of 230 applicants, 37 applicants were selected for the workshop that included 10
applicants from German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) alumni groups. The
participants were expected to follow structured qualitative research methods for discovering
actual social problems, analyzing them, developing mechanisms for intervention, and
evaluating the outcomes for solving potential social problems through appropriate means.
The importance of gaining knowledge on code of conduct for conducting interview include
prior consent of the interviewee, patience in listening, communication strategies on the part
of the interviewer, ability to motivate interviewee for generating story-telling. These would
allow preparation of standardized data collection and obtain answers to the research
questions.
A team of seven members, consisting of principal resource person Dr. Andreas Homburg,
Philipps University Marburg and a six-member core team under the leadership of program
moderator Prof. Anand Aditya, animated the workshop sessions. Each session was designed
to impart knowledge and skills to the participants on the concept, issues, approaches, tools,
and techniques of qualitative research in social sciences. Dr. Homburg carried out the
sessions four days in a week and other two days were conducted by the core team members.
Dr. Homburg focused on the use of scientific tools and approaches whereas the Nepali core
team members contributed in identifying social issues and contextualizing theories to pursue
qualitative research.
The group work for practising interview session, where each group consisted of four persons
with different roles as (i) interviewer, (ii) interviewee, (iii) documentator, and (iv) observer,
provided an opportunity to get the feeling of a real interview situation and the scope where it
could be improved in future.
Use of equipment, such as voice recorder, facilitated an authentic and precise record of the
communication process. This would allow the interviewer to concentrate more on discussions
and to observe nonverbal expressions. The collection of visual data by means of photos, film
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # II
analysis and video analysis would, in fact, help to assess verbal information obtained from
the interviewees. Besides, transcription is another important item, and one needs to be even
more careful when multiple languages are involved. Translation into other languages may
distort the actual meaning of the data due to subjectivity involved and the problems related to
vocabulary.
In this underdeveloped part of the globe, most of the researchers and their works are driven
by donors, and as such, they are knowingly or unknowingly inclined to meet the donor’s
objectives and expectations. This tendency of ignoring research findings or lack of
contextualizing the research outcomes has led to ineffective policy making and poor
governance. The qualitative research in social sciences must not only penetrate into the
problems faced by the citizens but also sensitize the policy makers and hold them responsible
for implementation to improve quality of life of the fellow citizens.
The tips and tricks for preparing a successful proposal for research are crucial. Any proposal
submitted for acceptance has to undergo scrutiny at various levels. Funding agencies are
always interested to know not only what is happening when an intervention is supported, but
also whether the intervention is worth what it costs, whether there are unintended bad results
as well as planned good ones, whether the methods used in the intervention are appropriate to
professional and ethical standards, and whether there are better ways to achieve similar
results.
In addition to applying quantitative methods for discovering facts that are holistic in nature,
researchers could also apply quantitative methods to confirm their findings objectively. The
participants are expected to introduce (or continue using) qualitative methods in their
research endeavor and regularly update their knowledge from relevant literature, discussion
and internet.
Many supporters, including Kantipur City College (KCC), University Grants Commission
(UGC), Social Inclusion Research Fund (SIRF), People with Disability (PWD) research team,
Event Managing Team, and the participants had contributed to the program in various ways.
The symposium at the end formed a regional forum and nominated Prof. Anand Aditya as the
coordinator and Dr. Thaneswor Gautam as the member-secretary. The team has been
assigned to invite many other researchers in the planning workshop that will finally design a
legal forum. Professors from various countries and the network made by the core team
recently have paved a new avenue for a consortium type of broad institution for supporting
social science research in Nepal.
We hope the program has benefited the researchers in their respective fields. We extend our
heartfelt thanks to all the contributors, including NEGAAS, German Embassy, and DAAD,
for their support and cooperation in every regard, and apologize for the shortcomings, if any,
on behalf of the organizers.
Acknowledgement: We are very much thankful to Prof. Anand Aditya and Mr. J.K. Tater
who reviewed the draft version and guided us to prepare this final report. Further, we are
indebted to Prof. Chandra B. Joshi, Mr. Rishi Shah, Mr. Surendra Dhakal, Ms. Roshana
Shrestha, Ms. Sarita Pradhan, Ms. Laxmi Tamang and Mr. Yuba Raj Bhusal for the
constructive ideas and feedback to bring out this report in this form.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # III
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-2
B. WORKSHOP ON QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN SOCIAL SCIENCES 1-32
1. Background 1
2. Formation of Core Team and Program Coordinator 2
3. Selection of Participants 3
4. About the Workshop 4
5. Workshop Inauguration Program 5
6. Workshop Session Plan: March 05 to 22, 2007 7
7. Session One: Introduction and basics (Monday, March 5, 2007) 8
8. Session Two: Appetizer and orientation (Tuesday, March 6, 2007) 9
9. Session Three: Social Science Research in Nepal: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
(Wednesday, March 7, 2007) 11
10. Session Four: Collecting verbal data, theoretical (Thursday, March 8, 2007) 15
11. Session Five: Collecting verbal data, practical (Friday, March 9, 2007) 13
12. Session Six: Contextualizing theories in Nepali context (Sunday, March 11, 2007) 15
13. Session Eight: Documentation and analysis of verbal data (Tuesday, March 13, 2007) 18
14. Session Nine: Experimenting with ideas (Wednesday, March 14, 2007) 21
15. Session Ten: Data-analysis/verbal data, practical (Thursday, March 15, 2007) 22
16. Session Eleven: Data collection/Visual data and Quality management
(Friday, March 16, 2007) 23
17. Session Twelve: The Fourth 'R' in development: Problems in practice
(Sunday, March 18, 2007) 24
18. Session Thirteen: Special applications-I: Evaluation (Monday, March 19) 26
19. Session Fourteen: Designing your own research: Special applications-II
(Tuesday, March 20, 2007) 28
20. Session Fifteen: Planning for symposium and participants' presentations
(Wednesday, March 21, 2007) 29
21. Session Sixteen: Summary (Synthesis of Qualitative-Quantitative Research),
Evaluation and Feedback (Thursday, March 22, 2007) 30
22. Feedback management 31
23. Need assessment and perception of participant 32
C. SYMPOSIUM ON QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN SOCIAL SCIENCES:
STATE OF ART IN NEPAL 33-39
24. About the Symposium 33
25. Start-up of the symposium 34
26. Introduction and expectation of the symposium participants 34
27. Presentation on Learning from the workshop and feedback from the audience 35
28. Group work 35
29. Group presentation 36
30. Network Building Session 37
31. Closing Session 37
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # IV
D. ANNEXURE 40-52
Annex 1: Feedback Questionnaire 40
Annex 2: Major findings of the symposium: State of the Art in Nepal-23; March 2007
(Critical minimum consensus) 41
Annex 3: Formation of Regional Forum for the: Promotion of social science research
in the region 43
Annex 4: Press Release by SOQRISS-23 March 2007 (Nepali Language) 44
Annex 5: Income and Expenditure Statement 45
Annex 6: Special Note and acknowledgement 46
Annex 7: Interview Training Guideline Prepared in Groups 47
E. LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Approaches to Qualitative Inquiry 08
Table 2: Comparison of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches 10
Table 3: Interview Approaches 12
Table 4: Content Analysis Approaches 18
Table 5: Comparison of Methods for Collecting Multi-focus Data 24
Table-6: Transition of paradigms 26
Table 7: Evaluation approaches 27
Table 8: Questions to be considered while evaluating 27
F. LIST OF FIGURES
Figure: 1: Research culture 25
Figure 2: Integration of qualitative and quantitative inquiry 31
Figure 3: Feedback mapping 32
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # V
Funded by
DAAD Germany
Nepal German Dynamic Society Nepal German Academic Exchange Service
Academic Association
1. Background
The workshop was conceptualized and planned by Dr. Thaneswor Gautam with the support
of Dr. Chandra B. Joshi, Mr. Surendra Dhakal, Ms. Roshana Shrestha, and Ms. Sarita
Pradhan. Dr. Andreas Homburg from Philipps University Marburg, Germany was invited as a
principal resource person of the program where Dr. Gautam had worked as a Ph.D. research
fellow under the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) short-term scholarship
program. He submitted the proposal to DAAD on behalf of Nepal German Academic
Association (NEGAAS) together with Dynamic Society Nepal (DSN)-a non-profit research
organization. The DAAD provided the total fund of 3,140.00 for the program purpose.
Then, a planning session was organized immediately after this under the following banner:
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 1
2. Formation of Core Team and Program Coordinator
For the successful implementation of the project the planning workshop formed a core team,
involving Prof. Anand Aditya, Executive Director, Pragya Foundation; Prof. Dev Raj Dahal,
Executive Director, Fredric Elbert Sifting, Kathmandu; Prof. Ram K. Regmee, Head of Mass
Communication and Journalism, Kantipur City College; Dr. Mahesh Puri, Chief Researcher,
Center for Research on Environment Health and Population Activities, Mr. Surendra Dhakal,
General Secretary, NEGAAS and Dr. Thaneswor Gautam, member of NEGAAS and
Executive Director of Dynamic Society Nepal. The workshop nominated Prof. Aditya as the
program moderator and Dr. Gautam as the program coordinator. The core team held various
meetings for the session design, preparation of brochure and inviting researchers for
participation in the program.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 2
3. Selection of Participants
Participation was open for all active Nepali researchers, including DAAD alumni group or
professionals who had studied in Germany. Out of the total 230 applicants, the core team
selected 30 applicants including some DAAD alumni members for participation in the three-
week workshop followed by one-day symposium. The list of core team members, workshop
participants and facilitators are as follows:
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 3
4. About the Workshop
Background
A workshop on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences was organized by NEGAAS
in association with DSN and supported by DAAD in Kathmandu from March 5-23, 2007.
The workshop was found inclusive and pioneering in its type in Nepal, which has a deep
implication and significance for future activities. A brief description of the program,
objectives, methodology and the expected outcome of the workshop are presented as follows:
Concept
Qualitative research is an intricate domain of knowledge comprising a whole inventory of
tools, approaches, and methods. In general, it regards the world as one to be perceived,
contested, and interpreted in diverse ways and as one perennially changing over space and
time. Researchers try to reach closer to the ground reality of things observing the world to
understand the nature of the truth bounded by space, time and an individual’s role in the
overall context.
The workshop was a national level program designed to empower the Nepali community on
qualitative research in social sciences. NEGAAS and DAAD alumni members were the
program organizers and DSN, a research-related non-profit motive organization, was the
event organizer.
Objectives
The primary objective of the program was to enhance participants' knowledge and skills in
qualitative research methods. It focused on qualitative research tools, techniques, methods,
and approaches to enable participants to carry out independent qualitative research works in
future. The workshop also aimed to develop trainers so that many more individuals can
eventually get learning opportunities from the researchers who have attended the workshop
sessions.
Methodology
The workshop was participatory in nature. It offered illustrative lectures, interactive and
moderated sessions, and some practical exercises. The principal resource person focused
more on scientific tools and techniques available and used qualitative inquiry. The Nepali
resource persons presented illustrative lectures on the issues and applicability of qualitative
research in Nepali context.
Expected Outcome
The participants seemed to be extremely happy and satisfied. The feedback questionnaire
showed positive results. It appeared that the training workshop has increased the confidence
of participants and enhanced their skills in qualitative research methods. It is expected that
the participants will join in a roster of likeminded researchers for their future work and
professional development to make social contribution. Participants from Nepali universities
and research institutions have remarkably benefited from the workshop and the symposium.
Participants
The program offered an opportunity and a common platform to the research scholars,
research institutions and the universities in Nepal to acquire qualitative research skills in the
context of emerging knowledge economy. There was participation from women researchers
and also from marginalized groups.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 4
5. Workshop Inauguration Program
The program was inaugurated by the Chief Guest Mr. Norbert Meyer, Counselor of German
Embassy. Acting President of NEGAAS Mr. Rishi Shah chaired the inauguration ceremony
and General Secretary of NEGAAS Mr. Surendra Dhakal anchored the session. The program
had following schedule:
Session Chair – Mr. Rishi Shah, Acting President NEGAAS
Distinguished Guest – Mr. Norbert Meyer, Counselor of German Embassy
Special Guests – Mr. Sanjay Dhital, DSN Chairperson
– Mr. Kapil Upadhay, CDSN Chairperson
Program Moderator – Prof. Anand Aditya
Principal Resource Person – Dr. Andreas Homburg
Program Coordinator – Dr. Thaneswor Gautam
Panel of Core Team – Prof. Ram Krishna Regmee
– Prof. Dev Raj Dahal
– Dr. Mahesh Puri
Master of Ceremony – Mr. Surendra Dhakal, Member of Core Team
and General Secretary of NEGAAS
Organizer and Collaborator: Prof. C.B. Joshi (Founder Distinguished guest and Resource Persons: Mr. Norbert Meyer
President NEGAAS, corner); Mr. Kapil Upadhyay (CDSN- (corner), Counselor of German Embassy and representative of
chair), supporting group; Mr. Sanjay Dhital (DSN-chair), DAAD; Dr. Homburg, Principal Resource person from Philipps
co-organizer team; Mr. Dhakal (NEGAAS-Gen Sec.), and University Marburg Germany (center); and Prof. Aditya,
Dr. Gautam (Coordinator, front); and Mr. Rishi Shah Moderator and Nepali Core Team Leader (right)
(President , NEGAAS, standing).
Three members of the core team representing Nepali resource persons, namely Prof. Regmee,
Prof. Dahal, and Dr. Puri attended the session. Leader of Nepali Congress and former
minister Mr. Ram Hari Joshi, Mr. Kapil P. Upadhyay, president of Carl Duisberg Sociey
Nepal (CDSN) and Mr. Sanjay Dhital, acting chairperson of co-organizer of the program
DSN were the special guests and invitee of the opening program.
The program began with welcome speech of program coordinator Dr. Gautam, who also
represented three organizations DSN, NEGAAS and CDSN. He welcomed the distinguished
guests and the participants of the program. He honored the core team members as well as the
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 5
principal resource person Dr. Homburg. He also welcomed the DSN and CDSN chairs, all the
invitees in the program, participants and the support team including SIRF, KCC and CDSN.
Chief Guest Mr. Norbert Meyer Counselor from German Chief Guest Mr. Norbert Meyer (center) with the coordinator
Embassy reading the letter from DAAD (New Delhi), (right) and Mr. Ram Hari Joshi, former minister of Education
after inaugural speech and Culture and now a leader of Nepali Congress (left)
The chief guest Mr. Meyer lit the lamp and formally inaugurated the workshop. Program
moderator Prof. Anand Aditya briefly highlighted the program. He shared his vision and
discussed major issues of the program, highlighted rationale of the program and its features,
explained the importance of principal resource person's delivery and its utmost importance in
the present context.
Chief guest Mr. Meyer expressed the best wishes that he received from DAAD, Delhi and his
expectations from the program. He appreciated role of program organizers, their efforts and
encouraged the concerned to continue the program in future.
Core Team Members: General Secretary Mr.Dhakal (left) is Event organizer with others: Acting Chairperson of DSN
sharing with Core team member Prof. Dahal (center) and Dr. Mr. Sanjay Dhital (left) sharing with Core team member Prof.
Puri (right) Regmee (center) and Ph.D. research scholar (right).
The principal resource person Dr. Homburg representing Philipps University Marburg
presented his paper after introducing himself, his university, work team, and program
schedule for the three-week sessions of the workshop.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 6
The chief guest was invited to deliver the inaugural speech. He highlighted the importance of
qualitative inquiry in social science research and the effort made by the German academic
community in this regard. He also shared his desire to extend the best possible cooperation
for empowerment of social scientists. He congratulated the program organizers, participants
and the event managers.
Core Team Members with Participants and Guests: Participants and Guests: Mr. Ram Hari Joshi (second row,
Prof. Dahal and Prof. Regmee (center, second row) left) with the DAAD Alumni participants (first row, left)
Mr. Dhakal representing the organizing group and the core team expressed his thanks to DSN
and its members for proper event management. He offered special thanks to the donor agency
DAAD Germany and for the support provided by German Embassy in this regard. He
expressed sincere thanks to all the team members, collaborators, participants, and
coordinating team for the good design and successful program implementation.
Lastly, Chairperson Mr. Rishi Shah closed the formal inauguration program with motivating
remarks. He thanked DSN and the program coordinator; highly valued the contribution of
DAAD; honored all the resource persons; and congratulated all the participants.
6. Workshop Session Plan: March 05 to 22, 2007
Mo : 05 Session 1 Introduction and Basics - A. Homburg
Tu : 06 Session 2 Basics, appetizer and orientation - A. Homburg
We : 07 Session 3 Social science research in Nepal: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow - A. Aditya
Th : 08 Session 4 Collecting verbal data, theory - A. Homburg
Fr : 09 Session 5 Collecting verbal data, practice - A. Homburg
Su : 11 Session 6 Contextualizing theories in Nepali context - D. Dahal and S. Dhakal
Mo : 12 Session 7 Collecting verbal data, practice - A. Homburg
Tu : 13 Session 8 Documentation and analysis of verbal data - A. Homburg
We : 14 Session 9 Experimenting with ideas - R.K. Regmee and T. Gautam
Th : 15 Session 10 Data-analysis/verbal data, practice - A. Homburg
Fr : 16 Session 11 Data collection/visual data and Quality-management - A. Homburg
Su : 18 Session 12 Fourth 'R' in development: Problems in practice - A. Aditya
Mo : 19 Session 13 Special applications I: Evaluation - A. Homburg
Tu : 20 Session 14 Designing your own research: Special applications II - A. Homburg
We : 21 Session 15 Participants' presentation: Planning for symposium - T. Gautam
Th : 22 Session 16 Summary (Synthesis of Qualitative-Quantitative)
Evaluation and Feedback - A. Homburg
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 7
7. Session One: Introduction and basics (Monday, March 5, 2007)
The first session began at 3.00 after the refreshments on the inaugural day. The coordinator of
the program Dr. Gautam explained the systems and norms developed for the session. He
requested moderator Prof. Aditya to explain guidelines for the organizer and the resource
persons. Prof. Aditya justified the course module and the role of Nepali core team. He
highlighted existing limitations in the knowledge development and asked the participants to
be active.
Participants are actively involved in need assessment session External resource person or observer of the session Ms. Binjwala
and Dr. Homburg is seen busy making notes. Shrestha, a qualitative researcher is sharing her ideas
The principal resource person Dr. Homburg highlighted the objectives to develop confidence
in the use of qualitative research. The participants, facilitators, and core team members
introduced themselves. Dr. Homburg briefed on the subjects of the workshop that were to be
followed in the days to come. He started formal presentation on ideal research process,
starting from social problems and followed by analysis developing intervention and
evaluating the strategies and policy issues. He discussed various tasks such as exploring,
describing, testing hypothesis, and evaluating things by using basically two main traditions of
investigations: quantitative and qualitative. Then, he explained the features of qualitative
research as follows:
Table 1: Approaches to Qualitative Inquiry
Approaches to Subjective Description of social Hermeneutic analysis of
viewpoints situations underlying structures
Theoretical • Symbolic interactionism • Ethno-methodology • Psychoanalysis
positions • Phenomenology • Constructivism • Genetic structuralism
Methods of • Semi-structured • Focus groups • Recording interactions
data interviews • Ethnography • Photography
collection • Narrative interviews • Participant observation • Film
• Recording interactions
• Theoretical coding • Conversation analysis • Objective hermeneutics
Methods of
• Content analysis • Discourse analysis • Deep hermeneutics
interpretation
• Narrative analysis • Genre analysis
• Hermeneutic methods • Analysis of documents
• Biographical research • Analysis of life worlds • Family research
Fields of
• Analysis of everyday and organizations • Biographical research
application
knowledge evaluation • Generation research
• Cultural studies • Gender research
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 8
Finally, an interactive discussion was held with the participants. The issues discussed were
related to subjective viewpoints on causes, consequences and options; description of social
condition to figure out the situation; and analysis of underlying structures to have an insight.
After Dr. Homburg's presentation, Prof. Aditya raised the issue on some confusing terms like
“qualitative research” and “quality research”. He suggested to develop a profile of the
participants and to share that among the participants. External resource person Ms. Binjwala
Shrestha expressed happiness over the applicability of the session and presented some
important suggestions and guidelines. At the end, the coordinator shared some of the essential
information. The program moderator and the principal resource person assigned some roles to
the participants. A very short survey was made on the expectations of the participants, and
the brief notes made by them were collected by the organizing team. The participants were
encouraged to express their comments to make the next sessions more effective.
8. Session Two: Appetizer and orientation (Tuesday, March 6, 2007)
The session started with the coordinator’s brief presentation on inauguration session and also
highlighted the expectation of the session. Then, principal resource person Dr. Homburg
presented some examples of qualitative research to develop confidence in doing qualitative
inquiry. He highlighted the core aspects of qualitative research and explained the mental map
of qualitative research. Likewise, he explored ideas from the participants such that those
ideas can be integrated in his presentation. Finally, he stressed the importance of linking
resource person's presentation with the core team's presentation in future.
Explaining the central aspects of qualitative research, he pointed out that there are five
approaches, which can be used for the intervention: laws, government regulations and
incentives (taxes, rewards); education (information, knowledge, social learning theory);
moral, religious, and/or ethical appeals (environmental and anti-environmental appeals);
small-group/community management; and social change/social marketing. The aim was to
make the participants familiar with how their research is embedded with the complex process.
He also discussed different empirical issues such as exploring, describing, hypothesis testing
and evaluating things using basically two main traditions of investigations: quantitative and
qualitative. He then explained the features of both qualitative and quantitative research as
presented below:
External Resource Person Dr. Raj Kumar Sharma (third from External resource person Dr. Raj Kumar Sharma (center) with
the left) attending the session coordinator (right), core team member Prof. Regmee (left) and others
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 9
Table 2: Comparison of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches
Qualitative Quantitative
Phenomenological/inductive Hypothetic/deductive
Holistic Particularistic
Subjective/insider-centered Objective/outsider-centered
Process-oriented Outcome-oriented
Anthropological worldview Natural science worldview
Relative lack of control Attempt to control variables
Goal: understand actor's view Goal: find facts and causes
Dynamic reality assumed; "slice of life" Static reality assumed; relative constancy in life
Discovery-oriented Verification oriented
Explanatory Confirmatory
The focus of the presentation was on holistic approach of doing research with the proper use
of qualitative and quantitative tools, triangulation and concentrating on the best use of all
required approaches in research work.
He further stressed that understanding of the following central aspects is important to
understanding qualitative research as follows:
1. Single cases always have to be assessed and analyzed: adequacy of procedural methods
and the interpretation of results controlled.
2. Remain flexible so that amendments, endorsements and revisions are always possible,
both regarding the theoretical structures and hypotheses and the methods, if
necessary/required by the objective.
3. Research has to proceed in a methodologically controlled manner; the single
methodological steps have to be explained, documented and be based on well-founded
standards.
4. Analysis is always shaped/influenced by the analyst’s prior understanding. This needs to
be revealed and advanced.
5. Introspective data are an accepted source of information for analysis as well. But they
have to be identified/explained, justified and tested/checked.
6. Research is understood as a process in which the researcher and object are open to
change.
7. Analytic separations into human functional-, or living areas have to be repeatedly put
back together and be able to be interpreted and corrected in a holistic manner.
8. The concept has to be primarily historic, since social scientific objects always have a
history and can constantly change.
9. The starting point of social scientific research ought to be primarily precise and practical
problems.
10. Concerning generalization of social scientific research result, it must be reasoned
explicitly with valid arguments.
11. Inductive methods play a central role in the support and generalization of results, but they
need to be controlled.
12. Context-related rules should be followed instead of general laws.
13. It is possible to meet the requirements of reasonable quantifications.
External resource person Dr. Raj K. Sharma presented his comments on the principal
resource person and the organizer. External resource person’s feedback questionnaires were
very useful for the organizers to identify the ways to improve quality of the session. The
weaknesses found were corrected in the following days. These include sitting arrangement
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 10
was modified from a semi-circle into a theater style and handouts were printed into two slides
per page instead of four slides per page from the following day onward. Subsequently, the
feedback questionnaires were administered for follow-up. The moderator further explained
issues discussed by the principal resource person.
9. Session Three: Social Science Research in Nepal: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow
(Wednesday, March 7, 2007)
Dr. Homburg attended the public session organized by DSN at Public Information Center
(PIC) at Heritage Plaza, the World Bank Venue, Kathmandu from 1.00 to 2.30 pm and then
attended the session as commentator.
Prof. Aditya delivering his points, the Nepal Federation of Participants are observing the presentation of Prof. Aditya.
the Disabled, Mr. Birendra R. Pokharel with visual disability There are significant numbers of lady participants including
on his left from facilitators group
Prof. Aditya started the session with the mapping of issues of social science research. He
pointed out that prior to 1950s there was a trichotomy in the disciplines of study in the
university: Social Science, Management and Science and Technology. Science was
considered as no man’s land and there was a craze for technology. He also reflected on some
limitations such as lack of interest, linguistic problem and dearth of ideas.
With these observations, Prof. Aditya went on to highlight the factors that promote social
science research. He outlined four major factors with the help of anecdotal examples drawn
from his own life experiences. The areas of discussion covered the following:
a. Objectivity skills (truth-seeking behavior) include empiricism and precision. Empiricism
involves testing subjectivity into objectivity and precision refers to making exact
observations to draw a conclusion.
b. Personal traits (structural elements-3i-tech) include integrity (accountability, ethics, bias),
independence, inquisitiveness (skepticism), tenacity (drive), empathy trust, social capital,
commitment and humility vs. hubris.
c. Individual faculties (4-i skills) comprise of imagination, initiative (risk, entrepreneurship),
innovation and insight (intuition)
d. Systemic features probe into security (peace, stability, rule of law), openness
(transparency), communication, interaction, freedom (individual dignity: Khurana, Abdul
Salaam), information (basics, methodology: tools and techniques), research regime,
academic governance and study culture.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 11
He assigned some important tasks, explaining the need to review readings supplied to them
and to link the issue with the methods learned in the course of knowledge development. Dr.
Andreas Homburg appreciated the Nepali core team members' efforts and said it was an
opportunity for his learning as well. Lastly, the coordinator circulated some important notices
and the form to develop a profile.
10. Session Four: Collecting verbal data, theoretical (Thursday, March 8, 2007)
Dr. Gautam welcomed all the participants, introduced the external resource person Dr.
Rajendra Kumar B.C., Chief Researcher, Nepal Health Research Council and invited Dr.
Homburg to start the workshop session. The session began with Dr. Homburg's theoretical
lecture on collecting verbal data and focused on qualitative interview stressing on both open-
ended and closed questions.
He discussed general aspects of widely used qualitative interviews and pointed out the need
to gain knowledge on research area, subjective perspective, biography and interpretative
sociology for preparation of standardized data collection interviews. Different forms of
questionnaires like standardized vs. non-standardized, specific vs. broad, narrative vs.
answering questions could be used. The interviews could be of different types like dilemma-
interviews or clinical interviews besides the ones shown in the table below.
Table 3: Interview Approaches
Semi-
Focused Problem-centered
Criteria standardized Expert Interview
Interview Interview
Interview
Openness to the • Non-direction • Open questions • Object and process • Limited because
interviewee’s by unstructured orientation only interested in
subjective view questions • Room for the expert, not the
by: narratives person
• Giving a • Hypothesis- • Interview guide as • Interview guide
stimulus; directed basis for turns and as instrument for
Structuring (e.g.,
• Structured questions; ending structuring
deepening) the
questions; • Confrontational unproductive
issue
• Focusing on questions presentations
feelings
• Analysis of • Reconstruction • Socially or • Expert
Domain of subjective of subjective biographically knowledge in
application meaning theories relevant problems institutions
Dr. Homburg then stepped into problem-centered interviews and highlighted the basic ideas
as follows:-
1. Problem-centered orientation towards socially relevant problems with the processes of
cognition and learning prior to interpretation of the collected data.
2. Object-orientation emphasizes methodical flexibility in the face of different necessities of
the objects being observed.
3. Process orientation is maintained throughout the course of research which is reasonably
and acceptably focused on the reconstruction of orientations and actions; the interviewees
respond with trust and thus open up.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 12
Dr. Homburg then focused on the communication tools that need to be developed to handle
the interview situation. The instruments used for such an interview are (i) short
questionnaires, (ii) interviewing guidelines, (iii) tape recordings of the discussion and (iv)
postscript. Generally, for qualitative interviews, interview guideline should reinforce the
interviewer’s memory on the topics of research, provide a framework of orientation to ensure
comparability of interviews, lead questions into individual topics to start discussion, and
supervise how individual elements are worked out in the course of discussion. If an
interviewer intends to record an interview, prior consent of the interviewee is required.
Recording allows for authentic and precise record of communication process, the interviewer
is able to concentrate on discussions and to observe situation-related conditions and
nonverbal expressions. One of the important instruments would be to use postscripts, that is,
to note down some of the important things and reconfirm from the interview. Postscripts
would entail an outline of the topics discussed; comments on situational and nonverbal
aspects as well as on the interviewee’s own foci, spontaneous noteworthy remarks on the
topic and ideas for interpretation, and to create content-related criteria for the selection of
additional cases.
The participants are actively involved in informal networking. Senior faculty member of Tribhuvan University Dr. Prem Sharma
They share ideas with the resource person before and after the (center) attends the session as a participant and shares different
session. issues with Dr. Homburg
Dr. Homburg lastly followed some participative approach of delivery and summarized the
session. External resource person Dr. Rajendra Kumar B.C. appreciated the approach of the
principal resource person and congratulated the participants. The coordinator made the
primary findings of the feedback survey and expressed thanks to the participants for
providing feedback and support.
11. Session Five: Collecting verbal data, practical (Friday, March 9, 2007)
Dr. Gautam welcomed all the participants, presented a brief summary of earlier sessions, and
introduced external resource person Dr. Chitra B. Budhathoki, Qualitative Research
Consultant, Nepal Health Research Council and shared his expectations with the organizing
team. Then he invited Dr. Homburg to start the workshop session.
Dr. Homburg focused on developing communication tools for interviews. He stressed on the
communication strategies, which generate story-telling on the part of the interviewee, aiming
to generate comprehension on the specific issues or situations.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 13
Participants in group work: They are preparing interview Researcher group (including people with disabilities):
guidelines in Nepali context members are busy in group discussion inside the program hall
He further explained the communication strategies that generate story-telling. As presented
by him, the communication process would involve the following:
1. Pre-formulated introductory question: Focus discussion on the problem under
study, broadly formulate that it functions like an empty page, which is filled out by
the interviewee in his or her own words.
2. General exploration discloses the subject’s view of the problem (principle of
openness or induction).
3. Ad-hoc questions if certain topics are left out by the interviewees.
The strategies aimed at generating comprehension would involve the following:
1. Specific explorations: The interviewer uses the previously acquired knowledge to
develop questions (e.g. discursive validation).
2. Confrontations can promote further detailing of the respondents’ views and trust.
Change from generate story-telling to questions which generate understanding.
• The interviewer promotes narration through queries, which generate story-telling
and waits until individual statements fit into a pattern.
• Inversely, new patterns of understanding can develop with the different questioning
techniques for generating understanding or the former patterns can be corrected (or
controlled) through later details by the interviewee.
Following the tea break, participants were divided into four groups to apply theoretical
knowledge. Dr. Homburg continued his lecture on the step-by-step interview process as
follow:
a. Development of the research-questions: The questions should be clear and unambiguous;
revision should be made if they are too broad. However, too narrow areas of investigation
might miss the target of investigation
b. Transfer into interview-guide-questions: Types of topics in questions may relate to
behaviors - what a person has done or is doing; opinions/values - what a person thinks
about the topic; feelings - what he feels rather than what he thinks; knowledge - get facts
about the topic; sensory - what people have seen, touched, heard, tasted or smelled;
background/demographics - standard background questions such as age and education.
c. Design of the interview-guide: Briefing, warm up questions, development/narratives and
close the situation
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 14
d. Test of the interview-guide: The interview-guide has to be tested based on the available
time, required message/information, its acceptance to the participants, concentration on
the situation or issue, focus on the problems and the amount of data required
e. Interview-training: Qualification criteria for the interviewer to prepare for interview-
training include knowledgeable - being familiar with the topic; structuring - outline
procedure of the interview; clear - simple, easy and short questions which are spoken
distinctly and understandably; gentle - being tolerant, sensitive and patient to provocative
and unconventional opinions; and steering - to control the course of interview to avoid
digressions from the topic.
f. Update of the interview-guide
g. Final Version (Print out)
h. Preparation for Interview: Find and inform participants; choose a setting with the least
distraction; explain the purpose of the interview; address the topic of confidentiality;
explain format of the interview; indicate how long the interview usually takes; provide
contact information of the interviewer; allow interviewee to clarify any doubts about the
interview; and prepare a method for recording data, e.g., take notes.
i. Successful interviewing: Include productive atmosphere; few suggestive questions; few
evaluative statements, patience in listening; picking up stimuli for supplementary
questions; and flexibility in dealing with the interview-guide (this might be difficult!)
j. Postscript: Verify if the tape recorder worked, test quality of sound, and write down
observations made during the interview.
Finally, Dr. Homburg summarized the session, issued metacards to the participants and
collected feedback. Thereafter, external resource person Dr. Chitra B. Budhathoki shared his
opinion for a few minutes. He emphasized on the contextualizing qualitative research
approaches in the Nepali context and the need to learn newly developed methods from
foreign communities. He appreciated the efforts of the principal resource person and the
organizer.
12. Session Six: Contextualizing theories in Nepali context (Sunday, March 11, 2007)
The coordinator welcomed the participants and introduced external resource person Mr.
Ashok Ratna Tuladhar, Mr. Dhakal and Prof. Dahal. Mr. Dhakal and Prof. Dahal presented
the issues in the Nepali context and stressed upon relevance of the workshop to focus on the
issues currently faced by the country.
Mr. Dhakal pointed out that qualitative research is a tool used for creating, mapping and
disseminating knowledge. He used the management game (assembling different parts of a
rooster into a frame) and simulation technique to highlight what qualitative research is about.
When a certain quantitative phenomenon fails to describe a certain situation or when a
question rises as to why certain things happen, qualitative research gets activated. His
presentation was more focused on learning situations. He identified a learning situation as
either experimental which uses trial and error method or observational which uses minute
observations. The benefit of experimental learning situation is that the researcher is the
inventor of a theory or knowledge but might be extremely time consuming and risky. On the
other hand, an observational learning situation leads to a fast and safe learning but the
researcher only becomes a follower of the knowledge created earlier by someone else.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 15
After demonstrating the simulating management game, Mr. Dhakal highlighted the methods
and phases of observational learning situations. The phases of mapping of learning situations
reflected through the game were: attention, retention, reproduction, and motivation. It was
demonstrated that attention requires concentration, retention requires situational
reinforcements, reproduction requires simulation and on-the-job training and finally,
motivation requires recognition and reward.
Core team member and secretary of NEGAAS, Mr. Dhakal is Prof. Dahal (right) contextualizing social theories in Nepal’s
busy demonstrating a creative "learning game" context with external resource person Dr. Budadhoki (left)
The second part of the session was conducted by Prof. Dahal. He highlighted on the captive
minds of researchers and policy makers in the developing countries and touched the burning
issues that the government is trying to deal with when the country is going through a political
transition after a decade of bloody conflict.
His discussion was centered around the concept, nature and implications of contemporary
social movements in general, and in Nepal especially focusing on women, dalits and trade
unions, assuming that the movements of these forces are coming into sharper discourse and
shaping the political dynamics of social change. As it is very difficult to capture and generalize
various types of social movements organised by human rights, ecological and ethnic issues,
janajati and nationalities, religious and regional groupings, only a few which are constantly
struggling to establish right order in society were discussed. Not all of them, however, can be
said to be democratic in their aims because some of them link modern politics to the evidence
of history, psychology and anthropology. Especially, the proliferation of clan and lineage-based
pre-modern associations of solidarity among the high caste Brahmins, Chhetris and Newars and
ethnic Magars, Rais, Limbus and Thakalis are being redefined and strengthened in the modern
Nepali context. Nepal is a country of minorities with no ethnic group making up more than 18
percent of population. The Aadibasi or indigenous people's movement also draws attention to
the misery and destruction of ecology and culture and, consequently, evokes anti-modern,
ethnocentric reactions. Many of the groups are struggling to sustain their physical, economic
and cultural survival.
The state, the market and civil society of Nepal are dependent on international regimes for their
survival and development. This post-national constellation has effectively disconnected the
constructive "assemblage of political and legal systems, economic cycles and national
traditions within the borders of a territorial state" (Habermas, 2003:89). New social movement
theorists believe that power is not inherently rooted in governmental authority but in the ability
of people to acquire it by effective resistance. The increasing denationalisation of the state and
the market forces, and growing de-territorialisation of decision-making continue to
denationalise social movements pushing them towards acculturation to global culture. If this
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 16
process continues it will produce a "failed culture" where natives will not have any will,
beyond the accumulation of money, to live together in the nation-state (Falk, 1996:32).
In fact, there are deep stirrings at the grassroots, the upsurge of previously marginalized and
excluded section of people, generating real hopes for the regeneration of democratic politics
which is also capable of stimulating social transformation. Inspired by the highest level of
consciousness, the new social movements reflect a horizontal series of groups struggling
against penetration, fragmentation, exclusion and atomisation of society. Based on the ideology
of democratic pluralism these groups are socialising, mobilising and politicising people's
identities, activities and relations and are seeking to cast vertically integrated Hindu-Buddhist
caste society into a new form.
Located within civil society they are trying to enlarge the space of politics beyond the activities
of parliament, political parties, interest groups, bureaucracy and elites. The new social
movements in Nepal have made the majority of dominant political party powerless to act
arbitrarily. Some social movements, especially conducted by ethnic and regional groups,
defend the proportionality of representation in power while others, for example, bonded labour
and dalits, seek liberation from unwritten transcripts of society that governs their life. Under
post-modern conditions, politics is neither confined to the domain of the state, nor is the
citizenship confined to the bounded territory called the state. Multiple memberships of citizens
define the politics of their liberation, entitlements, life and choice.
Their ultimate success is proportionate to their power of movement, integration, collective goal
orientation, and adequate incentives for the participants, leadership quality and the ability to
absorb continuously changing aspirations of the younger generations. The best way to repair
Nepali democracy is to revitalize multiple social movements and energize their collective
action.
External resource person Mr. Ashok Ratna Tuladhar expressed happiness in getting an
opportunity to listen and present his observations as an external resource person. He
appreciated the knowledge workers who encourage the researchers to go into the required
areas of research to develop the nation. At the end, the coordinator of the program justified
the Nepali core team's presentation in identifying research issues.
10. Session Seven: Collecting verbal data, practical (Monday, March 12, 2007)
The program coordinator welcomed external resource person Prof. Basudev Kafle and briefly
explained the ongoing system and past sessions. Then, Dr. Homburg started the workshop
session. He focused on interview training and asked the participants to be in groups formed
on the previous day. Each group consisted of four persons, and each member played a
different role: interviewer, interviewee, documentator and observer. Before the actual
interview, the group worked on the following steps with proper timekeeping.
• Developing a simple research questionnaire [10 min]
• Transferring into interview-guide with a few questions [15 min]
• Designing a short interview-guide [20 min]
• Conducting an interview (clear roles of group members)[15 min]
• Providing feedback, reflection [15 min]
1. Interviewee, 2.Interviewer, 3.Documentator 4.Observer
What was positive? x x x x
What can be improved? x x x x
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 17
• Updating the interview-guide [15 min]
• Discussing the experiences (Plenum) [20 min]
After the practical exercise, the documenters made brief presentations, which reflected that
the participants were familiar with the situation and context of the interview. The exercise
also reflected that the participants were competent and consensus is necessary. A synopsis of
the whole exercise is given below:
Principal resource person Dr. Homburg (right) busy in group Prof. Basudev Kafle (Ph.D. in special education) is busy in
formation and animation discussing as an external resource person of the session
The coordinator Dr. Gautam briefed the participants about the symposium to be held on
March 23, 2007 and requested all the participants to provide support and to play active role.
External resource person Prof. Kafle expressed happiness to get such an opportunity and
provided important feedback to the organizer. Lastly, the principal resource person shared his
views and concluded the session.
13. Session Eight: Documentation and analysis of verbal data (Tuesday, March 13, 2007)
Program coordinator Dr. Gautam welcomed all the participants and introduced the external
resource person Prof. Damodar P. Gautam from Transparency International Nepal and Dr.
Shyam Prasad Lohani, Program Director, Hope International College. Program Coordinator
briefly presented the past developments and requested Dr. Homburg to continue the session.
Dr. Homburg started the session formally with a reflection of the previous day’s work “verbal
data collection technique” and suggested the group representatives to present their three
wishes. He also requested them to make both hard and soft copies available to the organizers.
Then, Dr. Homburg continued with the topic “documentation of data” for the day. He
highlighted on the means essential for data collection during interview like recording, field
notes, research diary, documentation sheets and transcription. He also drew attention of the
participants to the issues or problems that are frequently encountered during interview and
data collection.
In the documentation process, Dr. Homburg pointed out that transcription is very important
and one needs to be even more careful when multiple languages are involved. He stressed
that transcribing total content of the recording would be necessary, but cautioned that
translation into other languages may distort actual meaning of the data due to subjectivity and
vocabulary problems.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 18
Dr. Homburg highlighted on the qualitative content analysis of the text. He stressed on the
importance of coding, categorization, and analysis of content in qualitative research.
Table 4: Content Analysis Approaches
Conversation and Discourse Analysis Narrative and Hermeneutic Analysis
Criteria Conversation Discourse Narrative Objective
Analysis Analysis Analysis Hermeneutics
• Sequential • Reconstructing • Sequential • Sequential analysis of
Openness to analysis of the participants’ analysis of the the case
each text “talk-in versions case
interaction”
• Comparative • Integration of • Assessing formal • Group of interpreters
Structuring
analysis of a other forms of qualities of the • Consulting context
(e.g.,
collection of texts text (narrative • Falsification of
deepening)
cases versus hypotheses against
the issue
argumentative) the text
• Formal analysis • Analysis of the • Biographical • All sorts of texts and
Domain of of everyday and contents of research images
application institutional talk everyday and
other
discourses
He highlighted on some important aspects of content analysis in communication science and
focused on qualitative/interpretative steps of analysis. The object of qualitative content
analysis can be all kinds of recorded communication such as transcripts of interviews,
discourses, protocols of observations, video tapes, documents (reports etc.). Content analysis
analyzes: manifest content (primary content); context information as latent content; and
formal aspects of the materials that belong to its aims. Qualitative content analysis is
empirical, methodologically controlled analysis of texts within their context of
communication, following content analysis rules and step-by-step models, without rash
quantification.
The historical aspect of content analysis was discussed as mentioned below:
• Precursors: Comparison of texts in hermeneutic contexts (e.g. bible interpretations), early
newspaper analyses, graphological procedures, dream analysis by Sigmund Freud.
• Communication theoretical foundation: The basis of quantitative content analysis was
laid by Paul F. Lazarsfeld and Harold D. Lasswell in USA during the 20s and 30s of the
20th century.
• Interdisciplinary broadening and differentiation: In the sixties of the 20th century, the
methodological approach found its way into linguistics, psychological sociology, history,
arts, and others.
• Phase of qualitative critics: Working with simplifying and distorting quantification.
Content analysis developed with the rise of qualitative approaches.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 19
Participants busy in group work. Many of the participants also DSN (event managing organization) board members and
played one day rapporteur's role during the workshop period executives including CEO (coordinator)
Dr. Homburg presented basic ideas of content analysis as per the following four major
components.
• Determine on what part of the communication inferences shall be made concerning
aspects of the communicator (his experiences, opinions feelings), the situation of text
production, the socio-cultural background, and the text itself or the effect of the message.
• Rules of analysis: The material is to be analyzed step-by-step, following the rules of
procedure and devising the material into content analysis units.
• Categories in the center of analysis: The aspects of text interpretation, following the
research questions, are set into categories, which were carefully devised and revised within
the process of analysis (feedback loops).
• Criteria of reliability and validity: Inter-subjectively comprehensible, compare the
results with other studies (triangulation), check for reliability.
He presented analytical procedures by explaining on the following points briefly:
• Summary: to reduce the material in such a way as to preserve essential content.
Abstraction creates a manageable corpus that reflects original material in content analysis.
Therefore, the text is paraphrased, generalized or abstracted, and reduced.
• Explication: Involves explaining, clarifying and annotating the material. As a first step, a
lexico-grammatical definition is attempted, then the material for explication is determined,
and this is followed by a narrow context analysis, and a broad context analysis. Finally, an
"explicatory paraphrase" is made of the particular portion of the text and the explication is
examined with reference to the total context.
• Structuring: Corresponds more or less to the procedures used in classical content analysis
and is also viewed as the most crucial technique of content analysis, the goal of which is to
filter out a particular structure from the material. Here the text can be structured according
to content, form, types and scaling. The first stage is determination of the units of analysis,
after which dimensions of the structuring are established on some theoretical basis and
then features of the system of categories are fixed. Subsequently, definitions are
formulated and key examples with rules for coding in separate categories are agreed upon.
In the course of first appraisal of the material, the data locations are marked, and in second
scrutiny, these are processed and extracted. If necessary, the system of categories is re-
examined and revised, this necessitates re-appraisal of the material. The results are
processed in final stage.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 20
14. Session Nine: Experimenting with ideas (Wednesday, March 14, 2007)
The program coordinator Dr Gautam briefly explained about the earlier sessions, welcomed
the participants and introduced the external resource person for the day Dr. Bhoj Raj Aryal,
Central Department of Management, Tribhuvan University (TU). Prof. Aditya chaired the
session and Dr. Homburg played the role of special commentator for the session. There were
two resource persons from the Nepali core team, namely Prof. Regmee and Dr. Gautam, the
program coordinator.
Prof. Regmee encouraged the participants to review the ongoing social situation by reading
public writings. He focused a lot on experimenting with ideas while contextualizing a theory
in the Nepalese context. And he highlighted on six research problems that are demeaned and
unnoticed but the society has suffered a lot. He illustrated some of the issues that can be
explored as follows:
• Problem 1: Consequences of using mobile phones and trends of SMS language
• Problem 2: Reliability and accessibility of health services of Kathmandu
• Problem 3: Gender equality and violence at homes/teenage behavior
• Problem 4: Consequences of foreign employment
• Problem 5: Tiffin habit and noodles (oodles of noodles)
• Problem 6: Multi-university system and dilemma of higher education
However, Prof. Regmee admitted that most of the researchers are donor driven. As a result,
the outputs that come out do not properly address the needs of Nepalese society but the needs
of the donors. He believes that such tendency to ignore research findings or lack of
contextualizing the research outcomes has led to ineffective policy making and a government
without governance.
During the presentation, Prof. Regmee introduced some newly coined vocabulary in
qualitative research like research grammar and forming–framing–farming of ideas for
research. The tactical and practical illustrations that reflected his perpetual endeavors for
research contented participants’ queries about research fundamentals.
He summed up by advocating the role of social science research in policy formulation and
social service. He pointed out that qualitative research in social sciences must not only
penetrate into the problems faced by the citizens but also sensitize the policy makers and hold
them responsible for implementation to improve quality of life of its fellow citizens.
Dr. Gautam, the program coordinator, conducted the second part the session. His area of
discussion was Social Representation as a tool to test research theories in Nepal. He
presented the findings of his own research works from "social representation of
organizational commitment in Nepal". He focused on the types of commitment, content
analysis and knowledge advocacy that qualitative researchers in social sciences need to have
to be able to make a concrete contribution in bringing about social changes through
organizational commitment.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 21
The floor was open after the presentation. Many participants shared their ideas and raised
many issues to the plenary team comprised of Dr. Homburg, Prof. Aditya, Dr. Aryal, Dr.
Gautam, and Prof. Regmee. All of the resource persons took part in discussions with the
participants. Finally, Dr. Gautam summarized the session, assigned some works and
requested the external resource person to present his observation.
DSN board members and chairperson Mr. Sanjay Dhital at the Participants in tea break outside the program hall
center with other members
Dr. Bhoj Raj Aryal presented his ideas with comments. He appreciated the role of the
presenters and expressed his best wishes for success of the program. Prof. Aditya summed up
the session for the day with his commitment to contribute.
15. Session Ten: Data-analysis/verbal data, practical (Thursday, March 15, 2007)
The program coordinator welcomed the principal resource person, moderator, and the
external resource person after summarizing previous sessions. Prof. Damodar Gyawali from
Tribhuvan University and Mr. Upendra Phuyal from Dynamic Society Nepal participated as
the commentators for the session and principal resource person Dr. Homburg steered the
session.
Dr. Homburg linked the session with the earlier presentation and explained that though there
are numbers of procedures of qualitative content analysis amongst which two approaches are
central: inductive category development and deductive category application. He briefly
discussed basic ideas, history and analytical procedure of qualitative content analysis. He
emphasized on distinct analytical procedures: summary, explication and structuring, which
may be carried out independently or in combination, depending on particular research
question. He also pointed out limited appropriateness of qualitative content analysis,
particularly when the research question is highly open-ended with the possibility of a
combination of qualitative content analysis and other qualitative procedures.
Inductive category development: Qualitative content analysis has developed procedures of
inductive category development, which are oriented towards the reductive processes
formulated within the psychology of text processing.
Deductive category application: This works with prior formulated, theoretically derived
aspects of analysis, bringing them into connection with the text. The qualitative step of
analysis consists in a methodologically controlled assignment of the category to a passage of
text.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 22
He discussed the step model of qualitative content analysis of both inductive and deductive
approaches, which include research question, theoretical link, coding and rules for categories,
revision of coding agenda–reliability check, summative check, analysis, and interpretation.
Then, he gave some short examples of conflict based on research projects working with the
above explicated procedures: human versus nature, human versus human, human versus
human and nature, and focus on causes and consequences.
Dr. Homburg presented the summary, involved all the participants into the discussion. He
inquired about examples and issues from the participants’ side and checked their level of
confidence to conduct such research in future. Thereafter, the external resource person Prof.
Gautam and Dr. Lohani shared their views.
Participant sharing his views, others listening including Ms. Dr. Gautam, program coordinator sharing his views with the
Laxmi Tamang, member of facilitator team (second from right) participants and resource persons about the symposium
Dr. Lohani shared his experiences outlining some additional information and tips during data
generation to make the content more reliable. Prof. Gautam, former ambassador to USA and
Chairperson of Transparency International shared his experience and made necessary
comments on qualitative inquiry. While sharing his experiences, Prof. Gautam stressed on
one of the important aspects that interviewers should be able to motivate the interviewees to
share their information and feelings so that the objective of the interview can be achieved to
answer the research question. He also stressed on the importance of the interviewers’ self
presentation, to identify with the interviewees (both literate and illiterate) to get expected
result for research. Dr. Homburg closed the session with a vote of thanks.
16. Session Eleven: Data collection/Visual data and Quality management
(Friday, March 16, 2007)
The coordinator briefly presented the earlier sessions before introducing external observer Dr.
Krishna B. Bhattachan, Central Department of Sociology and Anthropology, TU. The
principal resource person Dr. Homburg focused upon visual data collection and discussed
quality management. He highlighted methods of collecting multi-focus visual data with some
examples of participant observation and non-participant observation. He also explained the
criteria, comparing use of different modes of analysis.
Dr. Homburg discussed on non-participant and participant observation. The researcher’s roles
in a non-participant observation could be range from full participation to just an observer. It
has different phases like selection of setting, defining what is to be documented (guide),
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 23
training of the observer, providing general presentation of the field, focusing on relevant
things and data-analysis.
He explained the reasons for using participant observation in qualitative research. These
include to identify and guide relationships with informants; help the researcher to get the
feeling as to how things are organized and prioritized, how people interrelate and what are the
cultural parameters; show the researcher what the cultural members deem to be important
manners leadership, politics, social interaction, and taboos; help the researcher become
known to the cultural members, thereby facilitating of the research process; and provide the
researcher with a source of questions to be addressed with participants. Further, he
highlighted that the phases of participant observation include access, utilizing flexibility and
field notes. However, the data-quality depends on subjective adequacy on time, place, social
circumstances, language, intimacy and social consensus of the context. He explained the
concept based on the following tabular presentation.
Table 5: Comparison of Methods for Collecting Multi-focus Data
No participant Participant
Criteria Ethnography
Observation Observation
Openness to the • Integration of • Integration of • Linking observation
participants’ subjective interviews interviews and interviewing
view • Empathy through • Mostly open
participation observation
Openness to the • Not influencing the • Distance despite • Participation in the
process of actions and observed field participation life world which is
interactions observed
Visual Data Methods
Criteria Use of photos Film Analysis Video Analysis
Openness to the • Subject as • Subversive • Asking the
participants’ subjective photographer • Interpretations focus participant to do
views one protagonist’s video recording
perspective
Openness to the • Documentation in • Analysis of stories • Comprehensive
process of actions photo series and processes in documentation of
and interactions films context
Mediated Data
Criteria Using Documents
Openness to the participants’ subjective view • Taking the context of the document into
account (who produced it for which purpose?)
Openness to the process of actions and • Using records of processes produced for
interactions • everyday purposes
The program coordinator requested the external observer Dr. Bhattachan to make necessary
comment on the content and style of presentation. He suggested a more participative
approach to teaching learning system and showed the limitations of conventional lecture
method. He emphasized on modern simulation methods of teaching and learning that should
be used.
17. Session Twelve: The Fourth 'R' in development: Problems in practice
(Sunday, March 18, 2007)
The program coordinator introduced external resource persons Dr. Bihari Binod Pokhrel,
Head of Research Department Nepal Commerce Campus and Dr. Karna Bahadur Thapa,
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 24
former Major in Nepal Army, security expert and researcher. He linked the session with the
earlier ones focusing on the need of issues so that researchers can do qualitative research in
future. Senior participant Mr. Madhav Aryal expressed hearty thanks to program moderator
Prof. Aditya for inviting participants to the national symposium. The session was specially
designed for Prof. Aditya to precede his presentation. The focus of his presentation was
basically two folds: understanding the research culture, and comprehend pattern analysis in
qualitative approach.
Prof. Aditya's presentation was participatory in nature. He explained the issues focusing on
critical mass triangle in social science research, which include research regime, academic
governance and study culture that provide the base and contribute to overall growth,
democratization and development of the nation. He explained that the inner triangle (see
Figure 1) is a subset of the outer triangle. The term research regime refers to the rules,
traditions and habits developed in the course of research work. Study culture is a function of
academic governance because academic governance defines and shapes up study culture.
Academic governance also determines the nature of political governance. All of these
together influence growth, democratization and development.
In the second part of the session, Prof. Aditya
explained how to study the pattern of data set
to analyze a situation. He used different
patterns of human development index for the
years between 1960 and 1992 and highlighted
the importance of pattern analysis in research
methodology. He asked participants to observe
the patterns in the Human Development Index
graph for the past 32-year period. Following
the exercise, Prof. Aditya pointed out that the
data alone presented in the table do not give an
idea of the shape of the curve, symmetry,
clusters, and the shifts from the line of parity.
Figure: 1: Research culture
The second half of the session was devoted to see global shift of paradigms in research, the
changes taking place in the contemporary society, social sciences, and qualitative research.
These are presented below in the following table:
Principal resource person Dr. Homburg and coordinator Dr. Dr. Homburg sitting with the participants; listening the
Gautam engaging in facilitation during the session delivery of Prof. Aditya and making necessary comments
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 25
Table-6: Transition of paradigms
SHIFT FROM TOWARD
State as prime actor Individual citizens, groups, and communities
Army People as a whole
Militarization Civic Education (Peace and Development)
Territorial Security and Sovereignty Livelihood and Environmental reform
Power, Force (Protection function) Welfare
Bilateralism Multilateralism
Center/Capital (Core) Remote Areas
Leadership, Power Elite Mass Public
Paternalistic Mobilization Participation
Parochialism Universalism
Centralism Localism
Majoritarianism Pluralism, PR, consociationalism
Oligarchy/Hegemony/Dominance Broader ownership
Clandestine transactions Transparency
Arbitrariness, personalismo Accountability
Nationalism Regionalism, globalism
Large States (Fusion) Small States (Fission)
Stability (Law and Order) Development
A World of States A World of Societies
After the presentation of Prof. Aditya, the coordinator requested the external observers to
present their comments and suggestions. Dr. Pokhrel congratulated them for initiatives from
NEGAAS and DSN. He presented the need of qualitative inquiry in knowledge development.
Dr. Karna Bahadur Thapa commented on the workshop as an important step towards research
in social sciences. The participants were impressed by the experiences of Dr. Thapa due to
his involvement in qualitative research in national security. While sharing his experience with
qualitative research, he focused on the intangible aspects of the data relating to phenomena to
which the researcher needs to be sensitive. He concluded his comments with an important
lesson for the qualitative researchers that one cannot be quasi-strategist working with
outdated wisdom. Then moderator and resource person for the day Prof. Aditya concluded
the session.
18. Session Thirteen: Special applications-I: Evaluation (Monday, March 19)
Program coordinator Dr. Gautam welcomed the participants and introduced the external
resource person as observer Prof. Devendra Bahadur Chhettri, Head of the Department of
Statistics, TU. He recalled the previous day’s session and requested Dr. Homburg to take
over the session. It was planned for understanding evaluation, forms of evaluation and their
examples, evaluation guideline and finally a checklist for evaluation.
Dr. Homburg started the session elaborating the meaning of evaluation as “The discipline
devoted to systematic determination of merit, worth, or significance". He explained that
evaluation could be classified according to the type of entity to be evaluated – for example,
program evaluation, or personnel evaluation. Further, he elucidated that there are more than
twenty recognized fields of evaluation. However, the funding agencies assigning the
contracts for evaluation not only want to identify what is happening but also find out
precisely what contribute the outcomes so that necessary intervention can be formulated and
explored in a better way to achieve the project goals. The methods used to evaluate an
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 26
intervention must be appropriate based on professional and ethical standards. Moreover, he
discussed on two forms of evaluation: formative and summative approach, which is presented
in the following table:
Table 7: Evaluation approaches
Formative Evaluation Summative Evaluation
• Conducts during the development or • Provides information on the product's
improvement of a program or product (or efficacy (its ability to do what it was designed
person, and other). Intent to improve. to do).
Dr. Homburg explained that the aim of formative evaluation is to develop a strategy fostering
community actions toward climate protection. It involves three successive steps: formulating
a primary version, application of the assumptions within the framework of a case study and
reformulation of the strategy in the light of empirical data. Summative evaluation is the
outcome that is oriented to enhance efficiency of the system.
The discussion then shifted to qualitative and quantitative evaluation. The evaluation can be
made through various approaches such as interviews, observations, and documentations.
These were discussed by Dr. Homburg as follows:
Interviews: Open-ended questions should yield in-depth responses about people's
experiences, perceptions, opinions, feelings, and knowledge. Data should consist of verbatim
quotations with sufficient context to be interpretable.
Observations: Fieldwork descriptions of activities, behaviors, actions, conversations,
interpersonal interactions, organizational or community processes, or any other aspect of
observable human experience. Data should consist of field notes with rich, detailed
descriptions, including the context within which observations were made.
Documents: Written material and other documents from organizational, clinical, or program
records; memoranda and correspondence; official publications and reports; personal diaries,
letters, artistic works, photographs, and memorabilia; and written responses to open-ended
surveys. Data should consist of excerpts from documents captured in a way that records and
preserves the context.
He further stressed on three central aspects of questions to be considered while evaluating.
These are a) outcomes related, b) process related, and c) criteria related. He explained these
issues in the following tabular form:
Table 8: Questions to be considered while evaluating
• What are the desired outcomes of the program?
Outcomes should be consistent with what could
What are the goals? What are we trying to
reasonably be accomplished and not overly
accomplish within the next month/quarter/
idealistic.
year(s)?
The activities are the interventions that the
• How will we get there? What activities will
program will provide in order to bring about
enable us to reach our outcomes?
intended outcomes.
Process and outcome indicators act as gauge;
• Which criteria will show to us that we are
whether and to what degree the program is
making progress towards the desired outcomes?
making progress.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 27
Dr. Homburg presented some of the questions framed by the participants for ‘formative’
evaluation as examples. They are as follows:
• Are audio-visual aids used in the workshop adequate? Which additional equipments are
required for improvement?
• How could we conduct a workshop in a better way?
• Is the location of the workshop appropriate?
A few questions framed by the participants for ‘summative’ evaluation were as follows:
• Do you think workshop improves your knowledge?
• Did the workshop meet expectation of the participants?
While evaluating a qualitative research, researchers can use checklist. He discussed mainly
about the ‘qualitative evaluation checklist’ during the second half of the workshop. He
highlighted different approaches and the important issues that are mentioned in the checklist.
He also requested the participants to visit the website: www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists for
the further information.
External resource person and observer Prof. Devendra B. Chhettri, Core team member and senior journalist Prof. Regmee sharing
Head of the Department of Statistics, TU making comments his ideas
At the end, observer of the session Prof. Chhettri made rich comments and the coordinator
Dr. Gautam concluded the session with some administrative information.
19. Session Fourteen: Designing your own research: Special applications-II
(Tuesday, March 20, 2007)
This was the concluding session of workshop. The event management team representative
and facilitator Mr. Dhan Raj Chalise welcomed the external resource person Dr. Damodar
Gyawali, Associate Professor, TU and requested the principal resource person to proceed his
session. In the second part of the workshop, coordinator Dr. Gautam and the principal
resource person Dr. Homburg joined in the interactive discussions with the participants for
their research career counseling.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 28
This session almost ended the exercise on knowledge delivery. Dr. Homburg explained the
targeted objectives and integrated all the sessions for the achievement of the objectives. He
motivated all the participants to raise issues as much as possible. All the participants became
active and Dr. Homburg tried to answer them systematically.
After a formal summary of all the workshop sessions, Dr. Homburg along with the
coordinator Dr. Gautam joined in the investigation of designing research for participants. The
participants took an active role and started to share their expectations and strategies to go for
further study and research. The session was very useful because it focused not only on
strategies but also into creative evaluation of research career.
At the end of the session, the participants started asking their questions and became very open
in searching their areas of interest for future research. External resource person formally
made some remarks and positive feedback to the organizer and expressed his happiness in
organizing such program. At the end, the principal resource person listed some important
assignments and the program coordinator issued few important notices for future session and
requirements.
20. Session Fifteen: Planning for symposium and participants' presentations
(Wednesday, March 21, 2007)
It was the public session day at PIC at Heritage Plaza, the World Bank Venue, Kathmandu
organized by DSN. Therefore, all the participants were invited there for the symposium plan.
Nepal German Academic Association executives took part in the joint session of the first shift
(1.00-2.30 PM) where acting chair and general secretary agreed to the modality of
symposium. The coordinator Dr. Gautam presented the plan for symposium and assigned the
role to all the participants of the workshop. The event managing team and the participants
held a joint meeting for 90 minutes at PIC. In this session, few other stakeholders and guests
also participated for planning of the forthcoming symposium.
The role of participants in report preparation, symposium facilitation, facility design,
receiving guests, presentations, etc. were fixed. The core team decided about the formal
session and fixed the number of invitees for the symposium.
After the completion of the public session at PIC, the participants joined in the CDSN
workshop hall at Anamnagar for regular session (3.00 PM to 5.00 PM). The formal
presentation started and some of the participants presented their concepts about their roles in
the symposium. The overall responsibility to coordinate the participants was assigned to a
steering team under the leadership of the coordinator. DAAD fellow members, mainly Mr.
Yuba Raj Bhusal and Mr. Rajesh Joshi, took important roles for the eventful day.
The participants' presentations were interesting where Dr. Basudev Upreti and Mr. Dhruba
Joshi took the role of external resource person cum observer for the session. The coordinator
Dr. Gautam began the session with guidelines for the symposium plan.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 29
External resource person and observer Mr. Dhruba Participants engaged in brainstorming session. Nepal Government
Joshy (left) and Dr. Basudev Upreti (center) discussing Officer Mr. Hira Raj Regmi (left) is sharing ideas
The participants were requested to present their views within a time limit of two minutes.
Peer evaluation system was developed from the pattern analysis concept of Prof. Aditya. The
presentations were appealing and impressive. Some of the participants took part as
commentators, thus, their role was appreciative and significant.
Following the presentations, the participants discussed upon the symposium plan. External
resource persons gave valuable inputs for symposium agenda. Dr. Homburg expressed his
willingness to support the participants only from Germany. He expressed his willingness to
work with DSN and NEGAAS teams in future and he said that he would remain in touch with
all the members via email. The program coordinator announced the concept of self
management team and empowered the workshop participants to manage the symposium by
themselves, and the participants expressed their enthusiasm to shoulder the responsibility.
21. Session Sixteen: Summary (Synthesis of Qualitative-Quantitative Research),
Evaluation and Feedback (Thursday, March 22, 2007)
It was the final workshop day that was designed for summarizing, evaluation, and feedback
of the total workshop package. The event management representative Mr. Dhan Raj Chalise
facilitated the principal resource person Dr. Homburg to begin the session. In the second part
of the workshop, Prof. Shri Prakash, Research Dean, Birla Institute of Management
Technology (BIMTEC), Greater Noida, India attended the session as external resource person
and observer. The aim of the session was to summarize, evaluate, and get feedback from
participants.
A combination of qualitative and quantitative research issues were discussed at the beginning
when Dr. Homburg presented alternative models for necessary triangulation of qualitative
and quantitative inquiry as follows:
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 30
Figure 2: Integration of qualitative and quantitative inquiry
1. Combination of qualitative and quantitative research 2. Combination of qualitative and quantitative research
Pre-study Model
Consolidation Model
Qualitative
Qualitative Quantitative Interpretation
Pre-study verifying Quantitative Correlation-
Results Study on a large Results explanation
generating hypotheses
sample Consolidation,
hypotheses
Case studies
Generalization- Model
Triangulation Model
Quantitative
Qualitative Quantitative
Issue oriented Results Generalizations Multi Level Approach Results
descriptive Context Triangulation
study analyses
Mayring, 2001, see also Flick, 2006
Qualitative Mayring, 2001, see also Flick, 2006
Thereafter, some of the basic issues such as process of collecting, preparing and analyzing
data and other design and sample issues were clarified by the principal resource person. In
that context, he explained the designs for a) Case-study, b) Analyzing documents, c)
Qualitative Evaluation, d) Action research, e) Field research, and f) Qualitative experiments.
Furthermore, he presented some pertinent rationales and options for sampling technique in
qualitative inquiry. These include maximum variation, snowball approach/networking,
extreme case, typical case, unique case, ideal case, and negative case.
Finally, he summarized all the earlier sessions followed by description on thirteen basic
characteristics of qualitative research. For instance, single cases; flexible situation; controlled
situation; prior understanding; justified and tested/checked introspection; interactional
process; holistic process; historic process; practical process; reasoned generalization;
inductive methods; context-related rules instead of “general laws”; and meeting the
requirements of reasonable quantifications.
The program coordinator invited the external resource person Prof. Shri Prakash for
necessary comments and suggestions. He focused upon holistic approach of learning and
knowing methodology in a broad base for design and methods as specific tools for research.
He also encouraged all the participants to be true researcher in today's knowledge economy.
At the end, Dr. Gautam disseminated some important information to the participants and
collected overall feedback on the use of qualitative approach. Two important questions were
asked to the participants: i) what are the workshop strengths? ii) what are the major
weaknesses of the workshop?. Opinions received from need assessment exercise, open
feedback, external experts' comments, structured questionnaire, and qualitative inquiry in
metacards and papers were analyzed to derive a meaningful conclusion on contribution of the
workshop, and the feedback for funding agency, resource persons and the organizer for
future.
22. Feedback management
Major sources of feedback information were generated in multiple stages. These include
collected participants’ expectation in the metacards; administered structured questionnaire for
session evaluation; received participants' and external resource persons' feedback and
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 31
suggestions; received written response to qualitative inquiry from the participants; and also
received feedback from the facilitator team.
The daily meetings of the coordinator with the principal resource person in the mornings
from 8.30 to 9.30 am helped a lot to understand the feedback information and to adopt the
best possible strategy for subsequent session. The data and texts were analyzed by using
qualitative methods even though well-structured questionnaires were administered to get the
feedback. The following pattern shows a clear picture of the quantitative data.
Figure 3: Feedback mapping
Layout
Handout Size denotes relative importance
perceived by the participants. The
Delivery Style mean score is the basis of the
Knowledge/content position of circle. Findings are
moderated by the external resource
Managerial persons' feelings as well. Results
Support showed that almost all the factors
Technical Support were rated positively.
Email attachments
Facilitators
Support
Very Slightly Slightly Strongly
Neutral
Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Satisfied
23. Need assessment and perception of participant
A structured checklist was administered in which a few options were given. The findings
showed significant results. Out of the total 30 participants, 24 (80%) expressed that the
research workshop was very important, 4 (13%) important, and 2 (7%) normal. Out of them,
24 participants had involvement in research projects, many of them were Ph.D. scholars or
potential Ph.D. scholars. These participants could be potential researchers in Nepal (see:
Profile presented in the annex). They expressed importance of such training workshops
would help them in their career. They also stressed the importance of qualitative research for
several reasons. First, they perceived that it is required to comprehend deeply rooted unseen
and sensitive issues of the society, to understand its causes and consequences, to develop
theory, to augment knowledge, and to disseminate Nepali field knowledge to the outside
world. Besides the qualitative inquiry using metacards, the facilitators identified the
workshop as imperative by observing the participants' behavior, attendance, and involvement.
All the participants agreed that the program was very useful. They took part actively as the
organizers of the symposium, which was one of the encouraging parts of the workshop.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 32
24. About the Symposium
It was a one-day regional symposium following the three-week-long qualitative research
workshop funded by DAAD. The major agenda of discussion included knowledge building
in the field of social science by using qualitative research and highlighting social concepts
in qualitative research. The program covered discussions on existing situation, exploration
of possibilities, cooperation and collaboration among research communities, and cross-
functional and cross-cultural research works.
Objectives
One of the objectives of the symposium, designed as a forum for interaction on contested
knowledge building process, was fixed as to explore, upgrade, and disseminate understanding
in qualitative research works. Another objective was network building among the knowledge
workers of social science areas.
Methodology
Multiple approaches such as panel discussion, open interaction, brainstorming, and
question-answer sessions were some of the methods that were followed in the program,
which encouraged the emerging researchers to share their experience, disseminate existing
opportunities and provide references to modern tools and techniques in qualitative research
with English as the language for communication.
Participants
A notice was made available via website and official circulation. As a result, only highly
interested research scholars registered for the symposium. A few invitees from the
neighboring countries, research representatives from diplomatic missions, representatives
from bilateral organizations, international non-government organizations, universities, and
research institutes were also the participants of the symposium. Besides, all the workshop
participants acted as associate organizers of the symposium.
Output
The symposium turned out to be a key mega event on the theme of qualitative research in
Nepal. It formed a regional forum to work in the area of qualitative research not only in
Nepal but also in the South Asian region. The presence of some senior researchers from
India and Pakistan in the workshop and symposium was the essence. The sponsored travel
and accommodation arrangements were taken care of by the event managing team of DSN.
The volunteers had contributed a lot too. The symposium disseminated the learning
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 33
experience and reading materials obtained from the principal resource person, core team
members, experiences of a dozen external resource persons and also planned workshop for
future regional forum. The workshop cum symposium reports; participants and core team
members profiles; audio-visuals, and guidelines generated from the three-week workshop
followed by the symposium constitute valuable package as the total output.
25. Start-up of the symposium
The symposium program had an informal beginning. Nevertheless, the acting president of the
program organizer Mr. Rishi Shah chaired the session. UGC member secretary Prof. Vinod
Kumar Shrestha, program moderator Prof. Aditya, principal resource person Dr. Homburg
from Philipps University Marburg Germany, Guest of Honor Indian professor Dr. Shri
Prakash from BIMTEC, and DAAD representative Ms. Sarita Pradhan were invited to the
dais.
Chair of the closing session and acting chairperson of Symposium moderator Dr. Poorna K. Adhikari generating
NEGAAS addressing the participants and distinguished guests ideas and involving the participants in the program
The core team members and special guests were honored and seated in their respective seats.
General Secretary of NEGAAS (the organizer of the event), Mr. Dhakal animated the
informal opening session of the Symposium.
26. Introduction and expectation of the symposium participants
Immediately following the opening ceremony, symposium moderator Dr. Poorna Kanta
Adhikari facilitated the symposium. A brief introduction of all the participants, guests, and
distinguished personalities along with their professional experiences in their field was
presented. All the distinguished personalities at the stage shared their opinion in a few
minutes’ time along with their introduction. Besides, Dr. Adhikari involved all the
participants and guests to note down their expectations for the day. He collected participants’
opinions in metacards by grouping them into small groups. Some of the major ideas
identified in the need assessment session included: a) learning b) sharing, c) network
building, d) career advancement, e) contribution to society etc. Finally, Dr. Adhikari
expressed his commitment to work for the best possible outcome and requested all for their
active participation.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 34
27. Presentation on Learning from the workshop and feedback from the audience
Program coordinator Dr. Gautam along with five participants of the three-week workshop
presented a brief profile of the workshop. DAAD alumni members, especially Mr. Rajesh
Joshi, took very active part in the dissemination of workshop learning. Many participants
took part from the floor to share their feeling about the workshop. In general, participants
expressed their pleasant surprise for the grand success of the program. They were contented
to get the opportunity for learning, wonderful experience on noble ideas, knowledge, and
skills. Dr. Gautam shared that how the project was conceptualized and funded, besides, he
narrated on the ongoing activities, expenses of the program, and the contribution from the
organizer. After a short tea break, the next session of the workshop proceeded.
Principal resource persons, DAAD representative, Guest of Program coordinator Dr. Gautam is presenting summary
honor, Chair of the session, Program moderator and others in profile of three week long workshop
28. Group work
All the guests, participants and facilitators were assigned four areas to work in the group.
First, each individual had to bring his or her idea into his/her note-book. They were divided
into small groups and the members were formally grouped into four segments.
Guest of honor Prof. Shri Prakash from BIMTEC India sharing All experts and guests are busy in group works and preparing
ideas with NEGAAS acting chair Mr. Rishi Shah on future their agenda for presentation and discussion
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 35
Four major areas for discussion were assigned as follows:
i. Knowledge Building Process: Synthesizing Research, Teaching and Service
ii. Identifying Qualitative Research Issues: Focus Areas in Nation Building
iii. Learning and Dissemination: Approaches and Strategies
iv. Networking and Collaboration: Cross-functional and Cross-cultural
The participants started working in the group before the lunch break. They had one hour
lunch break in between the group works. After the lunch break all the participants would join
in their respective groups and prepare themselves for presentation.
29. Group presentation
There were two stages of group presentation: within the group and among other groups.
Parallel sessions were designed for in-group presentation for the teams. Each member took
active part in generating, reporting, presenting their ideas, and each group selected two
representatives for the final presentation.
Group presentation among all the participants was lively. Each group systematically
presented their ideas within five minutes and got involved in floor discussion for ten minutes.
Comments received from the floor were included and necessary cards were adjusted in the
pin boards. It helped all the participants to understand the three components: major problems,
causes, and suggestions for possible actions. Critical minimum consensus was developed in
each presented four areas of discussion within the group before the final presentation.
Guest of honor Prof. Shri Prakash from BIMTEC India sharing Symposium participants presenting the findings of the group
ideas with NEGAAS acting chair Mr. Rishi Shah and other for discussion; Dr. Bhoj Raj Aryal from T. U presents the findings
future collaboration
Some of the problems in the areas of social science research, more specifically in the four
selected areas, were identified as positivist dominance, lack of match between research
findings and their applications, lack of research effort, lack of proper participation, lack of
proper legal provisions, social and political exclusion, lack of technological adaptation, lack
of meritocracy, lack of interaction, and lack of sharing among stakeholders.
Besides, the causes identified were weakness of research institutes, lack of commitments and
resource implementation, poor prioritization and planning, attitude of policy makers, lack of
dissemination of information, and appropriate work culture. Lack of institutional support,
financial support, and competency of the institutions, and lack of adequate participation by
the stakeholders were some other causes.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 36
Furthermore, some of the suggestions for future were identified as prioritizing research,
network building, joint seminars of policy makers and researches, developing hardware and
software, and ensuring proper management in research institutions and learning centers.
Details of theme-wise major problems, causes, and suggestions for possible actions are listed
in the annex 2.
30. Network Building Session
A network building session was designed after the tea break. The session was very fruitful to
develop common consensus and to develop a forum to work in the area of qualitative
research at regional level. All the distinguished guests and participants took part in the
discussion and finally passed a joint convention to go into the regional forum with the
support of all the stakeholders. The symposium declared, "Today on 23rd March 2007, we,
the undersigned assembled here in the course of the Symposium on Qualitative Research in
Social Sciences, hereby agree to create a regional forum to devise a plan of action and
implementation for the promotion of social science research in the region." The signatories'
name list is presented in annex 3. Other participants also accepted the decision with some
feedback suggestions as well.
31. Closing Session
Finally, a short but very important formal closing ceremony was held. Acting president of
NEGAAS Mr. Rishi Shah chaired the session and UGC president Dr. Kamal K. Joshi took
the charge of Chief Guest of the program. Principal resource person Dr. Homburg and
Program Moderator Prof. Aditya represented the core team and event organizing team. Prof.
Shri Prakash from BIMTEC and senior Pakistani researcher and visiting professor of Harvard
University Prof. Nasir Jalil were invited to the dais as the guests of honor. Similarly, DAAD
representative Ms. Sarita Pradhan and Symposium Moderator Dr. Poorna Kant Adhikari were
also invited to the dais. All the core team members and many other distinguished guests were
seated in their respective seats. The core team member Mr. Dhakal with the support of
program coordinator Dr. Gautam facilitated the closing session.
Prof. Nasir Jalil shared his opinion for a few minutes. He mainly focused upon conducting
qualitative inquiry and described the domain of research methods. He presented how hard it
is to understand the reality and to find out the way to measure it. There are many other biases
while designing a research project. The paradigm is different from positivist to
constructivism and interpretive. There are many approaches; therefore, it would not be a good
idea to select a quantitative research project without having a qualitative inquiry. He
congratulated all the participants of the symposium and encouraged them to hope for high
standard outcome.
Dr. Homburg expressed thankfulness for inviting in Nepal and providing him this opportunity
to work with Dr. Gautam, DSN, NEGAAS, and DAAD. He suggested all the participants not
to make any inter-group conflict between quantitative and qualitative aspects, rather to have
the required triangulation by combining them both. It is possible to work for the knowledge
building process such as research even in a conflict situation therefore, one must continue
working for career development and to contribute to the society.
Dr. Kamal K. Joshi, the President of UGC, expressed his happiness for inviting him and his
team. He showed his willingness to work for and with the researchers and to promote them in
every regard. Doing research in a university is not sufficient but it has a very important role
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 37
in knowledge development. Faculties of universities should produce knowledge to empower
themselves. The UGC recently been supported by the World Bank wants to enhance quality
of research in future. High quality research is warranted for socioeconomic development to
understand the significance of prevailing challenges, especially in faculty development,
institutional strengthening, and quality knowledge building. He highly appreciated the
formation of regional forum for the development of research sector in future.
Prof. Shri Prakash, Research Dean, BIMTEC, Greater Noida, India expressed his
commitment to work with Nepali researchers in future. He appreciated the contribution of Dr.
Homburg to the Nepali researchers. He stressed the need of understanding epistemology and
ontology because the research is philosophy, theory, method, and information driven. He
asserted that both positivist and normative approaches are not complete; therefore, making
necessary updates in future courses is essential. He suggested for the improvements in the
UGC system and hoped to get positive minded persons. He also wanted that the UGC and the
newly formed research forum would organize the training of the trainers, which will have
direct reflection among the knowledge workers. He shared his work experiences and
expressed his commitment to support on behalf of BIMTEC. He emphasized that if topics are
properly selected and the problem is well defined, then the research is half done. He
expressed his commitment to support in this regard in future.
Workshop participants led by Mr. Rup Kumar B.K , Ms. Rita Subedi, Ms. Laxmi Tamang,
and Ms. Pramila Thapa acknowledged the principal resource person Dr. Homburg by offering
souvenirs: Nepali cap, memento, honor letter of DSN his significant contribution. The group
expressed their gratitude to Dr. Homburg and hoped for his support throughout their research
career. Similarly, the participants offered memento to Prof. Shri Prakash and thanked him as
well.
Workshop participants and facilitators honoring the principal The distinguished guests and participants of the symposium in
resource person Dr. Homburg a photo session at the end of the program
Prof. Aditya, moderator of the total package, expressed his gratitude for active participation
of senior researchers and dignitaries. He highlighted the concept of the Fourth R – Research
in addition to Reading, wRiting, and 'aRithmetic’ among the skills required to become a good
professional. He discussed the limitation of academic governance and culture in Nepal and
his wish to invite researchers from other countries, including India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka,
and Pakistan in view of the emerging concept of a regional forum. He asked the program
organizers to continue their efforts and other agencies and researchers to join their hands in
future.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 38
Sets of training workshop and symposium certificates were handed over to the facilitator
team from the chief guest and moderator. Session animator Mr. Surendra Dhakal thanked all
the support agencies, including PWDs, SIRF-research team 2006, KCC, UGC, and Carl
Duisburg for their non-monetary support. He expressed his sincere thanks to the program co-
organizer and event managing organization DSN, event management team led by Dr.
Gautam, and all workshop participants for their time, devotion and support to make the
program very successful. The closing session chair Mr. Rishi Shah expressed cordial thanks
to the program coordinator Dr. Gautam, who is also an active member of NEGAAS, CDSN,
and a researcher for conceptualizing, implementing, and involving representatives from all
sectors. He strongly suggested that the team must continue such programs in future, and
congratulated all the participants to be a member of the SOQRISS and expected their active
participation in future. Lastly, he closed the session by giving thanks to UGC, Prof. Shri
Prakash, DAAD, German Embassy, colleagues of NEGAAS, CDSN, and DSN. A photo
session was organized immediately after the closing ceremony of the symposium. Workshop
participants' profile, facilitators' profile, questionnaires, major findings of the symposium,
reading materials, references, press release (Nepali), financial report, photos, and video
profile are included in the annexure of the report.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 39
Annex 1
Feedback Questionnaire
Dear Sir/Madam,
We have many limitations in the CDSN hall on organizing workshop. You are cordially
requested to supply your feedback and suggestions so that the organizing in the future team
could repair the weakness.
1. How satisfied are you with the following statements? Please supply your
Dissatisfied
Dissatisfied
Satisfied
Satisfied
valuable feedback and put a tick [ ] mark that comes closest to your
Strongly
Slightly
Slightly
Neutral
Very
opinion so that the organizer could repair the existing weakness as soon
as possible.
1 2 3 4 5
a Sitting arrangement and layout for today's session
b Handouts available in today's session
c Delivery style of today's resource person
d Agenda and knowledge shared by the resource person
e Support systems provided by the organizer team
f Technical support and facilities available for the session
g Soft copy files and handouts received
2. Your suggestions to the organizer
3. Your suggestions to the resource person
4. Your suggestions to the facilitators
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 40
Annex 2
Major findings of the symposium
State of the Art in Nepal
23 March 2007
(Critical minimum consensus)
A. Knowledge Building Process:
Synthesizing Research, Teaching and Service
SUGGESTIONS FOR POSSIBLE
MAJOR PROBLEMS CAUSES
ACTIONS
• Dominance of positivist • Weakness of research • Use of appropriate approach & training
approach in research institutions • Establishment and strengthening
• Inconsistency between • Lack of commitment institutions
finding and research among the users • Encourage the approach research
application • Lack of resources for • Teaching learning system should be
• Lack of research implementation changed
• Lack of participation • It is integrated: a place of both qualitative
• Teaching learning issue and quantitative approaches
• Lack of grass root • Ensure consistency of findings and
participation implementations
B. Identifying Qualitative Research Issues:
Focus Areas in Nation-building
SUGGESTIONS FOR POSSIBLE
MAJOR PROBLEMS CAUSES
ACTIONS
• Lack of need based • Biased allocation of power and • Prioritize research issues in nation
research resources building
• Lack of equal • Ignoring indigenous knowledge • Mainstreaming of excluded groups
opportunities and • Lack of methodological approaches • Understanding the problem in terms
access • Linkage in policy making of its policy implications
• Social and political • Poor prioritization • Proper comprehension of by the
exclusion • Poor attitude of the policy maker community of their rights
• Inadequate legislation
C. Learning and Dissemination:
Approaches and Strategies
SUGGESTIONS FOR POSSIBLE
MAJOR PROBLEMS CAUSES
ACTIONS
• Lack of opportunity for • Lack of forums and institutions • Participatory approach
learning for learning and dissemination • Networking
• Research findings not • Lack of appropriate culture • Knowledge workers and users network
reaching the target • Lack of confidence in the • Reflection is required that helps in policy
group researchers to disseminate due to making and social change: Knowledge-
• Lack of adequate social and economic problems policy making-and dissemination
technological • Inadequate emphasis on • Need to cultivate research culture
adaptation and its empiricism • Joint conference of policy makers and
proper adoption • Lack of encouragement researchers
• Neglecting • Lack of identification of learning
technological use needs
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 41
D. Networking and Collaboration:
Cross-functional and Cross-cultural
MAJOR SUGGESTIONS FOR POSSIBLE
CAUSES
PROBLEMS ACTIONS
• Problem • Institutional support • Need for research hardware and
identification • Tools software
• Absence of • Financial resources • Need assessment
recognition of • Lack of competency • Integration
Meritocracy • Lack of willingness • Participation
• Lack of motivation • Orthodox ideas • Proper evaluation
• Lack of interaction • Inadequate evaluation • Monitoring
and sharing • Need for continuous improvement
knowledge with time
• Networking
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 42
Annex 3
Formation of Regional Forum for the
Promotion of social science research in the region
Today on 23rd March 2007, we, the undersigned, assembled here in the course of the
Symposium on Qualitative Research in Social Sciences, hereby agree to create a
regional forum to devise a plan of action and implementation for the promotion of
social science research in the region.
1. Prof. Anand Aditya, Coordinator
2. Prof. Shri Prakash, Ph.D.
3. Dr. Andreas Homburg,
4. Prof. Keshav Lal Maharjan, Ph.D.
5. Dr. Nasir Jalil
6. Dr. Poorna Kanta Adhikari
7. Dr. Kamal Krishna Joshi,
8. Mr. Surendra Dhakal
9. Prof. Basudev Upreti, Ph.D.
10. Dr. Raj K. Sharma
11. Ms. Laxmi Tamang
12. Mr. Birendra R. Pokharel
13. Ms. Pramila Thapa
14. Ms. Juna Mathema
15. Mr. Dhruba Joshy
16. Dr. Prem Sharma
17. Mr. Rishi Shah
18. Mr. Toya Nath Bhattarai
19. Mr. Yuba Raj Bhusal
20. Mr. Mod Nath Prashrit
21. Mr. Rup Kumar B.K.
22. Prof. Ram Krishna Regmee
23. Ms. Tulsi Dhakal
24. Mr. Sushil Bhattarai
25. Mr. Bhakti P. Sharma
26. Ms. Amita S. Kaushik
27. Mr. Ishwari Banjade
28. Mr. Madhav P. Aryal
29. Ms. Sakeena Khan
30. Mr. Bal Ram Chapagain
31. Mr. Dhan Raj Chalise
32. Ms. Richana Daibagya
33. Mr. Ashok Pathak
34. Mr. Shambhu Sharma
35. Dr. Thaneswor Gautam
36. Mr. Birendra Bahadur Shrestha
37. Mr. Hamid Ansari
(Prof. Anand Aditya was appointed the chair of the forum and Dr. Thaneswor
Gautam was assigned the member-secretary’s role. The team will organize a wider
level planning workshop to proceed further. The proposal was approved by all the
participants of the symposium.)
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 43
Annex 4
Press Release by SOQRISS-23 March 2007
(Nepali Language)
$
! "# %&
'( )
$ * $,
+ %& *
-. /
.* 0& %. # . 1 % 1 / ( 23 4
$ ,6 %
5
1 . # +1 1 &(
17 % 81 1 . 9
3, & ,
3 $ ":/ 9 # .% (
% 6 9
1 1 #
0 2 1 &
9 % 0 &( 3 ,
, 9 ; 4 "< " 1 = % > "?
. :: *
6
1 ": / 9 #= : @ A= : . . = : . .1 = ":1 *
& . %. # .> 1 B% B
1 % & #
0 8 , % % (
* 5+ 1, 6 $, 5 +
B 1 #7 8 C) . 7 3, *6
+
& C, 3 , / % C- / 16 7 7 0#
& $ 8 1 ": B 3, D
"0 C % ( 3 ,
B
1 $ /E % 1 1 F1% 6 & 6 , &
81 5+ %
/ % * 1 / 1 1 % 6 67 16 3 , G 6 &
1 / (
1 B 1 % 6
/ 11 8 % 1 B 1 7 6 1
0 *=
' ,= / - C1 >H
. 3, * % .% ( 3 18 3,
' , / & 6
1 1 -/ 1 B 8& ' > (
= 4 = 8 & % 6 ' , .1 # ; -
% 9 % , $ & / ( # . # 1 6
' ,% 8 1 B 1 8 '# ( # 8= 7= =
-
$@ 16 -@ ' , % 8 %" 1 3 / % &
% 6
1 1 5+ , ( 3 8 , 67 D $ B -
1 DI /# +#
*6 & #7 3, J 7 3 , ,
1 %I (
3 % K .* 4 9 ;
1
42L B6 . . 8* 9 ". 8& / (
+
C, 3 , 2 . 7 7 5 1 C 1 .
H % 7 7
M 11 6 4 1 % 23 8 7 -
!
C C= 16 8
3 % # 1 (
7 E K.K J 7 &
F1 3, # % 6
/ 1 1 8 3
( 3, F N 2 3 ,6 A &
1 5 +1 $ / (C 1 8 6
-.* / . G * D
" . 0 ! 16 C 5 C /#
&
% / (
":/ 9 #
NF
OP Q , R ,
*30 ,
3 $
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 44
Annex 5
Income and Expenditure Statement
Workshop cum symposium on Qualitative Research in Social Sciences (SOQRISS) 05-23, 2007
A. Bills submitted to Sponsor: DAAD Germany
S.N Particular of the Expenditure Detail Breakdown Actual
and Remarks Expenditure
01 Air Ticket: Principal Resource Person Euro 860 81,000
02 Hotel Bill: Principal Resource Person Food and Accommodation 60,000
03 Symposium: Program Day Restaurant and sound 26,826
04 Snacks: Everest for 16 Days: Workshop 4500+3600+6250+7500 21,850
05 Printing: Dolphin Press Brochure, Certificate, Others 23,415
06 WorldLink Connection: SOQRISS Email Email Account with Internet 1,500
07 Telephone: Planning Phase Tel:2113215 4,364
08 Wages: Program officer and Assistant 2 months period 24,000
09 Electricity Backup & support by Microland Support and rental Charge 9,500
10 Audio-Visual Support: Real Photo Studio Capturing, transfer, and write 20,000
11 Stationery Diary, File, Handouts 22,010
12 Facilitation and technical support 4 Pin boards & day long 7,000
Total Cost Covered by DAAD 301,465
B. Bills submitted to Event Manager: Dynamic Society Nepal
1. Hall charge Paid to CDSN (50% support of CDSN and 50% paid) ·········.4, 500
2. Web update www.soqriss.com.np and CD purchase for distribution ·········4,500
3. Local transportation and snacks during the planning and program period,
(expenditure bill supplied by 10 member facilitator team)·······················11,500
4. Moderators transportation support ·····························································5,000
5. Core team's meeting allowance 5 meetings to 3 members @ 500: ············7,500
6. Guest and external resource persons transportation··································17,600
7. Mobile bill for two months bared by DSN for program coordinator···········1700
Total Cost Covered by Event Organizer ······················································· 52,300.00
C. Total (A+B) Expenditure of the program··························································· 353,765.00
(In word is Three hundred fifty three thousand seven hundred and sixty five)
D. Fund Received (Income):
Total Fund Received from DAAD ( 3,140.00) ..............293,511.00
Registration Fee Received: ...............................................34,000.00
Sales of reading materials 15 sets .............................................4,500
Fund contributed from Event Managing Team.........................3,800
Total Income ....................................................................335,811.00
E. Cash Deficit (C-D= 17,954) contributed by the event managing group with the
support of newly formed SOQRISS team and facilitators
(Cost covered from the organizers amounted NRS 52,300 is approximately 15% of
the total cost. The organizers generated the resources NRS 42,300 from the local
resources thus the cash contribution for the program is NRS 17,954)
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 45
Annex 6
Special Note and acknowledgement
Special Note:
Empowerment of DAAD Alumni members: Only 13 participants were fixed only at
planning with four (a quarter) DAAD alumni members namely Mr. Yubaraj Bhusal,
Mr. Rajesh Joshi, and Mr. Ram Prasad Dhital, and Prof. Dr. Chandra Bahadur Joshi.
Later, the number of participants increased up to 30 to get the best possible outcome
from the program from total 230 applicants. In selection criteria was sensitive that
included best available working researchers from women, Madeshi, Muslim, people
with disability, and indigenous groups. DAAD alumni members who were willing to
participate took part in facilitation, observation, and symposium program.
Special Thanks:
DSN Contribution: Event organizing and facilitation teams' voluntary contribution
for total program; One week accommodation for Prof. Shri Prakash, Research Dean
BIMTEC India; Four days home stay and necessary accommodation for Dr. Andreas;
Telephone access to the program, Secretariat Office, Web Site Contribution, Proposal
writing, and Report Printing and Binding.
Core Team: Coordinators three months involvement, moderators involvement for
around two months, other Core Team members partial involvement and regular
guidance
Kantipur City College: Multimedia support for total program (estimated rental
charge per day is minimum Rs. 1500, which was received for 18 days besides
planning and follow up)
UGC support: Courtesy to the Indian professor and vehicle provided for two days
St. Xavier’s College: Two hours guest lecture and contribution to Indian Professor
Rs. 2,500 for transportation as a guest lecture
Public Information Center: Hall for two public sessions conducted by Dr. Homburg
and Prof. Shri Prakash
M. Phil. program, TU: Courtesy and two sessions by Dr. Homburg at Faculty of
Management, Tribhuvan University, Kirtipur
Ms. Pramila Thapa and Ms. Laxmi Tamang: Handy Digital Camera
Ms. Juna Mathema: Design of Photo Profile
Ms. Laxmi Tamang: Final Report Editing
Participants Contribution: Contribution for local transport for Prof. Shri Prakash
and "Memento" to Dr. Homburg and Prof. Shri Prakash
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 46
Annex 7
Interview Training Guideline Prepared in Groups
Group One
Group members
Interviewer: Mr. Bal Ram Chapagain
Interviewee: Mr. Madhav Aryal
Observer: Dr. Prem Sharma
Documentator: Ms. Richana Daibagya
Research Issue/ Topic
Executives’ attitudes towards Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Nepal
Interview Guide
Prepare the interview questions on the following issues.
- Executives’ attitudes towards CSR
- Involvement of corporations in socially responsible activities
Briefly discuss the purpose of the study and take the consent of interviewee (i. e., a
business executive) for time and asking questions.
After taking the consent of interviewee, ask the following questions.
- What do you think of CSR, as it may have different meanings to different
communities and countries?
- Why should companies care about their social and environmental
responsibilities?
- What are the areas of CSR you’re being involved? Why?
Finally, appreciate for their time, enthusiasm and value-adding opinions.
Three Wishes of our group for further improvement of interview process, particularly the
interview guide, are:
We wish to use a checklist for crucial areas in order to ensure that all required
information is recorded/ collected.
We wish to be well prepared for adequate and appropriate supporting questions
anticipating the deviations in responses from an interviewee.
We wish to ensure confidentiality of responses to the respondent whenever necessary.
Group Two
Group members
Interviewee : Mr. Rajesh Joshi
Interviewer : Ms. Pramila Thapa
Documentation : Mr. Gyani B. Niraula
Observer : Mr. Ram Prasad Dhital
Research Issue/ Topic
“Role of expected fathers during Pre-natal period”
Interview Guide
Assumptions:
1. Urban setting
2. Appointment taken beforehand
3. Interviewee pre-informed about the expected duration and depth of interview
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 47
Research Questions
Q.1 Why do you think preparation is needed during the pre-natal period?
Q.2 Why is it important for the expectant father to take an active role during the pre-natal
period?
Q.3 What are the prevailing practices in the society that needs to be changed/improved?
Q.4 I have heard many expectant fathers dreaming about their child. Do you have a
similar experience?
Three Wishes of our group for further improvement of the interview process, particularly the
interview guidelines are:
1. Pre-testing of questionnaire;
2. Familiarization of content or drill by the interviewer before the interview; and
3. Formulation of questions according to the assumed situation/context.
Group Three
Group members
Interviewee : Mr. Yuba Raj Bhushal
Interviewer : Ms. Tulsi Dhakal
Documentation : Mr. Chintamani Sharma
Observer : Ms. Rita Subedi
Research Issue/ Topic
Low participation of women in civil service
Research Questions
1. Is the participation of women in civil service poor?
2. What are the affecting factors in low participation?
3. What are the government efforts to improve their participation level?
Interview Guide
1. Greetings
2. Warm-up
3. Situation matching with question then raising the following questions
- Do you really feel the low participation of women in civil service in Nepal?
- If yes, how can we improve this situation?
- What are the efforts from government side?
- If yes, are they sufficient for improvement?
- What are your suggestions for increasing the participation level?
4. Closing
Three Wishes from our group are:
1. Research issue should be cross cutting and burning.
2. Interviewee should be informative.
3. Interviewer should be inquisitive.
Group Four
Group members
Interviewee : Mr. Mohammad Shaphiullah
Interviewer : Mr. Pushkar Silwal
Documentation : Mr. Bhakti Sharma
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 48
Observer : Mr. Hari K. Mushyan
Research Question
Why do people prefer faith healers for their first treatment of illness?
Interview Guide
1. Rapport building and briefing of the research objective
2. Ask questions to collect information on name, age, caste, ethnicity, religion, distance
to faith healers and health centers, occupation and education.
3. Ask other questions as well which provide answers to the research question.
Interview
The interviewer greeted the interviewee, introduced himself and briefly explained the
purpose of the interview and the research
Took the verbal consent
Interviewee enquired about the time it would take for the interview
Questions asked in logical sequence
Maintained good eye contact with the interviewee
Questions asked politely
Interviewee seemed confident as reflected through straight and appropriately framed
quick answers
Interviewer acknowledged for time given by the interviewee
Informant also provided additional insights through suggestions
Three wishes
1. Knowledge about target population’s characteristics
2. Clearly defined objectives and question wording
3. A good ending or closure for future contacts
Group Five
Group members
Interviewer : Ms. Nirmala Thapa
Interviewee : Mr. Bhupendra Nirajan
Observer : Mr. Ishwari Prasad Banjade
Documentation : Mr. Hira Raj Regmi
Research Issue/ Topic
People's participation in drinking water system
Interview Guide
Prepare the interview question on the following issues:
1. Participation in planning process of DWS
2. Participation in implementation of DWS
3. Participation in evaluation of DWS
Taking Consent of interviewee, ask following questions:
How did you know, the WSP is selected in your village?
Have you participated by contributing money, labor, kinds etc?
How did you attend the public audit meeting?
Three Wishes for further improvement of interview process:
We wish to have –
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 49
1. In-depth knowledge on the situation, location other relevant social issues before
beginning interview;
2. Interview training for interviewer; and
3. Effective interview-questions those are relevant to the objective of the research.
Group Six
Group members
Interviewer : Ms. Juna Mathema
Interviewee : Mr. Mahesh Prasad Deo
Observer : Mr. Rup Kumar B.K.
Documentation : Ms. Laxmi Tamang
Research Question
How do people perceive when others mobile phone ring at a formal gathering?
Interview Guide
1. Briefing: Greeting, introduction and explain the purpose of the interview
2. Short description on the current trend of mobile phone use in Nepal
3. Warm-up Questions:
• Are you a mobile phone user?
• Do your family members have mobile phone? What is the purpose of using it'?
• How frequent do you use mobile phone?
4. Questions
• How often do you have to go to the formal gathering?
• Do you carry mobile when you are in the formal gathering?
• In what profile (setting) do you like to keep your mobile during formal gathering?
• Usually in formal gathering the organizer ask/request to all to switch off or keep in
silent mode. Is it necessary to switch off the mobile? If so, why?
• If someone's mobile rings during formal gathering how do you feel?
• What could be the solution for this?
• Do you have anything to say?
• Greeting: Thank You
Three Wishes of our group for further improvement of interview process, particularly the
interview guide, are:
1. One should have adequate knowledge and vision related to the subject matter.
2. One should understand the social context and sample's population characteristics.
3. Should have sequential flow of interview guide
Group No: Seven
Group members
Interviewer : Mr. Meghnath Dhimal
Interviewee : Mr. Prakash Rai
Observer : Mr. Basu Dev Kafle
Documentation : Mr. Machha Bhai Maharjan
Research Issue/ Topic
Public Opinion about Sustainable Solid Waste Management in Kathmandu Valley
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 50
Interview Guide
A. Introduction and warm-up
Namaste, my name is ____________. I am here on behalf of the ……………….to
collect information on the Assessment of Public Opinion about Sustainable Solid
Waste Management in Kathmandu Valley The information provided by you will
be instrumental to strengthen and /or to overcome barriers of solid waste
management in the Kathmandu Valley in the days to come. With your kind consent,
I would like to ask you some questions and our interview would be recorded in the
tape. Your name will remain confidential. Please feel free to express your opinions
openly, and ask me if you have any questions.
B. After taking the consent of interviewee, ask the following questions.
1. What is your household size?
2. How much solid waste is generated from your house?
3. How do you manage the solid waste generated from your house?
4. Have you faced any problem in managing the waste by this manner? (If no,
directly go to question no 6)
5. If so, what might be the reasons?
6. How do your neighbors manage the solid waste generated from their
household?
7. What types of problems might be due to haphazard disposal of solid waste?
8. In your opinion, who should be responsible for the proper management of
solid waste?
9. Do you think existing system of management is effective and sustainable?
10. If not, who should take the lead role for its management?
11. In your opinion, what might be the possible measures for the sustainable
solid waste management in Kathmndu valley?
12. If you have any more suggestions /comments about strengthening solid
waste management practice in Kathmandu valley, please let us know.
C. Finally, thank the interviewee.
Three Wishes of our group are:
1. Interview Guide should be specific to research objectives.
2. Interview Guide should be strictly followed
3. Ambiguous, commanding and too long questions should be avoided
Group Eight
Group members
Interviewer : Ms. Savitri Rai
Interviewee : Mr. J. N. Kharel
Observer/ Documentation: Mr. T. N. Bhattarai
Research Question
Why do socially marginalized groups such as dalits unable to take part in the development
process of Nepal?
Specific research questions
1. Are you participating in the development process in any manner? (behavior)
2. How do you feel when you find yourself not within (or involved) in the process?(feelings)
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 51
3. What is the level of participation of dalits in the development process? (knowledge and
judgment of facts)
4. How can more dalits be able to participate in the development process?
5. Can education be useful in making them empowered to join the mainstream development
process?
6. What kind of education might be the best measure to expand dalits’ inclusion both
socially and developmentally?
7. What would be the best strategy to make dalits participate equitably in the development
process?
Interview Guide
1. The interview guide was designed after discussing the questions.
2. While updating the interviewee guide, the following things were considered:
a. Briefing was effective so it should be continued in the future interviews
b. Warm was not adequate
c. Questions were clear but narratives and story telling were not encouraging.
d. Closing was abrupt as it was announced in the plenum that no more time was
available for further deliberations
Three Wishes
The group thinks that the interview could be better if the following were managed:
1. Pre-testing of questionnaire
2. Answer recording format with elaborated (pre-conceived) checklist.
3. Some kind of audio-visual reorder
Synopsis of the group exercises on interview training
This synopsis summarizes the group exercises on 'interview training' in the course of a
workshop session on qualitative research methods in social sciences, organized by NEGAAS
and DSN at CDSN Hall, Anamnagar, Kathmandu.
Many participants from wide range of backgrounds, including high level government
officials, academicians, and practitioners participated in this group exercise. Several social
sciences research issues were raised, specific research questions pertaining to the issues were
formulated, interview guides were prepared and updated, and finally three wishes from each
group were shared particularly aiming at fine tuning the interview process in the days to
come.
In fact, it was quite interesting and insightful as the diverse issues were there. Some were
raising the questions on social inclusion/exclusion; some were talking about health and
environmental issues; and others were trying to explore attitudes of business executives
towards corporate social responsibility.
During the exercises, the principal resource person Dr. Andreas Homburg was reaching to
each group to see whether the group is following the norms. Last but not least is that the
organizer was also active in facilitating the participants throughout the process.
Workshop and Symposium on Qualitative Research Methods in Social Sciences: NEGAAS & DSN, KTM # 52
Related docs
