concurrent triangulation approach where data collected through various methods were compared to examine convergence, difference, or combination (Creswell, 2009). Qualitative data were collected from my observations of the simulation experiments, subject questionnaires, and subject interviews in order to address subject perception of the simulation experience and its impact on critical thinking. Qualitative data were also collected from faculty questionnaires to examine faculty perceptions of the simulation experience as an evaluative tool. Quantitative data were collected through the California
Qualitative data from field observations were transcribed and organized. Questionnaires from the experimental group of subjects were broken down so that answers to each question could be examined individually. Data collected from subject interviews were transcribed and examined for themes. Qualitative data were then examined in the aggregate to observe for common themes. Quantitative data from the pre- and post-test were examined to observe for variations in critical thinking disposition before and after the simulation experience. Qualitative and quantitative data from the experimental group were then examined together to observe for common themes. Quantitative data collected from the control group were then examined and compared with data from the experimental group to observe for variations or themes. Finally, data from faculty questionnaires were broken down so answers to individual questions could be examined individually and common themes noted.
The research questions were addressed individually and collectively through the following methods:
Research question 1. How did simulation through the use of standardized
participants impact the critical thinking disposition of undergraduate health administration students at Centerville University?
Student pre-test. The California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory was used
to observe critical thinking skills prior to the simulation experience in the experimental group. A control group of subjects took the CCTDI without undergoing simulation.
Simulation experience. Subjects in the experimental group participated in the
Student post-test. The California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory was
used to observe critical thinking skills in the experimental group post simulation experience.
Field notes. I observed the simulation and maintained descriptive and reflective
notes.
Research question 2. What were students’ perceptions of the impact of a
simulation experience on their own critical thinking skills?
Interviews. I met with subjects after the simulation experience in order to debrief
and exchange feedback.
Field notes. I maintained descriptive and reflective notes.
Student questionnaire. Subjects completed a post-simulation survey.
Research questions 3 and 4. What were faculty perceptions of the efficacy of
simulation as a training tool for undergraduate students in the health administration program at Centerville University? How can simulation be effectively used to evaluate conceptual and technical competencies of students at the conclusion of their
undergraduate health administration program at Centerville University?
Faculty questionnaire. Faculty completed a post-simulation survey.
Conclusion of Cycle III. The study report was produced and presented to the
faculty at Rowan University.
Researcher’s Disclosure
I am a full-time faculty member in the undergraduate health administration
program at Centerville University, where I have been employed 18 months. For two years prior to tenure as full-time faculty, I held a full-time administrative role in the college that
houses the health administration program. Since 2005, I held an adjunct faculty position in the undergraduate health administration program concurrently with other employment. At no time have I held decision-making authority over the health administration program, its leaders, or its staff.
Reliability
The issue of reliability or trustworthiness is addressed through a process of establishing credibility (confidence in the findings), transferability (applicability in other contexts), dependability (consistency and repeatability), and confirmability (absence of researcher bias) (Shenton, 2004). I have addressed these standards through rigorous application of appropriate qualitative research tools necessary to accomplish the goals of the study in a transparent fashion.
The research is credible because it addresses the concerns of practitioners who are personally involved in the research, and the research questions are practice oriented. To address the issue of transferability and dependability, I conducted this research in a practice environment, and designed data collection strategies specifically to yield the level of detail necessary to answer the research questions and address the practice issues, and I made every effort to clarify my assumptions and describe the research context in detail. I addressed confirmability by using a triangulation approach to data collection and interpretation, and by using evidence from various data sources to develop a coherent justification for my observations and conclusions. Finally, I documented all procedures fully, and made every effort to avoid human error in collection or transcription
Conclusion
This chapter addressed the methods used to design, implement, and evaluate a research study to observe how a simulation experience impacts the critical thinking skills of students in an undergraduate health administration program at Centerville University, and examine the efficacy of simulation as a programmatic evaluative tool. Applied action research was chosen as a method for the study due to its philosophical compatibility with my worldview, as well as its pragmatic value in providing an action plan to address a need identified by the faculty in the undergraduate health administration program at Centerville University. In this section, I outlined the data collection strategies and analysis procedures, as well as the three action research cycles employed in the study: Cycle I outlined details of planning the study, Cycle II addressed implementation of the study, and Cycle III provided information on data analysis procedures.
Chapter 4
Cycle I – Planning the Study