Response to 9q3ad Unit


Responseto 9q3ad


The suggested approach, qualitative multi case study, suits this typeof study for several reasons. One of them is the fact that aqualitative approach is best equipped in collecting descriptive datawhich, in this case, includes the subjective experiences of severeautism students in the receipt of special education assistance inpublic schools. A case study approach would provide detailedinformation but captured data would not be generalizable. Thus toensure that the data collected is detailed and generalizable,increasing the number of case studies addresses the weakness.However, for most qualitative approaches, the main focus is notgeneralizability but rather the deep information collected(Fairweather &amp Rinne, 2012). Furthermore, interviews are bestequipped in empowering researchers in creating suitable environmentsfor collecting qualitative data. This is very critical in the case ofautistic participants who are likely to be affected by theenvironments in terms of their mood and ability to expressthemselves. As such, creating the right environment will impact datacollected (Kristensen &amp Ravnv2015).

I also agree that a qualitative approach that collects data from asample population of children with special needs can best utilizeinterviews and observation. For one, the participants have learningdifficulties which makes it hard to apply other methods of datacollection such as questionnaires. Reybold, Lammert, and Stribling(2012) say that sample selection in qualitative studies must be aliveto the contextual and emerging factors. In this case, I am impressedthat the student noted that the special needs of the participants andalso the need for ethical approval by the parents and their presenceduring research where applicable. Again, the presence of the researchin interviews will assist in clarifying information and dealing withany arising issues such misunderstanding questions.


Fairweather, J., &ampRinne, T. (2012). Clarifying a basis for qualitative generalizationusing

approaches thatidentify shared culture. Qualitative Research, 12(4),473–485.

Kristensen, G. K., &ampRavn, M. N. (2015). The voices heard and the voices silenced:Recruitment

processes inqualitative interview studies. Qualitative Research, 15(6),722–737.

Reybold, L. E.,Lammert, J. D., &amp Stribling, S. M. (2012). Participant selectionas a conscious

research method: Thinking forward and the deliberation of “emergent”findings. Qualitative Research, 13(6), 699–716.