Article Critique †‘You Have Someone To Trust (2012)

Article Critique You Have soulfulness To pull (2012)Jessica Bowstead setting and PolicyQualitative Research Article Critique You Have soul To Trust (2012).Jessica BowsteadM2067675Word Count-1650Mortimer, J North, K Stead J. (2012). You Have Some ane To Trust. Outstanding safeguarding practise in primary educates. unappreciated ( unfamiliar), pg1-74.The purpose of this schoolmanian piece is to critic eachy measure out the article You Have Someone to Trust, it will begin with examining the literary works and will discuss info abbreviation and findings and then will conclude by synthesising evidence as to whether it is a valued piece of work. The article of choice is soft. Qualitative look is a term used for inquiry strategies that atomic number 18 aimed at how human beings pick up, experience, envision and produce the social world (Hammersley, 2013). The main strength of soft search is it generates an opportunity for great depth and information on the social off shoot (Griffin, 2007). Quantitative data, on the other hand focuss on counting and classifying features and constructing statistics (Mangell, 2013). Mortimer utilizes the method of ethnography in her research, this largely relies on contemplation and interviews as an essential aspect of its methods, the researcher endeavours to start part of the research, winning note of everything they see and hear (Saks and Allsop, 2007).Validity, reliability, and objectivity atomic number 18 criteria used to evaluate the quality of research. As an explanatory method, the content of qualitative research abbreviation differs from quantitative data, from its assumptions, research purposes, and inference serve welles, and so make the criteria unsuitable for qualitative research (Bradley, 1993). Early work conducted by Lincoln and Guba (1985) suggested four measures for evaluating qualitative research credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. For the purpose of this crit ical review, the author has chosen the McMaster critical approximation tool Framework (1998, online). Following a full critical rating and checklist, it is appargonnt that Mortimers paper is an interesting but a tortuous piece of research.You Have Somebody to Trust (2012) was created with the notion that it would specify criteria for institutionalize in relation to safeguarding children. Policy making relies heavily on the academic literature, from the research it is distinguished how severe a problem is, what actions are unavoidable and know how implement it into practice (Exblom, 2002). After school and services failed to blemish and understand former legislation, and a series of serious case reviews, a new framework Practical Tips for Schools was created in January 2012 (Mortimer et al, 2012). Mortimers study helped pee the new framework with her research, this was by an evidence-based approach.You confine someone to trust was funded by the Childrens Commission, which w as established by the Childrens Act 2004 (Mortimer et al, 2004). Due to the record of the funding, this research could be seen as one sided. Its the governments duty to discipline practitioners are following safeguarding procedures (GOV.UK online) so one mightiness believe that the results whitethorn bias to fit their own aims. However, this has not affected the result or completion of the study.It is essential that studies are clear and coherent callable to the research being built on previous research (Dawson, Dawson Over content 2013) allowing the information to be transferred. Here Mortimer clearly discusses the purpose of study in the first theatrical role Executive Summary. It is also explicitly stated in the present moment section, Object of the Study stating The research was in order to identify outperform professional practice in response to child protection and safeguarding concerns in primary schools (Mortimer et al, 2012). Although generalizability is disregarded in qualitative studies (Ali Yusof, 2011) it is important the findings from this article are transferable. Although no two schools are the same, the general operation of a school and their approach to safeguarding should be.In qualitative research it is essential to examine the permit literature on the issue of the study, this provides the reviewer with a rational punctuate of the study (Fink Arlene 2005). Mortimer does draw on a signifi displacet amount of literature to contextulize her research. In section four, there is a varied quantity of literature on the chosen bow, including Intervening early cited by Eason and Gee 2012 and A shared dread of outstanding practice cited by Ofsted Safeguarding Schools (2011) this is predominantly precious in that it provides evidence of the subject matter. Generally, there is a clear raillery regarding the literature which in turn strengthens her study.Mortimer has chosen to use purposive sampling, she has ideal this by intentionally s electing participants who can contribute a deep understanding of the phenomenon that she is studying (Klenk, 2013). The procedure of pattern selection was not highlighted in Mortimers report, this could increase transferability. Without this a notion of bias may be questioned due to the deficiency of information. To strengthen her report Mortimer could take stated the sex, race, age and ground of the participants. Discarding this information the paper cannot be seen as a true representation of the population (Janson, 2010) which will decrease transferability. Although the sampling information is limited, one can clearly summarize that the type of sampling here is a level best Variation Sampling. This involves deliberately selected cases with a wide variation on dimensional interests as an effort to understand the context and created transferbility (Polit Beck, 2013).In the executive summary section it states that the sample of the school, which were visited were specificall y selected to ensure a variation in size, geographical location and demographic intake(Mortimer et al, 2012). Here Mortimer has addressed the becharm actions and increased her confimability in relation to the school selection. There was no resoluteness as to whether all participants took part, allowing the reader to assume that all asked contubuted to the study. Overall, the choice of sample selected for the research purposes is suitable as it does seem to offer a benevolent opportunity for research into the properties of safeguarding in education. Nevertheless, due to the insufficiency of information provided the results lack confimibility and tranferability.Mortimer does not go into either substantial detail about the process of data collection, in section five there is a bleak mention of it however, only basic information is provided. It states that semi structured interviews and thoughts had taken place, but again examples are not specified. The reader was not able to cri tique the questions appropiability or notice if they were clearly understood. Survey respondents misunderstand questions more often than one might expect, and the collection process mistakes are difficult to discover and correct (Conrad Schober 2005). To amend the validity of the research, Mortimer could of included member checks. Member checks involve sharing all of the findings with the participants, allowing them to question and comment on the authenticity of the work (Creswell, 2007) this would eliminate whatever misunderstandings. Forwarding that Mortimer could have piloted her study so she was able to recognise any gaps in her proposal method (Sampson, 2004).The researcher has a clear state to ensure that they protect the right and well being of their participants irrespective of the nature of their research, there are many guidelines that reinforce these principles and many aspects are legally enforceable (Eby, 1991). Mortimer does not discuss any estimable issues tha t she considered, or whether ethical approval was given. Participants who are subject in a research subject must be competent, have full disclosure of the subject field, understand the process and voluntarily participate (Emanuel, Abdoler Stunkel 2006). This is not disclosed in Mortimer study, therefore the reader is required to assume that the correct ethical procedures were adopted.The data analysis of the study was satisfactory. Mortimer provided a clear breakdown of the data that she gathered. However, no secret writing was present, coding is an important aspect of a study, it allows studies to be repeated and validated, it makes methods perspicuous (Shenton, 2004). In Mortimers case the coding should of been finalized once the survey was immaculate and in the case of interviews after the data was collected (Bourque, 2004). She included some(prenominal) direct quotes from participants, which increase the credibility in her research. Quotations give an insight and center and illustrate the argument (Holloway Wheeler, 2013) facilitating the reader to understand how the findings were presented. However, it ought to be recognized that her findings are clearly presented and concluded.You have someone to trust (2012) can be seen as having an insignificant amount of credibility. Credibility can be defined as The plausibility of ones study (Pitney commonser 2009). This article is a young document created in 2012, suggesting that the information if current and up to date, furthering that, credible sources have been researched through the paper such as the NSPCC Safeguarding For Children. The investigators, background and qualification are unknown, Patton 1990 believes that the credibility of the researcher is especially important as it is the person who collects the data. It is believed that this is evenly as important as the procedure credibility (Alkin, Daillak White, 1979).Beyond that, triangulation is a credible strategy that Mortimer does practice. Individual interviews, focus groups and surveys are used on with supporting data from documents. Other credible strategies include member checks and a prolonged study time (Munkhjargal, 2006). However, these were not applied throughout Mortimers study. finished triangulation of data collection methods, interviewing and data analysis, Mortimer has enhanced the validity of her work. Alongside these methods of data collection Mortimer has kept her focus on the objectives of her study. Mortimer has created transferability in her research through referencing literature collected on similar topics and areas.The research intentions are therefore found as a result of the work. That being stated, the subject field was very brief and a large amount of data could have been supplied to enhance the validity of the article. Without these any reader may believe that she has become too subjective in her decisions to understand her participants, reducing confimability in her work. Nevertheless, o ne can expect to ensure comparable results in similar settings from this study, making it clear that the researcher was dependable. On a whole it is clear that the research was valuable, Practical Tips For Schools was created and the objective of the study achieved.ReferencesAkin, M, Daillak, R White, P (1979) Using evaluation does evaluation make a difference? Beverly Hills Sage Volume 76.Ali, A Youseff H. (2011). Quality in Qualitative Studies. Issues in Social and Environement Accounting. 5 (1/2), p25-64.Bourque, Linda B. Coding. In The Sage Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. Eds. Michael S. Lewis-Beck, Alan Bryman, and Timothy Futing Liao, v. 1, 132-136. green Oaks, Calif. Sage, 2004.Bradley, J. (1993). Methodological issues and practices in qualitative research. Library Quarterly, 63 (4), 431-449.Conrad, F Schober, M. (2005). daybook of Official Statistics. Promoting Uniform Question Understanding in Todays. 21 (2), P215-231Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design Choosing among five traditions (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA Sage.Creswell, JW. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design Choosing Among Five Traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA Sage Publications.Dawson, M, Dawson, B Overfield, J. (2013). Reading for Your Research Project. In Unknown communication Skills for Biosciences. Unknown Wiley Blackwell. p67.Eby M 1991, Ethical issues in nursing research the wider picture. go for Researcher 3 (1), 5-13Emanuel, E Abdoler, E Stunkel, L. (2006). How to treat people who accede in research. Research Ethics. Unknown (6), p7.Fink Arlene (2005). Conducting Research Literture. 2nd Ed. capital of the United Kingdom SAGE. p46-58.Griffin, C. (2007). The advantages and limitation of qualitative research. Unknown. 11 (3), p127-156.Hammersley, M (2013). What is qualitative research?. capital of the United Kingdom Bloomsbury. p2.Holloway, I Whealer, s (2013). Qualitative Research in Nursing and Healthcare. tertiary Ed. We st Sussex Blackwell Publishing. p325.Jenson, H. (2010). The Logic of Qualitative Survey Research and its Position in the Field of Social Research Methods. Qualitative Social Research. 11 (2), p.Klente, K (2008). Qualitative Research in The Study of Leadership. Bingley Emerald Group. p11.Letts, L., Wilkins, S., Law, M., Stewart, D., Bosch, J., Westmorland, M.. (2007). Critical Review Form. easy http//www.srsmcmaster.ca/Portals/20/pdf/ebp/qualreview_version2.0.pdf. Last accessed fifteenth Jan 2015.Lincoln, YS. Guba, EG. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA Sage PublicationsMangel, S K (2013). Research Methodology in Behavioural Science. Unknown PH Learning Privert Limited. p45Munkhjargal, D. (2006). Data analysis. The Relationship Between Mathematical Discourse and the Curriculum. Unknown (3), p90.Patton, M (1990) Qualitative Education and Research Methods. 2nd Ed Newbury Park SagePitney, W Parker, J (2009). Qualitative Research in animal(prenominal) Activity and the He alth Professions. Canada Unknown. P63-64.Potit, F Beck, C (2013). Essentials of Nursing Research. 8th Ed. Unknown Walter Klue Health. p285.Saks, M., and Allsop, J., (2007) Researching Health, Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Methods. London. SageSampson, H. (2005). Qualitative Research. Navigating the waves the usefulness of piloting in research. 4 (3), p383-402.Shenton, Andrew K. The analysis of qualitative data in LIS research projects A possible approach. Education for Information 22 (2004) 143-162Unknown. (2014). GOV.UK. Available https//www.gov.uk/schools-colleges-childrens-services/safeguarding-children. Last accessed 15th Jan 2015.1