Qualitative Evaluation Methods in Ethics Education: A Systematic Review and Analysis of Best Practices

ABSTRACT

Although qualitative research offers some unique advantages over quantitative research, qualitative methods are rarely employed in the evaluation of ethics education programs and are often criticized for a lack of rigor. This systematic review investigated the use of qualitative methods in studies of ethics education. Following a review of the literature in which 24 studies were identified, each study was coded based on 16 best practices characteristics in qualitative research. General thematic analysis and grounded theory were found to be the dominant approaches used. Researchers are effectively executing a number of best practices, such as using direct data sources, structured data collection instruments, non-leading questioning, and expert raters. However, other best practices were rarely present in the courses reviewed, such as collecting data using multiple sources, methods, raters, and timepoints, evaluating reliability, and employing triangulation analyses to assess convergence. Recommendations are presented for improving future qualitative research studies in ethics education.

KEYWORDS:

• Best practices
• ethics education
• ethics instruction
• qualitative evaluation methods
• qualitative research

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Logan Steele, Brett Torrence, and Megan Turner for their contributions to the present effort.

Funding

This project was supported by grant number ORIIR140010-01-00 from the Office of Research Integrity. The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Department of Health and Human Services or the Office of Research Integrity.

Notes

* References marked with asterisks were included in the review of qualitative studies.

Additional information

Funding

This project was supported by grant number ORIIR140010-01-00 from the Office of Research Integrity. The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Department of Health and Human Services or the Office of Research Integrity.