Abstract

Writing and communication researchers are in the early stages of developing procedures for reusing and maximizing the analytical potentials of qualitative data. Contributing to this effort, we critically reflect on our methodological decision-making process in developing innovative procedures for cross-analyzing two distinct studies. Our reflection responds to the need for published guidance on how to undertake methodological adaptation, the lack of which limits opportunities for other researchers to develop new study procedures to address complex problems. By discussing how and why we made particular methodological choices and adaptations in our collaborative study of faculty and doctoral student writers, we propose collaborative secondary data analysis as a fruitful avenue for qualitative writing researchers and show its potential to enact richer and more equitable research designs.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2021-07-01
DOI
10.1177/07410883211010166
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (2)

  1. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
  2. Written Communication

Cites in this index (14)

  1. Written Communication
  2. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  3. Research in the Teaching of English
  4. Written Communication
  5. Written Communication
Show all 14 →
  1. Research in the Teaching of English
  2. College Composition and Communication
  3. Written Communication
  4. Written Communication
  5. Written Communication
  6. Written Communication
  7. Written Communication
  8. Written Communication
  9. College Composition and Communication
Also cites 17 works outside this index ↓
  1. Belcher W. L. (2009). Writing your journal article in twelve weeks: A guide to academic publishing success. S…
  2. Dancy T. E., Edwards K. T., Davis J. E. (2018). Historically white universities and plantation politics: Anti…
  3. Dippre R. J., Phillips T. (Eds.). (2020). Approaches to lifespan writing research: Generating an actionable c…
  4. Edwards M. A., Roy S. (2017). Academic research in the 21st century: Maintaining scientific integrity in a cl…
  5. Hendry P. M. (2009). Narrative as inquiry. Journal of Educational Research, 103(2), 72–80. https://doi.org/10…
  6. Hinds P. S., Vogel R. J., Clarke-Steffen L. (1997). The possibilities and pitfalls of doing a secondary analy…
  7. 10.4159/9780674039414
  8. Kegan R., Noam G. G., Rogers L. (1982). The psychologic of emotion: A neo-Piagetian view. New Directions for …
  9. Madden S., Eodice M., Edwards K. T., Lockett A. (2020). Learning from the lived experiences of graduate stude…
  10. Madden S., Tarabochia S. (2020). Emotional labor, mentoring, and equity for doctoral student and faculty writ…
  11. Patel L. (2015). Decolonizing educational research: From ownership to answerability. Routledge. https://doi.o…
  12. Poe M., Inoue A. B., Elliot N. (2018). Writing assessment, social justice, and the advancement of opportunity…
  13. Ruggiano N., Perry T. E. (2019). Conducting secondary analysis of qualitative data: Should we, can we, and ho…
  14. Shahjahan R. A. (2014). Being “lazy” and slowing down: Toward decolonizing time, our body, and pedagogy. Educ…
  15. Simpson S. (2016). Introduction: New frontiers in graduate writing support and program design. In Simpson S.,…
  16. Stewart A. J., Valian V. (2018). An inclusive academy: Achieving diversity and excellence. Massachusetts Inst…
  17. Tarabochia S. L. (2020). Self-authorship and faculty writers’ “trajectories of becoming.” Composition Studies…
CrossRef global citation count: 2 View in citation network →