Qualitative Research Method in Türkiye: A Systematical Overview of Doctoral Theses in Educational Sciences
Abstract
This study provides a systematic overview of doctoral theses in the field of educational sciences in Türkiye that use qualitative research methods. To ensure both comprehensiveness and accessibility, the national theses database was reviewed. A total of 491 doctoral theses aligned with the qualitative research paradigm were identified through keyword searches. The data were analyzed using content analysis techniques, focusing on various aspects such as research design, sampling methods and groups, data collection tools, data analysis methods, trustworthiness criteria, the researcher’s role, and presentation of findings. The results showed that while certain elements—such as qualitative design types, sampling strategies, and data analysis techniques—were commonly used, other components received less attention. Notably, the presentation of trustworthiness and the role of the researcher were often vague or missing, indicating inconsistency across the theses. Most of the studies lacked sufficient detail regarding the methodological rigor expected in qualitative research. Overall, the findings suggest several methodological shortcomings and a need for improvement in the effective and consistent use of qualitative research methods in doctoral theses in the field of educational sciences in Türkiye. The study emphasizes the importance of providing detailed methodological information and adhering to qualitative research standards to enhance the quality and credibility of future research in this field.
Keywords
Qualitative research method, systematical review, educational sciences, descriptive analysis
Supporting Institution
There is no supporting institution for this research paper.
Ethical Statement
Ethics committee approval was not necessary because all the research papers studied were open access. All research papers had open access so it was assumed that the researchers give permission to obtain information and research.
References
- Akdemir, A. B., and Kılıç, A. (2021). Method analysis of qualitative articles. Journal of Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Education, 8(2), 486–502. https://doi.org/10.21666/muefd.834707
- Artut, P. D., and Yetkin, N. (2022). Trends in primary and secondary school studies on mathematical modeling in turkey between 2011- 2020: A content analysis. Journal of National Education, 2(2),322-345. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6782554
- Başkale, H. (2016). Determination of validity, reliability and sample size in qualitative studies. Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Nursing Electronic Journal, 9(1), 23-28.
- Battal, A., and Çalışkan, A. (2021). Investigating the Studies Conducted between 2015-2019 in the Field of Computer Assisted Mathematics Instruction. OPUS International Journal of Society Research, 18(40), 2258-2287. https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.837465
- Bıkmaz, F. H., Aksoy, E., Tatar, Ö., and Altınyüzük, C. A. (2013). The content analiysis of PhD theses completed in the field of curriculum and instruction (1974-2009). Eğitim ve Bilim, 38(168).
- Bogdan, R., and Biklen, S. K. (1997). Qualitative research for education. Allyn and Bacon. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0902027
- Creswell, J. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (4th ed.). SAGE.
- Creswell, J. W., and Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design (4th ed.). CA: Sage.
- Cleary, M., Horsfall, J., and Hayter, M. (2014). Data collection and sampling in qualitative research: Does size matter? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70(3), 473-475. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12163
- Corbin, J. and Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 4th ed., Sage Publications