En kritisk diskusjon av ‘tematisk analyse etter Braun og Clarke (2006)’ i naturfagdidaktiske studier

Kari Beate Remmen
{"title":"En kritisk diskusjon av ‘tematisk analyse etter Braun og Clarke (2006)’ i naturfagdidaktiske studier","authors":"Kari Beate Remmen","doi":"10.5617/nordina.10094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke (2006) have become a phenomenon within qualitative research – and science education is no exception. However, thematic analysis is poorly understood and even misused in published research. In this article, I investigate the use of Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis in 26 studies published in Nordic Studies of Science Education (Nordina) between 2015-2022. Applying a shortened version of Braun and Clarkes (2021a) evaluation tool, I critically examine and discuss how ‘thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke (2006)’ is described and performed in the Nordina-articles. I find that thematic analysis is used in various ways, and often in ways that seem incompatible with Braun and Clarkes approach to the method. The findings and reflections should have implications for the use of and review of ‘thematic analysis after Braun and Clarke (2006)’ in science education research.    ","PeriodicalId":37114,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Studies in Science Education","volume":"117 28","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Studies in Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5617/nordina.10094","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke (2006) have become a phenomenon within qualitative research – and science education is no exception. However, thematic analysis is poorly understood and even misused in published research. In this article, I investigate the use of Braun and Clarke’s (2006) thematic analysis in 26 studies published in Nordic Studies of Science Education (Nordina) between 2015-2022. Applying a shortened version of Braun and Clarkes (2021a) evaluation tool, I critically examine and discuss how ‘thematic analysis following Braun and Clarke (2006)’ is described and performed in the Nordina-articles. I find that thematic analysis is used in various ways, and often in ways that seem incompatible with Braun and Clarkes approach to the method. The findings and reflections should have implications for the use of and review of ‘thematic analysis after Braun and Clarke (2006)’ in science education research.    
对科学教育研究中 "布劳恩和克拉克(2006 年)之后的主题分析 "的批判性讨论
继 Braun 和 Clarke(2006 年)之后,专题分析已成为定性研究中的一种现象--科学教育也不例外。然而,在已发表的研究中,人们对主题分析的理解并不深刻,甚至存在误用现象。在本文中,我调查了布劳恩和克拉克(2006 年)的主题分析法在 2015-2022 年间发表于《北欧科学教育研究》(Nordina)的 26 项研究中的使用情况。应用布劳恩和克拉克(2021a)评价工具的简缩版本,我批判性地检查并讨论了 "布劳恩和克拉克(2006)的专题分析 "在北欧科学教育研究(Nordina)文章中是如何描述和执行的。我发现,专题分析的使用方式多种多样,而且往往与布劳恩和克拉克的方法相悖。这些发现和思考对于在科学教育研究中使用和审查 "布劳恩和克拉克(2006 年)之后的专题分析 "具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nordic Studies in Science Education
Nordic Studies in Science Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信