The portfolio as a whole is worth 30% of your overall module mark and comprises a series of activities, as outlined below. The portfolio should not exceed 1500 words equivalent. All sections except the overall title, References, Appendices are included in the word count. The completed qualitative portfolio should be submitted electronically as one document.
The three elements of the portfolio are weighted at 40%, 40% and 20% of the overall mark for the assessment. Failure to include an element will lead to no mark being included for that element. Note that the overall mark may be reduced if the reference list and/or appendices are incomplete.
Part 1: Thematic Analysis Coding
This will have a piece of text outlining the subject position and choice of coding technique, together with a thematic map (diagram or table) and a line of argument for each theme. A marked up copy of the transcript should be included as an appendix (either electronic mark up, or scanned off paper). This piece is viewed as 400 words equivalent, in that it takes as much effort as writing a 400 word essay with references etc. It will not in itself be 400 words, since it is not sensible to do a word count of the thematic map.
The marking criteria are:
• Is it clear what guidelines have been used to inform the approach to analysis? (E.g. Braun & Clarke, 2013; King & Horrocks, 2010)
• Has the data been set out appropriately? (Spacing, line numbers)
• Is there clear evidence of descriptive coding (perhaps on the transcript)?
• Is there clear evidence of interpretative coding (perhaps on the transcript)?
• Is there evidence of theme construction, through identifying interpretive codes for themes?
• Are the themes sufficiently distinct and convincing?
• Do the coding and theme titles reflect a critical relativist position?
• Is the thematic map clearly formatted?
• Lines of argument (this summary can be included in the main body).
o Has a clear line of argument been made for each theme (and sub-theme where appropriate)?
o Has a clear line of argument been made linking all the themes together in relation to the research aim?
o Do these lines of arguments reflect a critical relativist position?
Part 2: Thematic Analysis Narrative
The marking criteria are:
• Is a clear, coherent and compelling argument put forward in relation to the focal theme?
• Does the write-up thread together an appropriate balance of interpretative and analytic narrative, data excerpts (a maximum of 4) and academic literature?
• Has the author demonstrated analytic sensibility:
o Does the discussion go beyond description and paraphrasing and offer interpretation?
o Does the theme construction and write-up reflect a critical relativist epistemological position?
Part 3: Personal Reflection on Research
The marking criteria are:
• Does the reflection discuss views of research following the Futures Conference poster session?
• Does the reflection identify and discuss challenges faced and lessons learnt whilst undertaking the qualitative exercises?
• Does it go beyond surface reflection and look more in depth at reflexive aspects? E.g. consideration of subject position and philosophical stance
• Is this written in first person and as continuous prose?
References and Appendices
The marking criteria are:
• Is there evidence of appropriate academic reading around research methodology and the focal topic?
• Have citations been included in the main body of the report where appropriate?
• Have corresponding full details been included in the reference list?
• Have citations and references been formatted in line with APA conventions?
• Is a worked on copy of the transcript included as an appendix?
• If not included on the thematic map, are interpretive codes indicated for themes?
