This course presents pragmatic, concrete strategies for designing and writing effective and competitive qualitative and mixed methods research proposals. We will cover principles generic to proposal design, and specific ways to communicate the aims, significance, conceptual framing, methodological details (sampling, data collection, analysis plans, and plans for optimizing validity and human subjects protections) of, and budget and budget justification for, the proposed study. We will also cover strategies for addressing those aspects of qualitative and mixed methods research designs likely to draw concern among reviewers less familiar with them, most notably the purposeful sampling frame and generalizability of study findings.

In addition to didactic instruction, handouts, and a suggested reference list, the course will also include an interactive session where participants will have the opportunity, as time permits, to ask questions about their own proposals.

This course is appropriate for graduate students and faculty in the practice disciplines (e.g., clinical psychology, education, medicine, nursing, population health, public health, social work) as well as researchers from other fields of study (e.g., sociology, anthropology).

Grounded theory is recognized as one of the most popular and highly cited methodologies in qualitative research, yet a perusal of many papers citing its use demonstrates a lack of understanding of its core features. This course aims to make explicit and clarify for participants the core features of a grounded theory research design, and the adaptations necessary to align the methodology with constructivist principles. This two-day workshop introduces participants to key topics including:

• The history and development of grounded theory
• Critical reflexivity and researcher positionalities
• Coding stages and categorizing
• Memoing and diagramming
• Theoretical sampling
• Involving participants in the research process
• Constructing, conceptualizing and writing up a grounded theory
• Evaluating a constructivist grounded theory (CGT)

The course includes multiple practical exercises to actively engage participants in developing and refining their knowledge and skills. Data for use in these activities will be provided, but participants may also bring their own data if they prefer. The course commences with the fundamentals and then engages more deeply with implementing grounded theory’s core processes and considers the application of constructivist adaptations. Throughout the course, there is an emphasis on CGT’s epistemological foundation and resultant adaptations to the research process, including the literature review, researcher positionality/ies and reflexivity, and participant involvement. Other topics include using some of the powerful grounded theory strategies (such as open coding) in studies with a different overall methodological approach.

Course content will draw on the extensive scholarship of Kathy Charmaz, Barney Glaser, and Anselm Strauss, as well as readings and resources from grounded theory scholars Robert Thornberg, Adele Clarke, and myself, including the following:

• Charmaz, K. (2014) Constructing grounded theory. 2nd edition. London: Sage
• Charmaz, K., Thornberg, R., and Keane, E. (2018) Evolving grounded theory and social justice inquiry. In N. K. Denzin, and Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. pp. 411–443
• Morse, J. M., Bowers, B. J., Charmaz, K., Clarke, A. E., Corbin, J., Porr, C. J., & Stern, P. N. (2021) Developing grounded theory: The second generation revisited. Routledge.
• Keane, E. (2015) Considering the practical implementation of constructivist grounded theory in a study of widening participation in Irish higher education, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 18(4), pp. 415-431
• Keane, E. (2022) ‘The Legacy of Kathy Charmaz's scholarship and mentorship: Enacting her constructivist principles through critically reflexive grounded theory practice', in Bryant, A. and Clarke, A. E. (Eds) Festschrift in Honor of Kathy Charmaz'. Studies in Symbolic Interaction, 56, pp. 133-148.
• Keane, E. (2022) Analytic memoing. In C. Vanover, P. Mihas, and J. Saldaña (Eds.), The Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data: After the interview. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, pp. 259-274
• Keane, E. (2023) 'The use of literature in a grounded theory study' In Birks, M. and Mills, J. (Eds): Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide (3rd. ed). London: Sage, pp. 94-95
• Keane, E. and Thornberg, R. (2023) 'Grounded Theory: History, Genres, and Implementation' In Lester, J., Salvo, J. and Ulmer, J. (Eds): Routledge Encyclopaedia of Qualitative Research Methods. London: Routledge.
• Keane, E. and Thornberg, R. (Eds.) (2025) The Routledge International Handbook of Constructivist Grounded Theory in Educational Research, London: Routledge
• Thornberg, R. (2012) Informed grounded theory. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 56, pp. 243–259.
• Thornberg, R., and Keane, E. (2022) Designing grounded theory studies. In U. Flick (Ed.), Sage handbook of qualitative research design. London: Sage, pp. 452-466

Communicating research findings is storytelling; some stories are supported by qualitative data, some are supported by numbers, some by both. This course is for researchers who want to incorporate mixed methods into their scholarship and consume mixed methods research. Rather than furthering the misguided rivalry between inquiries, this course will focus on the shared principles between qualitative and quantitative analysis, noting divergence when necessary. This approach will position scholars to determine patterns and draw integrated conclusions across analyses and across a literature, all toward the goal of telling rich, well-informed stories.

Core discussions will include:

• Basic principles, assumptions, and practices in mixed methods.
• How to develop a sound, flexible analysis strategy.
• Specific methods for integrating qualitative and quantitative findings.
• How to manage assumptions to maintain analytic legitimacy.
• Best practices for writing-up mixed methods findings.
• Concrete examples and tips for practice.