Explore the vast range of titles available.

The role of iteration in qualitative data analysis, not as a repetitive mechanical task but as a reflexive process, is key to sparking insight and developing meaning. In this paper the authors presents a simple framework for qualitative data analysis comprising three iterative questions. The authors developed it to analyze qualitative data and to engage with the process of continuous meaning-making and progressive focusing inherent to analysis processes. They briefly present the framework and locate it within a more general discussion on analytic reflexivity. They then highlight its usefulness, particularly for newer researchers, by showing practical applications of the framework in two very different studies.

Purpose – This conceptual paper aims to argue that times, spaces, bodies and things constitute four essential dimensions of workplace learning. It examines how practices relate or hang together, taking Gherardi’s texture of practices or connectedness in action as the foundation for making visible essential but often overlooked dimensions of workplace learning. Design/methodology/approach – This framework is located within and adds to contemporary sociomaterial- or practice-based approaches, in which learning is understood as an emergent requirement and product of ongoing practice that cannot be specified in advance. Findings – The four dimensions are essential in two senses: they are the constitutive essence of textures of practices: what they are made of and they are non-optional; it is not possible to conceive a texture of practices without all of these dimensions present. Although the conceptual terrains to which they point overlap considerably, they remain useful as analytic points of departure. Each reveals something that is less clear in the others. Research limitations/implications – This innovative framework responds to calls to better understand how practices hang together, and offers a toolkit that reflects the multifaceted nature of practice. It presents a distinctive basis for making sense of connectedness in action, and thus for understanding learning in work. Originality/value – The paper offers a novel conceptual framework, expanding the texture of practices through dimensions of times, spaces, bodies and things, rendering visible aspects that might otherwise be ignored.

Introduction To extend research on positive aspects of health care, this article focusses on health care for children who tube‐feed—this is because knowledge about tube‐feeding for children is limited and fragmented. This is achieved by consulting with clinicians and carers who supported children who tube‐feed to clarify their understandings of and experiences with brilliant feeding care. Methods Nine clinicians and nine carers who supported children who tube‐fed were interviewed. The interview transcripts were analysed thematically. Results Findings highlighted several features of brilliant feeding care—namely: practices that go above and beyond; attentiveness; empowerment; being ‘on the same page’; hopefulness and normalcy. Conclusions These findings show that seemingly trivial or small acts of care can make a significant meaningful difference to carers of children who tube‐feed. Such accounts elucidate brilliant care as grounded in feasible, everyday actions, within clinicians' reach. The implications associated with these findings are threefold. First, the findings highlight the need for clinicians to listen, be attuned and committed to the well‐being of children who tube‐feed and their carers, share decision‐making, source resources, and instil hope. Second, the findings suggest that carers should seek out and acknowledge clinicians who listen, involve them in decision‐making processes, and continue to source the resources required to optimize child and carer well‐being. Third, the findings point to the need for research to clarify the models of care that foster brilliant feeding care, and the conditions required to introduce and sustain these models. Patient or Public Contribution All of the carers and clinicians who contributed to this study were invited to participate in a workshop to discuss, critique, and sense‐check the findings. Three carers and one clinician accepted this invitation. Collectively, they indicated that the findings resonated with them, and they agreed with the themes, which they indicated were well‐substantiated by the data.

Gaining a better sense of how pupils conceive school geography is crucial if we are to understand the ways in which their ideas and values mediate learning processes.Geography in Secondary Schoolsexplores how pupils experience geography lessons, what they think geography as a school subject is about, and what it means to them. School geography aims to help young people think about the world and their place in it in a distinctive - geographical - way. However very little is known about the kinds of thinking and values they associate with the subject. Researchers are increasingly taking young people's ideas seriously as important and worthy of investigation in their own right. In this book, Nick Hopwood takes such an approach to explore the relationships between pupils and geography as a school subject. He follows six pupils through their geography lessons for a period of three months, discussing their learning experiences in depth with them. Their participation in class, written work, and comments made in interviews form the basis for a detailed investigation of their ideas.

While model organisms have had many historians, this article places studies of humans, and particularly our development, in the politics of species choice. Human embryos, investigated directly rather than via animal surrogates, have gone through cycles of attention and neglect. In the past 60 years they moved from the sidelines to center stage. Research was resuscitated in anatomy, launched in reproductive biomedicine, molecular genetics, and stem-cell science, and made attractive in developmental biology. I explain this surge of interest in terms of rivalry with models and reliance on them. The greater involvement of medicine in human reproduction, especially through in vitro fertilization, gave access to fresh sources of material that fed critiques of extrapolation from mice and met demands for clinical relevance or “translation.” Yet much of the revival depended on models. Supply infrastructures and digital standards, including biobanks and virtual atlases, emulated community resources for model organisms. Novel culture, imaging, molecular, and postgenomic methods were perfected on less precious samples. Toing and froing from the mouse affirmed the necessity of the exemplary mammal and its insufficiency justified inquiries into humans. Another kind of model—organoids and embryo-like structures derived from stem cells—enabled experiments that encouraged the organization of a new field, human developmental biology. Research on humans has competed with and counted on models.

Background and Objective Migrant and refugee women, families, and their children can experience significant language, cultural, and psychosocial barriers to engage with child and family services. Integrated child and family health Hubs are increasingly promoted as a potential solution to address access barriers; however, there is scant literature on how to best implement them with migrant and refugee populations. Our aim was to explore with service providers and consumers the barriers, enablers, and experiences with Hubs and the resulting building blocks required for acceptable Hub implementation for migrant and refugee families. Design, Setting and Participants This project was undertaken in Sydney, New South Wales, in communities characterised by cultural diversity. In this qualitative study, we used semi‐structured interviews guided by the consolidated framework for implementation research, with service providers from health and social services (32 participants) and migrant and refugee parents (14 parents) of children who had accessed Hubs. Research and Discussion Our initial qualitative data themes were developed into step‐by‐step building blocks, representing a way to address contextual determinants to establish and sustain a Hub that can support migrant and refugee families. These include the setting‐up phase activities of buy‐in and partnership development, which outlines mechanisms to foster collective action and collaboration between health and social services. Following this, our orientation model articulates the need to establish Hub coordination and navigation, activities that enhance a Hub's relevance for migrant and refugee families and ongoing integration mechanisms, such as engagement of same‐language general practitioners. This is the first study to explore the building blocks required for acceptable Hub implementation to meet the needs of migrant and refugee families in the first 2000 days of a child's life—a critical time to optimise child development and health. Patient or Public Contribution The research questions were developed based on qualitative research undertaken with Hub participants, community members, and service providers. The original investigator team had a consumer representative who has since relocated and consultation was undertaken with local Hub partner services. The researchers also consulted multicultural health services, including cultural support workers, to ensure research materials were culturally nuanced. Patients or participants have not directly been involved in the current study design. Clinical Trial Registration This trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials (ACTRN12621001088831).

This submission is a reflection by Srivastava and Hopwood on their earlier article, A Practical Iterative Framework for Qualitative Data Analysis, originally published in International Journal of Qualitative Methods in 2009, and selected for the journal’s special anniversary issue, “Top 20 in 20.” They discuss how they have applied the framework in their various studies since then, Srivastava, primarily in field-based international research in education and global development, and Hopwood, in education and health. Based on a brief analysis of the paper’s citations, they identify its impact to have been: in a wide variety of fields crossing disciplinary boundaries, studies situated in a range of domestic and international contexts, studies analyzing data from intersectional perspectives and conducted with marginalized participant groups, referred to in methodological textbooks and publications, and used by researchers of all levels of experience, independently or in teams. They end by identifying what they consider to be key emerging topics associated with qualitative data analysis, Hopwood, on nonrepresentational and posthumanist perspectives and the implications of “postcoding,” and Srivastava on considering the agency of less privileged, marginalized, or vulnerable participants in data collection and analysis.