Date: 08.04.2025
Location: ISPW, Berne (online workshop)
Organisers: Prof. Dr. Noora Ronkainen
Guest lecturers: Dr. Michael McDougall, University of Stirling
Participants: in total 13 participants from the University of Bern, the University of Stirling and the Norwegian School of Sport Science (of which 8 PhD students, 2 post-Docs, 2 lecturers, 1 full professor)
Aim and focus of the workshop
The interactive workshop, organized in collaboration with Dr. Michael McDougall (University of Stirling), aimed to discuss current developments and challenges for PhD students with a focus on qualitative research. The focus was on an in-depth reflection on methodological, theoretical, and strategic issues in scientific practice.
The first session, led by Prof. Dr. Noora Ronkainen, was devoted to interview research and the question of why researchers obtain certain stories and not others from interviewees. The discussion focused on what influences the construction of personal stories, what experiences are shared, and what constitutes a “good story” in a research context. Participants reflected on whether interviews should be conducted openly or theory driven. The second focus, presented by Dr. Michael McDougall, was on research impact. Against the backdrop of competitive funding structures, different dimensions of impact were explored and strategies discussed for convincingly presenting selected dimensions, such as social relevance, in grant applications. The third session was devoted to post-qualitative research. Based on the reading of Bishop and Camiré (2024), the extent to which traditional, humanistic research logics should be rethought or even abandoned was questioned.
Theoretical discussions
The discussions were designed to be dialogical and were characterized by a high level of participation. In the first unit, the interview was understood as a relational process in which meaning is constructed jointly. The participants reflected on theoretical assumptions, positioning, and power relations. In the topic area of impact, concrete project ideas were discussed and refined in terms of their social impact. The exchange enabled practical further developments of the participants' own research projects. The third session was designed as a pure discussion round. Post-qualitative approaches were experienced as productive irritation that opened up uncertainties but also new perspectives.
Conclusion
Overall, the workshop was characterized by a constructive, critical, and reflexive atmosphere in which theoretical concepts were not only presented but also jointly scrutinised and further developed.
