Researchers use the policy Delphi method to explore a complex topic with little historical context that requires expert opinion to fully understand underlying issues. The benefit of this research technique is the use of experts who have more timely information than can be gleamed from extant literature. Additionally, those experts place researchers in a specific moment, thus increasing the possibility of capturing change over time. One limitation of the policy Delphi is the difficulty in developing an accurate initial questionnaire to start the process. The purpose of this article is to identify benefits and limitations of this research method. Key words mixed methods research . policy Delphi method . research methodsResearchers have a variety of methods at their disposal to collect and analyze data related to diverse topics from differing philosophical perspectives. For some research scholars the discussion of methodology is an either/or choice between quantitative and qualitative inquiry methods. There is, however, the additional option of selecting a research design that Innov High Educ (2007) 31: 237-246

No abstract

This article reports on a naturalistic research study exploring faculty attitudes about the use of technology in the college classroom. The data collection method consisted of a series of synchronous, computer-mediated focus group sessions using a group support system. Participants in the four focus group sessions were faculty employed at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. The researchers found that the computer-mediated format for the focus group method of inquiry improved the objectivity of each session, reduced the influence of a sensitive topic on participation and enhanced the management of participant discussion. Furthermore, the electronic format improved the accuracy of the data collected by capturing every voice and every comment in ‘real time’. The primary disadvantage of the computer-mediated method was the reduced ability of the researcher to guide the discussion and request elaboration on any given topic.

Interpreter Education Programs (IEPs) frequently encounter a dilemma when attempting to assist students who have completed a second-language learning sequence in their transition to interpreter education. Typically, students exhibit difficulties making this transition when they perceive their language base is inadequate to successfully complete the interpreting sequence in their program. This investigation was designed to (a) explore factors that contribute to or inhibit readiness to apply language skills to interpretation, and (b) identify similarities and differences between students’ perspectives of this transition in the context of signed language and spoken language interpretation programs. The Interpreter Education Program (American Sign Language/English) at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock, USA conducted this study in collaboration with the Institute of Theoretical and Applied Translation Studies at the Karl-Franzens-University of Graz, Austria (which offers eleven languages). Observations from both programs provide insight for interpreter educators as they strive to improve programs and enhance student retention and program completion rates.

Background: People with multiple sclerosis (MS) receiving disease-modifying therapy must persist with their treatment for the prescribed duration and adhere to the prescribed interval and dose to achieve the full benefits. Aim: This audit aimed to assess whether the MySupport programme for patients with MS could improve persistence with subcutaneous (sc) interferon (IFN) β-1a. Methods: Anonymised data was retrospectively supplied by homecare providers for patients registered to receive sc IFN β-1a in January 2010. The number of ‘active’ patients (those continuing to receive scheduled deliveries) was recorded monthly for 24 months for patients receiving NHS treatment alone and those receiving both NHS treatment and MySupport. Results: A greater proportion of patients receiving NHS treatment and MySupport than of patients receiving NHS support only were on treatment at 12 months (90.0% vs 79.3%) and 24 months (74.9% vs 61.8%). The odds of being on treatment were significantly greater in patients receiving NHS treatment and MySupport than NHS support only at all time points (P<0.0001). Conclusion: A personalised support programme using one-to-one nursing support and additional support media can increase the likelihood of patients with MS remaining on sc IFN β-1a.