| Course | RES 6033 Qualitative Research Designs |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Qualitative design proposal |
| Length | 1,230 words, about 4 pages plus title and reference pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | American College of Education |
| Program | Ed.D. and DBA doctoral core |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for RES 6033 Module 5
Keep or Close: A Qualitative Multiple Case Study Proposal Examining How Leaders of Small Rural Hospitals Decide the Future of Obstetric Units
Student Name
American College of Education
RES6033: Qualitative Research Designs
Module 5 Assignment
Instructor Name
November 9, 2026
Problem and Purpose
Rural hospitals have been closing obstetric units for years, and each closure lengthens the trip that women in labor must make. A study of rural hospitals in nine states found closures concentrated among the smallest hospitals and in places short of physicians who deliver babies, and showed that women in affected communities faced an average of 29 additional miles to reach a hospital offering deliveries (Hung et al., 2016). Research of this kind identifies which hospitals close units but not how their leaders make the decision, what alternatives they weigh or why some similar hospitals keep their units. The purpose of this qualitative multiple case study is to understand how leaders of small rural hospitals in Kansas and neighboring states reach a verdict on their obstetric services.
Research Questions
RQ1: In their own accounts, how did each hospital's leaders move from first concern to a final vote on the birthing unit?
RQ2: Which money, staffing, community and governance factors do those leaders say decided the result?
RQ3: Where do process and factors differ between the hospitals that still deliver babies and those that stopped?
The first two questions restate those from Module 2 in shorter form; RQ3, added since, makes the comparison between outcomes explicit and depends on the case selection described below.
Design and Rationale
The study uses a qualitative multiple case study design. Baxter and Jack (2008) described case study as suited to how and why questions about a contemporary phenomenon in its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clear, and they distinguished multiple case studies, which allow comparison across cases, from single case studies. Each case is one hospital's decision, bounded from the first recorded discussion of the unit's future to the final board vote. Cases are selected by replication logic: some are expected to show similar results, hospitals that closed units, and others contrasting results for predictable reasons, hospitals that kept them. Module 1 compared this design with phenomenology, grounded theory, ethnography and narrative inquiry and chose it because each decision has clear edges in time, leaves a paper trail and should yield lessons other hospitals can use.
Case Selection
Six cases will be selected: three hospitals that closed an obstetric unit and three that considered closing but kept theirs, all within the past five years. Eligible hospitals have fewer than 50 beds, are located in rural counties and delivered at least 50 babies a year before the decision. Hospitals will be identified through state hospital associations and public reports, then invited by letter to the chief executive. Within each group, selection will seek variation in ownership, independent or part of a system, and distance to the nearest hospital offering deliveries. No hospital in my own system or in an affiliation negotiation with it will be included.
Participants and Documents
At every hospital I will seek out the people closest to the vote: its top executive, a trustee or two, a doctor who handled deliveries and someone from the unit's nursing staff, for four to six interviews per case. If a key participant has left the hospital, efforts will be made to reach them, since departed clinicians may be among the most important voices. Documents requested from each hospital include board and committee minutes from the decision period, financial and feasibility analyses, staffing records for obstetric coverage and public statements; local news coverage will be collected separately. A data use agreement will govern each hospital's documents.
Data Collection
Interviews will follow the semi-structured protocol developed in Module 2: an opening question on role, a grand tour question asking participants to describe how the unit's future first came up, process and considerations questions with probes held back to avoid steering and closing questions on advice to other leaders and suggested participants. Interviews will last about 60 minutes and take place in person or by video, recorded with permission and transcribed verbatim. Where I can read the minutes first, I will tie my questions to the meetings and reports they record. Data collection for each case is expected to take six to eight weeks, and cases will be collected one or two at a time across about 18 months.
Data Analysis
Analysis proceeds in two stages. Within each case, transcripts and documents will be analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, following the phases Braun and Clarke (2006) described: familiarization, coding, generating candidate themes, reviewing them against coded data and full transcripts, defining and naming them and writing up. A case summary will describe the decision's timeline, participants and themes. Across cases, a matrix will set each case's themes, timeline and conditions side by side, and the analysis will look for patterns that hold across cases with the same outcome and differences between cases that kept and closed their units. The practice coding in Module 3 suggested that a turning point, often the loss of surgical coverage, may settle decisions before the formal process begins, a pattern the cross-case analysis can test directly.
Trustworthiness
Following the criteria summarized by Korstjens and Moser (2018), credibility will be supported by triangulation across documents and participant roles, synthesized member checking with case summaries and peer debriefing with a qualitative methods faculty member. Transferability will be supported by thick description of each case, reported in ranges to protect confidentiality. Dependability and confirmability will rest on an audit trail including protocol revisions, the codebook, memos and cross-case matrices. A reflexive journal will be kept throughout.
Ethical Considerations and Researcher Role
The study will be reviewed by the university's IRB. Participants will give informed consent, and the consent form will state that the research is independent of my employer and that no data will be shared with it. Because small rural hospitals are easily identified, cases will be described without state names, characteristics will be reported in ranges and participants will review quotations attributed to their role. I am an executive in a rural hospital system who led a decision to close an obstetric unit. That experience gives me access and understanding, but it also creates a risk that I will hear my own story in others'. A positionality statement in the final report and a reflexive journal throughout the study address that risk.
Limitations and Delimitations
By design, the study covers only small Plains hospitals whose boards ruled on obstetric services in the last five years. Its findings will describe six cases in depth and will not estimate how common any pattern is. Participants' accounts are retrospective and may be shaped by the outcome, a limitation partly offset by documents created at the time. Hospitals willing to share board minutes may differ from those that are not. These limits are consistent with the study's purpose, which is to explain how decisions are made rather than to count them.
Conclusion
This proposal brings together the course's five modules: a multiple case study chosen for a bounded, documented decision; an interview protocol built to invite accounts rather than steer them; reflexive thematic analysis within and across cases; and a trustworthiness and ethics plan suited to a study of peers in small communities. Comparing hospitals that kept and closed their units gives the study a chance to show other rural leaders what tips the balance.
References
Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Hung, P., Kozhimannil, K. B., Casey, M. M., & Moscovice, I. S. (2016). Why are obstetric units in rural hospitals closing their doors? Health Services Research, 51(4), 1546-1560. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12441
Korstjens, I., & Moser, A. (2018). Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 4: Trustworthiness and publishing. European Journal of General Practice, 24(1), 120-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2017.1375092
RES 6033 Module 5 instructions, in plain terms
The closing module of RES 6033 generally asks students to bring the course together in a complete qualitative design proposal. Expect to include, in order, the problem and purpose, research questions, the design with its rationale, case or participant selection, data collection procedures and instruments, an analysis plan naming a specific method, trustworthiness strategies, ethical protections, the researcher's role and limitations and delimitations. Many instructors grade it as a first draft of Chapter 3. Alignment carries the most weight, so each element should follow from the research questions and fit the chosen design. A short timeline for data collection and analysis is often welcome as well.
How the RES 6033 Module 5 example is put together
Grounded in a nine-state analysis of closures, the proposal states the problem and purpose and three research questions, including one added to compare outcomes. The design section explains multiple case study and replication logic. Case selection describes six hospitals, three that closed units and three that kept them, with eligibility criteria and variation sought. Participants, documents and data collection follow, then a two-stage analysis plan, first within each case and then across all six, that tests a pattern from the practice coding. Sections on trustworthiness, ethics, the researcher's role and limitations and delimitations close the proposal. Each section draws on the module that first developed it.
Where the points sit in the RES 6033 Module 5 rubric
Qualitative proposals are typically scored on alignment, methodological fit, completeness and transparency. Graders usually check that the design suits the research questions, that case or participant selection is justified, that data collection and analysis are specific enough to follow and that the analysis method is named and described. Trustworthiness strategies and ethical protections should fit the setting. Distinguishing limitations from delimitations, describing the researcher's role openly and drawing on current methodological sources mark the strongest proposals in most sections. Consistent APA formatting and precise use of design terms complete the expectations. A proposal that a committee could approve with minor revisions is the target, so clarity and completeness matter as much as sophistication.
RES 6033 Module 5 help: mistakes that cost points
Qualitative proposals bring together decisions made over a whole course, and gaps between questions, design and analysis often show up only at this stage. If case selection, the analysis plan or the researcher role section is where your draft falls short, our writers can help. Send us your earlier module drafts together with the final assignment, and the qualitative proposal we write will align your own decisions into one document. Health administration, nursing and business case studies use the same structure and the same alignment checks. Limitations and delimitations are separated clearly, and your role as researcher is described openly. Every section is checked against your research questions so the proposal reads as one aligned argument.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official American College of Education document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More RES 6033 and Ed.D. and DBA doctoral core sample papers
- RES 6033 Module 1: Qualitative Designs Paper
- RES 6033 Module 2: Interview Protocol Paper
- RES 6033 Module 3: Coding and Themes Paper
- RES 6033 Module 4: Trustworthiness and Ethics
- RES 6561 Module 2: Framework Revisited
- RES 6023 Module 4: Power Analysis Paper
- LEAD 6173 Module 2: Cross-National Comparison
- LEAD 6011 Module 5: Leadership Growth Plan
RES 6033 Module 5 questions, answered
What does RES6033 Module 5 usually ask for?
The final RES6033 module typically asks for a complete qualitative design proposal: problem, purpose, research questions, design, participants, data collection, analysis, trustworthiness, ethics and limitations.
What is replication logic in a multiple case study?
Selecting cases expected either to show similar results or to show contrasting results for predictable reasons, so that patterns can be tested across cases.
What is the difference between a limitation and a delimitation?
Delimitations are boundaries the researcher chooses, such as setting or time period; limitations are weaknesses the researcher cannot fully control.
Where can I find a free RES 6033 Module 5 sample paper?
This page holds the full Module 5 qualitative proposal for a six-hospital comparison of birthing units that survived and birthing units that closed.
How many cases does a multiple case study need?
Often four to ten, chosen for what they can show; the number depends on the research questions, replication logic and feasibility.