Reflexive Thematic Analysis on researcher’s position as an “in-betweener”
Claire Hadfield, Senior Lecturer and PhD researcher in Education at Plymouth Marjon University
Reflecting on my journey using Reflexive Thematic Analysis (RTA) in a qualitative longitudinal study of early career secondary teachers’ professional identities, I draw on my position as an “in-betweener”—moving from school teaching into initial teacher education. This role placed me close enough to share aspects of participants’ experiences while also able to view them from a different perspective. Working with interviews, viva reflections, and journals, I returned to the data repeatedly in an iterative process of theme development. RTA supported deep engagement through analytic journaling and participant discussion. I will discuss how insider knowledge both enriched and complicated the analysis, how slowing the process helped avoid premature conclusions, and how reflexivity was essential in managing bias. The session will share practical strategies and honest reflections on the challenges and insights that came from applying RTA in a long-term, identity-focused study.
How to prioritise participant voice in data analysis when a third voice is present – the use of advocates in research
Kim Collett, Lecturer in Education at The Open University
For my PhD I conducted interpretivist research, using research driven photo elicitation interviews and thematic analysis, comparing experiences of inclusion in the classroom. For some of the participants adjustments were needed to ensure the research was accessible. This included having advocates present during data collection. One of the under explored, issues with advocacy in research is how to deal with advocate voices in the data. The words of advocates will appear in verbatim transcripts and removing them can change meaning/context. However, keeping them means they become part of the analysis and introduce a third voice.
I kept the voices of advocates and analysed these along with the words of the participants. However, careful consideration was needed to determine if the data was really reflecting the experiences/thoughts of the participant when the advocate was speaking. Sometimes it was clear as the participant would verbally or non-verbally agree/disagree, or the content would reflect other parts of the conversation. However, sometimes there was no confirmation. Reflexivity was key to assessing this and the findings chapter had to carefully cover the use of advocates when a finding was based on or informed by the advocate.
Educational researchers are often encouraged to reflect on their ‘philosophical positioning’, i.e. the ontological, epistemological and axiological (ethical) assumptions that underpin their research design. Meanwhile, in recent years in anglophone educational research departments, using philosophy as a ‘method’ in its own right, as opposed to a tool supporting empirical research, has tended to go out of fashion. A group identifying as philosophers of education, including current doctoral researchers and their supervisors, seek to demonstrate the benefits and attractions of continuing to work philosophically, sometimes treating the existing literature as priori data to be analysed, at other times working in partnership with empirical research. They showcase a range of distinctive philosophical perspectives, including examples from hermeneutical/analytical (Janet Orchard + 1) and critical/post-structuralist (Naomi Hodgson + 1) traditions. This event is aimed at doctoral researchers at any stage who would like to hear more from enthusiasts of the theoretical on how to think more abstractly about data analysis in research.
Issues with using police data to investigate offending: A research perspective Dr Ioana Crivatu, Research Fellow at the University of Birmingham Dr Ruth Spence, Senior Research Fellow at Middlesex University
Police data is an important source of information for researchers about investigations, suspects, and victims. However, crime records can be problematic to work with. Here we outline three key issues along with our approach in combining and quantitatively analysing police data from several police forces in England and Wales which used different crime recording systems. We discuss data quality, which reflects missing and misclassified values; inconsistency, which refers to the vague and at times different definitions provided; and granularity, which reflects the lack of detailed information included in the datasets. We recommend developing a robust strategy for working with missing data, triangulating across different sources, creating higher-order categories where necessary, and creating a detailed data governance plan before analysis begins.
Preparation of a Large-scale Assessment in Education and its use in a Quantitative Intersectional analysis in R Dr Natalia López-Hornickel, Postdoctoral Research Associate at Roehampton University; SWDTP alumni
In this presentation, first, I aim to show the considerations and challenges of preparing large-scale assessment data, using the International Civic and Citizenship Education Study (ICCS) from 2016. This includes the sources of the data and the merging process, which is usually an overlooked but crucial step before proceeding with the analysis. Second, I will refer to the analysis steps to obtain descriptives and models. Particularly, I will use the case of the Multilevel Analysis of Individual Heterogeneity and Discriminatory Accuracy (MAIHDA) to develop an intersectional analysis of students’ endorsement of the gender equality scale (Fifth paper of my thesis). This technique is a parsimonious alternative to multiplicative terms in regressions.
All the explanations will be conceptual and also accompanied by a description of some R syntax.
My research looks at the lived experiences of working-class mature students in the South-West of England through a Bourdieusian lens. I am looking to find evidence of emergent forms of capital that students may embody that may enable them to overcome adversity and succeed in Higher Education despite lacking high levels of economic, social, and cultural capital. Unlike most academic research into mature students’ experiences, I am examining how certain forms of embodied experience and dispositions arising from them function as beneficial forms of capital.
Learning is highly relational, yet prevailing discourses in education position students as individually responsible for learning, attainment, and behaviour. My research follows a group of students from Yeat 9 to Year 11 to explore how narratives around attainment and learning influence students’ co-construction of an ethics of responsibility. I explore feminist and queer theoretical re-framings of responsibility that offer potential to rethink individualising impulses that position students in opposition to others, to consider new modes of cooperative relationality in school cultures.
Each participating SWDTP institution provide facilities for PGRs. In addition, there is a dedicated SWDTP building at 1 Priory Rd, Bristol, available with hot desks and basic kitchen facilities for all students to use. The building is open at 8am until 6pm Monday to Fridays (excluding bank holidays). It is not a 24-hour access building and entry is via a Bristol U-card. Bicycles are not permitted in the building but can be locked in the cycle racks outside. Non-University of Bristol students can request visiting student registration to access 1 Priory Road, re-registration is required at the beginning of each academic year to maintain access.
Students can also make use of the two meeting rooms at the SWDTP office for reading groups, seminars etc. The rooms can be booked via swdtp-enquiries@bristol.ac.uk. Both rooms hold around 20 people.
Site Access
For visiting and accessibility issues for each university, please see the following links:
The libraries at partner institutions all have informative web pages, containing information about opening times, dedicated PG areas (where relevant) and helpful contacts. Please see:
The Society of College, National and University Libraries (SCONUL), operates various reciprocal access schemes between many higher education libraries of the UK and Ireland. All partner universities are members of this scheme. This scheme allows postgraduate students to borrow material from other SCONUL access member libraries. Students must first register with SCONUL by applying online, and be authorised by their home institution. Both home ID card and SCONUL Access authorisation must be presented on each visit.
Disabled Students’ Allowance (DSA)
If you have a disability which means that you incur additional expenditure in connection with your studies, then you may be eligible for an allowance. The allowance can cover costs such as daily expenses and equipment (photocopying and consumables to be claimed through your RTSG), and for non-medical helpers such as support workers, specialist tutors, library assistance and note-takers. The amount of each allowance is not fixed and is determined according to the individual needs of each student. Please discuss your additional support needs with your home institution in the first instance and let the Disability Officer know that you are ESRC funded. Please note, if a laptop is purchased through DSA, you are expected to pay a £200 contribution. For students commencing 2017-2023, the ESRC grant reference is ES/P000630/1. For students commencing 2024, the ESRC grant reference is ES/Y001575/1. For further information, please visit the UKRI Standard Terms and Conditions.
The University of Bath runs a Researcher Wellbeing Group that aims to offer a safe space for PhD and early career researchers to discuss the tolls that researching a sensitive topic can take. Anyone is welcome to join regardless of area of research, department, university or country of study.
Specialist Supervision Support
Unless an exceptional case has been discussed and agreed at the point of application, for cases where specialist supervision support and / or counselling is required due to the nature of your PhD research, we strongly advise you to identify sources of departmental / institutional funding and support.
Mature Students/Parents and Carers
Each institution offers information and support for mature students and students who are parents and carers. Please follow the links below for your institution.
The SWDTP has a student-led Parents and Carers Network. The network meets a couple of times a year, but has a WhatsApp group for informal/ ad-hoc meet ups: https://chat.whatsapp.com/LA6D8dSKzDCEu7lEPTpVUF
“Do you admit ‘mature students’ and students from other under-represented backgrounds?”
The SWDTP is committed to being an inclusive partnership that does not discriminate on and is open to postgraduate study regardless of anyone’s age, gender, ethno-cultural heritage, sexuality, health conditions or impairments, socio-economic background or any other potential barriers to participation. If there are reasonable adjustments that you would like us to consider as part of our shortlisting process then please contact us at swdtp-enquiries@bristol.ac.uk , no later than the funding application deadline.
“Do I need a Masters qualification to apply?”
No, you do not need a Masters qualification to apply. If you do not have one and if your application is successful, it is likely that we will make your PhD funding conditional on passing, at an overall grade of 60% or above, a Masters course that is linked to the pathway to which you are applying. We will pay for you to take that course and provide you with a stipend. This means your overall period of funding and study will be extended by one year full-time or two-years part-time.
“How do you decide who receives a studentship award?”
Every year we have more applications than we have studentships available to offer so, sadly, we have to reject good applicants. Typically, we have a total of 34 studentships available each year.
We use a combination of institutional selection, the judgment of academics in each pathway, a process of cross-pathway review and some (limited) randomisation to decide on who to shortlist, who to put forward to our awards panel, who to make initial offers to and who will be put on a wait list. We place caps on the number of applications that can go forward from institutions and from pathways at each stage of the shortlisting process with the goals of: aiming to make sure that applicants are not advantaged or disadvantaged by the ‘size’ of the pathway (the number of institutions offering it); balancing a competitive allocation process with ensuring a diverse range of disciplines and, by extension, students, institutions and types of research are represented within our student cohorts; and making sure the strategic steers are met.
“Is there an interview?”
We prefer to think of it as a research conversation although the exact timing and format of it will vary with the institution to which you are applying. There may not be an interview if you are not shortlisted by your institution for further consideration in this year’s process. A typical format of the conversation and questions that might be asked are in Annex D, which can be found here Pathway Leads and Supervisors | SWDTP. You may be asked to give a presentation as part of the interview, typically of between 5 and
10 minutes, giving a working title for your research, some initial research aims and objectives, a brief overview of ‘why the research matters’, and some thoughts about the methods or practices you will use to do the research. However, this is at the discretion of the institution and/or pathway to which you are applying.
“What are the interdisciplinary pathways?”
Our interdisciplinary pathways support research that spans across disciplinary interests. They are (1) Climate Change, Sustainability and Society, (2) Global Challenges and Transformations: Geopolitics, Inequalities and Mobilities, (3) Health, Wellbeing and Society, and (4) Sociotechnical Futures and Digital Methods. For applications to interdisciplinary pathways, there must be a clear case for why the research should be considered interdisciplinary. The interdisciplinarity may arise in the cross-cutting nature of the research topic, theorisations and/or methods employed.
“Is there funding for Difficult Language Training, Overseas Fieldwork and/or Overseas Institutional Visits?”
Yes, but additional funding for Difficult Language Training and Overseas Fieldwork can only be claimed if details are outlined in the original research proposal at the time of the studentship application. It is important to be realistic about the scale of the fieldwork. Costs have to be sensible and the places you are proposing to visit must be fully justified and essential to the intended research. You should work on the basis that the maximum funding for overseas fieldwork (not including any difficult language costs) will be about £4000.
We also offer funding for Overseas Institutional Visits. If you can include details in your application, that is useful, but we recognise that these opportunities might not be known at the point of application. You will need to work within a budget of £3000.
“Are there any countries or places that are not deemed safe to undertake research in or about or to visit?”
We are usually prohibited from funding travel to countries or parts of countries that the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) advises against visiting. For the latest advice, please see https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice. In some cases, it may be possible to undertake the research remotely; for example, by interviewing people online. If so, and particularly if the research is politically sensitive, then it is important that you give thorough consideration to the safety and potential repercussions both to your respondents and to yourself, and make sure such risks are avoided. Discussion of the ethics of your research would need to be included in your application.
“Can I get help in writing my application?”
Yes, but you need to be careful to make sure you stay within the following bounds. Critically, your research proposal must be substantively your own work and must neither plagiarise any other person’s work nor be written by anyone else on your behalf which would constitute contract cheating. That type of cheating is taken very seriously by universities and extends to using ChatGPT or other artificial intelligence tools to write substantial elements of your research proposal. Keeping in mind that a PhD is predominantly a written piece of work then if you did resort to such methods to try and write your proposal, then it is likely that you would struggle to complete a PhD so, as well as being forbidden, it is a very weak and unstable foundation for an application.
You may use grammar and spelling checking tools and we allow potential supervisors to read, comment and provide feedback on draft research proposals, if they are willing and have the time to do so. We also recognise that some research is collaborative and co-produced with an external partner that may provide guidance in framing what sort of research questions are of interest to them and what resources they have available to support the research (e.g. access to data, archives or policy networks). However, it would be entirely unacceptable to present another person’s work or ideas as your own and would likely result in any studentship offer and your place on a PhD programme being withdrawn, with the possibility of you being asked to pay back any of the scholarship received.
“What is Research in Practice?”
Research in Practice is about supporting skills development and professional development as a researcher with transferable skills that will support a career outside of the university sector, as well as within it. A key component of it is a placement, internship or equivalent, of three-months total length (but not necessarily taken in one three-month period).
“Do all SWDTP funded students have to do three months ‘Research in Practice’ placement”?
Unless there is an exceptional and compelling reason not to do so then all students whose funded period began in October 2024 or after are expected to complete the Research in Practice placement, internship or equivalent, in accordance with the ESRC’s training requirements. Three months of funding to support this is included in the offer. Students who do not engage in the Research in Practice process are likely to have their funding reduced or withdrawn.
“Is it OK to apply elsewhere as well as to the SWDTP?”
We ask that anyone who applies to the SWDTP has us as their first choice for PGR funding. However, given the competitive nature of PhD funding, it is reasonable for you to apply to other funding opportunities too. Please keep in mind that we are looking for applicants who are keen to be a part of the SWDTP, the opportunities we offer, and our cross-institutional, postgraduate community. If you are planning to apply elsewhere, we encourage you to inform your prospective advisor as a courtesy to them for the time they will spend supporting your application.
“I have heard that it can take a long time to let people know if their application has been successful or not. Why is this?”
The process of reviewing applications takes from the middle of January (once the deadline for applications has passed), into March. This can seem like a long time, but it is used to check your application and supporting documentation, go through the process of institutional and pathway shortlisting, review the nominations from the pathways, and make a final ranking of shortlisted applicants. From about mid-March onwards can make a first set of offers to an initial group of successful applicants. Some others will be placed on a wait list should places becomes available. We may not fully fill our places until the end of August or even September.
Colleagues at our partner institutions will endeavour to keep you updated about the status of your application.
“Why do you collect data about people’s personal characteristics?”
Across UK Higher Education it is generally suspected that access to postgraduate study is neither as open nor as inclusive as it should be and that more needs to be done to widen participation and equality of opportunity. However, the data needed to help make the system be more equitable is not as complete or as reliable as it needs to be to most effectively support change.
Providing EDI (equality, diversity and inclusion) and equal opportunity data helps to better understand issues of selection and under-representation in postgraduate study. Such data are held confidentially and separately from the rest of your application. They are used only in aggregated and anonymised forms for internal monitoring purposes and as part of our required reporting to our funder, the ESRC – for example, as counts or percentages of the numbers in each category. We ask all applicants to complete the monitoring form. A link to the online form will be sent to you on submission of your funding application documents.
“Do you offer feedback on my application?”
Due to the number of applications we receive, the SWDTP does not offer feedback on the applications we receive.
“Can I appeal a decision not to shortlist me or to offer me a studentship?”
Please refer to our complaints and appeals document, which can be found here.
“Who can I approach for further information?”
If you have any questions, we recommend emailing the relevant institutional contact, listed below, or asking your proposed supervisor. If none of these answer your query, please contact swdtp-enquiries@bristol.ac.uk.
Application Procedures Depend on Which Institution You Are Applying To
An application for SWDTP studentship funding is a separate process from your application to a PhD programme offered by one of our Partner Institutions, although these processes can happen either sequentially or simultaneously depending on which institution you are applying to study at.
For example, the University of Bristol, an applicant needs to be accepted on to a PhD programme before they can apply for an SWDTP studentship so they may need to have applied for a PhD with that institution by early December. At other institutions, an applicant can usually apply for a PhD programme and a studentship simultaneously, but please check locally.
Please follow the application procedures of the institution at which you wish to be based, links to the relevant information for each institution are below. To apply for an SWDTP studentship funding, you will also need to complete the additional forms found below.
To be considered for an SWDTP studentship funding you will need to have:
– Followed the application procedures for the institution at which you wish to be based. Applying for an SWDTP studentship funding does not automatically mean you are also applying for and enrolling for a PhD.
– Written a research proposal and completed the Studentship Application (Annex A).
– Gained the support of a prospective PhD supervisor for your proposal, who needs to complete the Supervisor Statement (Annex B).
– Submitted your application for a studentship and all the accompanying material (listed at the end of Annex A) by no later than the funding deadline 12 noon (GMT) 9th January 2026.
For us to offer a Studentship you will:
– Need to be accepted on to the PhD programme.
– Be able to commence your studentship in the September of the same calendar year in which you were offered a studentship. We cannot, typically, defer the funding.
Should I apply for a Masters or a PhD?
The SWDTP makes no distinction, at the point of application, between those who will be funded to do a Masters before progressing on to a PhD, and those who will not.
The hard distinction between what were previously called ‘1 + 3’ and ‘+ 3’ studentships no longer exists. Students are now funded in a range of ways: PhD only, PhD plus ‘top up training’, or Masters + PhD. Our funding offer is based on a Training (Development) Needs Analysis at the point of application, which is then reviewed by members of our Awards Ratification Committee.
We cannot say, in advance, what your funding offer will be. We try to avoid asking people who already have a Masters to do another but many still have to do mandatory top-up training (for which they receive additional funding) to meet the funder’s (the ESRC’s) training requirements.
Completing your Development Needs Analysis
In our application form you are required to complete an initial Development Needs Analysis (DNA). Throughout the PhD, DNA is a self-assessment, a conversation – often between you and your supervisor –, and a process. DNA is concerned with supporting your developmental needs as a researcher, which includes equipping you for a career within the university sector or outside of it.
DNA begins at the point of entry to the SWDTP so we can align our funding offer with what you need to do to meet the training requirements of the ESRC. Because of this, it is important that you are honest in your self-assessment (we may ask you to provide evidence). The ESRC’s core training are mandatory for all students so we have to ensure you have undertaken all that they are looking for. Remember, they are intended to help you develop as a researcher and in your employability after the PhD.
Please be assured that we do not score this part of your application and that our interest is only in supporting and training students, regardless of their existing proficiencies, not to select those with high existing ones.
Application Forms and Documents
Download a copy of the Studentship Application Form 2026 Entry (Annex A)
Speaker: Dr Rafael Mitchell, Senior Lecturer, Department of Education, University of Bristol.
This session introduces critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) as a systematic approach to collating, reviewing and synthesising a diverse body of research evidence. CIS aims to produce fresh insights on an issue of concern, drawing on techniques that are common in qualitative inquiry, such as the ongoing refinement of research questions and an iterative process of data collection and analysis. I will share my own experiences of using CIS in solo and collaborative projects in the field of education (Mitchell, 2025). In this interactive session we will consider CIS in relation to other approaches to systematic review, comparing their logics and processes. We will consider the affordances and challenges of using CIS in a doctoral research project, and strategies for incorporating CIS within your own work.
Reference: Mitchell, R. (2025). Using critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) for theoretical development: Mobilising African education research. In Sage Research Methods Cases Part 1. SAGE Publications, Ltd., https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071984185
This session introduces critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) as a systematic approach to collating, reviewing and synthesising a diverse body of research evidence. CIS aims to produce fresh insights on an issue of concern, drawing on techniques that are common in qualitative inquiry, such as the ongoing refinement of research questions and an iterative process of data collection and analysis. I will share my own experiences of using CIS in solo and collaborative projects in the field of education (Mitchell, 2025). In this interactive session we will consider CIS in relation to other approaches to systematic review, comparing their logics and processes. We will consider the affordances and challenges of using CIS in a doctoral research project, and strategies for incorporating CIS within your own work.
This session is hosted by Dr Rafael Mitchell, Senior Lecturer in Comparative and International Education, and co-director of the Centre for Comparative and International Research in Education (CIRE) at the University of Bristol.
Reference: Mitchell, R. (2025). Using critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) for theoretical development: Mobilising African education research. In Sage Research Methods Cases Part 1. SAGE Publications, Ltd., https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071984185
