RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok
Share Embed Flag
Download ePaper

RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

hshowail
12.01.2015 Views

INTERPRETATION IN QUALITATIVE DATA ANALYSIS: MULTILAYERED TEXTS 499 she, the teacher, sits on a chair, i.e. physically above them). The teacher controls and disciplines through her control of the conversation and its flow, and, when this does not work (e.g. lines 56, 71, 104) then her control and power become more overt and naked. What we have here is an example of Bernstein’s (1975) ‘invisible pedagogy’, for example, where the control of the teacher over the child is implicit rather than explicit; where, ideally, the teacher arranges the context which the children are expected to rearrange and explore; where there is a reduced emphasis upon the transmission and acquisition of specific skills. What we have here is a clear example of the importance of the children learning the hidden curriculum of classrooms (Jackson 1968), wherein they have to learn how to cope with power and authority, praise, denial, delay, membership of a crowd, loss of individuality, rules, routines and socially acceptable behaviour. As Jackson (1968) says, if children are to do well in school then it is equally, if not more important that they learn, and abide by, the hidden curriculum rather than the formal curriculum. What we have here is also an example of Giddens’s (1976; 1984) structuration theory, wherein the conversation in the classroom is the cause, the medium and the outcome of the perpetuation of the status quo of power asymmetries and differentials in the classroom, reinforcing the teacher’s control, power and authority. The teacher has been placed in a difficult position by being the sole adult with 27 children, and so her behaviour, motivated perhaps benevolently, is, in fact a coping or survival strategy to handle and manage the discipline with large numbers of young and demanding children – crowd control. The children are learning to be compliant and that their role is to obey, and that if they are obedient to a given agenda then they will be rewarded. The ‘core variable’ (in terms of grounded theory’) is power: the teacher is acting to promote and sustain her power; when it can be asserted and reinforced through an invisible pedagogy then it is covert; when this does not work it becomes overt. Now, one has to ask whether, at the fourth level, the researcher is reading too much into the text, over-interpreting it, driven by her own personal hang-ups or negative experiences of power and authority, and over-concerned with the issue of discipline, projecting too much of herself onto the data interpretation. Maybe the teacher is simply teaching the children socially acceptable behaviour and moving the conversation on productively, exercising her professional task sensitively and skilfully, building in the children’s contributions, and her behaviour has actually nothing to do with power. Further, one can observe at level four that several theories are being promulgated to try to explain the messages in the text, and one has to observe the fertility of a simple piece of transcription to support several grounded or pre-ordinate/pre-existing theories. The difficult question here is, ‘Which interpretation is correct’ Here there is no single answer; they are all perhaps correct. The classroom transcription records only what is said. People will deliberately withhold information; some children will give way to more vocal children, and others may be off task. What we have here is only one medium that has been recorded. Even though the transcription tries to note a few other features (e.g. children talking simultaneously), it does not catch all the events in the classroom. How do we know, for example, whether most children are bored, or if some are asleep, or some are fighting, or some are reading another book and so on All we have here is aselectionfromwhatistakingplace,andthe selection is made on what is transcribable. One can see in this example that the text is multilayered. At issue here is the levels of analysis that are required, or legitimate, and how analysis is intermingled with interpretation. In qualitative research, analysis and interpretation Chapter 23

500 CONTENT ANALYSIS AND GROUNDED THEORY frequently merge. This raises the issues of validity and reliability. What we have here is a problem of the ‘double hermeneutic’ – as researchers we are members of the world that we are researching, so we cannot be neutral; we live in an alreadyinterpreted world. More extensively Morrison (2003) suggests that the problem extends beyond this. Look at the example above: The teacher and the children act on the basis of their interpretations of the situation (their ‘definitions of the situation’). The lived actions are converted from one medium (observations, actions and live events) to another (written) by choosing to opt only for transcription – an interpretation of their interpretation. The researcher then interprets the written data (a third hermeneutic) and writes an unavoidably selective account (a fourth – quadruple – hermeneutic – an interpretation of an interpretation of an interpretation of an interpretation!). The reader then brings his/her own biography and background to interpret the researcher’s written interpretation (a fifth – quintuple – hermeneutic). Given the successive interpretations it is difficult not to suggest that reliability and validity can easily be compromised in qualitative research. Reflexivity as the disclosure of one’s possible biased interpretations does little to reduce them – I can state my possible biases and interpretations but that does not necessarily stop them from being selective and biased. This suggests, perhaps, the limits of reflexivity. In connection with increasing reliability and validity, reflexivity is not enough. The accompanying web site contains an introductory manual for using QSR NUD.IST (the principles of which apply to N-Vivo: see http:// www.routledge.com/textbooks/9780415368780 – Chapter 23, file 23.2 doc). The web site also contains a full set of Word-based data files specifically prepared for QSR, concerning a single project of assessment and testing (see http://www.routledge.com/textbooks/ 9780415368780 – Chapter 23, files qsr23.13 through to qsr23.23). These have also been saved into Word documents (see http://www. routledge.com/textbooks/9780415368780 – Chapter 23, file 23.3.doc through to file 23.13.doc). A listing of the documents of qualitative data that are prepared is available on the accompanying web site (http:// www.routledge.com/textbooks/9780415368780 – Chapter 23, file QSR FILES ON THE WEB SITE).

500 CONTENT ANALYSIS AND GROUNDED THEORY<br />

frequently merge. This raises the issues of validity<br />

and reliability. What we have here is a problem of<br />

the ‘double hermeneutic’ – as researchers we are<br />

members of the world that we are researching,<br />

so we cannot be neutral; we live in an alreadyinterpreted<br />

world. More extensively Morrison<br />

(2003) suggests that the problem extends beyond<br />

this. Lo<strong>ok</strong> at the example above:<br />

The teacher and the children act on the basis<br />

of their interpretations of the situation (their<br />

‘definitions of the situation’).<br />

The lived actions are converted from one<br />

medium (observations, actions and live events)<br />

to another (written) by choosing to opt only<br />

for transcription – an interpretation of their<br />

interpretation.<br />

The researcher then interprets the written<br />

data (a third hermeneutic) and writes<br />

an unavoidably selective account (a fourth –<br />

quadruple – hermeneutic – an interpretation<br />

of an interpretation of an interpretation of<br />

an interpretation!).<br />

The reader then brings his/her own<br />

biography and background to interpret<br />

the researcher’s written interpretation (a<br />

fifth – quintuple – hermeneutic).<br />

Given the successive interpretations it is difficult<br />

not to suggest that reliability and validity can<br />

easily be compromised in qualitative research.<br />

Reflexivity as the disclosure of one’s possible<br />

biased interpretations does little to reduce them – I<br />

can state my possible biases and interpretations<br />

but that does not necessarily stop them from<br />

being selective and biased. This suggests, perhaps,<br />

the limits of reflexivity. In connection with<br />

increasing reliability and validity, reflexivity is<br />

not enough.<br />

The accompanying web site contains an<br />

introductory manual for using QSR NUD.IST (the<br />

principles of which apply to N-Vivo: see http://<br />

www.routledge.com/textbo<strong>ok</strong>s/9780415368780 –<br />

Chapter 23, file 23.2 doc). The web site<br />

also contains a full set of Word-based<br />

data files specifically prepared for QSR, concerning<br />

a single project of assessment and<br />

testing (see http://www.routledge.com/textbo<strong>ok</strong>s/<br />

9780415368780 – Chapter 23, files qsr23.13<br />

through to qsr23.23). These have also been<br />

saved into Word documents (see http://www.<br />

routledge.com/textbo<strong>ok</strong>s/9780415368780 –<br />

Chapter 23, file 23.3.doc through to file<br />

23.13.doc). A listing of the documents of<br />

qualitative data that are prepared is available<br />

on the accompanying web site (http://<br />

www.routledge.com/textbo<strong>ok</strong>s/9780415368780 –<br />

Chapter 23, file QSR FILES ON THE WEB<br />

SITE).

logo

products

Resources

Company

Terms of service
Privacy policy
Cookie policy
Cookie settings
Imprint
Change language
Made with love in Switzerland
© 2024 Yumpu.com all rights reserved

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!