RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction
3.3 The Research Methodology
3.3.1 Methods
CDA must not be understood in the context of this study as a single method but rather as a approach or in broader terms as a methodology, which constitutes itself at different levels, and at each level a number of selections have to be made. These selections are what I refer to as the methods. Meyer (2001) succinctly captures the notion of methods.
He submits that the term method denotes research pathways. These path-ways link the researcher’s own theoretical assumptions to the collection and interpretation of the data that will answer the research question(s). Meyer (2001) posits that methods that are systematically chosen have the following research merits: they can help both the addressees of research findings to reconstruct the researchers’ argumentation and can help other researchers to see the starting point differently, and even to decide not to go back but to find other more interesting starting points; and lastly, methodical procedure will make it easier to record research findings and to compile reports of experiences.
The broad and complex nature of discourse itself and CDA in particular also means that there are many methods involved in using it for analysis. More importantly, it also means that in any practical sense, it might be very difficult, if not impossible to do a complete CDA due to the fact that a full analysis of a short passage might take months and fill hundreds of pages. This is supported by van Dijk (2001) who re-iterates that complete analysis of a corpus of text or talk is totally out of the question. By implication, the need to make choices in CDA methods becomes a condition sine-qua-non.
However, these choices cannot be made in a haphazard manner. According to van Dijk (2001; 2008), knowledge of the text-context link must inform any choice because the
64
link tells which properties of discourse may vary as a function of which social structures.
Therefore, for closer analysis in CDA the structures that are selected have to be as relevant as possible to the study of the social issue in question, specifically heritage, for this study. Moreover, Meyer (2001) and van Dijk (2001; 2008) suggested that whether these choices are linguistic or structural, it is imperative that the specific research questions of the study be considered when making them. Their argument is that even in those discourse structures that are contextually variable, some are marginally relevant and others are more significant, depending on the research questions one asks.
With this in mind, the choices made for analysis in this study are borrowed from both Fairclough’s idea of the structure of the text and Halliday’s notion of the grammatical aspects of the text otherwise known as interactional analysis, which deals with the linguistic features of the text (Meyer, 2001). These two aspects that are illustrated in Figure 3.1 below constituted the method I used to analyse the data for this study.
However, it should be noted that these models are part of the analytical dynamics of the discursive material as a whole (Fairclough, 2003).
Figure 3.1 Figure illustrating three dimensional configurations of discourse and discourse analysis as applied to this study
In his analytical framework for CDA, Fairclough proposed three dimensions of analysing texts that include description (text analysis), interpretation (processing analysis), and explanation (social analysis) (Fairclough, 1989, 1992, 1995, cited in Locke, 2004, p. 42 and Rogers et al., 2005, p. 371). As Figure 3.1 indicates, the first goal therefore was to deal with the internal mechanisms of the text and the focus was on aspects of text
3
Explanation
Social analysis
2
Interpretation
Processing analysis
1
Description Text analysis
65
analysis that include grammar and vocabulary, as influenced by Halliday. In this regard, individual words or articulated expressions and some language properties that are made clear in the text in relation to heritage were described. The main purpose of this section was to identify and fundamentally describe the lexicons used in the text in relation to heritage.
In the second level of analysis which is interpretation, the goal was to interpret the data captured and described in the previous section. This was done in relation to the conceptual framework in such a way that the indicators in the framework served as signifiers in the analytical instrument. I proceeded by checking the aspects of lexicalisation against the indicators in the conceptual framework. The final nature of representation of heritage in the history textbooks analysed was based on my conceptualisation of heritage. Table 3.3 below is an example of the instrument recruited for my step two analysis. It is important to note that each section of the history textbook chapter analysed carries a separate instrument for analysis and this applied to all three textbooks. Finally, each instrument will also contain a column for comments on the nature of heritage in terms of whether it is tangible, intangible, or IN-Tangible as explained in the conceptual framework on pp. 33-35. Table 3.3 below is a sample rubric for data analyses at step two.
Table 3.3 Example of instrument for analysis for step 2 (interpretation)
Indicator Signifiers/
Lexicons Tangible, Intangible or IN-Tangible heritage Natural heritage
Cultural heritage
-Symbolic-identity heritage -Ethnological heritage -Scientific-technological heritage
Finally, the last step of analysis is the level of explanation known as social analysis. At this stage, data obtained from the description and interpretation of the textbooks was compared and contrasted to each other with the purpose of establishing the trends and
66
patterns of heritage representation as obtained in the three textbooks across the publications. This stage answered my first research question, namely to understand the nature of heritage representation in Grade 10 history textbooks.
The second research question is addressed in chapter five where the findings from the previous chapter are discussed in relation to the theoretical and research literatures the context underpinning the study namely being a post-conflict society. This level of analysis therefore provided reasons why heritage is represented the way it is in the selected Grade 10 history textbooks.
Moreover, the methods considered for analysis in this study also included an examination of issues of gender, race, and geography within the selected textbooks as part of CDA. This was inspired by van Dijk (2001) who suggested that CDA is mainly interested in the role of discourse in the abuse and reproduction of power and hence particularly interested in the detailed study of the interface between the structures of discourse and the structures of society. The implication here is that discourse has social effects and functions especially when it in turns contributes to the formation or confirmation of social attitudes and ideologies. This is therefore linked to this study in that issues of race and sexism for example are “not merely abstract systems of social inequality and dominance, but actually ‘reach’ down in the forms of everyday life, namely through the beliefs, actions and discourses of group members” (van Dijk, 2001, p. 117-118)
Summarily, the analysis progressed systematically from description to interpretation and then to explanation of the data, in order to show how discourse constructs and deconstructs versions of the social world and as Rogers et al (2005) disclosed, it is this movement that serves as the point where CDA departs from other analysis frameworks such as discourse analysis and socio-linguistic analysis.