4.8 Data analysis
4.8.1 Process of analysing data
Here, there was no categorical measurement scale used for data analysis. Interpretive and constructivist techniques were used instead for processing data. As the researcher, I served as the main instrument for categorising, analysing, interpreting, and ascribing meaning to data, guided by the research questions (Flick, 1998; Patton, 2001). The editing and analysis
148
began immediately after each interview was conducted to avoid lapse of time and recollection (Verd, 2004). Analysis began during the data collection process, for example, to determine which phrases or statements by the participants were captured. This was later used in the write up of the thesis in order to ensure that the respondents own language was used to capture the essence of the responses. Data analysis was informed by simultaneous deduction [using research data to test existing literature and theory, and induction - extraction from data, ideas and recommendations relevant to the research questions (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).
Responses were organised into emerging patterns and themes and analysed and interpreted qualitatively to respond to the research questions. This took into account that the ‗validity‘ is not defined in terms of the extent to which the operational definition corresponds with the construct definition but by the degree to which the researcher can produce observations that are believable for her or himself, the subjects being studied and the eventual readers of the study (Blanche & Durrheim, 1999, p. 46). These preliminary codes guided me to reduce the data and to establish initial emerging patterns. Inductive reasoning allowed me to construct new codes and thereafter to combine some codes to form new categories. Berg (2001) clarifies this step elaborately and it assisted me in gaining insight to conducting the task. Data analysis starts by coding each incident into as many categories as possible and as the analysis continues, the data is placed into categories (Seale, Gobo, Silverman, 2004; Marshall &
Rossman, 1999). These categories were modified and new categories emerged. Through the interpretive approach, I explored the meanings and interpretations which the respondents presented on their reflection on the subject. This enabled me to describe and explain the principals‘ understanding of the use of systems thinking approach to school development. I ascertained an in-depth understanding of the scope and depth of the principals‘ reflection of the use of systems thinking in school development.
Responses were considered to be key if they consistently emerged across two or more of the sources of data namely, a) semi-structured interviews, b) focus discussion group c) reflective journals and diaries d) document analysis /review
Some themes specific to the understanding, the efficacy, the benefits and challenges of systems thinking were prioritised particularly those that contrasted the views of the participants and those not commonly identified in the reviewed literature. Inconsistencies
149
between the different sources of data and those with known literature and theory also drew attention.
The process of analysis comprised of reviewing, grouping, and categorisation of every statement or expression or remark that constituted responses to each question for every participant, allowing for themes to emerge naturally. This began with grouping together statements with similar meanings into similar headings for example ―networks, cluster, professional development, strategic planning‖ which led to the next level of grouping of more than such related statements into categories such as achievements; efficacy of Systems Thinking to School Development. The categories were further grouped into themes which would be interpreted to mean a holistic approach to school development. Each interview lasted about one hour. In order to ‗bring meaning‘ to the responses of the semi-structured interview and focus group discussion transcripts, the researchers adopted Krueger‘s
‗framework analysis‘ as adapted by Rabiee (2004) and this entailed identifying a thematic framework; indexing; charting; and mapping and interpretation. Familiarisation entailed the repeated listening to the audio-taped responses, and the repeated reading of all transcribed interview responses. Secondly, identifying a thematic framework involved the writing of short phrases, ideas or concepts in the margins that arose from the reading of the texts.
Thirdly, indexing comprised sifting the data and highlighting and sorting out verbatim quotes. Fourthly, charting involved lifting the verbatim quotes and re-arranging them under the newly-developed themes. Lastly, mapping and interpretation entailed being creative and analytical in order to discern the relationship between the verbatim quotes and the links between the data as a whole.
Theory emerged as the ‗supra meaning‘ – a product of synthesis or what is referred to in this study as ―whole reflection‖ on the collective of themes derived from different pieces of data.
The ―whole reflection‖ entailed a systematic process of connecting the patterns of causal relationships of different themes and identifying those that are offered as explanation and options that addressed the main research question which was: ―What is the use of systems thinking to school development?‖
150
In order to gain an in-depth understanding of the principals‘ reflection on their use of the systems thinking, I divided the secondary question into sub-questions and also allowed a lot of probing in order to derive rich data on the subject concerned.
The table below illustrates the pseudonyms that were allocated to each school and principal in order to prepare the reader to follow the discussion in the next chapter where data is presented.
Table 4.1: The Pseudonyms of Schools and Principals
School Principal
Lungani Primary Mrs Godide Gateway Secondary Mrs Denison Thokozwayo Primary Mr Jokozela Mbongwa Secondary Mr Ndonga Bramley Primary Mr Goldstone
The following table summarises the following emerging themes, viz.: the understanding of systems thinking, use of systems thinking to School Development, strategic planning, process of school development planning, curriculum development, teaching and learning, cluster c- ordination and networks, partnerships for school development, handling of social ills, continuous professional development, the functionality of the structures, the value of journaling and challenges of working with systems thinking.
151 Table 4.2: Themes of questions for participants
No Theme How the questions were asked 1. Principal‘s
Understanding of System Thinking
What is your understanding of systems thinking?
2. The Use of Systems Thinking to School Development
What are the benefits of using a System Thinking Approach to school development?
Can you relate what you consider as some of the highlights and achievements in terms of developing your school?
3. Strategic Planning How do you go about conducting strategic planning for school development?
4. Process of School
Development Planning What sort of processes do you engage in terms of arriving the developing the school improvement plan
5. Curriculum
Development How have been involved in curriculum development as part of engagement in systems thinking to school development?
6. Teaching and Learning What are the benefits of using a System Thinking Approach to school development?
7. Cluster Co-ordination
and Networks Drawing from experience as principal working from Systems perspective thinking for approaching school development what can you tell us about the use of system thinking in school development?
In your involvement at circuit and cluster level what can you share as your experience and engagement in systems thinking and its use in school development?
8. Partnerships for School
development What are the areas of whole school that you have developed?
9. Handling Social Ills What can you attribute as some of your school development achievements?
10. Continuous Professional Development
How do you consider as the working systems that contribute school development?
11. The Functionality of
the Structures Share your experiences in working with school communities in school development?
What sort of structures or committees do you work with to show are consulted in school development planning?
152 12. The Value of
Journaling What are the new things you are doing that contribute to school development?
13. Challenges of Working
with Systems Thinking What are some of the challenges of using a System Thinking Approach to school development?