Data analysis in qualitative research implies examining the elicited data which is in the raw form from the field work, in order to address the initial propositions of a study. In this instance, I occupied myself with investigating the contemporary phenomenon of the professional development of teachers within its real-life context, as it emerged (Yin, 2012). Yin (2014) observes that a researcher makes assumptions about the case, and these motives drive the research questions for the case. I assert that the research questions were formulated at the beginning of the study in order that data may be elicited in a planned and consistent manner, with inferences made from the data to answer the research questions. Data analysis may be described as a process used to search and categorise useful data from transcriptions and to explore the relationships among the resulting categories (Creswell, 2014; Merriam, 2009;
Check & Schutt, 2012). It is further postulated by Vithal and Jansen (2006); Hesse-Biber and
Leavy (2011) and Cohen, et al. (2011) that data analysis involves making sense of how the participants viewed and commented about the situation being explored so that patterns, themes, categories and commonalities in the data may be deduced. This analysis is a process of searching, summarising and giving meaning to the data in relation to the problem that is being investigated. I bore in mind the suggestion by Stake (2010) that although qualitative research is rounded and contextual, and offers a detailed description of the case, one must desist from telling the whole story due to page constraints and audience patience.
4.10.1 Analysis of interview data
The study saw me adopt the four step approach when analysing interview data as proposed by Creswell (2014). Firstly, I painstakingly transcribed all seven of my participants’ recorded raw interview data from the voice-recorder to a text format (Creswell, 2014; Remler & Van Ryzin, 2011; Struwig & Stead, 2013). At this juncture, I declare that the discussion of the data was completed in congruence with the two research sites. Whilst Chapter Five discusses data that was generated in Glow Primary School (GPS), Chapter Six discusses data elicited from Diamond Primary School (DPS). Chapter Seven attempts to bring together what emerged from the two schools and the last chapter presents the findings and makes some recommendations.
Against this backdrop, I opted to personally transcribe the data as I believed that by constantly listening to my participants’ responses, I might grow increasingly familiar with that which my participants were saying. The second step saw me repeat the reading of these transcripts as well as listening to the recordings of the interviews to verify that I had accurately transcribed the recordings and to ensure that the data was not distorted in its initial phase (Green, et al., 2007; Struwig & Stead, 2013. This process of re-reading and annotation of transcripts assisted me to acquire deeper understanding of the data and to identify relevant codes and themes (Creswell, 2014; Merriam, 2009).
The third phase of the analysis compelled me to chart the common themes that emerged whilst using the supporting hard copy documents and individual interviews. Thereafter I colour- coded themes and looked for recurring ideas that emerged from the data eliciting process.
Coding may be defined as the process of arranging raw data into pieces or sections of transcript before attaching meaning to data (Creswell, 2014; Merriam, 2009). Here I noted single words or short phrases in the transcripts and applied labels as espoused by Hesse-Biber and Leavy (2011). The final section of this portion of data analysis comprised an understanding of
assertions and interpretations of the meaning of the case (Creswell, 2014). These segments were labelled with terms that described the data on different levels of abstraction (Struwig &
Stead, 2013). In claiming that the coding procedure was iterative in nature, I used pre-defined coding and emerging categories. I performed individual script analysis, and compared the themes in different scripts then across scripts, consistently testing the relationship between the data and my interpretations (Bless, Smith & Sithole, 2013). During this coding process, I developed codes of meaning in order to offer denotations of each segment, with codes being associated with actions, enterprises, links, situations and participant viewpoints, amongst others (Bless, Smith & Sithole, 2013). This process of coding was iterating and non-linear. It involved a forward and backward movement through the transcripts, giving special attention to the research question and considering the theoretical concepts. Fourthly, I had to deduce and understand the implication of the identified themes. Thus, after coding the data, I extracted data from their original contexts and then placed them together with other similar examples of data that spoke about the same issue, whilst looking for patterns and themes, an aspect which will now be elaborated on.
4.10.2 Discovering patterns
It is claimed by Bless, Smith and Sithole (2013) that a pattern denotes an association that exists among groups. Thus, in order to discover the patterns, the data was examined in as many ways, drawing from the different origins. The patterns and relationships I found under these themes formed the basis of my report. According to Creswell (2014), qualitative research is interpretative by nature. After this analysis has taken place, the researcher’s task is to answer the 'so what' question and to offer explanations for the groups that have emerged (Struwig &
Stead, 2013). After having transcribed and presented the interview data, I interpreted the meanings of the coded data against the conditions of my study, its background and experiences, and compared these findings to information brought together from the literature or theories (Green, et al., 2007; Green, 2007; Creswell, 2014). This level of data analysis is sometimes viewed as being the latent level of analysis. During this phase, as outlined by McMillan &
Schumacher (2010), the dialogues of the participants are scrutinised and used as proof of what was actually spoken by the participants. This process implies listening with understanding, whilst viewing their spoken words as “text” (McMillan & Schumacher, 2010).
The organisation of my case study report included a Microsoft Word self-created template in which I typed my findings in the appropriate areas so that explanations, descriptions, and causal analysis of the identified phenomenon could be produced. This brought clarity to the part I played and parts played by the participants, which provided the foundation for developing one traceable story from different stories given by the participants (Green, 2007; Hesse-Biber &
Leavy, 2011; Creswell, 2014), into a clearer picture of the participants’ perceptions of their role in the professional development of teachers under their care. The non-participant stance adopted leads to a participant viewpoint to help with the process of being able to channel observations from a broader picture to a tighter one (Creswell, 2014). I believe that this approach helped limit the assumptions and biases that I carried into the participants’
educational setting.
The final section of this process of data analysis was to gain an understanding of assertions or interpretations of participants which might be inherent within the case (Creswell, 2014). I therefore argue that the manner in which I analysed the data appeared to be methodically sound.
The analysed information was then saved in a password protected computer file. This addressed and transferred my participants’ meanings that came from learning about the perspectives that they held as SMT members concerning their role in their teachers’
professional development participation. Stake’s (2010) chapter whereby the manner in which one ought to go about writing the report, was likewise adapted and adopted.
In extension of the above, I concur with the postulation echoed by Stake (2010) that qualitative research of superior quality is founded on the principle of trustworthiness. With this in mind, the precautions I took to ensure trustworthiness of the findings, hence follows.