Coding method

From Saldaña’s (2009) manual of different coding methods, I selected In Vivo Coding. Also known as Verbatim Coding, it codes what is being said by lifting the words “rooted in the participants own language” (ibid., p. 6). I chose In Vivo in an effort to lean on the participants’ intention and work with their vocabulary as co- constructors of my research process. Saldaña further suggests that working with In Vivo demands sensitivity to words which are highlighted as important by the speaker, through repetition, turn of phrase, metaphorical language or even vocal emphasis (p. 75). In Vivo therefore demands not only that I read the transcripts but also listen attentively to the recorded interviews. I attended to the pauses (marked by ‘. . .’); pace and stress (marked by highlighting the words in bold); emphasis as well as tonal quality of the words (italicised and explained) and added them into the transcriptions. An example is shown in an extract taken from Joan’s interview transcript.

J: Not just from the teachers so that was an interesting discovery for me . . . (5: 15) even though I have always been consciously building it but watching it I, yah that’s what I like and I need and, and cause you are so alone (emphasised) right otherwise in the school . . . I mean there are the teachers in charge but its different ah? They are not going to be operating the sound or going to get your prop for you. I mean, it’s different. So that was very very nice . . . So it was more like what I (laugh) thought of when I saw the video (laugh throughout last 7 words). Yeeeyah (dragging, thinking). (20 August 2011 / DS400098)

Subsequently, when I reconstructed and edited the narratives for brevity to be included in this thesis, I employed [. . .].

The interview transcriptions underwent two cycles of coding. The first cycle focused on theme generation. My entry point to generating themes, as Dey (1993) suggests, came from the categories of interview questions derived from both the key and subsidiary research questions (Table 3.6, p. 92). The second cycle aimed at reducing the different thematic-based codes by comparing between different sets of transcriptions to produce umbrella categories.

To illustrate the discussion on the coding cycles and the writing of memos, I will offer the process of coding two interview transcripts (Olivia and Sandra) under the category of artistic and teaching histories.

Raw Data

Theme Generation

Categories and sub-categories

Fr o m ra w d a ta to c a te g o ry g e n e ra tio n Re tu rn in g t o r a w d a ta s u p p o rt in g c a te g o ri e s

11.3.1: First cycle coding

In the first cycle, I concentrated on one interview transcription at a time. I sieved line-by-line the various elements highlighted by the interviewee in response to the variables I identified earlier. Sieving, termed as ‘splitting’ by Saldaña (2009), puts the data through a “fine-grained” scrutiny to capture “a more nuanced analysis” (p. 20). Fine-grained splitting was undoubtedly time consuming and it was often overwhelming. But I felt it was necessary to limit my own researcher filter and offer the first cycle an opportunity to surface concepts and ideas beyond the variables identified from the research questions.

Table 3.8 demonstrates how Olivia’s interview transcript was given the first cycle treatment. In this first stage, I listed any word or phrase that seemed important to the interviewee. The first cycle was done at least 3 times. There was a tendency, as the coding got underway, to start identifying themes. I did that by adding numbers to the codes. Each number represented a theme as it emerged from the transcript. Alphabetical codes were added to note the sequence and repetition of words or phrases as I combed through the transcript.

Table 3.8: First cycle coding: identifying codes Theatre Artist: Olivia

Categories of codes:

1. Theatre Training / 2. Impressions / 3. Mentors

Names Transcription Codes

NM We begin with the first question, the historical journey, your training and if there is any pedagogical training or workshops which you have attended that has allowed you to engage in arts education. What is that journey for you, that history?

O Erm . . . for me I think it 1_{started with erm, erm, theatre studies in junior}

college. It was the first encounter by 2a_{chance with theatre. Erm, then ah, and}

then the 2b_{first big impression that er . . . may or may not be the one, apart}

from the ones, you know well, for other reasons, for being very strict or whatever, was 3a_{BB. So erm . . . and I still . . .}

1. J.C.

2a. “chanced” upon theatre

2b. “big impression” 3a. Mentor #1: BB O Ahm, he was, he was very 3bexacting and he was ahm . . .(sigh) . . . first of

all I think he . . . 2c _{the way I got to know him was unique in that I wasn’t}

you know supposed to be doing theatre, I was in Science and then I switched over. I just came to check out the theatre studies class and . . . he just asked me to like you know hang out, join in. So he was already 3cbending the rules at that time now. I look back I know what a 3d_{rebel he was. And he noticed}

two things. Number 1 ahm . . . that I had, he asked me to get involved in like an improvisation, like I said I was in Science and I had to switch over, erm . . . so he noticed that he saw that 2d_{I was really in my element.}

2c. “unique way - supposed to be doing theatre, I was in Science and then I switched over”. 3b. “exacting” 3c. “bending the rules”

3d. “rebel”

2d. “I was really in my element”

With each fine-grained reading, new themes emerged and previous themes were either grouped together to form one larger theme or found no longer significant in the light of new interpretations. I then generated a table to itemise all the codes and the corresponding themes. In this way I was able to track codes with their respective themes. Table 3.9 offers a brief extract of a longer table of thematic codes.

Table 3.9: First cycle coding: categorising codes into themes Theatre Artist: Olivia

Codes Themes

1a “theatre studies in Junior College”

1b “A very good American college” (nb: she avoids detailing this period) 1c “LaSalle”

1. Artistic Training

2a “First encounter by chance” 2b “First big impression”: teacher

2c “Unique – not supposed to be doing theatre, I was in Science and then I switched over.”

2d “I was really in my element” 2e “_{I was still interested, still doing it”}

2. Chance encounters

3a “BB” 3b “exacting” 3c “bending the rules” 3d “rebel”

3. Influential people (also perception of influential people)

4, 4a, 4b “_{freelancing”}

4c “teaching drama” (“bad stuff that you have to kinda go through”)

4. Teacher training or teaching experience 5a “It was important for me”

5b “It was the community of people” 5c “we made things happen”

5. I and We

6 “an older theatre person saw something in a younger person” 6a “he made an impression on me”

6b “he opened this world of theatre” 6c “he saw my interest and passion”

6. Older person(s) making impression

Once I have completed the first cycle treatment on Olivia’s transcript under the category of artistic and teaching history, I then moved on to Sandra’s interview transcript within the same category. The same approach of first cycle coding was applied on Sandra’s transcript and subsequently on Joan’s.

This same coding method was applied on the interview transcripts collated from the research done in England. In fact, I began initial coding with the English set first prior to moving on to Singapore. I eventually produced 6 tables of thematic codes. I worked with Pattern Coding to compare and contrast the thematic codes and identified larger umbrella categories. This cross-table analysis using Pattern Coding constituted the second cycle.

11.3.2: Second cycle coding

In the second cycle, categories were created using Pattern Coding, which sought similarities from first cycle codes and grouped them into categories for further analysis (Miles & Huberman 1994; Saldana 2009). I compared the categories between different sets of interview transcriptions to look for patterns and similarities to generate larger, overarching umbrella categories as illustrated in Table 3.10. In the second cycle, I returned once again to the transcribed narratives of the theatre artists. While not invoking narrative inquiry as a methodological approach, I found some of its principles useful when managing the narratives in the interviews. Bruner’s (1991) note on viewing “particulars of narratives” as tokens of larger meanings was useful (p. 6). In that regard while the coding unpacked the ‘particulars’, I returned to the transcripts to extract the narratives in which the particular is embodied. This particular-narrative, or as Bruner puts it, “part-whole interdependence” (ibid., p. 8) formed much of the second coding process, leading to the final identification of sections of narratives as representatives of the codes featured in the later chapters.

Table 3.10: From Cycle 1 to Cycle 2 to narrative reconstruction

In Vivo codes from cycle 1 (O) – Olivia

(S) - Sandra

Pattern Coding cycle 2 Reduced the 2 themes into 1

Returned to the transcripts Narrative reconstruction

1. Chance encounter: events as catalyst

- “I wasn’t supposed to be in Theatre”(O)

- I “did directing by default” (S) - I “inevitably ended up in these performances” (S) - “I fell in love” (S) - “I knew it” (O & S) - “we set up from nothing” (S)

2. They/mentors “opened the world

to theatre” (O)

- schools / arts organisations - “passion and belief” - “older person sees something in a

younger person”

- “a lot of it influenced my

teaching” (S)

- “completely changed my life” (S)

1. Influential mentors, peers and events as catalyst: both Artistic and Pedagogic History

Olivia

Her artistic journey began with “an encounter by chance” with “theatre studies in junior college”. Her ‘A’ level drama teacher left a

“big impression” on her. He was credited as having “opened this world to theatre”. Thereafter, Olivia pursued a degree in theatre in a university in the US. But shortly after, she returned to Singapore and enrolled in a local college of performing arts. In the performing arts college, she met another pivotal mentor who was described as a teacher “great at her craft and deeply committed to her students”.

Upon graduating from the arts college, she worked as an actor as well as a workshop facilitator with different theatre organisations. Her next two mentors came from one of the theatre organisations she obtained a full-time residency with. “I learnt devising by practising it with them. So I learnt their way, how they made theatre. [. . .] I still think of them as my most influential ‘early’ teachers”.

(DS131010).

Sandra

So I was doing quite a lot of work with [X theatre company] mainly as a director though I did some acting. We wanted to get work out. I fell into it (directing) by default and learnt on the job [. . .] I suppose a lot of it influenced my teaching.

Her engagement with the arts started early. “I clearly went into the arts because, to be honest, I was acting since I was a child. My mother was doing all these operettas in a [local school]. I inevitably ended up in these performances. [. . .] And then when I went to [name of school] that completely changed my life. Secondary 1, Merchant of Venice . . . I have to say that even at 12, I fell in love with Shakespeare”.

11.3.3: Code comparison and memo writing

As the analytical process deepened in the second coding cycle, theoretical implications emerged. For instance, I picked up on Olivia and Sandra’s emphases of how their interactions with theatre as well as its community of practitioners were pivotal in shaping their practice and identity as theatre artists. I noted statements indicative of the importance of those early moments (Table 3.10). The importance they placed on ‘learning as social’ was subsequently reflected in a memo. Memo writing was undertaken to work through the links offered by the codes. Below is an extract of one such memo, written after coding Olivia’s and Sandra’s interview transcripts on artistic and teaching histories.

Memo, 11 January 2011

Jo Trowsdale’s research points to training as a crucial factor in determining the artists suitability for school engagement. This remains to be a slice of a bigger picture. Olivia’s and Sandra’s transcripts refer to a process of continual learning. They talk about picking up experiences along the way. This then challenges Jo Trowsdale’s argument of artistic training as deterministic. Artistic training does offer directions but professional development helps to shape philosophical perspectives on how to teach. It is a dialogic experience between past training, present professional experience and their own construction of their learning experience. Also, more than just the training programme itself, the data identify ‘influential and older’ persons as well as significant and memorable ‘teaching moments’. These are also influential in shaping their world view/values/paradigm on the ‘training’ or ‘education’. There is a sense of the training experience as a community or world (Goodman?) made up of persons (older persons/teacher; students/peers), memorable moments (not limited to schools but also with other members of the theatre making community), and the experience of the learning they received from institution, persons and moments.

A significant discovery in the initial coding process was the presence of communities. The first was made up of older and “respected” teachers, spotting, supporting and nurturing younger talents. The second set of community was peers who were committed to doing something “out of nothing”. These communities were impactful in the way memberships in them generated knowledge and values about theatre making principles as well as about life at large. This emerging theme pointed to further readings on values as a constellation of action guiding ideas (Appiah 2006). This directed me to Bourdieu’s concept of habitus (1991), and Goodman’s

worldmaking (1978) as well as Clifford’s Geertz world view (1973).