Constructivist Grounded Theory

Constructivist grounded theory is the process in which theories are produced through inductive reasoning and are “abstracted from time and place”

(Charmaz, 2006, p. 133). Inductive or logical inference is the consideration of multiple explanations, “forming hypotheses for each possible explanation,

checking them empirically by examining data, and pursuing the most plausible explanation” (Charmaz, 2006, p. 104). This induction or theorising begins as

soon as the research is initiated in order to construct and reconstruct lines of inquiry. Initial findings create trajectories of ideas and questions that inform the direction and findings of the project. Collected qualitative data informs the research, allowing the creation of theories that can be examined in critical discourse or applied thematic analysis (Charmaz, 2001).

Constructivist grounded theory methodology assists in “conducting

qualitative research that focuses on creating conceptual frameworks or theories through building inductive analysis from the data” (Charmaz, 2006, p. 187). This methodology allows theory to be “developed from data in an iterative or recursive and evolving process” (Ong, 2012, p. 2) by the researcher. Findings of qualitative

studies emerge from organised and reorganised analytic categories from within the accessible collected data through thematic analysis. This approach does not

proceed through predetermined, quantitative, or subjective extant theoretical production (Burns, 2000; Charmaz, 2006).

Thematic analysis is used to synthesise and provide rich descriptions of data, which enables an event or phenomenon to be given consideration according to the intricate observations made by the researcher during analysis (Guest, MacQueen, & Namey, 2012). It is a method in which language in the data can be coded or grouped and reorganised into categories by the researcher, based on a theme, idea or nuance otherwise not explicitly detailed within the data (Boyatzis, 1998; Weedon, 1987). This allows the data to be re-opened and exposed to, or informed by, other ideas or themes within the collected data to help explicate and connect issues and events. This assists the researcher in collating evidence for issues identified by the researcher in the ensuing discourse analysis.

Constructivist grounded theory is a detailed data analysis process, which: assumes an obdurate, yet ever-changing world but recognizes diverse local worlds and multiple realities, and addresses how people’s actions affect their local and larger worlds. […] [A] Constructivist approach

aim[s] to show the complexities of particular worlds, views, and actions. (Charmaz, 2006, p. 132)

The constructivist grounded theory approach assists in the interpretation of the effect of implementation of the AC: E for secondary English teachers in Tasmania, by positioning the researcher as an observer of individual participants in a larger group, some of the English teaching staff at seven secondary schools in the south east of Tasmania, from the three Tasmanian education sectors.

Charmaz (2006) notes three main phases of coding, which identify ideas, to employ constructivist grounded theory in order to classify the ideas with codes, categories or themes, and discourses. These three phases used to construct

discourses, require the constructivist grounded theory coding processes of initial coding, focused or selective coding, and axial coding for the discovery of themes.

Charmaz (2006) argues that constructivist grounded theory enables a rigorous data analysis approach by looking further into the research participants’

construction or perspectives of their realities through the thorough analysis of data involving preliminary, selective or initial, focused, and axial coding phases (section 3.6.1.1), which allows for data saturation or repeated location of ideas with rich, infinitesimal qualitative detail to be found in “interpretative

understanding of subjects’ meanings” (Charmaz, 2003, p. 250). This is

achievable by ensuring data saturation and discourse analysis of the data. The stages of constructivist grounded theory were employed by the researcher within a qualitative poststructural feminist paradigm, allowing for rigorous process enabling a strengthened discursive analysis of teacher

perspectives, which explores the hegemonic issues that impact teacher practice.

3.6.1.1 Constructivist grounded theory coding phases

The three sequential phases of constructivist grounded theory used in the analysis of the data of this research, include initial coding, focused coding, and axial coding. The codes were created and applied to the data, by the researcher.

Phase 1 – Open, initial coding

Open or initial coding, is the first phase of data review in the

constructivist grounded theory approach (Charmaz, 2006). This is an important inductive phase. Initial coding is a process which allows the researcher to read and interrogate the data, discovering and identifying the codes relevant to the study. This produces the initial codes.

Initial coding aids the analysis process by satisfying the fit and relevance criteria of grounded theory. In grounded theory, fit refers to how the study meets the empirical requirements of developing codes that confirm the participants’ or researcher’s experience. Empirical confirmation through open coding bolsters

methodological rigour (Bendassolli, 2013). Relevance is where the analysis describes with transparency, what is happening in the data and provides links between “implicit processes and structures” (Charmaz, 2006, p. 54).

Close and repeated reading of collected data to construct initial codes creates a thorough understanding of the data for the researcher, with the context and position of participant data (Bryant & Charmaz, 2007; Charmaz, 2006; Charmaz & Mitchell, 2001) as complex.

The act of assigning codes in this stage of data analysis involves one of four methods: word-by-word, line-by-line, incident-by-incident, or segment-by- segment. As each method suggests, data are coded word-by-word, line-by-line, incident-by-incident, segment-by-segment, or, by larger data portions such as phrases or paragraphs, in detail. According to Charmaz (2006), the most common methods for the initial coding stage, is by using word and line level coding. At word level, pertinent, high-value words for the researcher are recognised and coded. Semantics and semiotics are used to analyse multiple meanings. Line-by- line coding is the identification of a phrase or group of words that can be

summarised to form a particular code. These approaches allow the researcher to become immersed and more efficient in the data analysis process (Charmaz, 2013).

Incident-by-incident level coding is summary of notable occurrences or events within the data, and is particularly relevant for interview transcripts (Charmaz, 2006, 2013). Chunks of data are coded segment-by-segment, allowing faster coding and analysis of incidents or themes to be highlighted and named or confirmed reflexively by the researcher. These initial “temporary labels” or codes

are then “densified” (Denzin, Salvo, & Washington, 2008, p. 163) or collapsed in the next stage of coding. This constructivist grounded theory coding practice has been applied in this research study to questionnaire responses and the interview transcript data.

Phase 2 – Focused or Selective coding

The second phase of coding for qualitative constructivist grounded theory analysis (Charmaz, 2006), is the creation of focused or selective categories. Focused or selective categories are a condensed and refined set of codes, which identify emergent occurrences in the data. This phase is carried out by combining similar initial codes through relating, restructuring and rebuilding the data into various groups to expose links and relationships. Focused or selective coding is “the identification of a core category or story around which analysis focuses”

(Ezzy, 2002, p. 92). These focused or selective categories inform the production of the axial codes and then dominant discourses, which summarise the findings of this research. This phase gives “coherence to the emerging analysis” (Charmaz, 2006, p.60) of this research.

Phase 3 – Axial coding (for thematic analysis)

Axial coding is the next phase of collapsing data into more manageable codes. Similar ideas found in the previous focused/selective phase, are further collapsed into axial categories and considered for their collective meaning (Foucault, 1972). Memo writing of definitions and connections between categories allow similarities to be identified by the researcher, from which meanings are made and discourses can be formed (Charmaz, 2000, 2006). The axial codes are regrouped by the researcher, to construct dominant themes.

The use of constructivist grounded theory enables inductive or cogent reasoning through the researcher’s interpretation or reflexive descriptions of the

identified codes for the following stage of discourse analysis in this research (Burns, 2000; Charmaz, 2006; Creswell, 2007, 2012; O'Reilly, 2005), where “knowledge claims [are] set within the conditions of the world [or context] today and in the multiple perspectives of […] group affiliations” (Creswell, 2007, p.

25), or the studied environment. This enables the studied context to be explored with rigour (Charmaz, 2006, 2013; Hoepfl, 1997).

The coding phases of constructivist grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006) are integral to conducting an applied thematic analysis. Applied thematic analysis is connected to constructivist grounded theory, which uses inductive reasoning and multiple analytic techniques to attempt to explain an event or phenomenon (Charmaz, 2006; Guest et al., 2012). Applied thematic analysis is a flexible approach, which produces dominant themes from the data, which are then explored through a critical discourse analysis.