Data Analysis and Interpretation

The majority of the data derived from this qualitative study was analysed using a form of content analysis; the data from the questionnaires was analysed using a form of quantitative analysis. Qualitative data are in the form of words, accurately transcribed from observation, discussion/research conversations, responses from open-ended questions of questionnaires and documentary evidence (the children’s written work and my own field notes and reflection journal). Miles and Huberman suggest that, in order to prepare for data analysis, the data from observations and the researcher’s field notes and reflection journal need to be converted into ‘write-ups’ and the discussion/research conversations must be transcribed so that the texts are clear and ready for interpretation: “So we are focusing on words as the basic medium and are assuming that the words involved have been refined from raw notes or tape recordings into a text that is clear to the reader or analyst” (1994:51). In addition, I collected data from children’s art and craft work and imaginative role play. The answers received to the closed questions of questionnaires were analysed in the form of numbers to help readers to get a clear pattern of the children’s perspectives on the whole project.

A huge amount of data was amassed over the duration of the twelve-week project and I began by placing it in chronological order. Johnson states that:

Action researchers…observe messy, real-world events in which humans are mucking about. These humans are inherently…unpredictable and not at all inclined to exist in hermetically sealed worlds. Thus, each time we search and research we expect to see different things. The closest we come to repetition is noticing recurring items, themes, or patterns that emerge from our data…Therefore, action research findings are not generalised broadly, instead they are used to help understand particular situations as well as inform similar situations (2002: 73).

In the process of data analysis, I have re-visited all the collected data several times, taken notes, made comments and established connections. Macintyre advises researchers to “pull meaning from the different records of evidence to identify constructs such as themes, incidence, patterns and trends” (Macintyre, 2000: 91). Data analysis and its interpretation is therefore a matter of establishing relationships within the data and making connections between data derived from different situations, in order to develop multiple standpoints (Graue and Walsh, 1998:160).

In the first stage of the analysis process all the data was coded and categorised. Miles and Huberman (1994:56) claim that: “Codes are tags or labels for assigning units of meaning to the descriptive or inferential information compiled during a study. Codes are usually attached to ‘chunks’ of varying size—words, phrases, sentences, or whole paragraphs.” In this research, significant categories were identified and coded as follows. Some of these overlap with the areas to investigate through participant observation which I have discussed in 3.3.1.

Figure 3.5: Categories and codes for analysing data.

Code What to investigate and analyse

Preferences Preferences for particular stories and activities. Visual cues Use of pictures to support understanding.

Response to pictures in the selected picture books. Response through drawing and art work

Response On a spectrum, negative and positive responses to sensitive and traumatic stories in this study

Response after exploratory and imaginative role play Response to emotional reflections after exploration of the stories.

Experience Personal experience of sensitive and traumatic issues. Insights into or awareness of the value of human experience.

Adults’ perspectives

Classroom teacher’s attitudes towards the processes of teaching and learning.

Other Any major and relevant unexpected events that occurred during the project.

Four figures (from Figure 4.44 to Figure 4.47) have been used to present the information from the closed question analysis I derived from the questionnaires.

The processes of coding, categorising, interpreting and linking the data help the researcher to move beyond the descriptive to an analytical level of understanding in order to fully investigate what has been learnt from the data and what it can contribute to the future research agenda. I have drawn on evidence from all the data in order to understand the meaning behind a particular response, to make links within the findings and to discuss the results and conclusions.

Each participant’s responses are equally valuable in this research and I examined the responses of every child in order to generate some sub- categories for each category listed above. Similar patterns are grouped into these sub-categories and represented with the most relevant or powerful utterances and are discussed inChapter Four. Since the children’s responses were collected in different ways, it was clear to me that they might respond differently. For example, some children’s artistic responses could be more comprehensive or meaningful than their written responses; therefore, their responses might be cross-analysed. The children’s drawings and art work (see Figure 4.31 to 4.38) have been considered as part of the data and are discussed as part of my analysis of the children’s understanding of the stories and their reflection on personal experiences (Arizpe and Styles, 2003:118). In particular, I have discussed their choice of colours and subjects, as well as the general impression I gained from their drawing and art work (Lewis and Greene, 1983:29-30). I am not an artist, nor an art critic, and so I have been guided in my response by the work of Doonan, Graham and Arizpe and Styles, which I discussed inChapter Two.

The final part of the analytic process is the writing up of the study. I use the process of analysis described above to identify areas for examination and interpretation. Each area will be discussed using data from all the participants and will include the presentation of a valuable amount of primary data, especially the children’s responses, writing and art work, when writing up the findings.

I have discussed in the previous sections how this research focuses on investigating young children’s responses to sensitive and traumatic issues. There will therefore be no standardised or uniform answers to be found in their voices. Instead, their comprehension, the richness of their responses and their meaningful interpretation and reflection have all been taken into account when evaluating their learning. It is not my intention to compare the children’s responses with each other but to analyse their response in order to explore the research questions, and seek out any patterns that might emerge.

The key reason for interpreting young children’s oral and written responses in this research is to help me to understand what they have learnt and how they have responded to the selected texts and issues. Even though interpretation is applied to their oral and written responses, I must reconfirm that every individual’s voice is valued and respected in this research.