Data analysis

3.2.6.1 Data management

Since I employed different data collection methods in my ethnographic research, my fieldwork produced rich data in terms of both data sources and a wide range of perspectives from different groups of participants. This would have resulted in difficulty in later data analysis if a data management strategy had not been set up from the beginning of the fieldwork. I therefore developed a master list of types of information gathered, as suggested by Coffey, Holbrook and Atkinson (1996). I tried to record data collected every day during the fieldwork in the list. By the end of the fieldwork I produced a data collection matrix (see Appendix F) to locate and identifying data for the research (Ibid). Such a matrix helped me in understanding the levels of significance of the data collected as well as in identifying new themes when addressing my initial research questions. In the process of data management, I coded the names of participants and related background information in order to protect the anonymity of participants. I also saved a backup copy of my computer files as advised by Kaiser (2009).

3.2.6.2 Approach to data analysis

As I discussed earlier a large amount of detailed data was gathered from my ethnographic fieldwork, and I started with writing up an account of my non- participant and participant observations from short jottings made during the day. In this way I tried to approach my data analysis from smaller units of analysis to

more complex data categories.

According to Richards (2015), the strategies for data analysis in qualitative research should be identifying, coding, and categorizing patterns found in the data. I followed such strategies in my data analysis by:

 Working on the data matrix to identify and collating key themes addressed in my research questions and emerging themes that I was not aware of before;

 Transcribing tape recorded data and translating data collected in Chinese to English;

 Breaking down transcripts into smaller significant parts of data by a process of open coding;

 Refining themes by a constant comparison approach as analysis was progressed;

 Demonstrating adult participants’ perspectives by the use of quotations taken directly from the transcripts of interviews;

 Demonstrating children's perspectives by the use of quotations and other evidence such as pictures, drawings, photographs;

 Highlighting the arguments to draw a conclusion.

My study focuses on making meanings or interpretation of the viewpoints and experience of the research participants (Lofland and Lofland, 1995; Mason, 2002). This decides the ethnographic nature of my data analysis. Thus, my study can be regarded as a process to generate a theoretical and empirical account of participants' perspectives within a specific cultural context through the ethnographic investigation in the field of ECEC. The data analysis of my

study is accordingly not limited to a pre-planned hypothetical framework whilst it develops from fieldwork as well as with the investigations of the literature review. Therefore, the nature of data analysis in my study is qualitative and ethnographic by discovering and interpreting rather than testing some pre- designed hypotheses.

The process of data analysis was based upon the data collected from the pilot study and the main study, including observational data obtained from field notes, photographs, and videos, which reveals direct and indirect meanings of what the participants did and think; communicative data obtained from formal interviews and informal conversations, which provides direct interpretation of

participant’s perspectives on relevant research questions; as well as

documentary data obtained from school policies and handbook, teacher’s teaching plans, textbooks, and children’s learning journals, even national policies of ECEC in China, which offered supplementary evidence beyond the previous two types of data. The process of data analysis in my study attempted to develop meaning-making and sufficient account by breaking down data into components in terms of different themes generated from the initial analysis of data. Then, I attempted to make connections between and within the components. The procedure of coding was simultaneously ongoing during the process of breaking down data. In other words, the aim was to describe, classify and connect them (Dey, 1993) with the purpose of deeply understanding the relevance between the data and my research questions (Mason, 2002). I initially started the analysis from looking through and annotating data including the field notes, visual data and literature review, which provided me a general picture of the data. Then, I subsequently collected data to go beyond description, and

code and classify them under different themes which were related to the research questions of the study. Then, a clearer whole picture of the data was generated by making connections between categories generated by different research approaches and methods.

3.3 Summary

The chapter has explained how the data was collected in pilot studies in England and in China and during the main study in China, as well as the underpinning rationale. It focuses on demonstrating how the ethnographic approach was adopted for the research design and how it was developed to answer the research questions. There are two main sections. Firstly, the methodological and ethical issues in researching ECEC are discussed in the context of China, including the theoretical basis for ethnography as the research design and the way specific methods were developed to answer the research questions; and the strategies of sample selection, and the consideration of ethical issues involved in the study. Secondly, it reflects on the ethnographic fieldwork justifying the specific techniques used in the research process. This second section also includes an account of the data analysis including methods for data management and the analytic framework.