The analysis of qualitative research is not a technical process, but an insightful process requiring inductive reasoning, considering and theorizing. For this reason qualitative researchers have their own individual methods of
analyzing their data (Taylor & Bogdan, 1998). Following is a description of how I analyzed my data.
The use of multiple data collection methods produced a great deal and wide variety of data. These included notes from participant observations, transcripts of interviews, focus group sessions and meetings, research journals and official documents. Interviews, focus group sessions and reflective meetings were
transcribed within two weeks of their recording. Transcribing these recordings myself allowed me to consolidate my impressions of the events and become aware of anything that I might have missed. Data analysis occurred over two phases. Preliminary analysis of data occurred concurrently with data collection and a deeper analysis of the data was conducted during the final stages and after the completion of data collection.
Transcripts, participant observations and minutes from meetings were all manually coded using margin coding during the preliminary analysis phase. Broad categories were initially established according to interview questions based on a review of the literature. Themes were then identified and elaborated with subsequent interviews and observations. This phase of data analysis allowed me to feedback pertinent findings to the staff at CFK. It also enabled interview questions to be refined and new questions developed.
The transcripts were also imported into Nvivo 2.0 (Qualitative Solutions and Research, 1999) for further analysis. Nvivo 2.0 is a computer program designed to manage and analyze large quantities of qualitative data. Data was coded again using this program ensuring that all pertinent findings were revealed. Findings from document analysis were mainly used to create a narrative of the case and to gain a better understanding of events that transpired prior to my engagement with the group.
The second phase of data analysis involved a much deeper analysis of the data. This involved a great deal of consideration of the findings moving beyond the identification of themes to how they were interrelated. Drawings, diagrams, figures and cognitive maps contributed to this process. This is a common approach to attempting to make meaning of complex data (Miles & Huberman, 1994). This is reflected in the finished product of this thesis, with the many figures that have been used to assist communication.
A great deal of this analysis occurred during the writing of the findings sections of this thesis. Writing is well recognized as a method of inquiry
(Richardson, 2000). The process of drafting these sections forced me to consider my findings from the point of view of the reader. I needed to communicate them in a way that would act as supportive evidence for my interpretation of their
meaning and my deductions. This process enabled me to consolidate and further develop my conclusions.
3.5.1 A Change in Direction
Qualitative research is an iterative process, where ideas are visited and revisited from many different angles throughout the entire research period (Piantanida & Garma, 1999). This requires attention to and integration of
findings which produce unanticipated results. Given the length of time it takes to complete a doctoral dissertation there is great potential for change in the author’s and the participants’ understandings of the area of interest. This makes it difficult to have clear objectives from the outset that would account for unforeseen
outcomes and new perspectives.
As is not uncommon in qualitative investigations, the development of this research, through the input of participants and an increase in my understanding of the topic, resulted in a change in direction. The central aim of this research was to gain a deeper understanding of the implementation processes with an emphasis on those implementing the community intervention. Towards the end of the data collection phase it became clear that the original methodology proposed to achieve this aim would not capture the complexity of the implementation of CFK.
As the data collection and concurrent analysis progressed it was
increasingly apparent that the guiding principles for implementation were not relevant to the participants and therefore not helpful in their quest to implement a successful community intervention. Participants did not wish to engage in
theoretical discussions about intervention implementation or the development of a framework for best implementation practice, but wished to relay their
experiences of the implementation of CFK and of being part of the CFK team. Participants’ reactions to the framework were highly relevant as they contributed to knowledge specific to the research questions. Further, it was vital that all of the views expressed by the participants be considered in the analysis of the data. A focus on themes related to the guiding principles was too narrow and continued emphasis on this area was likely to overlook other important
information that would better assist in the understanding of the implementation of the community intervention.
3.5.2 A framework for analysis of results
It can be very useful to have a framework to guide the analysis of qualitative data. I had believed that the guiding principles would provide the framework for this research. Unfortunately, as was discussed above, this framework was not likely to enhance understanding of the implementation process and it became necessary to consider other framework options.
As is common in research, review of the literature continued for the entire research period. As I was collecting and analyzing data, as discussed above, I was also reading relevant literature. During this period I discovered a number of articles that discussed community interventions using a systems perspective. This perspective was congruent with and better framed the understandings of
participants with regard to their experiences of implementation of the
intervention. Consequently I decided to pursue an analysis of the data that was guided by a framework based on a systems approach.
Rather than making use of a single perspective for the analysis of the data I decided to utilize concepts from two approaches to form an integrative
framework for the data analysis. The idea of combining more than one approach in this way is not a new one. Visser and Schoeman (2004) used a combined social ecology, systems and social constructional approach to the examination of a the implementation of a community intervention for HIV prevention.
Chrispeels and Martin (2002) integrated concepts from systems theory and micro politics to use as a framework for analysis of their data on school reform.
Concepts from systems theory and ecological approaches were integrated to create a framework suitable for the analysis of the data collected in this study. The use of this integrative framework assisted in revealing the complexities of the implementation of CFK.
The following chapters outline the case, the findings, and the integrative framework for the analysis of the data. Chapter Four is a descriptive chapter. It contains an outline of the case. It describes the creation of the intervention, the
of the intervention. Chapter Five details the analysis of the data gathered for the development of the guiding principles for community intervention
implementation. Chapter six, seven, and eight, are an integration of the systems and ecological literature with illustrative findings from the case study. Finally, chapter nine contains a synthesis of the data, interpretations of meaning and a review of how it fits into current theory.
CHAPTER 4
CONNECT FOR KIDS: A CASE STUDY