Data analysis and interpretation stage

Qualitative data were analysed through thematic analysis. Since a voice recorder was used, the data were first transcribed. As indicated earlier, some interviews were conducted in the learners’ home language, before being translated after the transcriptions had been done. The study was cognisant of the fact that translating has a number of problems which may affect the validity or reliability of the data collected. However, care was taken to check the accuracy of the data which were transcribed and translated. For this study, the data were analysed according to the phenomenological stages as reflected in the analytical framework developed by Marshall and Rossman (1999). The six stages of this framework are the following:

 Stage one: organising the data so that they are retrievable and convenient to work with;

86

 Stage two: making groupings, themes and patterns. Marshall and Rossman (1999, p. 154) concur that this is a very difficult stage of the data analysis process;

 Stage three: data coding, which includes various types of coding systems for the categories and themes created. Codes may take on several forms that include the abbreviation of keywords or numbers/numbering;

 Stage four: testing developing understandings, where part of the stage involves eliminating redundancy;

 Stage five: searching for alternative explanations. Giorgi, Fisher and Murray et al. (1975) add that at this stage participants’ language or vocabulary is transformed into the language of science, and that such language must reflect the participants’ perceptions; and

 Stage six: this is where the researcher embarks on writing the report.

In terms of data interpretation, this was done according to Bassey’s (1999) stages, which include the following:

 The use of mechanical means to record data, i.e., a voice recorder to record interviews word for word. This implies that the transcripts that were used were more accurate than if the researcher had taken notes during the interviews; and

 The researcher acknowledging bias and possible circumstances that may affect the data in any way. This implies a need to acknowledge that any account is a representation of reality.

Being clear about the theoretical lens or perspective the researcher used to interpret data meant there was sufficient evidence to back up interpretations, and no unsubstantiated claims were made (Bassey, 1999, pp. 222–223).

After the transcriptions and interpretation of data had been done, the responses were arranged in accordance with each question asked. The arranged responses were printed out and analysed using Marshall and Rossman’s (1999) analytical framework. The transcriptions were read and re-read in order to obtain a deeper sense of what was contained in each interview, to make sense of the subsequent analysis. While doing the thorough reading, themes were identified on which the written-up report was based.

87 4.20 Limitations of the study

In general, studies have their strengths as well as weaknesses or constraints. The limitation of this study may be the fact that the participants might not have provided a true reflection of what is happening in their schools, where dictatorship and autocracy prevail. This implies that the participants might have tried to give the impression that their schools are run in a democratic way. As a consequence, they may have been trying to protect those who are in fact autocratic, which would have negatively impacted the research findings. That is why, in this case, I as the researcher opted to be the part of the research: to obtain first-hand information.

The information gathered in this study was based on the experiences of the participants, who – in the interviews – may not have understood certain questions or may have given the answers they thought the researcher wanted to hear. As a result, some answers arising from the interviews may be null and void, based on how the respondents perceived specific questions. To work around this, semi-structured interviews were used which enabled me as the researcher to dig deeper and direct the participants’ responses towards answering the research questions without deviating from them.

In a school set-up, the researcher is not supposed to know the answers, but to seek answers from the research population. Interestingly enough, to the very people who are supplying the answers, the researcher may seem to be a Miss or Mr Know-it-all. This relationship may have a negative impact on a study, as the respondents may try to impress the researcher. Even worse, some may not wish to speak at all, perhaps due to concerns about their linguistic capabilities – as was the case in this study. The Bill of Rights clearly states that everyone has a right to freedom of speech, which implies that a respondent can speak in any language s/he feels comfortable with. A struggling interviewee, who is trying to express him/herself in English, might provide distorted information which will negatively impact the study. To avoid this, the issue of language was discussed and agreed upon prior to starting the interviews.

Advancing with this empirical study was largely dependent on the time frames available to the case study schools, i.e., when they could accommodate the researcher. Another factor to consider was related to participation: Would all the stakeholders (participants) be open to be

88

interviewed at a time that suited the researcher? That is why the time frames were negotiated beforehand with the relevant people.