Data analysis

The focused interviews were audio recorded and transcribed by an administrative assistant. A synopsis of each of the participant’s experiences was constructed using their artefacts (where obtainable) and focused interview responses as a resource in order to record their narratives as a whole initially (see Appendix 12 for condensed synopsises). Initially I used the themes of strands of identity; identity changes; impact on family relationships and family support to initially structure the data and construct the synopses. These themes were created partially through my review of the literature; my research aims (May, 2011) and through the questions set by the mind mapping exercise in phase one. This enabled me to see the stories as a whole to begin with, rather than as fragmented pieces into codes or themes which may lose the integrity and meaning of what was said (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2011). Seeing each synopsis as a complete narrative enabled me to have a better understanding of each woman’s comments before I began to dissect this and look for key themes.

68

Content analysis of the data occurred through a process of coding in order to find similarities and differences in these key themes using colour coding of the individual interview transcripts in order to make comparisons (May, 2011). The frequency of key phrases (May, 2011) was also analysed using common words such as stress, guilt, etc in order to make further comparisons and look for patterns in the women’s responses. The common words were determined initially through my awareness of their frequency of their occurrence; this was then collaborated with a system of counting to corroborate this. Each word was considered in context as well as different words with the same meaning, for example, mum, mummy and mother. After the initial coding I managed my data by focusing on both each synopsis and theme in order to illuminate my understanding through in depth interpretation of the reduced data (Spencer et al., 2014). I used a framework approach (see Spencer et al., 2014) to organise my data which enabled me to

combine the thematic and case analysis approach. It was important to keep the cases as a whole in the analysis so that they weren’t taken out of context (Bazeley, 2013), but themes across the data could be generated. I did not wish to generalise the women or the men’s experiences but draw on the differences and similarities in their narratives.

Using a thematic framework analysis approach enabled me to be systematic, comprehensive and transparent in my data analysis through familiarisation, constructing the initial thematic

framework, indexing and sorting, reviewing and connecting the data then summarising the data (Spencer et al., 2014). Although this was time consuming, it allowed me to develop an in depth knowledge of the variety of data I had gathered. This enabled a thematic mind map to be constructed; this was defined and redefined (Saldana, 2013), in order to develop a theoretical model of analysis. My final three themes were identity construction during HE, the impact of HE on the family and family capital (see Appendix 10). Initially I explored the theme of support systems on offer in the family. Through further analysis of the data looking for similarities and common themes and through scrutiny of the literature I developed this into the conceptual framework of family capital.

69

4.5.1 Possible bias in the data collection methods and analysis

My reflexive approach continued with the data analysis as I was aware of the critical role I played when analysing and interpreting the data (Doucet, 2006). Etherington (2004:19) sees reflexivity as ‘an ability to notice our responses to the world around us…and to use that knowledge to inform our actions, communications and understandings’. Therefore

understanding the social context is also important in justifying my methods of data analysis.

In the social context of the college and my research, the women were all known to me, whereas the men were not. As the women already had an established rapport with me and trust built through the lecturing environment, this had to be established with the men in their interview. The trust and rapport was on a deeper and more meaningful level with the women as I had built relationships with them over time and the relationships would continue after the research had completed. This was in contrast to the men who I may not have contact with again. The differences in my relationship with the men and women could lead to concerns about the reliability and validity of this research.

Through using positioning as a conceptual tool here it is worth noting that the women (and the men) may have positioned and presented themselves consciously in a certain light. Although the women were quite informal and involved me in the retelling of their stories using phrases as ‘You know’, ‘You know what I mean?’, ‘We have talked about this before’, I am still aware that they may have deliberately positioned themselves in the exchange. Positioning may also

account for how they positioned themselves in terms of the accounts of their social identities (May, 2011), as the interview process is a way of a participant accounting for their position in different relationships and making sense of it (May, 2011).

My own experiences of this subject may have influenced my analysis as I could have re- presented the stories given to me and made conscious and sometimes unconscious decisions about which aspects of their stories to illuminate and which aspects to disregard (Etherington, 2004). In order to refute my initial assumptions regarding marital relationships being under

70

strain when the wife studies I took time to critically evaluate the data to find similarities and differences (Silverman, 2010).