Qualitative approaches are very diverse, complex and nuanced (Holloway and Todres, 2003) and one of the most common approaches to qualitative data analysis entails what is often referred to as thematic analysis. However, unlike strategies like grounded theory, it is not an analytical approach that has an identifiable heritage or that has been outlined in terms of a distinctive cluster of techniques. In fact, Bryman (2008) stated that thematic analysis did not merit discussion in earlier editions of his work. However, Braun and Clarke (2006) insisted that thematic analysis should be seen as a foundation method for qualitative analysis and one of the first that should be learned by novices to qualitative interpretative methods. Boyatzis (1998) characterises thematic analysis as a tool running across different methods rather than a specific method in itself. Ryan and Bernard (2000) agree and locate thematic coding as a process performed within major analytical traditions, for example grounded theory, rather than a specific approach in its own right. Braun and Clarke (2006) disagree and argue that thematic analysis should be considered a method in its own right (Appendix 13). They suggest that an absence of clear and concise guidelines around thematic analysis lays its use open to the “anything goes” critique of qualitative research (Antaka, Billing, Edwards and Potter, 2002:56). Braun and Clarke (2006:78) provide a vocabulary and “recipe” for people that is theoretically and methodologically sound, without losing flexibility in how it is used. They stress that researchers need to be clear about what they are doing and why, and to include ‘how’ they conducted their analysis in their reports. Their review of using thematic analysis in psychology (2006) found that the ‘how’ is often omitted in reports. If it is not known how people went about analysing their data, or what
assumptions informed their analysis it is difficult to evaluate their research and compare or synthesise it with other studies on related topics in the future (Attride-Stirling, 2001). I agree, as from my own positivist background, clarity on process and practice of methods are
Irena Grounds NTU ID: N0360228 Professional Doctorate. Document 5: Main Research Project Page 44 essential for peer review of research procedures. The audience and researcher need to be convinced that the findings are based on critical analysis of available data.
The vocabulary of thematic analysis revolves around data display and analysis. Data corpus refers to all the data collected for a particular research project, while data set refers to all the data from the corpus that is being used for a particular analysis, for example the interview transcripts collected. Data item is used to refer to each individual piece of data collected, for example one of the transcribed interviews, which together makes up the data set or corpus. Finally, data extract refers to an individual coded chunk of data which has been identified within, and extracted from, a data item. There will be many data extracts though only a selection will feature in the final analysis. Thematic analysis is a method for identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (themes) within data. It should describe the data set in rich detail and is characteristically uses the whole context of the participants’ experiences accessed through a range of data sets, in my case, transcribed interview, reflective journals, professional development profiles etc.
Themes or patterns within data can be identified in one of two primary ways in thematic analysis: in an inductive way (Frith and Gleeson, 2004) or in a theoretical or deductive way (Boyatzis, 1998). In an inductive approach the themes are strongly linked to the data
themselves (similar to grounded theory) so in this form the thematic analysis is data-driven. In contrast, a theoretical or deductive thematic analysis is driven by the researcher’s
theoretical or analytical interest in the area and thus more explicitly analyst-driven. This form of thematic analysis tends to provide a less rich description of the data overall, and a more detailed analysis of some aspects of the data. The researcher either codes for a specific research question which maps onto the more theoretical approach or the specific research question can evolve through the coding process of the inductive approach. A theoretical approach requires engagement with literature prior to analysis, whereas the inductive approach may be enhanced and more receptive to emergent themes by not engaging with literature in the early stages of the analysis (Tuckett, 2005). However, this is never wholly possible as literature review preparation and exposure to professional debate around relevant theoretical frameworks is implicit in being a teacher-researcher. In addition, having completed two subsidiary supporting studies resulted in a comprehensive literature review regarding associated theoretical frameworks with the main study.
In inductive thematic analysis the emergent themes are strongly linked to the data themselves, similar to grounded theory but there are subtle differences in the two
approaches. Grounded theory seeks patterns in the data but it is theoretically bounded. The analysis of the data should be directed towards theory development because the goal of grounded theory is to generate plausible and useful theory of the phenomenon that is grounded in the data (Macleod, 2001; Holloway and Todres, 2003). Braun and Clarke (2006) suggest that a well identified thematic analysis procedure means that the researcher need not subscribe to the implicit theoretical commitments of grounded theory if they do not
Irena Grounds NTU ID: N0360228 Professional Doctorate. Document 5: Main Research Project Page 45 wish to produce a fully worked out grounded theory analysis. Though the methods share a search for certain themes or patterns across the entire data set, thematic analysis is not bound by any pre-existing theoretical framework and so can be used within different theoretical frameworks as the analysis proceeds.
Braun and Clarke (2006) define thematic analysis (Appendix 13) as a method for identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (themes) within data. Like grounded theory it involves searching across a data set, in this case a dossier of information from both school and university experiences, to find repeated patterns of meaning. However, identified common concepts rather than fully formed theories may be the outcome. The participants in my bounded case study were limited in number and chosen in the ways previously described. There was no attempt to saturate categories or themes with as many appropriate cases as possible in order to demonstrate their relevance into more general analytical frameworks outside of the setting as required by grounded theory. Analysis involved a constant comparison across the entire data set. Interesting features of the data were coded in a systematic way. Collated codes were gathered into potential themes. From the thematic map, clear definitions and names were given for each theme which were further
interrogated to assess which themes linked and interconnected. Subsequent combining, refining and separating themes resulted in the final analysis which addressed experiences that supported progress in professional and personal confidence. The same colleague, who acted for document 4, acted as a ‘critical friend’ and discussed the process including reading the extract examples that were selected which related back to the research question and literature. A second colleague, who was not involved in the doctoral programme, acted as a peer debriefer by reviewing the draft documents and asking questions accordingly. This gave an interpretation beyond the researcher adding validity to the account.
The terms validity and reliability are terms associated with quantitative research and relate to the need for well-founded studies showing validity of a causal inference (internal validity) or the generalisability of the findings (external viability). Reliability concerns the replication of the study under similar circumstances employing standardised measures in controlled settings. However naturalistic investigations, like my own, derive consistency through coding of the raw data in a way that another person can understand the themes and arrive at similar conclusions and so can show reliability. Validation is the process of evaluating “the trustworthiness” of reported observations, interpretations and generalisations (Mischler, 1990:419) a term also used by Lincoln and Guba (1985:316) as an assessment criterion for qualitative research studies. I enhanced “trustworthiness” of my study (Rudestam and Newton, 2007: 113) through peer review and external audit of my data collection and analysis, triangulation by soliciting data from multiple and different sources and keeping a detailed audit trail that others could use to recapture steps and reach the same conclusions. Presenting findings regularly to the professional doctorate research community within my university was an effective way of reflecting on ways of presenting and explaining the data and receiving constructive critical analysis of procedures from colleagues. Having to explain
Irena Grounds NTU ID: N0360228 Professional Doctorate. Document 5: Main Research Project Page 46 methodology, methods and terminology to others acted as critical self-reflection
component of research identity development. The study was bound by ethical considerations.