Historical Documentary Analysis

“Documents are useful in rendering more visible the phenomena under study” (Prior, 2003 in Cohen et al, 2010: 201). Many different kinds of documents can be used to “establish facts and draw conclusions about past events” (Borg, 1963 in Cohen et al, 2010: 191), including field notes, diaries, formal records, minutes of meetings, memos and emails, reports and statistics, archives, policy documents,

68 public records etc (Cohen et al, 2010: 201). One advantage of documentary analysis is that “there is little or no reactivity on the part of the writer, particularly if the document was not written with the intention of being research data” (Cohen et al, 2010: 201). This aspect was important in my study in order to achieve validation of the interview data by triangulation or, in Newby’s words (2010: 122), to “corroborate interview evidence with documentary evidence.”

The following historical documents were analysed in this study: 5.6.3.1 Senate and Faculty Minutes

I obtained written permission from the Registrar to access and analyse the University’s Faculty and Senate minutes, which entailed spending many hours searching through the University archives in the Cory Library as RU archive records are not available electronically before the year 2002. The University Senate meets once per quarter and each Faculty has a minimum of four Faculty board meetings per annum. As there are six Faculties at Rhodes, I studied 280 sets of minutes over the 10 year period 1999-2008. It should be noted that only four Faculties – Commerce, Education, Humanities and Science - are included in the discussion as two Faculties, Law and Pharmacy, had no statistically significant AEG admissions during that period.

5.6.3.2 Formal Motivations from Supervisors

The University’s Higher Degrees Guide (RU, 2012b: 5) states that “ad eundem

gradum students should submit a full motivation for their admission with supporting

documentation to the Head of Department”, and the RPL Policy (Appendix 2) states that “Applicants lacking the necessary formal qualification (an Honours degree) may be admitted by Senate, on the recommendation of Heads of Departments, Deans and Faculties.” The recommendation of HoDs is normally presented in the form of a letter of motivation - sometimes accompanied by a CV - written by the Supervisor and signed by the HoD and Dean, and attached to the agenda of Faculty meetings. All Faculty agendas during the period under analysis, 1999-2008, were accessed by myself and any motivation letters included in the agenda documentation were photocopied and analysed (see Chapter 8 for a discussion of the results). In many instances where applicants were being proposed as AEG admissions, just a brief motivation was included as part of the agenda itself, often only one paragraph. These ‘in-agenda’ motivations were also photocopied and analysed, and are included in the discussion in Chapter 8.

69 The motivation letters and paragraphs were examined using a qualitative content analysis approach which is:

A set of procedures that can be applied to any medium…to identify what is being communicated, by whom and to whom. It is concerned with the significance and meaningfulness of the communication. Thus it is concerned not just with words but also on the concepts and ideas that are being communicated.

(Newby, 2010: 484)

In this method, researchers create a coding structure based on their interpretation of the meaning being conveyed in the data. A line-by-line analysis of the motivation letters and paragraphs was undertaken from which codes were generated. Thereafter a table was developed amalgamating the codes into categories implied in the documentation, and made explicit by myself.

Other historical documents used to provide context and background in this study included the University’s 2005 institutional audit portfolio and draft Institutional Plan as well as various institutional and national policy documents. Personal memos and notes taken while attending Faculty and Senate meetings during the period studied (as part of my job as Director of Institutional Planning at RU) and observation of discussions on AEG admissions, were also used as research materials.

5.7

Research Methods in Grounded Theory

It is important to note once again that grounded theory differs from other qualitative research methods in that the researcher does not choose a theoretical framework and then apply it to the data, but rather collects the data and then enables the theory to emerge during analysis of the data. “Concurrent data collection or generation and analysis using codes and categories are essential methods that differentiate grounded theory from other predominantly interpretive research designs.” (Burks & Mills, 2011: 94)

Burks and Mills (2011) identify two main rules in grounded theory data analysis: i) Everything is a concept (or, as Glaser claimed in 1978, “All is data”); and

ii) Data analysis should always be undertaken in relation to the research question. Grounded theory is essentially an inductive form of research – which “involves the search for pattern from observation and the development of explanations – theories – for those patterns through a series of hypotheses.” (Bernard & Ryan, 2010: 266) In contrast, deductive research would begin with a theory (usually

70 derived from the literature or based on experience) from which hypotheses are developed and then tested against observations.

Various terms are used by grounded theorists to describe the same thing, which can be very confusing for a novice researcher. As mentioned earlier, I have used Glaser’s (1978) terminology in this study, the key concepts of which are:

5.7.1 Memoing

Memos are essentially “field notes about codes and contain our running commentary as we read through texts.” (Bernard & Ryan, 2010: 76) “Memos in grounded theory research are records of thoughts, feeling, insights and ideas in relation to a research project. Stern (2007) regards memos as the mortar that holds together the building blocks (data) that comprise a grounded theory”. (Burks & Mills, 2011: 40). Charmaz (2000: 517), helpfully describes memo writing as “the intermediate step between coding and the first draft of the completed analysis.” It is not important how one memos, but it is important that one memos (Corbin & Strauss, 2008). Glaser (1998) describes ‘theoretical memoing’ as “the theorizing write-up of ideas about substantive codes and their theoretically coded relationships as they emerge during coding, collecting and analyzing data, and during memoing". Theoretical memos are anything written down or drawn in the process of constant comparison.

More generally, memos are an integral part of any grounded theory research approach, and include every written note or diagram relating to the research, from its commencement to its conclusion. In the case of my study, the numerous memos I had made of Senate discussions and thoughts I had on the issues of access and graduateness long prior to the formal commencement of my study, also proved invaluable.