Thematic analysis

Thematic Analysis “a method for identifying, analysing, and reporting patterns (themes)

within the data” (Braun and Clarke, 2006) was applied to all the qualitative interview data.

Thematic coding can be located ‘as a process performed within analytical traditions (such as grounded theory) (Ryan and Bernard, 2000). It was used in this research because it moves beyond counting explicit words. For instance in word-based analysis, (which would have been problematic in this research as the transcribed data included non-words and any and all non-verbal phrases) thematic coding allowed me to identify and describe both implicit and explicit ideas (Guest, MacQueen and Namey, 2011). The data analysis procedure benefitted from the flexibility gained by using a thematic approach. To ensure flexibility did not lead to inconsistencies when developing themes, I maintained reflexivity throughout and conducted the data analysis process using the six phases of analysis as outlined by Braun and Clarke (2006).

5.1.2.1 Phase one

Phase one consisted of me familiarising with the data (Braun and Clarke, 2006). To ensure that I was fully immersed in the data (Wellington, 2000), I watched each video recording again and looked over every ‘Talking Mat’ before transcribing the verbal and non-verbal data, I then repeatedly read the transcripts actively searching for meanings and patterns as suggested by Braun and Clarke (2006).

5.1.2.2 Phase two

Phase two required me to organise the analytical process and to begin to generate initial codes from the transcribed data. Initially, I chose to use qualitative software NVivo (v.10). My decision was based on NVivo’s capacity for storing and organising many documents and for organising the coding process when analysing the transcripts. As I have no previous experience of using NVivo I decided to undertake a two-day intensive training course before engaging in the process.

My process of analysis using NVivo was deductive; I approached the transcripts with pre- developed topics derived from the participants ‘Talking Mat’s, information about the lived experiences of dyslexic children and adults taken from the literature review, and patterns I had noted during my initial stages of analysis (phase one). I created a Node, a node in NVivo represents the system by which codes are stored, for each of the topics derived from the ‘Talking Mats’, these included, reading, writing, and paying attention. I also went back to the literature review and created a tree node for each of the themes I had identified in the literature review, with sub-nodes based on sub-headings. I also created free nodes based on ideas and patterns I had noted during the initial phase of my data analysis.

Despite the benefits of using NVivo, such as being able to store and analyse large amounts of transcribed data, I decided not to use it after this initial coding phase, phase two,

primarily as I felt a distance from the data. I feel manual data analysis “promotes familiarity

and appreciation for subtle differences” (Gilbert, 2002: 216). As my data included a range of

transcripts and as I aimed to preserve the participants ‘voice’, I felt familiarity through immersing myself with the data was more successful when using a manual analysis process.

5.1.2.3 Phase three

Phase three of Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six phases of conducting a thematic analysis involved identifying potential themes from the coded transcripts. During the completion of this phase, I used a range of visual representations, which included creating ‘mind maps’ and writing the name of each code on a separate sticky note, which helped me to physically move the codes around so I could begin to sort the different codes and consider how they could form overarching themes.

Initially, at the end of phase three, I had three overarching themes: theme one -what is Dyslexia? theme two-Bullying, Humiliation and Oppression and theme three-The Way Forward. However as suggested by Braun and Clarke (2006) I decided not to abandon anything, including initial coding, at this stage:

as without looking at all the extracts in detail (the next phase) it is uncertain whether the themes hold as they are, or whether some need to be combined, refined, and separated, or discarded (p. 91).

5.1.2.4 Phase four

During phase four the themes were reviewed at the coded level and by viewing the entire data set to ensure the data within the themes cohere together (Braun and Clarke, 2006). When the data refinement stopped adding anything substantial, the final thematic map was developed and, theme one became, Diagnosis, theme two, Dyslexia and theme three

became, Discrimination. Such reflexivity remained possible as I kept a complete set of records throughout all phases of the data analysis process. My ‘audit trail’ (Bryman 2016, Lincoln, and Guba 1985) not only ensured the research was dependable but enabled me to be able to re-focus the themes throughout the data analysis process.

Initial Themes Finalised Themes

Theme 1 What is Dyslexia? Diagnosis

Theme 2 Bullying, humiliation, and

oppression Dyslexia

Theme 3 The way forward Discrimination

Figure 5.1: Themes generated from thematic analysis of data

5.1.2.5 Phases five and six

Phase five, consisted of, using the final thematic map to define and further redefine the final overarching and sub-themes and then identifying the “the ‘essence’ of what each theme is

about”(Braun and Clarke 2006: 92). When I felt this was complete, I began phase six,

producing the final write up of the data analysis. I have kept this description brief as the two final phases will be best demonstrated throughout this data analysis chapter.

5.1.3 Themes

Having described the process of the data analysis, the remaining chapter will present the data and the analysis of the data under the three overarching themes, Diagnosis, Dyslexia and Discrimination.

To provide the reader with a linear structure to the data analysis I decided to present the theme of Diagnosis first. I have made it clear throughout this research that I do not consider the formal ‘diagnosis’ and labelling of dyslexia to be a determining aspect for a dyslexic student’s experiences. The participants also spoke about this theme slightly less than others. This is not to suggest that the participants had less to say about the identification of their dyslexia or that it had not been influential in their lives. Data on the topic could have been influenced by the limitations of the ‘Talking Mats’ interview (stage one interview), as there was no ‘topic’ symbol for ‘diagnosis’, ‘dyslexia’ or even for ‘tests. During the semi-structured (stage two interview) I had the opportunity to rectify this limitation and either elaborate on the topic of identification, if it had been previously discussed or to explore the topic by asking each child, for example, what dyslexia meant, if they could explain why they were identified as dyslexic and if they could tell me who explained it to them. However, as only

sixteen of the twenty-one participants completed this stage this again could have influenced the amount of data within this theme.

As participants had been recruited from mainstream state schools, without the sampling requirement of a ‘diagnostic assessment’ this could also have influenced the amount of data within this theme. As previously discussed in chapter 4.5.6, although I had requested data from each of the participant's school, which included information on how their dyslexia had been identified, this was only gathered from seven and of those only the reports from four diagnostic assessments were obtained. It, therefore, remains unclear how many participants had been identified as dyslexic using formal assessment methods. However, as this research is about the participant's subjective experiences of being identified as dyslexic and the effects of these views and not the assessments themselves, the amount of data obtained from the schools regarding identification methods is only used to provide background data regardless of the amount received. Throughout the analysis of the data in this theme, information from the assessment reports that were obtained will be provided, but only to offer commentary on the process, they will not be used for information about the

participant.

As with the first theme, Diagnosis, data collected and presented within the second theme,

Dyslexia, again could have been influenced by the potential limitations of the ‘Talking Mats’

interview (stage one interview). Although the ‘Talking Mat’s’ application had topic symbols for many areas of impairment that are commonly associated with dyslexia, for example, ‘reading’, ‘writing’ and ‘paying attention’ some areas, such as ‘spelling’ and ‘memory’ were absent from the topic tile list which had the potential to limit students responses. However, as the ‘Talking Mat’s’ application was flexible and gave the students the option to add their own tiles, Alex (year 5), took this option and created a tile for ‘spelling’ and placed it under the dislike column. Even without adding a tile to their Mat, many other students had chosen to speak about the difficulties they encounter with spelling. Therefore, evidence would suggest that the ‘Talking Mats’ application did not limit the responses the students gave regarding the range of difficulties they experience in the classroom.

5.2 Diagnosis – Dyslexic students’ experiences of the process of being