This page is very long and includes specific instructions and examples for this assignment. Please review and attend to the details.
Assignment Guide:
Goal of the assignment
Preparation
Introduction
Codes and Coding
Codes and Frequencies
Code Definitions
Coding Transcripts
Example of Coding a Transcript Using Word
Example of Coding a Transcript Using a Spreadsheet
Words of Advice: Procedures to Avoid
Presenting Data: Illustration of Five Parts
Table 1: Illustration of Five Parts
Axial Coding: The Weaving Process
Table 2: Creating Categories
Table 3: Category Definitions
Excerpt of Your Weaving Process
What to Submit
Goal of the assignment
The analysis of data that is generated as the result of the implementation of a qualitative research methodology can be a complex and onerous task. Neuman addresses various types of qualitative data (e.g., interview transcripts, photographs) in the subsequent step of data analysis. In this assignment, you will analyze the transcription of a series of meetings that were held to address three questions:
Meeting 1 – What are the main concepts in distance education?
Meeting 2 – What are the program and instructional design considerations for distance education?
Meeting 3 – What is the relationship between technology and distance education?
Choose only 2 of these 3 transcripts to code. You may find that in addition to the topic for each focus group, the participants talk about their lives surrounding the topic.
Preparation for Your Journey
Before you begin, acquire two notebooks or create Word documents, one for your personal research journal and the other for analytic memo writing (see Section 15.2, p. 412). This is for you to document questions, thoughts, and decisions as you do your research. Even comments such as how you feel or what else is happening in your life are acceptable entries. The researcher is a tool, and analysis performed while well-rested may be different if performed while exhausted. When in doubt, the journal will tell you what you need to know, but only if you wrote about your process in the first place.
In the Journal section of your assignment, discuss:
How you proceeded with the coding and what your thoughts were as you went along;
Any personal insights or changes in perceptions that you notice about yourself.
The Researcher’s Journal reveals your thinking and understanding of the process. In effect, it reveals whether or not you understand the process of analyzing qualitative data. Therefore, a representative portion of the journal is included in the final mark.
Read your textbook: Section 15.2, pages 408 – 413, Coding and Concept Formation, will be particularly helpful. Review this section frequently as needed. Also, tackle articles in the course and recommendations having to do with qualitative analysis. Review any commentary in the conferences on the topic. Students tend to post information from different perspectives, which is very helpful for budding researchers.
Rearrange your schedule as needed. Set aside some time every day to at least review your work as a way to keep your thinking fresh, but open and axial coding requires blocks of time. Map out how long you think each section of this assignment will take to avoid asking for an extension.
Introduction to the Story
As a qualitative researcher, you have gathered together a group of graduate students to discuss issues in distance education. There are three focus groups, each with the same four graduate students and one interviewer. Although the interviews are a simulation, they are not unlike genuine human interactions that yield rich, in-depth information.
Your task is to engage in the Grounded Theory qualitative research design to code the transcripts and identify categories from the codes. In other words, you are to practice authentic listening in an attempt to understand and summarize what the interviewees are really expressing in the interviews.
While reading and rereading these transcripts, it is essential to repeatedly ask yourself, “What is this person trying to say” or “What is the context of this statement?” and even ” Is there subtext lurking about that has meaning but is not being expressed directly? For example, one interviewee might say, “Oh, she was there when I needed her.” So, after reflecting, you might determine that what this student is trying to tell you is that they felt “supported” or “comforted.” Hence, you might code this statement as either “comfort” or “support.” Beware, another person may understand “support” in terms of technical support or help desk support. The code “support” would not be used for both meanings. Remember it is important to recognize the context in which statements are situated because a statement can have more than one meaning – i.e., words like “support” and “comfort” are related, but not conceptually, identical. This is why it is very important to keep a record of code definitions during your coding.
Do not code the interviewer’s comments and questions.
Codes and Coding
A point of confusion may arise here regarding the term “code.” To code the transcript is to read through repeatedly and assign codes as they emerge. In this case, code is the active form of verb coding. A code, on the other hand, is the result of the coding process. We may say that to code results in identifying a code, or coding results in identifying a code. Regardless, it is important to be clear on the difference in meanings for the same term.
To this point, consult your textbook and unit readings for information and resources regarding the Open Coding phase of the Grounded Theory approach to qualitative data analysis. Codes emerge from the text, so data must be reviewed multiple times during this phase for the researcher to become satisfied that saturation has been reached; that is, there are no more new concepts or codes emerging from the data. We must “listen” carefully to the data to ensure that the researcher’s interpretations authentically and credibly represent the participant.
Keep in mind that Dr. Charmaz and Dr. Gibbs recommend “line by line” coding. Break sentences apart on separate lines as what seems appropriate. Not each and every line of text will contain something that needs to be coded; Remember, also, that there may be more than one codeword applied to a portion of the text. Code words may overlap, meaning that a phrase of text is then coded with a different codeword. Be creative! Remember that there is no right or wrong method for coding a file.
Review course materials and the two videos to get a better understanding of qualitative analysis. Drs. Kathy Charmaz and Graham Gibbs are leaders in this field.
Because your time is valuable, I recommend that you use the formatting examples I included in these instructions so you can focus on coding.
Do not confuse qualitative analysis coding with technology or software programming.
Codes and Frequencies
For codes, frequency involves how many phrases of text are included in the code. As you review your frequencies, see if they are relatively balanced. If you have a code with a much higher or lower frequency than the others, we revisit and reexamine the transcripts to determine if the code should be deconstructed further to ensure we understand what we believe the participants are saying. We ask, is the code too broad? Too narrow? Are all the phrases similar enough, or did we miss a subtext lurking somewhere that would shift some of them into a different or new code? If a new code emerges from examining the text, the transcript must be revisited to see if that new code pops up elsewhere. On the other hand, after you review your coding decisions (you documented these in your journal), you may agree with the frequencies as you coded them in the first place, so no adjustments need to be made.
When you are satisfied with the data you have identified for your codes, reviewed and refined the code definitions, the next step is to count how many phrases you assigned to each code accurately. This frequency will be included in Table 2.
The next step, axial coding, examines code definitions to generate a category, which can be understood as a group or family of codes that form a new identity. Each category has its own unique name and definition. This process is called weaving, because you weave code definitions together to create their own category.
Code Definitions
Definitions for codes are identified by the researcher based on what they thought at the time the code emerged from the data rather than being predetermined and forced onto the data. This may sound like researcher bias, and in a way, it is. Interpreting human communication requires skill, and the skilled researcher who is adept with the listening phase of coding data will be better able to identify codes and interpret definitions with stronger authenticity and credibility.
To facilitate accuracy, every time a code emerges from the data, immediately note in your journal what that code means to you, the researcher, in rich detail. This is important because as you take your analysis forward into the category phase, you will be comparing code definitions. It is essential that you note definitions at the time you create them. Remembering the definitions you assigned allows analysis to unfold in an orderly manner.
Coding the Transcripts
Open the transcript file. The link is at the top of this page. The file should download as a Word doc. Read the transcript at least twice and begin noticing recurring themes, patterns of thought, reflection, and strongly held opinions embedded in the text. As you review the transcript, make notes in your journal on words, concepts, quotes, or terms that you encounter. During additional read-throughs, contemplate the meaning of the concepts you found and try to form these into codes. Neuman states: “Three errors to avoid when coding…are staying at a descriptive level only (not being analytic), treating coding as a purely mechanical process, and keeping codes fixed and inflexible.”
As mentioned previously, there are three sections to the transcript, each one focusing on a different aspect of distance education. Choose two to work with. Although the transcript records the discussions during three separate meetings, your coding should not be conducted as two separate documents; rather, code both transcripts as a single document. According to Glaser, codes emerge from the data rather than being predetermined and forced onto the data. This means that you should not code each meeting separately with a focus on the topic of the meeting, but rather, code the two transcripts from the perspective of the participants’ experience.
As you examine the transcripts, you will find many codes in the data unrelated to the focus group topics. The coding phase of this assignment may produce 30 or more codes. If only a few codes emerge from the data, fewer than 10, for example, your approach to deciphering participants’ conversations is too broad, too flat. Review the transcripts a few more times to allow participants to speak to you in greater detail. The broad strokes of this painting come in the axial coding, where you will identify categories.
Read on…
Example of Coding a Transcript Using Word:
To avoid any confusion regarding which portion of text is associated with a code, be very clear and specific regarding how both text and code are identified. A method that is highly visible works well. Separate sentences and even phrases onto separate lines so coding is clearly associated with specific text.
The following is an example of coding in a word processing program such as Microsoft Word or an open-access program. Notice how text is separated with the code clearly presented at both the beginning and end of the code. The closing code looks different from the opening code, such as adding a character like @ or # to demark the end of the portion of text to make it visibly different. Any character will do. There just needs to be a visible indicator to indicate the end of the coded text. Do not skip the ending notation.
M1: Right. All this information age stuff we hear about every day has
[Change]
affected the way we approach learning, communicate, live our lives. Man, when I think about my Dad and his generation, and how things have changed since they went to university and got jobs, it’s wild.
[#Change]
You worked your whole life in one career and never thought—or had to think—about doing something else. Now, that is almost impossible.
F1: I know what you mean. When my company was downsizing, and I got caught in the crunch, I had to rethink about what I was going to do with my life and career. Refocus, I guess.
[Life-long learning]
So here I am a middle-aged woman with a family, whose job was considered redundant. There was no question that I had to go back to school to upgrade or retrain, but with a young family, traditional schools were out. Distance education was my white knight.
[#Life-long learning]
Note that each codeword is used twice to bracket the relevant text. There may be instances in which two codewords overlap in that they are tied to the same text or to a common portion of a phrase. In that case, you may have two codewords together at the beginning of some text or at the end. This is not a problem. An easy way to maintain clarity is to copy the repeated text, paste it into the next line, and apply the different code.
Example of Coding a Transcript Using a Spreadsheet
Using a spreadsheet for analysis adds another layer of preparation for coding. For this assignment, use this procedure:
First, in the transcript document, prepare the text by separating sentences into their own lines. If you see that a sentence clearly speaks to more than one idea, possibly a code, break that phrase from the full sentence, or copy it onto a row directly below the sentence.
When you have completed deconstructing the transcript in this manner, copy it into a spreadsheet. Each separate sentence and phrase will land in its own row. The first column can be named for initials of the participant the text belongs to. The second column is for the code/label. The third column is for the detailed definition of the code. The fourth column is for analytic notes.
The spreadsheet format is separate from your research journal.
Words of Advice – Procedures to Avoid:
Avoid any procedure that obscures visual links between codes and their text. Having reviewed all of the sections in this guide, you can understand how clarity will save considerable time as you proceed with your analysis.
Avoid the Comment functions for coding as they tend to be version-specific, may not translate across platforms, and the size must be small to fit in the margins. Codes that are offset from the text are visually difficult to associate with each other. If coding is complex with overlapping codes, it will be difficult to see which code is attached to which text phrase. Visibility is important.
Absolutely avoid embedding codes within the transcript text. Codes can look like text. Overlapping codes can be confusing when embedded within text. It is easy to miss embedded codes when conducting frequency analysis.
Presenting Data: Illustration of Five Parts
This section provides an additional explanation of Table with Code, Definition, Example, Flag, Qualification in Neuman’s Chart 15.2 (2020, p. 410).
The use of tables is a nice juxtaposition of a “quantitative look” in a qualitative study. A research report should include tables as a means to relay information that is familiar to readers (committee members) who are more accustomed to tables than narrative.
Neuman states that codes have five parts: a one- to three-word label or name, a definition with the main characteristic, a “flag” description of how to recognize the code in the data, any exclusions or qualifications, and an example.
1. The label is simply the name you assign to the code.
2. The cell in the table for Definitions is small. For purposes of the table, an abbreviated version of your definition would be a good choice to include here.
3. A flag is a way to identify meaning that specifically fits a code that has already emerged from the data. For example, in my dissertation I had a label called ‘Preferences.’ Flags I used for that one were the words “I like,” “I don’t like,” “I hate,” “I love.” An example would be “I hate red!” or “I like the soft colors.” These examples include the text that was being coded. What makes sense to me is that the flag consists of the words or phrases that tell you to consider that particular code. It’s like when you (or someone) has car trouble and you flag down a passing motorist. The flag indicates that someone is having car trouble. Without the flag, the person with car trouble might be missed. Think of flag from that perspective.
4. Qualifications are notes that you make to further clarify the flags, something specific to do with the context of the code. A qualification can be what the label includes or doesn’t include, perhaps location, context, who is talking, and so forth. Think of someone who is ‘disqualified’ from an event. What reasons contribute to ‘disqualification?’ These help to clarify what the code is about.
The best example I can think of is to note what not to include. For example, if a code is ‘feast’, a flag might be ‘holiday meal’, ‘lots of food’, turkey & ham’, that sort of thing; a qualification might be ‘food only, not feelings about or opinions of the food (which would be under a different code).
5. An example would be a quote from the transcript. Include the initials of the speaker if you wish. I find that including the speaker helps me to locate the text later if I need to clarify what is being said. The quotes illustrate what you’re thinking and help keep the researcher on track when doing the coding.
Example only: compilation of codes, categories, and definitions compiled by Dr. Cynthia Blodgett-Griffin
Note: the definitions in this table are not substantive enough to provide a good foundation for identifying and defining categories. These are examples of shortened versions of full definitions that will fit into the table cells. In the truncated versions, aim for stronger definitions.
Table 1: Illustration of Five Parts
[These are examples only, not suggestions or recommendations for your analysis. You may find that you identify these codes, but that would be due to your own analysis, not because of these examples that are provided for this assignment.]
Code
Example only
Definition
Example only
Flag
Example only
Qualification
Example only
Example
Example only
Change
Things are not like they used to be
Change, different, new, fresh
Context refers to a change in the way things are done; a shift in thinking, communicating or learning. Not change in appearance
It seems that everyday we are reading about how things are changing in the educational field—
Choice
Making decisions about how something is done
Like, feel, own time, CMC, independence, want
Context must indicate two or more possibilities and cannot indicate a forced decision.
I had to rethink about what I was going to do with my life and career.
Refocus, I guess. So here I am a middle age woman with a family, whose job was considered redundant. There was no question that I had to go back to school to upgrade or retrain,
Applying knowledge
Ability to use or share a person’s knowledge to another context
Learn, CMC, communicate, express, conferencing
Context must describe an opportunity the learner has to share previous or new knowledge with others. Applied knowledge of non-learners such as a professor, does not qualify.
I think a lot about my ideas before expressing them in CMC.
Supported
Feeling like you are not alone
Support, care, together, classmates, professor
Context describes learner feeling emotionally or educationally supported. It does not qualify if describing financial or physical support.
help from our materials, classmates and professors.
Axial Coding: The Weaving Process
Weaving to create and define categories
In the Grounded Theory analysis protocol, the second phase is Axial Coding where we identify and define categories. It is in this phase that the quality and depth of code definitions are tested. While codes and their definitions emerge from the data, categories and their definitions emerge from codes that share similar meanings. During Axial Coding, definitions of codes are examined and grouped together to tighten further any common meanings that human communication offers in the form of data. This process of weaving can be quite complex.
This particular phase of your report is very important. It results from hours of analysis and is an essential step to the grounded theory qualitative method. This practice is based on the intent to keep the participants’ voices as authentic and alive as possible.
Making sense of the axial coding weaving process
With your codes clearly defined, the next step is to undertake the process of creating categories by examining code definitions to group those that seem to “go together.” In this step, you will use the full definitions of your codes, not the shortened versions you included in Table 1. Look through all of your code definitions. While code definitions may group together with obvious criteria, a deeper analysis may tease out other meanings that group with other codes that share a similar, more subtle message.
Begin by copying your list of all codes and their definitions from the first two columns in Table 1. As noted, expand the short definitions you used in Table 1 into the more comprehensive version you had in mind. Sort these with a method that aligns with how you process information. A way that some researchers use is to print out the document with codes and their definitions, then separate each code/definition pair by cutting up the analysis document. Having separated the pairs from each other, the slips of paper can be spread out on a table and moved around to experiment, grouping them according to different nuances in their meanings.
Periodically, during this process, codes assigned to categories may begin to reveal that they don’t quite fit together as well as first thought. This will become apparent if you find that there are several more codes in a category compared with just a few in another category. Thinking of how you decided that these codes group together, take a close look and see if there are codes that could be reassigned to a different category or if there is another category lurking about that some of the codes can identify and add to your analysis. As with the codes, if you find that you have a category that includes only a few or even one code, examine this category closely to see if the codes can be reassigned or even deleted.
Each little family of a category and its codes illuminates part of the meanings expressed by research participants who provided the data. Altogether, these groupings provide insight into the next phase of analysis, selective coding.
This assignment does not include selective coding and is limited to open and axial coding, the first two phases of grounded theory analysis.
When you are satisfied with the way your codes have grouped similar characteristics or concepts into categories, create Table 2. You already compiled frequencies for codes, so enter those in this table.
Table 2: Creating Categories
Category Name
Name of Code Code Frequency
Category name
code for this category
#
another code
#
another code
#
Another Category name
code for this category
#
Discussion of Weaving Process
In this section, under a heading named Weaving, you will walk the reader through Table 3, that is, describing decisions you made as you grouped codes that are similar in some way together to create a new meaning. It is this new meaning that is the new category definition. To name the new category, all you have to do is choose a name that, to you, is a good fit for the definition that emerged from the codes. Each new category and definition are added to Table 3. This section is a report of your decisions that brought you to Table 3.
This section is usually comprised of one or two paragraphs (about 100-150 words) per category. To help you with this, refer to the journal where you have been documenting your reflections and decisions along the way. When this section includes enough detail and reflection, it can provide evidence to support the credibility and authenticity of your analysis.
You can place your Table 3 either at the beginning or end of this section.
Table 3: Category Definitions
Category
Definition
Name of category
i.e., Advertisements
i.e., Graphic Design
Definition of the category that results from weaving together the definitions of codes you grouped together to form this category.
For example…
Advertisements in pages or as pop-ups are designed with graphics and content to attract the User’s attention. Ads affect the emotional, physical, cognitive, and focus of the User.
Web pages are artfully developed with colors, pictures, sound, animation, and designs. Graphic Design is the intentional combination of visual and auditory elements to achieve an objective.
Conclude your narrative with a Conclusion, Reflection, and References.
What to submit:
Paper of approximately 10-15 pages of narrative. Table 1 will extend this. Page count does not include transcripts, cover page, front matter, table of contents, references, or appendixes.
As you develop your assignment, bear in mind that APA 7th edition is the style for this university and for the education field at large. Please attend to APA 7th edition with formatting cover sheets, levels of headings, tables and chart construction, in-text citations, and references. Note: the grid-style tables constructed in the LMS are not APA compliant, but are functional within the limits of the software.
The format of the paper for this assignment should include a cover page followed by the following 10 sections:
Introduction: 3-4 pages
a. Description of this assignment
b. A general overview of qualitative research; include your understanding of epistemology and ontology for qualitative, interpretive research; include what constitutes authenticity and credibility for qualitative data analysis;
c. What you will present in your paper (hopefully, similar to the assignment);
Discussion of how you chose the codes and categories: approximately 1-2 pages;
Table 1: Coding with Label, Definition, Flag, Qualification, and Example;
Table 2: Code and Category frequency table;
Table 3: Category definitions table;
Weaving: Substantive discussion of how the codes’ definitions weave together to create the category. Discuss each category and its own set of codes as a specific unit; essentially, how do the definitions of the set of codes weave together to create the category name and definition? Approximately 2 pages
A section of your research journal. Choose good examples of your thinking process while engaged in this analysis. This provides necessary information as to whether the researcher “gets it” in terms of understanding the difference between qualitative and quantitative paradigms. Your journal excerpts should be 1-2 pages. Do NOT write up journal notes late in your analysis phase, or after your analysis is completed. Keeping a research journal is a necessary part of research, not a step to leave out or leave for last.
Conclusion & Reflection; This includes a wrap-up of what you presented in this paper, followed by your reflection on what you learned from this assignment.
Reference section to include at least seven (7) sources, preferably more. The Reference section should include at least Neuman and articles in the course site. Additional articles, videos, and websites are recommended. The source of every citation must be included in the Reference section’; likewise, only references that are cited should be included in the Reference section.
The coded transcripts. If coded in Word, copy and paste to the end of your assignment. If coded in a spreadsheet, submit as a separate document.
