Table 2 Steps in data analysis (Sjöström and Dahlgren, [61]
Transcription | TM transcribed all the interviews, getting an opportunity to start familiarisation with the data |
|---|---|
Familiarisation consideration | Reading the interview transcripts to get initial impressions of the data. Both the researchers read the transcripts separately |
Condensation | Identifying meaning units and generating codes. This was done separately and later codes and meaning units were compared. Consensus was agreed on the key codes |
Comparison | The researchers scrutinised the meaning units to identify similarities and variations in the units |
Grouping | The researchers allocated the meaning units into categories based on their similarities in relation to ways participants understood the phenomenon of role in teaching and learning |
Articulating | Capturing the essential meaning of a certain category. The researchers read and discussed categories seeking to identify the essence of each category. It is at this stage where meaning units were further scrutinized to ensure that they exclusively fit into a category. In addition, the researchers sought for links among the categories, the hierarchy in the categories and the dimensions of variations were identified. This process was done iteratively until the researchers could not move any meaning units, consider different names or dimensions of variation |
Labelling | Expressing the core meaning of the category Steps 3–6 are repeated in an iterative procedure to make sure that the similarities within and differences between categories are discerned and formulated in a distinct way |
Contrasting | Comparing the categories through a contrastive procedure whereby the categories were described in terms of their individual meanings. The outcome space was viewed holistically verifying the order of the hierarchy of the categories. When consensus was reached on the key areas or hierarchy and dimensions of variation, the outcome space was produced |