Task Review and Reflection:
The task for today was to try one of the three methods with a small bit of text based data say for example this could be a policy document an interview transcript. I elected to use three different types of data the first one was some tweets from an online support group for female adults with ADHD. The next one was a Guardian newspaper article which was a personal account of a female’s experience of ADHD.The final piece of text was a transcript from the how to ADHD YouTube channel. In the time given I only really had time to grapple with the Tweets. This is something to be mindful of in the future given that I tend to be overly ambitious. For a task like this it may have been more useful to use less data and spend more time in the immersion in this data.
We only had 30 minutes to do this task which was in itself they challenge but the goal was to experiment and then reflect on these three methods and then we were able to critically discuss them their advantages where they might work well and where and when they might not be so successful.
One example offered was one researcher in the group used a school Ofsted report and applied critical discourse analysis. Their comments afterwards showed that this did not have the desired creative and results. What might happen is that you just end up reproducing and repeating the discourses to not very productive or generative ends. My comment in the chat was that CDA would lend itself to more polemic writing . The other problems with this approach is that it is politically charged by nature and this would not be welcomed in some contexts. Another potential pitfall is that CDA has a problem in that if you ever wanted to use participant checking as a method of traigulation, the participants might not like to hear or indeed accept any perceived political undercurrents within their own discourses or utterences.
I used the thematic analysis model with this basic framework below: Taken from Braun and Clarke.
Reflections on Thematic Analysis:
This was an approach I was familiar with from last year. Last year I used a thematic analysis to analyse radio transcripts podcast transcripts on interview transcripts regarding in the topic of ADHD and barriers to learning .The approach is quite flexible but I found that it was particularly challenging today especially in terms of how time consuming it is and the fact that you really have to immerse yourself in the data. Last year during my Masters in Education I had constant re-visits to the data whereas today we had about 20 minutes.
How does one ‘UNTHINK’ previous encounters with data?
If I’m to reflect on my experience of today I would say that I found it quite hard to ‘unthink’ my themes and codes from last year . This is despite the fact that I was approaching a different research question. I kept looking for the familiar and it almost seems like a default was to find codes from previous data sets. The research question that I was asking was:
How is female ADHD constructed online ? Which on reflection is a really broad question and my data sets are quite limiting and I didn’t really have time to critically engage with them. This being said this is part of the pedagogical process i.e. to test things out see what works, what doesn’t work and reflect on it like I am doing here. I think next time I would like to experiment with IPA but I would have to carefully consider the data sets .This is because they’d have to be personal accounts or something to do with people’s lived experiences of a phenomen