Condiciones que interrumpen los plazos de la extinción de la potestad sancionadora

To develop this interpretative framework, I reanalysed the data, primarily opera- tionalising the questions, “How do artists describe what they do and value what they have done?” In selecting data, I decided to include all eight artists who had participated in the study to this point. I did so because several artists were con- cerned that others would be left out of my research based on the three cases I selected. Moreover, including these other perspectives allowed me to further em- bellish, not necessarily triangulate, the concepts that had emerged in the three descriptive cases I had selected. I believed this would add greater depth and com- plexity to my representation. In developing this framework, my first and primary intention was to try to construct artists’ meanings and represent them conceptu- ally. As I have maintained, I used their vocabularies for categories to the extent possible. I thought that providing their vocabularies would be particularly useful for these and other artists in similar groups to consider how they talk amongst themselves. As I worked towards more abstract concepts and themes, I still tried to maintain density and variation by accounting for the complexity of the specific situations through which different artists enacted and interpreted those concepts (Strauss & Corbin, 2008, p. 305). I was not trying to smooth over differences simply to give a more coherent framework.

As I have stated, this analysis relied upon an open and comparative approach to coding. Data sets were reanalysed using new categories as they emerged and I began to coalesce these categories within broader emic themes that were still emerging. At the same time, I kept earlier sets of codes and categories for future comparison. As I coded, I operationalised each theme through different questions that pushed me to look at the data from different perspectives. I sought to develop

theories that related the themes to one another. Bearing in mind these emerging theories, I revisited codes and categories and then worked backwards towards re- vising the emerging theories.

I also continued to collect data as opportunities arose, such as a conference in which one artist presented on the big ideas of time and space. Through this on- going data collection and analysis, I coalesced my interpretive framework around themes of space, time, and material. I produced a summary table for these three themes, incorporating data from all the artists in this data display. Like the con- cept maps discussed earlier, I displayed data in this fashion to “view a full data set in the same location. . . arranged systematically to answer the research questions at hand” (Miles & Huberman, 1994, pp. 91–92). These summary tables included the:

1. Categories organised by theme.

2. Working definition of categories, relying largely on in vivo codes. 3. Number of instances for each category.

4. Descriptive examples of each category.

These data displays allowed me to look for relationships between themes, cate- gories and codes as I attempted to build theories. An example of a summary table is provided in Appendix K. Through this analysis, I began to work towards testing the theory that these artists were describing ways they altered time and space, used their bodies, and introduced materials to facilitate an immersive way of being that deeply and pleasurably engaged with unfamiliar possibilities. I began to reanalyse data and look for exceptions to this theory while continuing to alter and saturate categories through both inductive and deductive reasoning.

To deepen my understanding of existing themes, I also turned to etic concepts. I selected literature based on what was familiar to me, unfamiliar literature sug- gested to me by my literature review of artist pedagogy, and suggestions from my supervisors based on their reading of my descriptive cases and summary ta- bles. In particular, I turned to pragmatist William James’ Principles of Psychology (1901), which draws on both phenomenological introspection and laboratory-based research, to examine themes of time, space, and the body. As I became more aware of the body as a potentially relevant concept, I reanalysed the data, finding evi- dence of its significance. Therefore, my analysis at this point was gradually and cautiously shifting towards both an inductive and deductive approach.

I turned to Dewey’s Art as Experience (1934/2005), which draws on James’ theo- ries, to describe aesthetic experience as a sensory heightened state of being. This book was particularly useful for me in deepening my understanding of the artists’ approaches to body, material, and immersive experience. Also relevant were phe- nomenological perspectives, including drawing attention to the body and a pri- mordial sensory engagement with the lifeworld (Merleau-Ponty, 1962). Finally, I turned to pragmatist perspectives that draw on Nietzsche and Dewey’s theorisa- tion of the contingency of the world, thus allowing for opportunities for individual self-creation (Rorty, 1989).

It is noteworthy that I tended to avoid sociocultural theories and vocabularies in my theorisation of the artists’ pedagogies. Although scaffolding and structuring situations were useful concepts to an extent, I did not find the artists using these vocabularies in ways that resonated in particular with phenomenological litera- ture. Therefore, I tended to steer away from this body of work even though other

researchers of artist pedagogy had found it useful (e.g. Galton, 2008; Pringle, 2008).

As I extended my theoretical sensitivity of time, space, body, and material as themes, I continued to negotiate the ambiguous and complex balance between ac- counting for artists’ meaning of their pedagogies and my own. To negotiate this complexity, I tried to create different spaces within my interpretive framework for them. I decided to write about artists’ interpretations of categories within each theme, and selected data for its density, repetitiveness, and variation to present a meaningful way for readers to engage with the data. This conceptual analysis referred back to the descriptive cases in order to give a situated understanding of them. I embellished concepts within each theme by incorporating all of the artists’ descriptions and interpretations of situations that did not feature necessarily in the descriptive cases.

After presenting the artists’ views within each theme, I wrote and rewrote anal- yses that drew on literature and personal experience to provide an outside view. My aim was to extend cautiously beyond these local meanings in ways that might further deepen and expand the reader’s understanding of these artists’ pedagogies. Slightly generalising these concepts could be useful by illustrating their relevance beyond the sites I observed and artists I researched. However, I wanted to empha- sise the provisional, contingent, and situated nature of this interpretation. This interpretation was not the final say, but one among many, as I made sense of spe- cific moments in the past.

To make this clear, I used provisional language, whilst also attempting to clearly signpost whose interpretation was being put forward, either the artists’ or my own. Whilst developing this interpretive framework, I continued to collect data to re-

solve remaining uncertainties and begin to seek some validation. I turn to discuss these final acts of data collection in the next two sections.