Datos de Inicio

Many researchers (Cohen et al, 2007; Braun & Clarke, 2006; Holloway & Todres, 2003; Miles & Huberman, 1994) hold that a range of approaches to qualitative data analysis is complex and diverse, including discourse analysis, interpretative phenomenological analysis, narrative analysis, and grounded theory. Holloway & Todres (2003: p. 347) consider ‘thematizing meanings’ as one of a few shared generic skills across qualitative analysing and, therefore, thematic analysis is regarded as a foundational method for qualitative analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Thematic analysis was chosen for analysing the data related to the qualitative part of this study - written documents and transcripts of individual and focus group interviews. Thematic analysis is claimed to provide a flexible research tool which can describe the data set in rich detail and which can be used within different theoretical frameworks (Braun & Clarke, 2006).

In line with the interpretivist/constructivist paradigm employed in the qualitative part of this study, the researcher relied upon participants' views of the situation being studied (Bryman, 2012; Cohen et al, 2007; Braun & Clarke, 2006). The researcher explored the opinions of teachers and students who were expected to provide valuable insights in the challenges and opportunities created by the implementation of the new learning and instruction methods. This process resulted in the development of a large number of themes displayed in the scheme in Appendix 5. One can see that the themes presented in this scheme are developed from the data from different sources like

57

interviews, reports or instructional plans, and reflect participants’ views on the use of the new educational methods and their perceptions of the changes to instruction and learning practices. However, as Miles & Huberman (1994: 58) argue, open coding is context-sensitive, its ultimate objective … is to match observations to a theory or set of constructs and, therefore, it is not at all a ‘completely unstructured’ process. The process of text encoding and theme development was guided by a variety of perspectives referring to the conceptualization of HOTS and development of intervention measures. For instance, such names of codes/themes as ‘student-centered classroom’, ‘deductive instruction’, ‘formative assessment’, ‘problem-based learning’, ‘modifying scaffolding according to students’ needs’, and many others were suggested by the literature studied (Jordan et al., 2011; Zohar & David, 2008; Mayer, 2008; Jonassen, 2000; Perkins, 1992).

The first stage in the process of analysis was familiarization with the data. The transcripts of the interviews, texts of the teachers’ reports and students’ written responses to open-ended questions were read and re-read to become familiar with their content. Notes were taken on the ideas that were expected to be helpful for creating codes. For the process of coding, a simple sentence (either a standalone sentence or as subordinate clause) was decided to represent a meaning unit. In addition, the approach of ‘inclusive’ coding’ (Hardy & Bryman, 2004: 539) was used. According to this approach, text encoding is based on the understanding of context which includes two simple closes of the compound sentence or two-three adjacent simple closes (Hardy & Bryman, 2004). Appendix 14 displays the principles of text encoding. In the table, sentences highlighted in blue represent the examples of inclusive text encoding, according to which the development of codes is based on the two or more related simple closes included in the compound one. Adjacent sentences (for instance, 23-24; highlighted in green) create the context in the following way: the first simple close serves to emphasise the meaning of the second one.

Text encoding, which had actually started at the familiarization stage, continued to the next phase. It involved generating of codes that that might be relevant to answering the research questions and concerned the methods for developing HOTS, participants’ behaviours, attitudes, and experiences related to the programme implementation. The process of text encoding involved contrasting and comparison of the codes and then grouping similar codes into themes and sub-themes (Bryman,

58

2012; Cohen et al, 2007; Boyatzis, 1998; Miles & Huberman, 1994). Boyatzis (1998: 161) develops the following definition of a theme:

A theme is a pattern in the information that at minimum describes and organizes the possible observations and at maximum interprets aspects of the phenomenon.

Some segments of data were coded with more than one code. As a result, a meaning unit and codes identified can fit into more than one theme (Graneheim & Ludman, 2003). For instance, encoding of some sentences (14 or 22, for instance) in the interview with the history teacher resulted in creating two codes for each sentence (see Appendix 14). Also, in students’ comments referring to the transfer of knowledge, the theme emerged of having responsibility towards the local community. The theme prevalence was counted in terms of the number of data items (i.g. interview transcripts and the documents) in which the theme appeared (Chabot, 2011; Braun & Clarke, 2006). Braun & Clarke (2006) point out, however, that significance of a theme is not necessarily dependent on quantifiable measures, but whether it has an important meaning in relation to the overall research question. In the present study, the themes, which reflected the problems teachers’ experienced during the programme implementation, were developed mostly from the interview data. In terms of appearing in data items, the frequency of these themes is lower than that of the themes describing the intervention measures and results of the student performance. However, they point to impeding factors in the implementation of the HOTS programme.

The development of themes followed the principle that themes should be internally coherent, consistent, and distinctive (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Bryman, 2001; Boyatzis, 1998). Braun & Clarke (2006) hold that there may be a number of codes that do not belong anywhere. A number of codes were reexamined across the whole set of data and some of them were finally discarded. Those referred to some details of students’ written responses to open-ended questions that were irrelevant to the research questions (descriptions of the context related to the response topic). The analysis was an iterative process in which the data were constantly revisited (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Bryman, 2001). The purpose was to identify any additional data within themes that had been missed in earlier coding process (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Miles & Huberman, 1994). Devising and refining the whole thematic scheme were aimed at ensuring that the research questions were being

59

addressed. The themes identified were used to refine the first research sub-question. It was revealed, for instance, that many teachers were careful to describe how they used the methods for developing HOTS, paying attention to the process of the activity described. As a result, the first research sub-question was rephrased: instead of asking whether changes took place in instruction practices, the accent was placed on the process of the HOTS-based instruction.