For the analysis of the interviews with the boys on an individual level, I considered how words carry meanings and how these are context sensitive. Perhaps one of the biggest hurdles to be overcome in analysing the results of the interviews was that of interpreting a social reality which may not be shared due to age. As pointed out by Scott et al (2011:29) ‘it is impossible to separate oneself as a researcher from the historical and cultural context that defines one’s interpretive frame since both the subject and the object of research are located in pre- understood worlds.’ Every attempt was made to understand how the boys
interpreted their labels and these needed to be questioned and probed, a process requiring both creativity and conceptual flexibility. However, interpretation can never be arbitrary and it was intended that due consideration would be given to my own voice within the study which is based in interpretivist and constructivist
philosophies (Schwant, 2000). This ensured that I was striving towards
120
same time accepting that the participants’ projection of the self is based in their social experience and as such is a ‘moment to moment situated experience’ (Augustinous and Walker,1995:276).
From the outset the voices of the boys was not viewed as simply raw data but as reconstructed narratives requiring critical examination. As noted by Glesne (2011) this was not a separate stage of the project but an ongoing process and a
reflective activity that informed further data collection and writing (Coffey and Atkinson, 1996). My own voice was then consciously inserted to avoid this self being concealed (Scott et al,1999). As this study focuses on the lived experience it is accepted that interaction and language is not only a means for understanding but also plays a role in constructing social reality as perspectives change due to daily interaction with significant others. Thus, when interviewing the boys, it was necessary to consider how, during the course of the interviews, their ideas were emergent and may have been brought about by the study itself.
According to Scott et al (1999:11), ‘any research, whether in the natural or social sciences, makes knowledge claims and for that reason alone is implicated in epistemological questions’. Not least of these is the consideration of my own role as the researcher and the subjectivity I may bring to any inquiry as, according to Scott, it is the researcher who ‘define[s] the problem...the quality of the interaction between researcher and researched, the theoretical framework [and] who writes the final text’ (ibid, 1999:17). Therefore, according to Fine (1994) all researchers
121
are epistemic agents who both embody and embed their stances. This is a particularly pertinent consideration in the gathering of qualitative data involving children where there are most certainly issues of power. Therefore, during the both period of data collection and the subsequent analysis there needed to be a
consistent and ongoing consideration of the extent to which the scripts of the boys were being embedded with the voice of a dominant adult. Certainly the
constructivist philosophical position taken for the study presented certain problems when considering issues of the validity in drawing conclusions as its belief in multiple constructed realities ‘is not consistent with the idea that criteria for judging the trustworthiness of an account are possible’ (Seale, 1999:468). In order to overcome this problem Guba and Lincoln (1994) propose using the criteria of ‘authenticity’ and it is hoped, that this is demonstrated in the thesis by presenting a range of different realities and by considering and commenting on my own overall position as a researcher.
In addition to considering the ‘Fidelity’ (Blumenfeld-Jones, 1995) which requires honesty in terms of reporting, rigour must also be achieved in terms of evidence; be it through thorough transcriptions or conscientious coding which is checked with participants. This was paramount in the issue of defining and explaining ‘labels’ as it is accepted that as abstract constructs they can only be viewed through the eyes of the actors themselves.
122
At the outset of the data collection process, each of the transcripts for the discussion groups were closely analysed, following the approach suggested by Rapley (2011), which is often referred to as ‘in vivo coding’. Key words and
phrases were highlighted, and subsequently colour coded to identify both common themes and contradictions amongst the boys. Notes were taken during the
analysis to raise points again during individual interviews and to check any
comments for subjective meaning and to explore constructs which were unfamiliar to me. These notes were also used to explore comments in the individual
interviews which had been made during our initial contact so that my ongoing analysis shaped the study as it developed.
Following the transcription of the individual interviews, these were again, analysed so that key words, phrases and sentences were labelled and colour coded by theme. These were examined to identify any correlation with the themes identified in the literature review (performing masculinities, maintaining gender orders, the rejection of school and literacy) whilst also keeping an open mind to evidence which might call them into question or to the emergence of new themes. As asserted by Bowen (2006:17) it was necessary to use a ‘constant comparative method, marked by an iterative process…to identify points of similarity as well as difference’. The revision of coding and identification of themes within their
discourse was continued to the point of saturation (Patton, 2002) and this became central to my understanding of their experience and informed my subsequent conclusions.
123
I was aware of the software packages available to assist with the coding of themes but rejected this as a method in order to retain the integrity of the context of
particular comments and chose instead to consistently review the transcripts in the light of emergent themes as the data collection moved forward. In this way, I feel I was not only able to watch for themes prevalent in the various discourses
concerning boys and their schooling but also to ensure that the data was revisited to process and link emerging themes which challenged existing studies.
4.11 Summary
This chapter offered a detailed discussion of the methodology adopted for this study. It argued that using a qualitative interpretive approach was the most
suitable way to answer the research questions and outlines the approach taken to recognise my own voice as adult in interpreting the views of young children. Particular care has been taken to explain the procedural elements of the study with regards to the ethical considerations of working with young boys as well as justifying the selection of participants in terms of minimising other variables which can affect attitudes towards school. The chapter also argues the reasons for recognising both a materialist and social constructivist approach to theorising masculinities to recognise the influences at play in how boys view themselves and
124
others. Finally, this chapter set out the basis for discussion of the analyses and findings in the next three chapters.
125