FERTILIDAD DEL SUELO

‘MALTHUS’ 11 years

Outwardly confident but underlying need for reassurance

Asperger’s Diary, Interview,

Observations

‘BOB’ 15 years

Quiet, serious Asperger’s ObservationsInterview,

‘SID’ 6 years Selectively friendly, quick to exhibit behavioural issues Autism, ADHD, language and behaviour issues Observations ‘JOE’ 13 years

Quiet, ‘hides away’ Asperger’s Observations (interviewed during

pilot)

‘OLIVIA’ 10 years

Quiet, friendly Asperger’s Observatons (interviewed during

pilot)

‘ALBERT’ 9 years

Friendly, speaks to selected people, his routine is crucial

High functioning

autism Observations

‘SIMON’ 12 years

Quiet, Speaks only when questioned directly Asperger’s Observations ‘JONATHAN’ 10 years Friendly, chatty, focused on activities Waiting for

diagnosis Diary, Interview, Observation

‘ABIGAIL’ 11 years

Outwardly bubbly, confident and chatty with underlying need for reassurance

Autism with mid

severity Diary, Interview, Observations

The process of analysis used consisted of:

1. Listening back to the interviews immediately afterwards making any pertinent notes (for example, hesitations, long silences or discomfort during particular questions) while still fresh in my mind;

2. Typed transcription of each interview from the audio recordings. I chose to do this myself so that I could fully immerse myself in the data and be able to interpret the atmosphere, the intonations and any other sounds which were likely to be relevant, for example, any noises or visual distractions;

3. Third listening of each interview recording, checking and adding anything I might have missed and initial reflections relevant to the research questions and specifically the learning experience;

4. Typing up of observation field notes, adding any initial memos relevant to the research questions and initial reflections. My only rationale for taking field notes, was to note anything I considered to be relevant to the learning experience;

5. Highlighting text on transcriptions, field notes and diaries (by way of post-its

as students wanted the diaries back after the study) relevant to research questions and autism: initial data reduction;

6. Coding the data into themes (assigning categories);

7. Transferring the data themes onto the main thematic matrices (used for all three phases) according to the research questions;

8. Checking back from the matrices to the interview recordings, field notes and diaries for accuracy and validity and abstracting examples to be used in writing up the data;

9. Referring to the raw data on many occasions during analysis and writing up. The diagram below summarises the mosaic approach analysis. The numbers of participants taking part in each method were:

Interviews: 5/9

Observations: 9/9

Coding data into themes Mosaic Approach Analysis Process 2 Listening Full transcriptions

Type up field notes Add initial memos

and reflections OBSERVATIONS INTERVIEWS 1st Listening Make notes 3r Listening Checking for omissions Initial reflections DIARIES

Read through noting relevant data

Transferring data into main matrices according

to Research Questions,

Highlighting text relevant to Research Questions and Autism

Initial Data Reduction

Checking back from matrices to three data sources for accuracy,

This mosaic approach was very much about interpreting the data and therefore was ideal for the research epistemologically. The very nature of the approach produced layers of rich data which, analysed together using the aforementioned rationale, allowed me to really dig deep into the meanings within the raw data and listen to the ‘voices’ of the participants. As a researcher I value the opportunity to hear these young people, to find out what they really think and feel about their learning experiences. As a professional I believe it is my duty to find ways to improve the experiences of my students, and of the teachers I train in order to make this happen. This approach really enabled me to get into the minds of the individuals who matter.

‘SECRET BOX’

The third research phase; the ‘secret box’ method (Greig et al., 2007:161) added the final layer of data: it was another flexible method and used in various ways. Firstly, an actual sealed box was taken to various classes where students and teachers could ‘post’ their views. Secondly the research was ‘advertised’ on autism websites, blogs, social media pages and via my professional contacts for teachers; and participants could send in their views relating to advertised topics (the same topics used in both previous phases). The sealed envelopes were ‘posted’ into the box and the box was only opened at the end of the research period. All ‘postings’ were anonymous removing ethical complications and any possible bias and enabling individuals to have a ‘voice’ without fear of being recognised. This was especially useful for those young students who wanted to contribute but in a more anonymous way and in their own time.

The process for analysis was the same as for the on-line ethnography.

This method of data collection was a further way to allow individuals to have their say, and enabled teachers to be a part of the research as well for another viewpoint. It fitted my positionality in much the same way as the other methods in that postings would need to be interpreted or simply themes would be selected

depending upon the conciseness of the prose. It would not have been a method suitable by itself but as an addition it worked well.

I chose to analyse my data throughout manually, and used simple text and table processing as my only nod to computerised analysis. Despite the widely available software to transcribe, code, theme, and analyse, I really wanted to immerse myself in my raw data, to understand it and be involved at every stage of its transfer to results. As an autistic adult, I tend be very methodical and visual, and by using manual methods such as mind maps, simple column tables and notes, I find it easier to see emerging themes. Many would argue that this is an ineffective means of data management, and to an extent I would agree, but as an interpretivist I am adamant that the physical process of trawling the data, making annotations and sketching data maps draws in the researcher allowing reflections to assist the interpretation of the richness of the ‘voice’. From a more practical point of view, it allowed me to work with the data around me from all three methods without having to keep switching programmes and screens.

For all three phases the same topical areas were explored; each building upon the previous to give various layers of data and allowing triangulation of the results coming through to demonstrate reliability and validity. Phase two took the themes from the virtual ‘walls’ further and elicited more detail, and phase three collected any excess data as well as allowing a different perception of the same areas to add another dimension.

The matrix below shows more detail about the three phases used to answer the research questions.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS DATA COLLECTION METHODS NUMBER OF