Qualitative Research

Originally prepared by Professor Peter Woods.

Component now run by Dr. Nick Pratt.

© P Woods, Faculty of Education, University of Plymouth, 2006

Parts of this component were previously published by the Open University in Section 6 of its
Study Guide for E835 Educational Research in Action, 1996.   We are grateful to the OU for
permission to re-use this material.

Contents
1. FEATURES OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
o A focus on natural settings
o An interest in meanings, perspectives and
understandings
o An emphasis on process
o Inductive analysis and grounded theory
2. METHODS OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH
o Observation
o Interviews
o Sampling
o Written materials
o Questionnaires
o Validity
o Ethics
o Qualitative Research Assessed
3. QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
o Primary analysis
o Category and concept formation
o The generation of theory
4. TASKS
5. FURTHER READING
 6. REFERENCES

1. Features of Qualitative Research

There is a wide range of approaches to qualitative research.

Atkinson et al (1998), for example, outline seven different
approaches used in British educational research deriving from
symbolic interactionism, anthropology, sociolinguistics,
ethnomethodology, qualitative evaluation, neo-Marxist ethnography,
and feminism. In addition, a number of terms are often used
interchangeably, such as 'ethnography', 'case study', 'qualitative
research', though each, in fact, has its own particular meaning
(Click here to visit the section on Qualitative Approaches in The
Research Methods Knowledge Base). In effect, however, most
qualitative approaches have:

 a focus on natural settings;

 an interest in meanings, perspectives and understandings;
 an emphasis on process;
 a concern with inductive analysis and grounded theory.

[Component leader's note: It is worth noting that I now tend to use

the term 'interpretive research' to avoid confusion between the
notion of 'qualitative data' (data which is qualitative in nature) and
a 'qualitative stance' to research (which describes a paradigmatic
position. You can read more about this disctinction in the beginning
research component.]

A focus on natural settings

Qualitative researchers are interested in life as it is lived in real
situations. This has a number of implications:
 They do not set up artificial experiments. 'Natural
experiments', however, can be very useful. These are events
that occur naturally but interrupt the normal course of life,
such as a change in national or school policy, a pupil or
teacher career transition, the circumstances leading up to a
school exclusion.

 Researchers make as few assumptions in advance of the study

as possible. Things are there to be found out - you do not
know what they are beforehand. It is rare, also, though not
unknown, to use hypothetico-deductive methods, where you
construct a model of what might be, then test that model in
the situation. Openness of mind is the approach. Researchers
do not take things for granted, and try to 'make the familiar
strange'. This is not easy to do. Howard Becker writes that
when things are so familiar to you, 'it becomes impossible to
single out events that occur in the classroom as things that
have occurred, even when they happen right in front of you….
it takes a tremendous effort of will and imagination to stop
seeing the things that are conventionally "there" to be seen'
(1971, p. 10).

 Situations are deemed to be important because they influence

behaviour. People often behave differently in different
circumstances, such as in a staffroom or classroom, or in a
high-achieving or low-achieving class, or in a class at the
beginning or end of the week. The context cannot, therefore,
be taken as a given, but rather as a set of parameters with
which individuals interact. For a full view of, say, a teacher's
approach to teaching, one would need to sample across a
range of contexts.

 Researchers usually prefer fairly lengthy and deep involvement

in the natural setting. Social life is complex in its range and
variability, and operates at different levels. It has 'many layers
of meaning' (Berger, 1966, p. 34), and the researcher has to
'lift veils' (Blumer, 1976, p. 15) to discover the innermost
meanings. This is not to say that smaller-scale studies are
 without their uses, though they will have more limited
objectives and be more exploratory.

 In order to gain access to deeper levels, the researcher needs

to develop a certain rapport with the subjects of the study, and
to win their trust. Needless to say, this must not be abused
later when the researcher leaves the field.

Can you see any problems with this advocacy of naturalism? Make
brief notes on problems arising from the researcher a) studying, and
b) representing natural events.

When you have done this, see my comments by clicking on ‘Naturalism’.

  Return to CONTENTS

An interest in meanings, perspectives and understandings

The qualitative researcher seeks to discover the meanings that

participants attach to their behaviour, how they interpret situations,
and what their perspectives are on particular issues. Some students
might see school not as a place for learning but more as an arena
for socialising. Some might conform in some lessons, and be
disruptive in others. This disruption might perhaps be functional for
the student, earning status within the peer group. In some research
I did with Lynda Measor (Measor and Woods, 1984), a secondary
school was attempting to dissolve gender boundaries by having a
common curriculum, but pupils 're-gendered' them. Boys used
cakes as weapons and a sewing machine as a train. Girls protested
about nasty smells and unisex goggles in physical science.
Behaviour that is often represented as 'meaningless' or 'mindless' is
redolent with meaning if we can only discover what it is.

Consider the scenario below. Place yourself in the position of a) the

pupils and b) the teachers, and contrast their points of view. How might
different understandings of the situation be at the bottom of the dispute?
At one secondary school, the school blazer was a prime symbol of teachers'
authority and pupils' subordination. The rules for school uniform were
enforced with vigour in the interests of maintaining order. On the last day of
term, it was traditional for there to be a certain amount of 'blazer-ripping' -
symbolic of pupils gaining their freedom. One year, however, a boy's blazer
was ripped to shreds early in the week of departure. This precipitated a
crisis that disrupted the whole week for both teachers and pupils. The
teachers launched a major offensive to apprehend and punish the culprits.
The boys simply could not understand what all the fuss was about. 'They'd
been writing all over blazers, writing their names on them, it's a traditional
activity at the end of your school days. (Woods, 1979, p. 118)

When you have completed this exercise, see my comments by clicking

on ‘Perspectives’.

Implications:

 Research methods employed have to be sensitive to the

perspectives of all participants. In addition, the methods must
pick up the interaction between perspectives and situation to
see how they bear on each other. Researchers must also
sample across time, since the same items or activities may
mean different things on different occasions.

 Researchers therefore work to obtain 'inside' knowledge of the

social life under study. If they are to understand people's
outlooks and experiences, researchers must be close to
individuals and to groups, live with them from day to day, look
out at the world through their viewpoints, see them in various
situations and in various moods, appreciate the
inconsistencies, ambiguities and contradictions in their
behaviour, explore their interests, understand their
relationships among themselves and with other groups.

 The researcher tries to appreciate the culture of groups. The

task is to try to capture the meanings that permeate the
culture as understood by the participants. These meanings can
become extremely recondite to outside observers. Groups
might have their own language and use of language, and also
 engage in highly symbolic non-verbal activity. Consider the
symbolism in this example:

Of all the techniques used by gang members to communicate

rejection of authority, by far the most subtle and annoying to
teachers is demeanour. Both white and Negro gang members have
developed a uniform and highly stylised complex of body
movements that communicate a casual and disdainful aloofness to
anyone making normative claims on their behaviour. The complex is
referred to by a gang member as 'looking cool', and it is part of a
repertoire of stances that include 'looking bad' and 'looking tore
down'. The essential ingredients of 'looking cool' are a walking pace
that is a little too slow for the occasion, a straight back, shoulders
slightly stooped, hands in pockets, and eyes that carefully avert any
party to the interaction. There are also clothing aids which enhance
the effect such as boot and shoe taps and a hat if the scene takes
place indoors. (Werthman, 1963, pp. 56-7)

The researcher's point of entry to understanding here was the boys'

references to 'looking cool', which he then 'unpacked' by close
observation of their behaviour. You might be familiar with a number
of such cues from pupils from your own experiences, such as
'having a laugh', 'dossing or swotting', 'bunking off', 'being picked
on' or 'shown up'.

Specialist terminology is not the only clue. Subjects might use the
same language as the researcher but mean different things by it.
Pupils' understandings of 'work' for example have been shown to
vary among different groups. The words still have to be interpreted,
therefore. In essence, the researcher aims for 'shared meanings,
when one feels part of the culture and can interpret words and
gestures as they do' (Wax, 1971).

You are observing a lesson in a classroom when you see a student

hitting another student. How might you interpret this behaviour?
What possible meanings could it have? How would you find out?

When you have completed this exercise, see my comments by clicking

on ‘Meanings’.
 

  Return to CONTENTS

An emphasis on process

Educational research in the 1950s and 60s was mostly concerned

with relating 'input' factors, such as parents' social class, with
'output' factors, such as academic achievement. What went on in
between was largely neglected. Qualitative research, which has
become more popular since the 1970s, was directed towards
unpacking the 'black box' of the school and the complex processes
that went on within it. There is a focus on how things happen, how
they develop, on becoming. Everyday life is an ever-changing
picture, there is no settled state. Action is a continuous process of
meaning attribution, which is always emerging, in a state of flux,
and subject to change. Typical subjects for enquiry might be how a
group culture forms and develops, how particular roles are
perceived and performed, how a class of students and their teacher
negotiate the basis on which the class will be conducted, how a
student becomes deviant, how a particular piece of school policy is
formulated and implemented, how transitions are managed.

Quantitative and qualitative methods can work well together here.

For example, quantitative methods can show, by before and after
tests, what change has occurred; and, by surveys, how generally
and frequently it occurred. Qualitative methods can reveal in fine
detail just how change occurred in day-to-day activities,
negotiations and decisions.

Equally, quantitative and qualitative methods can be a useful check

on each other. For example, the vast amount of research on pupils'
inter-ethnic association, using quantitative techniques, had found
pupils preferring their own ethnic group and not forming many
inter-ethnic friendships. But Denscombe et al (1986), using a range
of methods including extended observation of free association in
classrooms and playground, found a high degree of inter-ethnic
association in the schools of their research, which supported
teachers' own observations. This, of course, could be a product of
the particular schools studied, but it is also possible that the earlier
studies failed to capture the complexity of the situation and the
understandings of those within it. There could have been many
forms of interaction, between and within ethnic groups, varying with
time, situations, persons, and in the nature and degree of
'friendship' - itself a concept about which children hold different
understandings.

  Return to CONTENTS

Inductive analysis and grounded theory

As noted earlier, qualitative researchers do not, on the whole, start

with a theory which they aim to test, though there is no reason why
they should not do so if they wish. They mainly work the other way
round, seeking to generate theory from the data. Theory is then
said to be 'grounded' in the data. Grounded theory became popular
in the UK during the 1970s, when it was beginning to be felt that
too much theory in social and educational research was far removed
from the realities of social life.

The research on differentiation and polarisation over the years is an

example of both the generation and testing of theory using
qualitative methods. It has taken this form:

 Hargreaves (1967) and Lacey (1970), using mainly qualitative

methods in a secondary modern and a grammar school
respectively, generated data from which they produced a
theory that suggested that where pupils were differentiated by
ability, as in streaming, then a polarisation of attitudes into
pro- and anti-school would occur among them. It will be seen
that this work bears on processes within the school. Both were
concerned to study the schools in their natural state, and to
discover the meanings and understandings of pupils and
teachers.
  Ball (1981) examined this theory in a comprehensive school,
finding the process still held under 'banding', but was very
much modified when mixed-ability classes were introduced.

 Abraham (1989), working in a setted comprehensive school,

found that polarisation occurred, but that other factors also
affected it, such as examination and career pressure, and the
onset of subject options.

 Burke (1985) in a sixth-form college, and Foster (1990) in a

multi-ethnic comprehensive school, have also developed the
theory in different settings.

This, then, is an example of how qualitative researchers can build

on each other's work in a theoretically productive way.

Not all qualitative researchers are concerned to test theory in this

way. Some would argue that their aim is to understand the quality
of social life. In pursuit of this they produce richly detailed material.
This has been termed 'thick description', which

Goes beyond mere fact and surface appearances. It presents detail,

context, emotion and the webs of social relationships that join
persons to one another. Thick description evokes emotionality and
self-feelings. It inserts history into experience. It establishes the
significance of an experience, or the sequence of events, for the
person or persons in question. In thick description, the voices,
feelings, actions and meanings of interacting individuals are heard.
(Denzin, 1989, p. 83)

Thick description often contains new ideas or concepts that cast new
light on the activity under study, and which might help us
understand similar activity elsewhere. I will say more about this in
the analysis section.

 Return to CONTENTS
 

2. Methods of Qualitative Research

The main methods employed in qualitative research are

observation, interviews, and documentary analysis.

For a useful video example of how one professional researcher

planned and organised her (large scale) research project, click here.

[Note that this will take you to the excellent materials at VResORT
and you will need to create a free account here before viewing
them. It is well worth doing this and only takes a minute.]

Observation

In seeking to explore the natural scene, the qualitative researcher

aims to be as unobtrusive as possible, so that neither research
presence nor methods disturb the situation. This is why participant
observation is one of the favoured approaches. Here, the researcher
adopts a recognised role within the institution or group. Researchers
have become, amongst other things, teachers, gang-members,
pupils, nudists, hippies, bread salesmen, and medical students.

The advantages of participant observation are:-

 It blends in with natural activity.

 It gives the researcher access to the same places, people and

events as the subjects.

 It gives access to documents relevant to the role, including

confidential reports and records.

 It facilitates the use of mechanical aids, such as tape recorders

and cameras.

 It provides personal first-hand experience of the role and thus

heightens understanding of it.
  It makes a worthwhile contribution to the life of the institution.

The disadvantages are:-

 It might be more difficult to make the situation 'strange',

especially if one is a member of the institution before starting
the research. Indeed there is a danger of 'going native' - an
over-identification with people's views so that one's
perspective as a researcher is submerged beneath them. One
must work hard to achieve 'analytic distance' from the role, to
set aside taken-for-granted assumptions and to see oneself in
the role. The cultivation of reflectivity, and keeping personal
diaries, have helped here.

 It adds to the demands on the researcher. Qualitative research

in any form is demanding, typically presenting a mass of
confusing and intricate data. Participation adds to this, taking
up valuable time and adding to one's responsibilities.

 There is a possibility of conflict between one's role as a

participant and one's role as a researcher.

Some have therefore preferred non-participant observation, which

today is the more common mode. Here, the researcher has only the
role of researcher and observes situations of interest in that
capacity. A lesson might be observed from the back of a classroom,
or a playground from behind the sidelines. The researcher adopts
'fly on the wall' techniques to observe things as undisturbed by his
or her presence as possible.

This mode is less taxing, and is a defence against 'going native', but
of course it lacks the benefits of participation. There are also
practical and ethical problems about being a 'fly on the wall'. A kind
of halfway position is that of involved observation. Here the
researcher has none of the responsibilities of a formal role, but
takes part in activities from time to time, for example 'helping out'
in the classroom, 'blending in' to the playground. In some ways, this
is a more natural role for the qualitative researcher to take. Epstein
(1998) discusses some of the pros and cons of this in her research
on pupil perspectives, where she adopted a ‘least adult’ role.

What and how you observe depends very much on your subject of
study. You may already have a clearly defined focus - for example,
contrasting a teacher's treatment of boys and girls, examining girls'
playground games, studying a particular pupil's reaction to lessons.
The task then is to capture as much of the detail and interaction as
possible, through making notes, tape-recording, photography,
filming. The benefits of the last three are that they record elements
of the action (too complex and manifold to take in at first gaze)
which can than be studied in detail later. However, it is not always
possible or desirable to do all of these. Also, they have to be done
as unobtrusively as possible. For this reason, qualitative researchers
are often only able to scribble notes on bits of paper at the time,
writing them up more fully at the earliest convenience. Typically, a
day's research is followed by an evening's writing up of fieldnotes.

If the subject of study is more general - for example, teacher or

pupil culture or subcultures, school ethos, teaching methods,
teacher-pupil relations - a wider net has to be cast in the early
stages. One looks for what are major issues or prominent themes to
the people concerned, and gradually comes to focus on those and
fill out their detail. Cues to these can be incidents that disrupt the
normal flow of events, or strange behaviour (like the blazer-ripping
incident), or subjects' own distinctive behaviour or terminology (like
'looking cool'). Researchers often have the feeling of 'hanging
around' and 'muddling through' this period, but it is surprising how
quickly and eventually how strongly the lines of focus emerge with
sustained observation.

Researchers who prefer more security from the beginning might

consider systematic observation. This involves using an observation
schedule whereby teacher and/or pupil behaviour is coded according
to certain predetermined categories at regular intervals.

The strengths of systematic observation are:-

  It is relatively free of observer bias. It can establish
frequencies, and is strong on objective measures which involve
low inference on the part of the observer.
 Reliability can be strong. Where teams of researchers have
used this approach, 80% reliability has been established
among them.
 Generalisability. Once you have devised your instrument, large
samples can be covered.
 It is precise. There is no 'hanging around' or 'muddling
through'.
 It provides a structure for the research.

The weaknesses are:-

 There is a measure of unreliability. Qualitative material might

be misrepresented through the use of measurement
techniques.
 Much of the interaction is missed.
 It usually ignores the temporal and spatial context in which the
data is collected.
 It is not good for generating fresh insights.
 The pre-specification of categories predetermines what is to be
discovered and allows only partial description.
 It ignores process, flux, development, and change.

There has been lively debate about the pros and cons of systematic
and unsystematic observation (see, for example, Part 1 of
Hammersley, 1993). In general, systematic observation is a useful
technique (its best known usage being on the 'ORACLE' researches -
see Galton and Simon, 1980), and can be particularly strong where
used in conjunction with more purely qualitative techniques.

See also the Observation Techniques component.

   Return to CONTENTS

Interviews

A great deal of qualitative material comes from talking with people

whether it be through formal interviews or casual conversations. If
interviews are going to tap into the depths of reality of the situation
and discover subjects' meanings and understandings, it is essential
for the researcher:

 to develop empathy with interviewees and win their

confidence;

 to be unobtrusive, in order not to impose one's own influence

on the interviewee.

The best technique for this is the unstructured interview. Here, the
researcher has some general ideas about the topics of the interview,
and may have an aide memoire of points that might arise in
discussion for use as prompts, if necessary. But the hope is that
those points will come up in the natural course of the discussion as
the interviewee talks. Care is needed, therefore, to avoid leading
questions or suggesting outcomes, and skill is called for in
discovering what the interviewee really thinks. The researcher aims
to appear natural, not someone with a special role, but one who
engages with interviewees on a person-to-person basis. Attention
will be paid to where the interview is held, arrangement of seating,
how the researcher dresses, manner of approach, all in the interests
of equality. There might be a certain amount of pleasant chat before
getting into explaining what the research is about. If rapport has
been established, there should not be a difficulty in getting people
to talk. The problem, rather, might be that they talk too
inconsequentially, or off the subject, or vaguely. There are a
number of techniques researchers use in the natural course of the
conversation to aid clarity, depth and validity. Here are some:

 check on apparent contradictions, non sequiturs,  imbalance,

implausibility, exaggerations, or inconsistencies ('Yes, but
 didn't you say a moment ago…?' 'How can that be so if…?' 'Is
it really?' 'Does it necessarily follow that…?' 'Why?' 'Why not?'
'What was the point of that?');

 search for opinions ('What do you think of that?' 'Do you

believe that?');

 ask for clarification ('What do you mean by…?' 'Can you say a
little more about…?' 'In what way?' 'Can you give me some
examples?');

 ask for explanations, pose alternatives ('Couldn't one also

say…?');

 seek comparisons ('How does that relate to…?' 'Some others

have said that…');

 pursue the logic of an argument ('Does it follow, then, that…?'

'Presumably,…?');

 ask for further information ('What about…?' 'Does that apply

to…?);

 aim for comprehensiveness ('Have you any other…?' 'Do you

all feel like that?' 'Have you anything more to say on that?');

 put things in a different way ('Would it be fair to say that…?'

'Do you mean…?' 'In other words…?');

 express incredulity or astonishment ('In the fourth  year?' 'I

don't believe it!' 'Really??');

 summarise occasionally and ask for corroboration ('So…?'

'What you're saying is…?' 'Would it be correct to say…?');

 ask hypothetical questions ('Yes, but what if…?'

'Supposing…?');

 play devil's advocate ('An opposing argument might run…'

'What would you say to the criticism that…?).
The researcher engages in 'active' listening, which shows the
interviewee that close attention is being paid to what they say; and
also tries to keep the interviewee focused on the subject, as
unobtrusively as possible. Something of the researcher's self -
perhaps involving some similar or contrasting experiences to those
of the interviewee - is also put into the interaction in the interests of
sustaining rapport and encouraging more discussion. In this sense,
the unstructured interview is a process of constructing reality to
which both parties contribute. A large amount of data is generated,
and if possible, it is a great advantage if the interview can be tape
recorded for later transcription. How this is then analysed I discuss
below.

As with observation, it may be that the researcher begins with a

more focused study and wishes to know certain things. In these
cases a structured interview might be more appropriate. Here the
researcher decides the structure of the interview and sets out with
predetermined questions. As with systematic observation, this is
less naturalistic. Within the spaces, the same techniques as above
might apply, but there is clearly not as much scope for the
interviewee to generate the agenda. For this reason, some
researchers use semi-structured interviews - interviews which have
some pre-set questions, but allow more scope for open-ended
answers.

Both kinds of interview might be used in the same research. For

example, the initial stage of a project might be exploratory and
expansive. But once certain issues have been identified, the
researcher might use more focused interviews. They are still
grounded in the reality of the situation.

See also the component on Interviews.

  Return to CONTENTS

Sampling
Where qualitative research is seeking to generalise about general
issues, representative or 'naturalistic' sampling is desirable. This
covers places, times and persons. Thus, if we were studying
teachers' or pupils' perspectives, or the culture of a group, we would
need to consider them in different settings, since behaviour can
differ markedly in different situations - for example, the formal
circumstances of a teacher's classroom or office, the staffroom,
different classrooms, the informal ambience of a pub, and the
personal stronghold of the teacher's home. The same point applies
to time. Weekly and yearly cycles, for example, are critical in
schools. If our research sampled at just the beginnings and/or ends
of terms, weeks or days, we would end up with a distorted study if
we were to claim our results applied more generally. Again, if we
are seeking to represent a group in our findings (the 'English
Department', the 'Year 10 Girls'), we should ensure that we have
sampled across that group according to some appropriate criteria,
such as age, gender, ethnicity, experience.

Representative sampling cannot always be achieved in qualitative

research because of a) the initially largely exploratory nature of the
research; b) problems of negotiating access; c) the sheer weight of
work and problems of gathering and processing data using only one
set of eyes and ears. Often, one has to make do with an opportunity
sample in those areas where access is offered; or a snowball
sample, where the sample is developed through personal contact
and recommendation as the research proceeds. In these cases, the
basis of the sampling must be made clear and no inappropriate
generalising claims made for the findings.

Written materials

Documents are a useful source of data in qualitative research, but

they have to be treated with care. The most widely used are official
documents, personal documents, and questionnaires.

Official documents include registers, timetables, minutes of

meetings, planning papers, lesson plans and notes, confidential
documents on pupils, school handbooks, newspapers and journals,
school records, files and statistics, notice boards, exhibitions, official
letters, textbooks, exercise books, examination papers, work cards,
blackboard work, photographs. Any of these might give useful
information, but they do not all provide an objective truth. They
have to be contextualised within the circumstances of their
construction. Registers of attendance, for example, do not contain
'concealed' absences. Delinquency rates are notoriously unreliable,
being subject to different and varying interpretations of the rules.
School and teacher records on disruption might be incomplete. It is
not something one necessarily wishes other people to know about.
The number and nature of notices around a school can tell us a
great deal about school ethos and policy. Punishment books, a
presentation of examination results, official minutes of meetings
might all present a truth of a kind, but perhaps not the complete
truth. The task for the researcher is not to take such documents at
face value, but to find out how they were constructed, and how they
are used and interpreted. They can thus be a useful way in to
observation and interview.

Some documentation is more objective. Colin Lacey (1976, p. 60),

commenting on his research methods in his Hightown
Grammar  study, said that while his core methods were participant
observation and observation 'the most important breakthrough for
me was the combining of methods', which included a key use of
documents:

The observation and description of classrooms led quickly to a need

for more exact information about individuals within the class. I used
school documents to produce a ledger of information on each boy,
for example, address, father's occupation, previous school,
academic record, and so on. I built on this record as more
information became available from questionnaires.

Documents can help reconstruct events, and give information about

social relationships. Burgess (1984), for example, found official
letters 'indispensable' in the course of his study. These included
letters between the headteacher and governors and LEA officials,
letters between teachers and parents, and notes circulated around
teachers. Similarly, a school's official brochure can tell you a great
deal about projected school ethos (which may or may not accord
with reality), sometimes as much from its omissions as from what it
contains. School reports ostensibly give an evaluation of a pupils'
progress, but they also are cultural products which might tell us
more about the teachers and the school than about the pupil.

The use of documents closely associated with teaching, such as

textbooks and work-sheets is a popular subject for study. Why are
some effective, and some not? Effective in what ways?

Personal documents

Among these are diaries, creative writing exercises, pupils' 'rough'

books, graffiti, personal letters and notes. If these have already
been created, they are part of the 'natural' situation, and can tell
the researcher a great deal about pupil and teacher behaviour,
culture and perspectives. In studies that I have been connected with
I have found out a great deal from these kind of documents, on, for
example:

 pupils' feelings about their transfer to a higher school (a

teacher's set exercise);

 pupil humour (children's written accounts and drawings);

 children's backgrounds and lives ('news' and 'story' books);

 pupil perspectives (exercises set by the teacher on such things

as 'my best friend', 'my ideal teacher', 'our school');

 influences operating on children (such as gender, race, age,

social grouping);

 pupil culture (unofficial pupil jottings and scribblings were very

informative here).

Diaries are frequently used in qualitative research. Their very nature

speaks to the features outlined in the first section above. They are
'natural', they contain personal meanings and understandings, and
they are processual. In a sense, they are observing and interviewing
by proxy. Where subjects agree to keep diaries in areas where they
are appropriate, they can provide personal insights not attainable by
other means. The researcher's range is broadened, and more data
is provided to enhance, fill out and/or challenge data gained in other
ways. Ball (1981, p. 100), for example, found that in his research
'material from diaries kept by some of the pupils…demonstrated
both a lack of subtlety in the sociometric instruments and the
degree to which the collection of sociometric data could be socially
constrained'.

Again, care would need to be taken in how diaries are interpreted.

The researcher needs to know the basis and motivation on which
they were compiled. They are particularly strong, therefore, where
used in conjunction with other methods. For example, one extension
of the method is the 'diary-interview', where the diary is made the
basis for an interview where the aim is to check for clarity,
completeness, validity, etc.

 Return to CONTENTS

Questionnaires

Questionnaires are not among the most prominent methods in

qualitative research, because they commonly require subjects to
respond to a stimulus, and thus they are not acting naturally.
However, they have their uses, especially as a means of collecting
information from a wider sample than can be reached by personal
interview. Though the information is necessarily more limited, it can
still be very useful. For example, where certain clearly defined facts
or opinions have been identified by more qualitative methods, a
questionnaire can explore how generally these apply, if that is a
matter of interest. Ideally, there would then be a qualitative 'check'
on a sample of questionnaire replies to see if respondents were
interpreting items in the way intended. Alternatively, a
questionnaire might be used in the first instance, followed by
qualitative techniques on a sample as a check and to fill out certain
features of the questionnaire replies. Interaction among techniques
in this way is typical of qualitative research.

In order to accord with the features of qualitative research outlined

above, one would need to take into account the questions of:-

 Access. Given what was said above about levels of reality, the
researcher needs to know that all are interpreting questions
and answers on the questionnaire in the same way and on the
same 'level'; and that respondents are giving full and truthful
responses.

 The nature of the data required. If the purpose of the

questionnaire is to find out factual details or to seek responses
to firm categories, the 'harder' the data requested the better.
If the purpose is to help discover new qualitative material,
then it is better to have more open, unobtrusive and
unstructured questions. Questionnaires in qualitative research
often contain a mixture of the two.

 The need to identify the context in which replies are being

given.

 The need for checks, balances, extensions and modifications.

See also the component on Questionnaires in Education Research.

 Return to CONTENTS

Validity

Some qualitative researchers are not concerned about validity as it

is commonly understood, preferring to aim for 'understanding',
which might be achieved by what Harry Wolcott (1994) calls
'rigorous subjectivity' - using the methods discussed above.
What I seek is something else, a quality that points more to
identifying critical elements and wringing plausible interpretations
from them, something one can pursue without becoming obsessed
with finding the right or ultimate answer, the correct version, the
Truth. (Ibid. pp. 366-7)

The quest is not so much with 'getting it right' as getting it

'differently contoured and nuanced' (Richardson 1994, p. 521). To
some, there are many overlapping truths operating at different
levels and constantly subject to change.

Whichever approach one adopts, however, validity or rigour in

qualitative research commonly depends on:

Unobtrusive measures

As discussed above, the less the researcher disturbs the scene, the
longer spent in it, and the deeper the penetration of the research,
the more the representation of it might be claimed to be authentic.
Subjects are not 'playing up' to the researcher, they are not doing
things differently because the researcher is there, they are going
about their lives as they always do. Of course it is difficult to be
completely unobtrusive, but that is the aim.

Respondent Validation

If we are aiming to understand the meanings and perspectives of

those being studied, how better to judge if our understandings are
accurate and full than by giving our accounts back to those involved
and asking them to judge? There is nothing more heartening for a
qualitative researcher to hear than something like, 'It's really good.
I've read through most of it. I think that you have really captured
what it's like for black kids at school' (Mac an Ghaill , 1988, p. 142).
The satisfying thing here is that one has 'captured what it's like',
one has grasped the experiences, feelings, problems, and managed
to convey them to others. In some ways this is an artistic pursuit,
not unlike the task artists set themselves.

At other times, we are reminded of deficiencies in what we do. The

same researcher received this comment from another student: 'You
can't really know, feel, what it's like for a black woman. That's why
I think that although what you have done is good, I think black
women should carry out their own studies' (Op.cit. p. 144).

Respondent validation may not always be appropriate or desirable.

For example, where the research touches on the micro-politics of
the institution, subjects might see the research primarily as either
aiding or damaging their interests, and respond accordingly. While
these responses could still be useful if properly contextualised, the
researcher could personally be drawn into the power struggle and
end up in a difficult position.

Triangulation

Triangles possess enormous strength. Amongst other things, they

make the basic frames of bicycles, gates and house roofs.
Triangulation enables extraordinary precision in measuring the
height of mountains and astronomical distances. It is also a strength
in research. The most common forms of triangulation in qualitative
work are:

 Of method. The use of several methods to explore an issue

increases the chances of depth and accuracy. For example, if
the project concerned a school's policy towards new intakes of
pupils, it would be a good idea to interview the headteacher,
usually the main formulator of the policy. But it would also be
useful to research it from other vantage points, for example,
the various meetings that are held with parents, pupils and
teachers and how the policy is presented and/or negotiated
with them; the views of people in these groups, the documents
associated with the policy, as well as observations of the policy
in progress.
One of the commonest forms of triangulation is to combine
interviews with observation. Observation will test and fill out
accounts given in interviews, and vice versa. Others have been
mentioned above.

 Of time. This allows for the processual nature of events. For

example, one might wish to study a teacher's teaching
methods. Observation of a class or classes is clearly indicated.
But a deeper understanding might be achieved if the
researcher were to:

a) discuss with the teacher beforehand what content and approach

was planned for the lesson;

b) observe the lesson as it happens;

c) discuss with the teacher afterwards what had happened and why,
if aims had been achieved, modified, etc.

 Of persons. This might involve consulting a range of people,

perhaps in different roles or positions about a particular item -
as with school policy above; or bringing more than one view to
bear on a situation, that is, using more than one researcher.
Checking each other's accounts for differences can lead to
closer interrogation of data, even revisiting the site to collect
more data, and more accurate development of theory.

 Return to CONTENTS

Ethics

The main ethical debates in qualitative research revolve around the

tensions between covert and overt research, and between the
public's right to know and the subject's right to privacy. Clearly,
some practices that might be extremely unobtrusive, such as
observing through a one-way mirror, concealed tape-recording, or
telephone-tapping are just not permissible - and might lead to
criminal proceedings! Participant observation has, on occasions,
been likened to 'spying' or 'voyeurism'. There is a temptation, too,
for some researchers to negotiate access into an institution, carry
out observations that he or she requires, persuade subjects to 'spill
the beans', and then 'cut and run'. Such practice runs against the
principle of 'informed consent' (people agreeing to take part in
research on the basis of knowledge of what it is about); invades
privacy; involves deception, all of which is inimical to generating
qualities of trust and rapport, essential ingredients for this kind of
research. As Dean (1954, p. 233) states,

A person becomes accepted as a participant observer more because

of the kind of person he turns out to be in the eyes of the field
contacts than because of what the research represents to them.
Field contacts want to be reassured that the research worker is a
'good guy' and can be trusted not 'to do them dirt' with what he
finds out.

This might not cover research in institutions like 'Dotheboys Hall' (I

would not wish to be seen as a 'good guy' in some circumstances!),
but for educational research in general at the present time, one
needs to cultivate relationships along these lines. Soltis (1989, p.
129) feels researchers should observe the 'non-negotiable' values of
'honesty, fairness, respect for persons and beneficence'. In practical
terms, this means, for example, not harming the institution or the
persons one is researching, if possible leaving them in a better
rather than a worse condition, protecting their identities in
disseminating the research (through, for example, the use of
pseudonyms), obtaining permission to view and film activities,
record interviews, and to use documents owned by others.
Respondent validation can be seen to have an ethical dimension.

However, in some forms of practice, many decisions must

constantly be made that contain the dilemma that observing these
non-negotiable values in one form means not doing so in others
(see Burgess, 1985). Discussing these through with other
researchers helps to clarify the issue.
Click here to see the University of Plymouth guidelines on ethics and
some advice on how to respond.

You should now read three articles that epitomise the principles so
far discussed. They are (click on the titles or obtain copies from the
library):

1. 'Problems of sociological fieldwork: a review of the methodology

of Hightown Grammar', by C. Lacey, in Hammersley, M and Woods, P
(eds) The Process of Schooling, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.

In reading this, you should pay particular attention to the combining of

methods and their integration in the analysis.

2. 'Primary teachers talking: a reflexive account of longitudinal research', by

J. Nias, in Walford, G (ed) Doing Educational Research, London, Routledge.

A good example of the operationalisation of qualitative criteria, and the

personal experiences of the researcher.

3. The chapter on 'Ethics' from the book by Hammersley, M. and Atkinson,

P. (1995) Ethnography: Principles in Practice, (Second Edition), London,
Routledge.

When you have read the articles, spend a little time in compiling two lists of
a) the potential strengths, and b) the potential weaknesses of qualitative
research. When you have done this, see my comments by clicking
on ‘Qualitative Research Assessed’.

 Return to CONTENTS

Qualitative Research Assessed

In summary, qualitative research is strong for :

 The attention to detail, the ability to embrace both verbal and

non-verbal behaviour, to penetrate fronts, discover meanings,
and reveal the subtlety and complexity of cases or issues.
 Portraying perspectives and conveying feelings and
experiences.

 Encompassing processes and natural environments.

 Actions are contextualised within situations and time.

 Theory is generated from the empirical data, and consequently

there is 'closeness of fit' between theory and data.

 Although this kind of research is sometimes criticised for not

being generalisable, there are two ways in which it is, namely
a) through the theory that is generated. Such theory then
becomes available to others to test and apply - see the
example above on differentiation-polarisation; and b) though it
might be only a single case study, it might contribute to an
archive of studies on a particular issue which then become
reinterpreted. Hargreaves (1988), for example, working from a
number of existing qualitative studies that had researched the
social circumstances of teaching, developed a different
explanation of teaching quality from 'official' ones which placed
emphasis on the personal qualities of teachers. Ball (1987)
similarly drew on a number of qualitative studies to generate a
theory of school organisation.

 Other strengths, emerging from the Nias reading, are: a) the

way her own self (experience, disposition, interests) related to
the research and gave her opportunities to advance the work;
b) how the quality of her data 'challenged' her to search for
interconnections, and how she found 'unexpected reefs' under
her feet; c) the benefits of time to think; d) the nature of
qualitative data as a seed-bed for ideas, and chaos as a
prelude to creativity; e) the recognition of weaknesses in the
study, but f) seeing the main strength as the insights the
research generated and how they will be used by others. As a
matter of interest, the insights of Nias' (1989) research have
been extensively used by others throughout the world.
 

As for difficulties and weaknesses:

 It has been argued that single qualitative studies cannot

provide grounds for generalising across cases - though see
above.

 Immersion in the depths of a qualitative study can lead to

either or both 'going native' (see above) and 'macro blindness',
that is to say the researcher might offer explanations in terms
of the situation under observation, oblivious to more powerful
forces operating on the situation from outside.

 Qualitative research can be a high-risk, low-yield enterprise. It

can take time to negotiate access, assemble a sample, develop
trust and rapport, find out what is 'going on' or what people
are thinking. 'Hanging around' and 'muddling through' can
bring worries. Maybe one will not find 'reefs beneath one's
feet' and drown in the maelstrom as a result!

 Qualitative studies are often accused of being impressionistic,

subjective, biased, idiosyncratic and lacking in precision. Some
of the bias comes through, typically, in the rhetorical
presentation of accounts (Atkinson, 1990). Researchers might
use a number of rhetorical devices, such as metaphor, jargon,
'loaded' terminology, selected and variable use of transcript,
quotations, selective use of examples, to subtly persuade the
reader to the author's line of argument. However, although
this is a charge that might be made of particular studies, it is
not an essential one of the approach. As we have seen above,
there are procedures available to establish validity and rigour,
and these should be demonstrated in the presentation.

 Return to CONTENTS
3. Qualitative Analysis

In qualitative research, analysis frequently takes place at the same

time as data collection. Many consider it a mistake to go on
accumulating data without examining it from time to time to see if
any major themes or patterns are emerging. If there are, these will
direct future data gathering in the process known as 'progressive
focusing'. Lacey explains this very well with his 'escalation of
insights' in ‘Problems of sociological fieldwork’, which you read
earlier . If this is not done, the researcher risks becoming swamped
in data that become increasingly more difficult to analyse. In order
to make sense of the data, much may have to be jettisoned - which
means a lot of time and work might have been wasted, as well as a
lower quality product. Harry Wolcott (1999) maintains that one of
the main problems in qualitative work is having too much data
rather than not enough.

Analysis, therefore, begins almost immediately, with 'primary

analysis'. Later on, after more data collection in interaction with
primary analysis, a second stage occurs with 'category and concept
formation'. The research might stop at this point, depending on the
aims, or it might proceed to a third stage, the 'generation of
theory'. I shall consider each of these.

Primary analysis

As interview transcripts are made, or fieldnotes of observation

compiled, or documents assembled, the researcher continuously
examines the data, perhaps highlighting certain points in the text or
writing comments in the margins. These might identify what seem
to be important points, and note contradictions and inconsistencies,
any common themes that seem to be emerging, references to
related literature, comparisons and contrasts with other data and so
on.. Many of these first attempts at speculative analysis will
probably be discarded later, but some ideas will no doubt take
shape as further data collection and analysis proceed. Much of this
early activity may appear chaotic and uncoordinated, but as Nias
notes, chaos is a prolific seedbed for ideas.
Sometimes, the notes one makes may be little more than a
scribbled comment; at other times, particularly as the research goes
on, one might write longer notes or memos, perhaps summarising
parts of data that go together but have come from different
sources, or rehearsing ideas at greater length. The following three
examples illustrate the range of these preliminary reflections.

Examples

Example 1

Click here to see a page of an interview marked up by the

researcher, where the phrases in boxes have been highlighted for
comment in the margins.

Example 2

The following extract affords another kind of initial analysis. The

researcher took notes at an interview with a teacher in a secondary
school about the members of his form (this one was not taped) and
wrote them up the same evening as fully as he could. A few days
later, when time permitted, he reflected on the teachers' comments,
adding some notes to them. This is one brief extract:

Teacher: Tim Brown - very disappointing. I noted a decline last year

and I spoke to him about it; and he's a right lout, isn't he? Always
shuffling around with his hands in his pockets, instead of being a
nice young man, as he was…

Researcher's reflections: Immediately he reveals his conception of

the ideal pupil, at least the behavioural one. Note the importance of
appearance and the choice of terminology - a 'right lout' is
counterpoised to a 'nice young man' - and a great deal seems to be
inferred from his appearance and demeanour. There is a great deal
of this among the staff…he could be subscribing to my double
standard hypothesis and assuming that kids may well be different at
school from what they are at home; it is what he expects that is
important, and the very fact that he sees fit to divide his comment
into 'academic' and 'behaviour'. So I conclude, tentatively, that he is
subscribing to the prevailing image of the ideal pupil and that his
choice of words and unqualified use of them is an indication of his
commitment to that ideal.

Example 3

This is a more considered memo, reflecting on a range of data. It

was sent by Lynda Measor to me in the course of our research
on Teacher Careers(Sikes, Measor and Woods, 1985). This research
investigated teachers' views of their careers and the influences
operating on it, and employed 'life history' interviewing. Thus a
series of interviews were held with each teacher in the sample
covering the whole range of their lives. The memo illustrates the
emergence of a new theme, carrying with it a sense of excitement
at a new discovery, speculation at the possibilities, but also
hesitancy in case, after further consideration, it is not such a good
idea after all!

Memo 4.1.83

A new idea, and as yet not very well thought out, but here goes.
Also I'm not certain if it has been used and talked about by
interactionists as I'll try and indicate later. I know the bibliography
in other fields - mainly political theory actually. I'm working towards
a notion of 'special events' in the individual's life. This would
connect into the theme B we have discussed, that of 'critical
periods'.

Methodology

How did I come across the idea? As I'm building up numbers of

interviews, that is I interview the same person lots of times, I've
noticed that they repeat their account of certain incidents, usually
fairly important ones in their lives. The other salient factor is that
the account is given in the same words each time, with remarkably
little variation. In addition, this kind of repeating of tales is elicited
most often when there has been a gap in my interviewing of a few
weeks, so the narrative has gone cold. They cannot immediately
recall exactly what they told me before. Then I got the repetition of
incidents, and the repetition of phrases, e.g.:

 Matt Bruce on being the leader of the invasion force into

Jersey and the way that got him introduced into schools
on Jersey.

 Maggie Corbin on the picture in her portfolio of her

father; he had a C.P. badge of the Soviet hammer and
sickle in his lapel and as a result the headmistress of
Varndean, who was interviewing her, found out she was a
Communist Party member herself

 There actually are quite a number in R.C. Clarke, and in

Reeves.

Explanations and ideas

It might simply be that the repetition of incidents is due to lapses in

memory, especially as people are getting older, that would not be
surprising. But there is a problem there, because it fails to explain
why these incidents should be repeated in exactly the same
phraseology. Why doesn't the lapse of memory extend to that too?
Why is it that it is only certain things, certain incidents that get
repeated?

So maybe we can work towards a notion of 'special events' in

people's lives, 'key incidents', yes, around which pivotal decisions
revolve, incidents which lead to major decisions or directions being
taken.

But it seems to me that there is something else of interest too, and

that is what people make of these incidents. A range of devices
seem to be employed to make these incidents 'special' or more
accurately 'more special'. I'm afraid I delve back into folkloric stuff
again; people seem to make a kind of mystique hang around these
incidents and events, they make them out of the ordinary, they
bestow special 'meaning' and special 'status' upon them. They seem
to do this by a variety of oral devices, storytelling, ornate tale-
making devices, which have the effect of drawing the listener's
attention to them. Humour is used too, or more accurately 'wit';
humorous short phrases surround the telling of the event, and again
these act as a signal flag, what Lewis called an 'alerting factor'. I'm
also reminded of Sykes' material you found in the article on tale
telling in the factory - some of those devices seem to be at work.

The device seems at a theoretical level to be involved with putting

meaning, organisation, shape to a life, trying to understand a
career? I picked up the idea of 'special event' however from political
theory (again I'm afraid it's my thesis material). It comes from
people like Sorel and Edelman. They discuss it in terms of the
political life of a nation, and point to the way that particular events
in the nation's history become special. Bastille Day to the French,
and the taking of the Winter Palace to the Russians. It's a bit harder
to do for England but maybe the Battle of Britain, or Dunkirk, as an
example. These events do get a lot of attention anyway; they are
meant to have meaning for the citizens of a nation, in that sense
they are 'special'. But for political theorists it is the secondary
devices which describe them which are equally significant. It is the
film, a TV repetitious coverage, and the telling the tale again and
again by many media, which helps build up the mystique. Telling
the tale, reciting events, helps make the thing 'remade', 'different',
and special. In fact there is more to this from classical theorists,
especially those on Greece, with a whole lot of stuff about
'Kerygma', which might, I suppose, be relevant. It's all about events
- real events, being seen as revealing underlying purposes and
directions. In a people like the British, who have been very affected
by Judaic-Christian and then Darwinian notions of onward progress
and purpose underlying it, we might be able to see something of
that socialisation. Anyway, that might be getting too fanciful. You
may think the whole thing is too fanciful.

(Measor, 1983, personal communication)

We did not consider the idea fanciful. In fact, Pat Sikes, who was
conducting interviews in a different area of the country, was able to
provide further substantiation from her own data and the theme
was written up as one of the key features of a teacher's careers
(Chapter 2 'Critical Phases and Incidents' of Teacher Careers: Crises
and Continuities,  by Sikes, Measor and Woods, 1985). Discovery of
the theme was made possible by certain clues - repetition of the
incident, use of the same words, the actual choice of words, and
perhaps the way in which they are said.

Other clues might be irregularities that one observes, strange

events, certain things that people say, things that get people
excited, angry, surprised. In the researcher is the recognition that
'something is up', prompting the use of a 'detective's nose' for
finding more clues and divining their meaning. For example, Measor
and Woods (1984) were cued in to the importance of the myths that
surrounded school transfer through a number of pupils prefacing
their comments with remarks such as: 'I have heard that…'; 'They
tell me that…'; 'There is this story that…'. Clearly, these accounts
were connected and there was a special quality to them.

In The Divided School  (Woods, 1979), my examination of 'teacher

survival' (i.e. teacher continuance in teaching) led to the theory
that, in situations where constraints on action exceeded the
expectations of strong commitment to teaching, a struggle for
survival would result. The theory was initiated by some observations
of what appeared to me to be very strange behaviour. One of these
was a chemistry class where the teacher taught for seventy minutes
what in many respects seemed an exemplary lesson, except that
the whole class ignored him, a fact that could not have escaped his
attention. Then, even more curiously, in the last ten minutes
teacher and class did come together as he dictated some notes and
they dutifully and silently recorded them in their exercise books. In
another instance, a teacher showed a class a film, even though it
was the wrong film that had been delivered and nothing remotely to
do with the subject he was teaching. Why did people behave in such
strange ways?
Inconsistencies and contrasts are other matters that arouse
interest. Why, for example, should teachers change character so
completely between staffroom and classroom, as Lacey (1970)
noted? Why do they lay claim to certain values and beliefs in one
situation and act out values and beliefs of strong contrast in
another? Why do they behave with such irrationality and pettiness
on occasions? Why do pupils 'work' with one teacher and 'raise hell'
with another, as Turner (1983) noticed. Anything that strikes us as
odd can be a lead in to analysis.

  Return to CONTENTS

Category and concept formation

Most qualitative researchers arrive at a point where their data has

to be organised in some kind of systematic way, if only for analytic
purposes. That is to say that, while there is a recognition that all is
fluid, processual, multiperspectival, and a bit chaotic, in order to
understand it we impose some kind of order on the data. Note that
it is not essential to do this. These days some qualitative
researchers, particularly of a postmodernist persuasion, are
experimenting with a number of different ways of presenting their
work in the interests of representing more faithfully the multi-
layeredness of social life, the many different truths that might
apply, and people's feelings and heartfelt experiences. These
approaches are still very much in the minority and under
development, so I shall concentrate here on the tried and tested
conventional approach - organisation by category.  (For information
about computer software that is available to help you with this visit
section 10 'How do I analyse the data?' in the RESINED component
on Interviews in Education Research.)

A popular way of doing this is through identifying major categories

in the data under which the data can be subsumed. This is not as
easy as it sounds. All the data have to be included. The categories
have to be exclusive, that is to say data must fit within one and one
alone, and the categories should be on the same level of analysis.
One usually has to have several shots at this before coming to the
most appropriate arrangement, reading and re-reading notes and
transcripts, and experimenting with a number of formulations. It
may be helpful to summarise data in some way, tabulate them on a
chart, or construct figures, or sketch diagrams. Such distillation
helps one to encapsulate more of the material in a glance.

The following are some typical examples of categorisation.

Examples

Example 1

The first part of Paul Willis' influential book Learning to

Labour (1977) was entitled 'Elements of a culture', concerning a
group of boys at a secondary school who called themselves 'the
lads'. It was divided into sections, each concerned with a major
feature of the lads' culture that Willis had identified from his
observations of and discussions with them. They were:-

 Opposition to authority and rejection of the conformist.

 The informal group.

 Dossing, blagging and wagging.

 Having a 'laff'.

 Boredom and excitement.

 Sexism.

 Racism.

Under these headings, Willis reconstructed the lads' outlook on life,

using liberal portions of fieldnotes and transcript to build up a
graphic and evocative picture. Notice that the categories include a
mixture of the lads' own terms, which alerted the researcher to
major areas of importance to the lads, and Willis' own summarising
features.

Example 2

In the article '"Sussing out" teachers: pupils as data gatherers',

Beynon (1984) observed a class of boys during all their lessons in
the first half-term of their first year at comprehensive school. He
was interested in 'initial encounters' between boys and their
teachers, and came to focus on 'the strategies the boys employed to
find out about classrooms and categorise teachers; the specific
nature of the knowledge they required; and the means they
employed to (in their words) ‘suss-out’ teachers' (p. 121). He found
there was a main group of boys who used a wide variety of 'sussing'
strategies. One of his first tasks, therefore, was to organise his data
and identify the kinds of strategies. He found six major groups:

1. group formation and communication;

2. joking;
3. challenging actions (verbal);
4. challenging actions (non-verbal);
5. interventions;
6. play.

He divided each of these into sub-categories. For example, 'joking'

consisted of:-

 Open joking.
 Jokes based on pupils' names.
 Risqué joking.
 Lavatorial humour.
 Repartee and wit.
 Set pieces.
 Covert joking.
 Backchat and 'lip'.
 Closed joking.
 Michelle: a private joke.
 

This, then, shows an organisation of data using categories and

subcategories, each being graphically described by classroom
observations, notes and recorded dialogue and interaction. The
effect is to re-create 'what it was like' for these pupils and their
teachers and to show the considerable depth and range of their
'sussing' activities. 'Sussing' is an important activity in initial
encounters, being the pupils' main means of finding things out
about the teachers, how far they will allow them to develop their
own culture, what rules will be imposed or negotiated, in short how
they are to conduct their lives together. How teachers respond to
'sussing', therefore, is an important aspect - and test - of their
professionalism. We need a comprehensive view of the 'sussing' if
we are to develop theory from it, and this is what Beynon provides.

Example 3

Neither of the above are concerned with interconnections among the

categories. This might be appropriate as far as they are concerned
as these are summative categories describing entities - in these
cases, cultures and strategies. Sometimes, however, we need to
consider priorities and relationships among categories. This is what
Gannaway (1976) did in 'Making sense of school'. The issue was
what makes an effective teacher in the eyes of the pupils. A number
of qualitative studies had already identified some prominent
features, such as keeping order, being fair, humour, understanding,
making pupils work, but had not established any interconnections.
Gannaway produced a more dynamic model:-

 The first priority is ‘can the teacher keep order?’ If the answer
is no, he is a non-starter.

 If ‘yes’, the next consideration is ‘can he have a laugh’? If ‘no’,

he is overstrict or boring and the pupils will make trouble.

 If ‘yes’, they then want to know ‘does he understand pupils’? If

the answer is ‘yes’, the teacher probably ‘has it made’, as long
 as he ‘can put over something remotely of interest in the
lessons’.

 If ‘no’, the teacher is boring and has no chance of making

lessons interesting. However, there are other factors that
come into play here, such as ‘has the subject any utility’? and
‘is it mainly writing’? You can imagine the results from
different answers to these.

You are now asked to attempt your own analysis of an

interview. The interview in question is one of a series that was carried out
in researching an outstandingly successful school production of the
musical Godspell . This was one of the ‘critical events in teaching and
learning’ reported in Woods (1993). The aim of the research was to find out
what were the actual educational benefits of generally recognised
outstanding educational events, and how were they achieved.

 Click here to read the Godspell Interview.

 Read the introduction to the interview.
 Read through the transcript to get a feel of the whole interview.
 Study the transcript more carefully, and consider:-

a) What did the interviewee, Martyn, gain from the experience?

b) Why did he consider the production such an outstanding success?

c) If you had a chance to re-interview Martyn, what points would you wish
to follow up?

d) Note any strengths and limitations in the interviewing technique.

e) When you have finished the exercise, see my comments by clicking

on Godspell Comments.

 Return to CONTENTS

The generation of theory

Many qualitative studies do not go beyond the construction of
models and typologies. This ordered, descriptive detail is a perfectly
legitimate pursuit. As we have seen, it takes considerable work, skill
and insight to achieve this level of description, and the results are
valuable. But we might want to go on from asking ‘what’ and ‘how’
questions to ‘why’ questions. What we saw in the second stage of
analysis above, was ‘how’ Willis’ lads and Beynon’s boys behaved –
interesting, but we would like to know ‘why’ they behaved like that.

If we take ‘sussing-out’ as an example, the first imperative is to

understand events from the point of view of the participants and try
to discover the pupils’ intentions. We would also want to know
exactly when and where ‘sussing-out’ took place, under what sort of
circumstances, and with whom. Is it limited to initial encounters
between teachers and pupils? If it is occurring at other times,
another explanation is required. Are all pupils and teachers
involved, or only some? What proportion of the pupils’ behaviour is
taken up with this kind of activity?

Then, what are the consequences of ‘sussing-out’? The theory

proposed would lead us to expect that where the required
knowledge was ascertained by the boys, where teachers justified
their claims to being able to teach and to control, different, more
settled behaviour would ensue. If it does not ensue, it may mean
that the behaviour was not ‘sussing-out’ at all. We would have to
consider alternative theories, such as the behaviour being a cultural
product (for example of male, working class or ethnic culture) –
Willis’ explanation for his lads, or an institutional product (for
example, of school organisation, such as streaming or setting –
perhaps having some relation with the differentiation-polarisation
theories discussed earlier). It may of course be that more than one
theory is relevant, and we would then have to consider their inter-
relationship. Here, it can be seen how the development of theory
might lead back into more data collection as one tests out
possibilities and fills in areas that demand more knowledge.

Types of theory
It is useful to see theories on two dimensions. The first is Glaser
and Strauss’s (1967) distinction between substantive and formal
theory. The former is theory that applies to a particular case; formal
theory is at a higher level of abstraction and applies to a generality
of cases. For example, in my study of Lowfield Secondary School
(1967), I developed a substantive theory of teacher ‘survival
strategies’. The theory sought to explain the behaviour of teachers
in that particular school. It could apply to other schools, but in that
wider context, survival strategies are seen to belong to a more
general concept of ‘coping strategies’. This concept, in turn, can be
applied to other personnel (such as pupils) and other areas of social
activity than education. The theory is becoming more formalised.

The second dimension is that of micro-macro. Qualitative research

lends itself more readily to micro research, which is concerned with
activity within classrooms and schools, interaction between people,
local situations, case studies. The examples cited so far in this text
are all micro research, with the exception of Willis (1977). Willis
used his description of the lads to develop a theory in the second
part of his book which related the lads’ school culture to working-
class culture. He argues that the latter not only operates as an
external influence, through, say, families, but is actually re-created,
produced and transformed by the lads in response to the school
situation, which has similarities to the work situation. The school
counter-culture, therefore, has similarities to shop-floor culture in
the factories, with its violence and aggression, its masculinity, group
solidity, ‘kiddings’ and ‘pisstakes’. This is why, almost triumphantly,
working-class kids choose working-class jobs. This, then, is a macro
theory, since its basis is social-class relations at the level of society
as a whole. One of the problems here is the further one ventures
into the macro area the less ‘grounded’ one’s theory becomes,
simply because it is getting further from the ground! But this is no
reason why qualitative researchers should not develop theory in this
area. The counter charge is that researchers who limit their gaze to
particular situations are myopic! The imperative in both cases is for
researchers to make their work as rigorous and grounded as
possible. With this in view, qualitative researchers have, on
occasions, strengthened or modified existing macro theory. Andy
Hargreaves’ (1992) article ‘Time and teachers’ work: an analysis of
the intensification thesis’ is a good example of this. Another article
of Hargreaves’ (1988), on ‘Teaching Quality’, shows how a
researcher can use an accumulation of qualitative studies to
generate an alternative theory to that in force at the time, with
sharply contrasting implications for educational policy. Have a look
at these articles if you have time.

Hammersley and Atkinson (1995 pp. 237-8) in consequence identify

four broad types of theory:-

 Macro-formal. In relation to education, these theories would be

concerned with global aspects – general trends that affect the
educational systems of a number of societies, such as
‘intensification’. In the current age of globalisation, we might
anticipate more macro-formal theories than heretofore.

 Macro-substantive. This would apply to one society and one

educational system.

 Micro-formal. The development of theory that might be

generalised across a number of cases and situations, but
explaining phenomena at an interactional rather than society
level, as in ‘labelling theory’, ‘coping strategies’, ‘spoiled
careers’ (Goffman, 1961).

 Micro-substantive. Theory applied to particular cases which

explains in their own terms. ‘Sussing-out’ is a good example.

As Hammersley and Atkinson point out, these are all worthy forms
of theory, but researchers would need to be clear about which type
(or types, since more than one might be involved) they were
developing as it would have implications for the conduct of the
research.

Comparative analysis
The development of theory proceeds typically through comparative
analysis. As we saw earlier, instances are compared across a range
of situations, over a period of time, among a number of people and
through a variety of methods. Comparisons are being made all the
time – in checking data, testing an idea, bringing out the distinctive
elements of a category, establishing generalities within a group. Any
of these could spark off ideas about ‘why’, which would bring more
comparisons to test and refine that idea.

Theorising goes on throughout the study. As soon as one begins to

identify significant events or words, and goes on to develop
categories and concepts, one is building up essential components of
theory. The researcher becomes steeped in data, but at the same
time cultivates analytical distance to enable thinking about the data
and to allow the imagination to work to see patterns in the detail, or
how apparently unrelated items might be connected. A variety of
devices might be used to aid this distancing, for example, a
research diary containing personal reflections on the research, one’s
own involvement in and feelings about it; further marginal
comments on fieldnotes, as new thoughts occur on re-reading them
in the light of later work; writing memos and notes; playing with the
data by making different kinds of summaries, figures, tables,
diagrams, all of which might help us to see an overview or
interconnections.

Consulting the literature is an integral part of theory development,

and the main way of making comparisons outside  the study. This is
what I did in working towards a theory of how teachers placed
pupils into certain types. I examined my own data in the light of
existing theories (Hargreaves et al., 1975; Keddie, 1971). My
teachers did not appear to typify pupils in the same way as
Hargreaves’ teachers. This could be the result of different research
methods, or different circumstances. I favoured the latter
explanation, which meant that both studies were equally valid, and
with some help from the Keddie analysis developed what I hoped
was a more comprehensive theory (see Woods, 1979, pp. 173-9).

Consulting colleagues, for their funds of knowledge and as academic

‘sounding-boards’, is also helpful and another source of comparison.
It might be done by discussion (the mere fact of trying to articulate
an idea helps to give it shape), by circulating papers, or by giving
seminars.

Another important factor is time. The deeper the involvement, the

longer the association, the wider the field of contacts and
knowledge, the more intense the reflection, the stronger the
promise of ‘groundedness’. As Nias remarks in the reading
recommended earlier:

The fact that I have worked for so long on the material has enabled
my ideas to grow slowly, albeit painfully. They have emerged,
separated, recombined, been tested against one another and
against those of other people, been rejected, refined, re-shaped. I
have had the opportunity to think a great deal over 15 years about
the lives and professional biographies of primary teachers and about
their experience of teaching as work. My conclusions, though they
are in the last resort those of an outsider, are both truly ‘grounded’
and have had the benefit of slow ripening in a challenging
professional climate. (Nias, 1991, p. 162)

Nias reminds us that a great deal of thinking has to go into this

process and that this is frequently painful, though ultimately highly
rewarding. Wrestling with mounds of accumulating material,
searching for themes and indicators that will make some sense of it
all, taking some apparently promising routes, only to find they are
blind alleys, writing more and more notes and memos, re-reading
notes and literature for signs and clues, doing more field work to fill
in holes or test an incipient theory, presenting tentative papers
which receive criticism as well as appreciation if one is lucky – all
these are part of the generation of theory.

Serendipity

We are often aided throughout the research by chance occurrences.

An unforeseen event, an overheard remark, a fortuitous meeting –
all can spark off new lines of thought and enquiry. They can
stimulate new ideas about analysis and theory just as well as they
can open up new avenues for data collection. We have to make sure
that we take advantage of these chance happenings, that we
recognise the possibilities, and that we try to ensure opportunities
for them to happen. Let me give some examples from the ‘critical
events’ research - click here to read an extract from:

Woods, 1998, pp.44-6 on ‘Serendipity’ from Woods, P. (1998)

‘Critical moments in the "Creative Teaching" research’ in G. Walford
(ed.) Doing Research about Education,  London, Routledge,

or obtain a copy from the library.

To see theory in one’s data requires not only perspicuity

in appreciating  the data, but also imagination in what to do with it.
One of the best statements on this is that of C. Wright Mills (1959),
talking about the ‘sociological imagination’, which

In considerable part consists of the capacity to shift from one

perspective to another, and in the process to build up an adequate
view of a total society and of its components. It is this imagination,
of course, that sets off the social scientist from the mere technician.
Adequate technicians can be trained in a few years. The sociological
imagination can also be cultivated; certainly it seldom occurs
without a great deal of often routine work. Yet there is an
unexpected quality about it, perhaps because its essence is the
combination of ideas that no one expected were combinable…There
is a playfulness of mind back of such combining as well as a truly
fierce drive to make sense of the world, which the technician as
such usually lacks. Perhaps he is too well trained, too precisely
trained. Since no one can be trained  only in what is already known,
training sometimes incapacitates one from learning new ways; it
makes one rebel against what is bound to be at first loose and even
sloppy. But you must cling to vague images and notions, if they are
yours, and you must work them out. For it is in such forms that
original ideas, if any, almost always first appear. (pp. 232-3)

Here, then, is another reason for not getting bogged down in data,
for standing back from it from time to time and letting one’s
imagination loose on its deeper meanings. Checks and tests will
follow later, but the research will not get far off the ground without
some imaginative insight.

Return to CONTENTS

4. Tasks

(NB Only for those University of Plymouth students

undertaking the ‘Research in Education’ module as part of
the preparation for the submission of a MA dissertation
proposal)

Tasks, once completed, should be sent to resined@plymouth.ac.uk,

making clear:

 which component it is from;
 which task it is (A, B or C);
 the name of your dissertation supervisor.

It will then be passed on to the component leader (and copied to

your supervisor). The component leader will get back to you with
comments and advice which we hope will be educative and which
will help you in preparing your dissertation proposal once you are
ready. (Remember that these tasks are formative and that it is the
proposal which forms the summative assessment for the MERS501
(resined) module.) This email address is checked daily so please use
it for all correspondence about RESINED other than that directed to
particular individuals for specific reasons.

Before tackling either of the two tasks (B or C) you might

want to consider...

... the relationship between qualitative and quantitative approaches.

Click here to go to The Qualitative Debate  at The Research Methods
Knowledge Base.
  In what ways might the two broad approaches appear to be in
conflict with each other?
 In what ways might they enhance each other?

Task B (Data Collection)

Ensure that you have read the sections above on Methods of

Qualitative Research and followed up some of the links and
recommended readings before completing this task. The book
by Mason (2002) is particularly useful as a starting point in my
view.

Consider your own potential research project. How might you begin
to collect qualitative data for this? In order to answer this question,
consider:

 what  you plan to do;

 how you might carry it out;
 how what you do will answer the research questions you have;
 the purpose of your work and things you will want to
do/consider in order to make it a trustworthy and convincing
piece of research.

Write a response for this task in relation to these questions (above),

and in doing so also consider the following more general points too:

 What will it require for you to have sufficient and satisfactory

evidence to answer your question(s) convincingly?
 How will you ensure that you pay sufficient attention to
sampling of people, place and time?
 Would it help to collect any quantitative data too? If so, what,
how and why?
 What would be the chances of another observer at another
time yielding similar results? Does it matter?
 What are the possibilities that much of what you do will be
selective perception on your part? Again, does this matter?
  What ethical issues might you face and how might you
overcome them?

Task C (Data Analysis)

To do this task it is best to have completed Task B above first, even

if you have not submitted it for formative feedback. Also, make sure
that you have studied the section on data analysis, including the
links and references, above.

In relation to your own project plans and specifically any response

you have made to task B above, consider how you will analyse the
data you might collect. In doing this, use the following questions to
guide you.

 What is the aim of the analysis and what form would it take -
will it be a primary analysis and categorisation, or will it go on
to generate theory too?
 Given the forms of data that you are likely to have, how will
you go about your primary analysis? In other words, explain
how you understand the business of qualitative analysis and
show how it will work in your case?
 How might you manage the formation of categories (noting
that you can't, or course, yet say what these will be if the work
is grounded)?
 How might you triangulate your analysis? In particular, how
might you ask the participants themselves to be involved?
 How do the words 'validity' and 'reliability' relate to your work?
Are they appropriate? If so, how; if not what other kinds of
checks might be?[Note that Mason (2002) is a useful reference
here.]
 What ethical issues might you need to consider in undertaking
the analysis?

 
 

Return to CONTENTS

5. Further Reading

Books

Those in bold are particularly good introductions to qualitative

research.

Delamont, S. (1992) Fieldwork in Educational Settings: Methods,

pitfalls and perspectives, London, Falmer.

(A highly readable guide for beginning qualitative researchers)

Denscombe, M. (1998) The Good Research Guide: for small-scale

social research projects, Buckingham, Open University Press

(Good for small-scale projects)

Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (1995) Ethnography: Principles in

practice (2nd edition), London, Routledge.

(The classic text on ethnography, drawing on research in all areas of

social life rather than just education)

Hitchcock, G. and Hughes, D. (1995) Research and the Teacher ; A

qualitative introduction to school-based research (2nd edition) ,
London, Routledge.
(A comprehensive and excellent introduction to qualitative research,
with particular reference to education, which covers all the areas
discussed in this module, and more besides)

Mason, J. (2002) Qualitative researching, London, Sage.

Maykut, P. & Morehouse, R. (1994) Beginning Qualitative
Research. A Philosophic and Practical Guide, London, Falmer
Press.

Robson, C. (2002) Real world research : a resource for social

scientists and practitioner-researchers, Oxford, Blackwell.

Walford, G. (ed.) (1991) Doing Educational Research, London,

Routledge.

(Semi-autobiographical accounts of the research of thirteen major

educationists, concerned with the personal and practical aspects of
the research process)

Walford, G. (ed.) (1998) Doing Research about Education, London,

Routledge.

(A follow-up to the 1991 collection focusing on the issues and

realities of the late 1990s)

Walford, G. (ed.) (1998, 1999, 2000, 2001), Studies in Educational

Ethnography, London, Jai Press

(This series of books, published annually, is the best source for

recent and current examples of educational ethnographic research,
mainly in the UK. Each volume focuses on a particular theme)

Woods, P. (1986) Inside Schools: Ethnography in Educational

Research, London, Routledge.

(Written especially for teachers, for whom the author believes

qualitative research is easily accessible)

Woods, P. (1996) Researching the Art of Teaching:

Ethnography for educational use, London, Routledge.

(Qualitative research as an art form, albeit governed by scientific

principles)

Woods, P. (1999) Successful Writing for Qualitative Researchers,

London, Routledge.
(Covers the analysis, theory, and writing-up stages of qualitative
research)

Website

Trochim, William M. The Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2nd

Edition. Internet WWW page, at URL:
<http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/> (version current as of
November 1, 2000).

CD-ROM

Barrett, Elizabeth; Lally, Vic; Purcell, S & Thresh, Robert

(1999) Signposts for Educational Research CD-ROM: A Multimedia
Resource for the Beginning Researcher. Sage Publications, London.

6. References

Abraham, J. (1989) ‘Testing Hargreaves’ and Lacey’s differentiation-

polarisation theory in a settled comprehensive’, The British Journal
of Sociology, 40, 1, 46-81.

Atkinson, P. (1990) The Ethnographic Imagination: textual

constructions of reality, London, Routledge.

Atkinson, P., Delamont, S. and Hammersley, M. (1988) ‘Qualitative

research traditions: a British response to Jacob’, Review of
Educational Research, 58, 2, pp. 231Ó50.

Ball, S.J. (1981) Beachside Comprehensive, Cambridge, Cambridge

University Press.

Ball, S.J. (1987) The Micro-Politics of the School: Towards a theory

of school organisation, London: Methuen.
Becker, H.S. (1971) Footnote added to the paper by Wax, M. and
Wax, R. 'Great tradition, little tradition and formal education', in
Wax, M. et al. (eds) Anthropological Perspectives On Education, New
York, Basin Books, pp.3-27.

Berger, P. L. (1966) Invitation to Sociology, New York, Doubleday.

Best, D. (1991) ‘Creativity: education in the spirit of

enquiry’, British Journal of Educational Studies, 34, 3, pp. 260-278.

Beynon, J. (1984) ‘"Sussing out" teachers: pupils as data gatherers’

in Hammersley, M. and Woods, P. (eds) Life in School: the sociology
of pupil culture, Milton Keynes, The Open University Press.

Blumer, H. (1976) ‘The methodological position of symbolic

interactionism’ in Hammersley, M. and Woods, P. (eds) The Process
of Schooling, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Burgess, R.G. (1985) The Whole Truth? Some Ethical Problems of

Research in the Comprehensive School,’ in Burgess, R.G.
(ed.), Field Methods in the Study of Education, Lewes, Falmer Press.

Burke, J. (1986) ‘Concordia Sixth Form College: a sociological case

study based on history and ethnography’, D.Phil. thesis, University
of Sussex.

Dean, J. P.(1954) ‘Participant observation and interviewing’ in Doby,

J., Suchman, E.A., McKinnet, J.C., Francis, R.G. and Dean,, J.P.
(eds) An introduction to Social Research, Harrisburg, Pa., The
Stackpole Co., pp. 225-252.

Denscombe, M., Szule, H., Patrick, C. and Wood, A. (1986)

‘Ethnicity and friendship: the contrast between sociometric research
and fieldwork observation in primary school classrooms’,  British
Educational Research Journal, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 221-235.

Denzin, N. (1989) Interpretive Interactionism, London, Sage.

Epstein, D. (1998) ‘"Are you a girl or a teacher?" The "Least Adult"
role in research about gender and sexuality in a primary school’, in
G. Walford (ed.)Doing Research about Education, London, Falmer.

Fine, D.A. and Deegan, J.G. (1996) ‘Three principles of serendip:

Insight, chance and discovery in qualitative research’, International
Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 9, 4, pp. 434-47.

Foster, P.M. (1990) Policy and Practice in Multicultural and Anti-

Racist Education: a case study of a multi-ethnic comprehensive
school, Milton Keynes, Open University Press.

Galton, M. and Simon, B. (eds) (1980) Progress and Performance in

the Primary Classroom, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Gannaway, H. (1976) ‘Making sense of school’ in STUBBS, M. and

DELAMONT, S. (eds) Explorations in Classroom Observation,
London, Wiley.

Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967) The Discovery of Grounded

Theory, London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson.

Goffman, E. (1961) Asylums: Essays on the Social Situations of

Mental Patients and Other Inmates, Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Hammersley, M. (ed.) (1993) Controversies in Classroom Research,

Buckingham, Open University Press.

Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (1995) Ethnography: Principles in

Practice (Second Edition), London, Tavistock.

Hargreaves, A. (1988) ‘Teaching Quality: a sociological

analysis’ , Journal of Curriculum Studies, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 211-31.

Hargreaves, A. (1992) ‘Time and teachers; work: an analysis of the

intensification thesis’, Teachers’ College Record, 94, 1, pp.87-108.

Hargreaves, D. H., Hester, S. K. and Mellor, F. J. (1975) Deviance

in Classrooms, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Hargreaves, D.H. (1967) Social Relations in a Secondary School,
London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Keddie, N. (1971) 'Classroom knowledge' in Young, M.F.D.

(ed.) Knowledge and Control, London, Collier-MacMillan.

Lacey, C. (1970) Hightown Grammar, Manchester, Manchester

University Press.

Lacey, C. (1976) ‘Problems of sociological fieldwork: a review of the

methodology of 'Hightown Grammar', in Hammersley, M. and
Woods, P. (eds) The Process of Schooling, London, Routledge and
Paul.

Mac An Ghaill, M. (1988) Young, Gifted and Black, Milton Keynes,

Open University Press.

Measor, L. and Woods, P. (1984) Changing Schools: pupil

perspectives on transfer to a comprehensive, Milton Keynes, Open
University Press.

Mills, C.W. (1959) The Sociological Imagination, Oxford University

Press, New York.

Nias, J. (1991) ‘"Primary teachers talking": a reflexive account of

longitudinal research’, in Walford, G. (ed.) Doing Educational
Research, London, Routledge.

Richardson, L. (1994) ‘Writing: a method of inquiry’ in Denzin, N.

and Lincoln, Y. Handbook of Qualitative Research, London and New
York, Sage.

Sikes, P., Measor, L. and Woods, P. (1985) Teacher Careers: crises

and continuities, Lewes: Falmer Press.

Soltis, J.F. (1989) ‘The ethics of qualitative research’, International

Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 2, 2, pp. 123-30.

Wax. R. (1971) Doing Fieldwork, Chicago, University of Chicago

Press.
Werthman, C. (1963) ‘Delinquents in school: a test for the
legitimacy of authority’, Berkeley Journal of Sociology, 8(1), pp. 39-
60. Also in Hammersley, M. and Woods, P. (1984) Life in School:
the sociology of pupil culture, Milton Keynes, Open University Press.

Willis, P. (1977) Learning to Labour, Farnborough, Saxon House.

Wilson, S. (1977) ‘The use of ethnographic techniques in

educational research’, Review of Educational Research, 47(1),
pp.245-65.

Wolcott, H. F. (1999) Ethnography: a way of seeing, London,

Altimira Press.

Wolcott, H.F. (1994) Transforming Qualitative Data: description,

analysis, and interpretation, London, Sage.

Woods, P. (1979) The Divided School, London: Routledge and

Kegan Paul.

Woods, P. (1993) ‘The magic of Godspell: the educational

significance of a dramatic event’, in R. Gomm and P. Woods
(eds.) Educational Research in Action, London, Paul Chapman.

Woods, P. (1993) Critical Events in Teaching and Learning, London,

Falmer Press.

Woods, P. (1995) Creative Teachers in Primary Schools,

Buckingham: The Open University Press.

Woods, P. (1998) ‘Critical moments in the "Creative Teaching"

research’ in G. Walford (ed.) Doing Research about Education,
London, Routledge.

Wright, C. (1992) ‘Early education: multiracial primary classrooms’,

in D. Gill, B. Mayor and M. Blair (eds.) Racism and Education,
London, Sage.