Once again, it is slow slogging with my data analysis. Two hours here, one hours there. Chip. Chip. Chip. Slog. Slog. Slog. I believe, however, that my categories are coming together as well as the various dynamics of relationship between them. Wow! I can't believe it is happening. I think I pretty much have categories for describing everything that is happening in these writer's reviews. This emergence of categories has been happening from the beginning, but I have had so many different names for things and so many different "things" going on that I was not able to spot the groupings of these things. I don't like the phrasing here "things" but it is ok for now. I'm struggling now with how so many of these categories have valences or variances. For instance, one category is goals or setting goals. This could be writing goals or revision goals: one is abstract and the other is specific to the task. Are these two separate categories or one category with two valences? This variance among categories also gets compounded with the categories are in relationship with each other. For instance, I have a category named "considering/evaluating what is." The "considering/evaluating" is a two-fold variable and "is" is a much larger variable, so it could be
considering writing goals
considering revision goals
evaluating writing goals
evaluating revision goals
In a big picture, this list describes two larger categories in dynamic with each other, but am I describing the variance within these categories correctly? I already am feeling the complicated way in which these categories related to each other, but then that is the goal of Axial Coding. Perhaps it is good that I am beginning to move into Axial land as my categories begin to solidify.
I'm wondering now whether Nvivo will become a good tool to use, and then whether I can get it to represent digitally the complicated dynamics within this phenomena so that I can code easily. That will come I think as I do one more slice of data--slice 5.
What will slice 5 be?
I think slice 5 needs to be "draft cycle" views--that is, everything surrounding a single draft and then what results in the next draft. Question: Do I include the previous writer's review or not? I don't know.
So if I were focused on draft 2 in an essay cycle:
(Writer's review 1.1?)
Peer response 1.2
Writer's review 1.2
Draft 1.3 (look at the changes and connect them back to draft 1.2 and reflective processing)
Although it may be tempting to include the 1.1 Writer's Review, I think it will be cleaner to focus on the draft cycle materials without it. I will get to see just what role the writer's review plays in the dynamic of draft to draft. How many to I sample? 4-6 1301 and 4-6 1302?
How do I code these? I think I should attempt to "code" them with my categories and see what sorts of tensions and problems I experience with the codes. What don't these categories capture? What other categories do I need? Hmm... We'll see.
I still have a bit of a ways to go with slice 4--I NEED to finish this weekend. We shall see what my continued analysis shows and what I figure out from my final slice 4 memo.