rogan & kock. 2005. methodology and methods of narrative analysis

8/20/2019 Rogan & Kock. 2005. Methodology and Methods of Narrative Analysis

1/23

http://qix.sagepub.comQualitative Inquiry

DOI: 10.1177/1077800405276777

2005; 11; 628Qualitative Inquiry Ann I. Rogan and Dorothea M. de Kock

hronicles From the Classroom: Making Sense of the Methodology and Methods of Narrative Anal

http://qix.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/11/4/628 The online version of this article can be found at:

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Qualitative InquiryAdditional services and information for

http://qix.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://qix.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

© 2005 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution. at HUMANITATS BIBLIOTECA on February 22, 2007http://qix.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://qix.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://qix.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://qix.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://qix.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://qix.sagepub.com/http://qix.sagepub.com/http://qix.sagepub.com/http://qix.sagepub.com/http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://qix.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://qix.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts


2/23

10.1177/1077800405276777QUALITATIVEINQUIRY/August2005Rogan,deKock/CHRONICLESFROMTHECLASSROOM

Chronicles From the Classroom:Making Sense of the Methodologyand Methods of Narrative Analysis

Ann I. RoganDorothea M. de Kock

University of Pretoria, Republic of South Africa

Within the qualitative research genre, narrative inquiry remains controversial, particu-

larly for the novice researcher, because of its uncertain boundaries and relationship toother qualitative methodologies. This article represents a novice researcher’s attempt toaddress the ambiguity by presenting a systematic, critical exploration of the analyticalmethods andmethodologyof narrative inquiry.Themethods are grouped intothree clus-tersfor discussion:the performative cluster, thestructuralanalysis cluster,and the liter-ary analysis cluster. Each cluster of methods is described, associated with its theoretical

framework, and applied to the compelling narratives collected from a series of interviewswithtwo preserviceeducators.Issues of credibilityand believabilityin the interpretativeanalysis of thenarratives arealso examined.In theconclusion of thearticle aretopics forcontinued reflection gleaned from the experience of trying to make sense of narrativeinquiry.

Keywords: educational research; narrative analysis; narrative methods; interview-ing techniques; teacher education

Studying the work of researchers suchas Elbaz (1983) and Phendla (2000)leaves thereader withthe impression of a naturally occurring clarity inherentin narrative inquiry methodology and methods. In addition, the narrativesappear to be combined effortlessly with descriptions of the research process.The impression of simplicity is, however, misleading. When studying theresearch literature and attempting to step into the domain of narrativeinquiry, it soon becomes apparent that the undertaking is a task rich withcontroversial issues and complex choices. Questioning definitions of eventhe mostbasic terminology of thegenre, thephases of the narrativeresearchprocess—from the selection of respondents to the development of an inter-viewstyleto the determinationof appropriate methods of dataanalysis—are

628

Qualitative Inquiry, Volume 11 Number 4, 2005 628-649DOI: 10.1177/1077800405276777© 2005 Sage Publications


http://qix.sagepub.com/http://qix.sagepub.com/http://qix.sagepub.com/http://qix.sagepub.com/


3/23

critically debated in the literature and encompass many points of view. Suchis the variety that some researchers have even suggested the need for a “tax-onomy of narrative inquiry” (Fenstermacher, 1997, p. 122). Complications of credibilityanddilemmas ofpracticeariseatevery turnfor thenovice andleadto theproblem examined in this article: How can I make sense of thecomplexitiesof narrative inquiry? The intent of this article is to present my perceptions as anovice researcher struggling to explore the fundamental questions of theachievements, the challenges, and the “character” of narrative inquiry studyin a systematic and organized fashion. Using data collected for a study of preservice educators’ experiences, a multilayered examination evolved. Twooverlapping domains of inquiry emerged, one that could be described asfunctional and the other analytical. The functional domain consists of identi-fying, categorizing, and then selecting the existing methods of analysis.

Embedded in the functional domain is the analytical domain that consists of investigating and interpreting the underlying assumptions, the effects, andthe results of applying the different methods to narratives.

THE FUNCTIONAL DOMAIN

Inthefunctionaldomainoftheinvestigation, I wasfaced withthe practicalexperiences of choosingthenarrators, identifying andcomparing a variety of methods, and trying to determine the “fit” with narrative excerpts from thedata. The rudimentary effort was first of all to merely assemble and name allof the narrative analysis methods. The quantity, variety, and differing desig-nations of terminology were overwhelming. To move the investigation for-ward andto aid inchoosing a balanced assortment of methods toapply to the

data, I constructed a framework of three clusters to serve as a descriptive,organizational structure in which the methods could be grouped, namely, the performative methods cluster, the structural methods cluster, and the literarymethods cluster. The performative methods cluster includes interviewapproaches andmethods (Smith, 1990, p. 115), whereas thestructural analysismethods cluster includes holistic as well as single unit languageanalysis (Gee,1999), and the literary criticism methods cluster includes the analysis of figura-tive language and literary devices (Polkinghorne, 1988). The questions thatariseandarelinkedtoeachof theclusters ofmethodspertain tothe influencesof the interview stance, language difference, temporal considerations, andvulnerable researcher integrity issues of trustworthiness and believability.Although the framework of methods clusters directs the study, it is alsoengaged with the elusive nature of the understanding of issues of meaningthat leads directly to the analytical domain.

Rogan, de Kock / CHRONICLES FROM THE CLASSROOM 629




4/23

THE ANALYTICAL DOMAIN

In the analytical domain, dynamic questions of connections and associa-tions ofdeepermeanings of theexperiencesemergedthatcould notbe placedinto precise categories but canbest be examined anddiscussed in thecircum-stances in which they arose. In search of more clarity, I constructed threetablesto documentand summarize thefindingsinboth theanalyticaland thefunctional domains.Grouped under thefunctional domain were thedifferentmethods and the possible input actions. The possible outcome expectationswere grouped under the analytical domain.

Forme, as a noviceresearcher, thechallenges were to make sense of narra-tive inquiry by examining not only the legitimacy and usefulness of cluster-ing the methods but also the validity of the interpretations of meaning

derived from applying the clusters of methods to specifically selected data.Each phase of collecting and working with my data became an experience to be scrutinized and documented. Reflected in this article is the process of theselection of the narrators whose spokenwords becamethetext to be used formaking sense of the methodology and methods of narrative inquiry.

THE NARRATORS

For this investigation, two South African preservice educators enrolled inthe school-based Postgraduate Certificate in Education (PGCE) program of the Faculty of Education at the University of Pretoria became the narrators.Both of these youngpeople were engaged atthe time oftheinterviews intheirfirst school-based teaching experiences in the university program and had

agreed to participate in a year-long study whose purpose is to describe thoseexperiences. The narrators were deliberately chosen for this study to repre-sent some of thediversecultural andlanguage backgroundsof SouthAfricansociety at large and because they were encountering the circumstances to beinvestigated. Inthefieldtext of thestudy, theparticipants are introduced anddescribed.

Lily is a tall, attractive youngwomanin herearly 20s. HerfirstlanguageisAfrikaans, but we conducted the interviews in English. Rose is a slight, verypretty young woman in herearly 20s. Shesays that sheis shy: “The first thingabout me is that I am very scared . . . I grew up in a certain way. I wasn’tallowed to say anything. My brothers and sisters had to say things for me.”She is seSotho speaking but is teaching in English.

Lily andRose were chosen(without havingmet them) fortheirindividualcultural and linguistic experiences. However, in addition to cultural and lin-

guistic differences, their different temperaments and family backgroundsemerged in subsequent interviews. Oneis confident, whereas oneis shy. One

630 QUALITATIVE INQUIRY / August 2005




5/23

is from a nuclear family and one is from an extended family. The additionaldifferences discovered in the interviews appeared significant. Anticipatingthepossibility thatthe narrators could express similaritiesof interpretationof thePostgraduateCertificatein Education programexperience,it seemed pru-dent to focus the investigation on people who initially might be expected toreveal divergent perceptions. The external and internal contrasting circum-stances of the narrators add depth to the interpretation of their shared con-text. Furthermore, finding by chance stark contrasts in the personal qualitiesof the narrators led to an awareness of the serendipitous nature of the enter-prise. The need for transparency of my approach as a researcher in theinterests of trustworthiness and believability became apparent.

INITIAL INTERVIEWSIn theinitial interviews, I introduced myselfandthepurpose of theinves-

tigation. The confidentiality measures thatwere to be taken were negotiated.Consent-for-participation forms were signed and the interview “style” wasestablished. This procedure appeared deceptively straightforward and un-complicated. However, in subsequent meetings with the narrators, theunmistakable complexity and dominant influence of the interview task wasrevealed. As the performative cluster focuses on the actual interview processand the role of the interviewer, the next logical step in the inquiry seemed to

be to investigate the methods in this cluster.

APPLYING THE PERFORMATIVE

METHODS CLUSTER

As a novice researcher, the security of a structured script of questions had been appealing to avoid any disturbing silences or awkward situations.Questions such as Can you remember when you first wanted to be a teacher? (LilyInterview1)or Wheredo you come from?(RoseInterview1)wereaskedwiththeintentionof eliciting chronological backgroundinformationin thestyleof lifehistory datacollection (Reddy, 2000, p. 178). However, during the interviewswith Lily and Rose, it soon became apparent that classroom chronicles werewhat the narrators wanted to talk about. The narrators continually side-stepped narrow “factual” questions and brought the discussion away fromwhat had happened in the past to what was happening now:

R: Don’t you remember being 12 in sixth grade?

Lily: I thinkI hada very innocent,verypleasant 12-year-oldlife butthese kids now, andthenthey have such terrible . . . um . . . circumstances at home. (Interview 2)





6/23

Thetoneof questioningappearedto alter andevendisruptthe narration.Thiscreated a tension of privilege, an epistemological tension perhaps, betweenmy expectations as researcher and the interests of the narrator.

The dilemma and deeper meaning of accommodating contrasting inten-tions of the narrator and the researcher led to an examination of the theo-retical foundations of the performative methods cluster. As described in theliterature, performative methods such as “earliest memory recall” (Lieblich,Tuval-Mashiach, & Zilber 1998, p. 86), “chronological annals” (Clandinin &Connelly, 1994, p. 419), “repertory grids” (Korthagen,1992, p. 268), and “nodalmoments” (Bullough & Pinnegar, 2001, p.19) “bring into beingthat whichtheyname” (Mottier, 2000, p. 537) and are methods that appear to directly effectthe content of the narrative text, whether through interview stance or thesolicitation of specific narrator experiences. In the early interview experi-

ences with Lily and Rose, it became clear that a pivotal decision was the tim-ing (preinterview or postinterview) of the use of the performative methods.The decision appeared to be linked to the theoretical viewpoint of the inter-viewerandcan beclarified bywhat happened. Intheinitial meetingswith thenarrators, choosing to conduct structured interviews included planning

before the interview to use the performative method of asking directly forinformation. Adopting the “prepared” style of interview presupposed anorderly, transparent, and “objective reality” according to Lincoln and Guba(1985, p. 82) that can be intentionally accessed through questioning. Theresult of the planned-question/structured interview was that although therequested information was obtained, the experience was primarily based onthenotion that thecontent, if not themeaning, of thenarrative wascontrolled

by the researcher.The unexpected, subtle clash of control of the discussion topic between

narrator and researcher intentions in the early structured interview of thisstudy made an alternative approach more attractive. At the other end of theperformative methods spectrum, Clandinin and Connelly (1994) suggesteddecreasing theinfluence of researcherintentions by “asking thepersonto tellhis or her own story in his or her own way . . . [so that] . . . the participant’sintentions are uppermost” (p. 419). Although understanding that as aresearcher, I can never disappear from the interview, using the strategyimplied a “constructivist” (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 82) view of reality thatencouraged narrators to participate authentically in interviews. In subse-quent encounters withLilyandRose, a nondirective listeningstance (Rogers,1980) was attempted. The flexibility of the conversational style of interviewprovided a personally more comfortable, less intrusive approach that alsoseemed to reducethe narrator/researcher control tensions.As the interviewsprogressed, conversational techniques began to emerge that appeared to

encourage Lily and Rose to offer their choice of narratives. I employedconversational techniques such as





7/23

motivating information sharing by emphasizing the professional significance of their participationResearcher: What I am trying to do is see how people learn to be educators. You know,

what exactly is it that helps us to learn to be educators? (Rose Interview 2)

supporting the experiences of the narrators by sharing professional storiesR: Exactly.Exactly. That’s whyI likeremedial teachingand I liketo work withthe kids that

needtheextrahelp.Yeh.It’smuchmoresatisfyingtomesomehow . (RoseInterview1)

defining the position of the researcher as a person with similar interests andchallengesR: I’ve a long history of teaching. (Lily Interview 1) I have a seminar . . . and I have to

write a paper for that seminar . . . so that’s what I am doing. (Lily Interview 7)

assuring confidentialityR: ButIwon’ttellthemyourname.InthispaperI’vecalledyouRose.(RoseInterview3)

providing a flexible interview scheduleR: Perhaps after the holidays, then, you could come back? (Rose Interview 1)

negotiating meaning with spontaneous questionsR: I wonder what the difference is? (Lily Interview 1)

supplying linking statements to clarify meaningsR: I cansee howyou could do psychology then because it all sort of fitstogetherwhen you

think about it. (Lily Interview 1)

supportive commentsR: I think that’s marvelous. (Rose Interview 1)

discussing word meanings in multiple languagesRose: And you know English is my second language. We were like twins.R: Sounds like sisters?Rose: Ja like twin sisters. (Rose Interview 1)

The narratives thatresulted from theunstructuredinterviews nowcontainedan abundance of anecdotal and episodic “little stories” (Walker, 2003) of the narrators’ experiences in the classroom that were available for furtheranalysis.

InthecaseofLilyandRose,eventhoughtheinformationwasnotaskedfordirectly, a postinterviewsearch of the textsfor descriptions of specific experi-enceswas fruitful. In their narratives, forexample,although evidenceof chro-nological annals, repertory grids, or earliestmemory recall wasnotpresent,itwaspossible todiscern inthetextswhat Elbaz (1991)called a “criticalepisode”(p. 17), Bullough and Pinnegar (2001) called a “nodal moment” (p. 19), andKelchtermans(1993)called a “criticalincident” (p.449), in other words, signifi-cant episodes in the narrators’ lives that are recognized as influential. Rose

described a very private and traumatic beginning to her university careerafter she was asked a spontaneous question about her love of psychology:





8/23

The other thing thatmademe wantto dopsychologyis . . . my. . . cousin diedin ’96 andwe were very close, we were like twins. Like twin sisters and she kil led herself. She com-mitted suicide. And the other thingthat makes me wonder is what makes her to do that?What did she do to her parents? Why should she want to finish her beautiful life thistragicway?. . . I lookedat psychology. . . . Withthis I canbe ableto understand what hap-

pened in there. (Rose Interview 1)

Lily described a false careerstartandtherealization that she wanted to bean educatorunderany circumstances after shewas also asked a spontaneousquestion about why she left her job overseas:

I decided to studyhoteland catering.This wasthe biggest mistake of mylife. I am notcutout for the hotel industry. I love staying in a hotel and love going on vacation but no I don’t want to work there. I’m glad I did it because I can use it as a subject in the schoolsnow. . . it’s nota wastedyearbecauseyou learn something. Forme personally it’s a wasteof time making sure people get their margaritas. . . . I went home and told them “I’ll kill

thenextpersonthatasks mefor somethingfrivolous.”ThenI decided that I’mgoingto dowhatI wantto do even if theydon’t pay me. . . . This, I loveit . . . you actuallysee thatinthe big scale of things you have done that much. (Lily Interview 1)

Combining the performative methods of the nonintrusive interview withthepostinterviewsearch forcritical episodes inthenarratives resulted incap-turing two chronicles of highly motivating events: the family crisis and thecareer choice dilemma that Lily and Rose later reported as having changedthe direction of their lives. The practice of looking for the critical episode inthe narratives after the interview initially relied on my interpretation of themeaning of events. However, in the postinterview, joining my interpretationwith the participant’s confirmation of the analysis appeared to extend thetrustworthiness and believability of the method. The combination of approaches supported not only collecting the stories but also evoking an

understanding of the importance of the experiences and the personal mean-ings of the experiences as the motivations behind the professional decisionsof these young educators.

From these experiences with the performative methods cluster, it alsoappears that thechoice of interviewapproaches depends on theobjectives of the research, the number of respondents involved, and the amount of timeavailable for interviewing. When the objective of the research is to exploreparticular, predetermined aspects of an experience in a limited time framewith a number of respondents, the structured interview is recommended.When theobjectiveofthe research is toexplorean experience throughtheper-ceptions of a small number of respondents during an extended time period,the unstructured interview is recommended. When working with the un-structured interview approach, ethical and analytical challenges are openedup that must be taken seriously.

Feeling a comfortable sense of achievement after using the performativemethods encouraged me to continue the exploration of narrative inquiry in





9/23

an effort to make sense of narrative methodology. A growing interest in thelanguage of the narratives further prompted my decision to examine thestructural analysis methods cluster.

INTERVIEW LANGUAGE INFLUENCES ON ASTRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

Applyingthestructuralanalysis methods in this cluster to thedatamovedtheinvestigationintothe actualtextand focused onan explorationof thecon-crete, technical aspects of the language of thenarratives.Resting on the theo-retical assumption that embedded, tacit, or hidden meanings (Polanyi, 1958)of a text can be revealed through a closer analysis of the language, the meth-

ods, including discourse analysis, individual word choice analysis, situated mean-ing of language, and external and internal text analysis, offered a contextualapproach for interpretation of the narratives that moves from a whole textanalysis to an individual word unit analysis. Even more appealing was anexpectation of an increased objectivity of the structural analysis. Because thestructural analysis methods logically can be applied only by looking at thecontent of the texts after the interviews, I assumed it is simply the languagethat is examined andthat the style of interview would have less influence onthe data.

However, my positionwasonce again exposed when comparingthe textsgathered from the structured and unstructured interviews. Notable differ-ences in the narrative language appeared. In the first structured interviewswiththe narrators, theinflexible languageof thestructured questions seemedto influence the language in the narrators’ response:

R: Tell me more about your childhood growing up.Lily: I had a lovely childhoodgrowingup.My mum was a teacher. Mydad’s anauditor . . . I

grew up in Germiston. (Interview 2)

In this excerpt, it appears that Lily’s short, sparse sentences may haveresulted from the interviewer’s short, sparse question.

Moving awayfrom the structured interview to a conversational approachopened up new analytical challenges, however. In the study with Lily andRose, for example, encouraging a narrator to talk about her own experiencesin her own way increased the unpredictability of language use. Colloquiallanguage unfamiliar to me such as “zero ona contract”(LilyInterview 8) and“warra warra” (Rose Interview 2) appeared. The home language, cultural,and age differences between the researcher and the narrators expanded theopportunities for misunderstanding meaning. Through trial and error, sev-eral methods were developed in thecourseof the interviews to cope with thepossibility of misinterpretation:





10/23

allowing the narrator to say the word in her own language and asking the tran-scriber to translateLily: Dit is waar.Translator: This is true. (Interview 1)

supplying a translation from the contextRose: Ooooh. I didn’t know what it . . .R: What they mean by reflection?Rose: Yeh. (Interview 4)

studying more than one statement for evidence of an ideaRose: It’sallabout connectingthings and themmakingsenseto you asit happens . . . dis-

cover themselves ’cause I don’t now believe more . . . and motivating them to be whatthey are created to be. You know. (Interview 2)

repeating back what the narrator saidLily: I think it’s a self-protection thing because I’m like . . .

R: . . . a coping mechanism.Lily: Ja . . . cause I can’t handle conflict. (Interview 5)

Inreflection,it seemedpossibleto indicate intheformatof a table (see Table 1)the functional domain or input actions of both theresearcher andthe partici-pantwhenusing interview methods in the performativecluster. Throughtheprocess of analysis, possible outcomes concerning the two different types of interview styles could be identified, including the language issues that actu-ally became a consideration in using each of the methods clusters.

Preparing Table 1 helped to clarify language issues involved in the choiceof interview styles, but in spite of theefforts to enhance effectivecommunica-tion between the narrators and myself, interpretations of meaning alwaysremained an underlying issue of concern.Mutual understanding proved dif-ficult to measure and perceptive sensitivity difficult to practice consistently.

Despite ongoing communication concerns, passages from the narratives of Lily and Rose did emerge that seemed appropriate for structural analysis.

APPLYING THE STRUCTURAL ANALYSISMETHODS CLUSTER

Excerpts from thenarratives that were long enoughfor a detailedanalysiswere chosen.Theexcerptscentered on a specificnarrator-chosen topic or con-tained distinctive word choices. Patternsof usage were selected for examina-tion. Frequentillustrations of an “expressive discourse” (Polkinghorne, 1988,p. 31)appeared inLily’s impassioned narratives, forexample. In this selectedpiece, Lily speaks about the multiple roles of educators:

And it’svery tiring because it’snot like a job thatyou go sit down somewhereand say . . . I think it’s likebeinga mom. You cannotjust switchoff. Some peopledo andsome teachersdo.Theyjustdecide they’re notin themoodfor this anymore andtheyjustswitch off,andtheyjustgo onwiththeirlives.But tobe a goodone,youcan’t justswitchoff,you’ve got





11/23

637

T a b l e 1

I n f l u e n c e s o f t h e P e r f o r m a t i v e C l u s t e r

F u n c t i o n a l D o m a i n

A n a l y t i c a l D o m a i n

C l u s t e r

M e t h o d

( I n p u t A c t i o n )

( P o s s i b l e O u t c o m e )

R e f e r e n c e

P e r f o r m a t i v e

S t r u c t u r e d

i n t e r v i e w

* p r e p a r e d s e q u

e n c e o f q u e s -

t i o n s t o e l i c i t e

a r l i e s t m e m -

o r y r e c a l l , c h r o n o l o g i c a l

a n n a l s , r e p e r t o r y g r i d s ,

n o d a l m o m e n t s , c r i t i c a l

e p i s o d e s

* a s s u m e s o b j e c t i v e r e a l i t y

* t r a n s p a r e n t r e s e a r c h e r c o n -

t r o l o f c o n t e n t a n d

m e a n i n g

* l i m i t a n d f o c u s o f

i n f o r m a t i o n

* i n f l u e n c e o f i n t e r v i e w e r

l a n g u a g e

L i e b l i c h , T u v a l - M a s h i a c h , &

Z i l b e r ( 1 9 9 8 )

C l a n d i n i n & C o n n e l l y ( 1 9 9 4 ,

2 0 0 0 )

K o r t h a g e n ( 1 9 9 2 )

B u l l o u g h & P i n n e g a r ( 2 0 0 1 )

M o t t i e r ( 2 0 0 0 )

L i n c o l n & G u b a ( 1 9 8 5 )

E l b a z ( 1 9 8 3 , 1 9 9 1 )

U n s t r u c t u r e d

i n t e r v i e w

* n o n d i r e c t i v e l i s t e n i n g

s t a n c e

* i d e n t i f y i n g s i g

n i f i c a n t

e p i s o d e s

* c o n v e r s a t i o n a l a p p r o a c h

s u c h a s s u p p o

r t i v e a n d

l i n k i n g s t a t e m

e n t s

* r e a l i t y c h e c k

* c o n s t r u c t i v i s t m u l t i l a y e r e d

v i e w o f r e a l i t y a s s u m e d

* n a r r a t o r c o n t r o l o f c o n t e n t

a n d i m p o r t a n c e

* u n p r e d i c t a b l e l a n g u a g e u s e

* e m e r g e n c e o f e p i s o d i c a n d

a n e c d o t a l l i t t l e s t o r i e s

L i n c o l n & G u b a ( 1 9 8 5 )

R o g e r s ( 1 9 8 0 )

W a l k e r ( 2 0 0 3 )




12/23

to be therephysically andemotionallyand that’s tiring. Forme that’s very tiringbecause you can’t just like . . . it’sa child’s life. It’snot like any other job. There’snot one job that’slike that. Not even doctors or anything. You are responsible for the child’s soul. If youdamage that, the child’s gonna be damaged for the rest of his or her life. If a doctor dam-ages something, it can be cured and the person can learn to live without a limb or some-thing like that. He won’t be emotionally scarred, he will be just as happy and contentwhatever. But if you damage someone’s soul . . . and I don’t want to be responsible forsomething like that. I don’t wantin 20years timesomeone mustcometo meand say if itwasn’t for you I could have been so much better in life. (Lily Interview 2)

In her moving discourse, Lily emphasizes that teaching is tiring because itdemands a physical and emotional presence and that is because it is work of soulful importance.Categorizing the form of discourse as “expressive, refer-ential,persuasive, narrationalor poetic”(Polkinghorne, 1988) inLily’s storiesfacilitated identifying the “global meaning” (Polkinghorne, 1988) of the

passage.Lily’s expressive discourse was also probed for a deeper interpretation of

meaning through“rich thick” evidential detail (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 124) by applying increasingly refined analysis methods. Looking at a detail suchas Lily’s repeated use of the word switch in the previous passage reveals its“situated meaning” (Gee, 1999, p. 51). In this case, switch does not refer to anelectrical device butin thecontextofLily’s discourse insteadreferstoanintel-lectual and emotional movement away from the classroom. Furthermore, acomparison tothe quickness andcontrol of themovement ofswitchinga lighton andoff could indicate theforce of herfrustration with theattitude of someof her colleagues and her passion for the importance of her work. The inten-sity of her language in this excerpt reinforces the interpretation that whenspeaking of matters such as the emotional importance and power of educa-tors,Lily usestheexpressive discourseform. In addition, an“internal evalua-

tion” of the passage through individual word analysis looks in even greaterdetail at the expression of meaningthrough“intensifiers, modifiers, quantifi-ers, wh-exclamations, repeated lexical items, gestures, heightened storystressors, vowel lengthening, pitch, range and intonation” (Cortazzi, 1993,p. 47)andrevealsfurthersupporting evidence(seeTable2). Lilyenhanceshermeaningbyusingtheword just in thispassage—frequentlywitha toneof dis-dain as a sign of dismissal. The repetition of thepowerful andemotion-filledwords damage and soul and tiring and life also add weight and impact to themessage of the narrative and leave the impression that the discourse wasthoughtfully produced and deeply felt.

Using structural analysis methods to examine thecomplete body of Lily’snarratives and continuing with increasing specific techniques until theresults of the analysis became redundant (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 202)proved to be a lengthy and complex but fruitful procedure. Recognizing and

identifying Lily’s frequentuse of particularwords or consistentpatternof useand comparing them in fine detail individually and collectively revealed a





13/23

639

T a b l e 2

S t r u c t u r a l A n a l y s i s M e t h o d s C l u s

t e r



C l u s t e r

M e t h o d

( I n p u t

A c t i o n )

( P o s s i b l e O u t c o m e )

R e f e r e n c e

S t r u c t u r a l

a n a l y s i s

W h o l e t e x t

a n a l y s i s

* c o n t e n t

* d i s c o u r s e

* e x t e r n a l e x a m

i n a t i o n o f

g e n e r a l t o p i c s

* a n a l y s i s o f l o n g e x c e r p t s

* c a t e g o r i z e f o r

m s o f d i s c o u r s e

s t y l e s : e x p r e s

s i v e , r e f e r e n t i a l ,

p e r s u a s i v e n a

r r a t i o n a l

* c o n t e n t d e p e n d e n t

* i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f g l o b a l m e a n i n g

o f t e x t

P o l k i n g h o r n e ( 1 9 8 8 )

I n d i v i d u a l w o r d

a n a l y s i s

* s i t u a t e d m e a n i n g

* s y n t a x

* s e m a n t i c s

* g r a m m a r

* i n t e r n a l e x a m

i n a t i o n o f s p e -

c i f i c n a r r a t o r

s e m a n t i c a n d

s y n t a c t i c c h o i c e s

* i d e n t i f y

i n t e n s i f i e r s ,

q u a n t i f i e r s ,

w o r d p a t t e r n s , a n d c o n t e n t

o f w o r d c h o i c

e s

* a n a l y z e t e c h n

i c a l a n d

m e c h a n i c a l a s p e c t s o f

l a n g u a g e

* g a t h e r i n g o f e v i d e n t i a l d e t a i l t o

s u p p o r t i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f g l o b a l

m e a n i n g

* e m e r g e n c e o f m e a n i n g e m b e d d e d

i n l a n g u a g e

P o l k i n g h o r n e ( 1 9 8 8 )

G e e ( 1 9 9 9 )

C o r t a z z i ( 1 9 9 3 )




14/23

credible understanding that appears to go beneath the surface content to theemotions and the meanings of the passage. Embedded in the structure of thelanguage, meaningsemergedthat could be braced withspecificevidenceandthrough which a detailed analysis to support an interpretation could be pre-sentedwith some confidence. Table 2 representsa summary of thefunctionaland analytical domains of the structural analysis cluster: the input actionsigniting possible outcomes.

Organizing the methods into a structural analysis cluster allowed me toselectthe methodstoapproachthemyriad fine detail in thesequence oflargertosmaller “chunks”of languagesegments.I wasableto become familiarwiththe mechanical aspects of the language of the narrators that provided thegroundwork for an investigation of other elements of the language in the lit-erary criticism methods cluster.

LITERARY CRITICISM METHODS CLUSTER

Applying the literary criticism methods cluster presented an entirely dif-ferent aesthetic framework of analytical methods that suggested an artisticappreciation (Eisner, 1998, p. 31) of the figurative language, plots, and themes of the texts. In contrast to examining the topics or the technical language of thenarratives, the literary criticism methods focused the investigation on theabstract and symbolic language and moved the investigation from details inthetext to whole text analysis. Lily’s useof theword switch fromthe previouspassage, for example, although an illustration of the situated meaning of words, is also used as a metaphor for the inconsistency of her colleagues.

INTERPRETIVE ISSUES

The narrators seemed to have a natural propensity for imaginative lan-guage. In the interviews, previously created images were encouraged byusing the performative method of repeating the words of the narrator:

R: Yousaid youfeltas thoughyouwerein anoceanand youweretold: Swim!Do youstill feelthat way?

Lily: I don’tknow—sometimes I have glimpses of mountains butthen it’s just waves again.(Interview 2)

In this excerpt, recalling the picture of swimming in an enormous seaprompted Lily to expand her image to include the occasional hope of seeingdry land. The ease of identifying, encouraging, and communicating in alle-

gorical language appeared to provide fertile ground for developing insight-ful interpretation. The visual images evoked from abstract language pre-





15/23

sented a method of interpreting meaning that could perhaps transcend the boundaries of language differences.

However, interpretingthe specificartisticlanguage inthetexts emergedasa challengeforme when Lily andRose unknowinglyused thesame figurativelanguage to describe their perceptions of the effective educator. First, Rosegavea negativeexampleand characterized herdislikeof the“chalk-and-talk”role of teaching as

playing the teacher role . . . the weekend before someone gave me some things about play-ing . . . playing the teacher role warra warra. (Rose Interview 2)

She uses this image to describe a style of teaching that she rejects as she com-pares the workto thatof an actor playing a role. Her image implies a percep-tion of a lack of sincerity or authenticity in the person who teaches by lectur-

ing (“chalk and talk”) only. Lily, on the other hand, presented anotherperception of the word when she commented on the enormous number of activities carried out by the educator:

Ja and I’ve also realized that you don’t just have one role. You are six things in one.Nowyou’re a teacher for one, then an emotional advisor for theotherand spiritual advi-sor for the other one and it’s just how to handle all of that role to be most effective. (LilyInterview 3)

When first confronted with theimages of “role” inthese excerpts,the tempta-tion wasto force thepassages to fit into thelimited personal interpretation of a roleasa specificentity. Unableto explainbothimageswitha singleinterpre-tation,however, itbecameclear thatespecially whenpresentedwithimagina-tive language, the narrator and the listener/reader are influenced by theirown experiences and bring their own meanings to the events. The two per-

ceptions of meaning became entwined and interdependent and in this studywere compounded by the ever-present mother tongue concerns. Whosemeaning andwhose “voice” then would be revealed in theinterpretation? Inthis case, comparing the differences of interpretation in the figurative use of the“role” inthetwo passages seemedto mediate theconflictby adding to theunderstanding of both of their images. To Rose, a role is a matter of pretend-ing. To Lily, a role is a responsibility. Thedistinction wasdifficult to discern atfirst and underscores the ambiguous, multilayered origin of meaning that issometimeshidden inthelayersof language(Lincoln& Guba,1985, p.107).Byanalyzingand comparing theuse of themetaphoric language andthe imagesthat are created, however, a supportable understanding of the passages sur-faced.Although notovertly stated, both narrators appearto be implying thatdeveloping and embracing an authentic stance as an educator is an essentialaspiration in their classroom chronicles.

Evidencefor interpretationin thestorieswasalsosoughtby examining theliterary convention of plot, the narrator’s connecting logic of the sequence of





16/23

events. Thecollectedstories appearedas chronicles ina varietyof formsinthenarratives: the conventional “little story” complete in one telling with a

beginningand an end, descriptive“vignettes”often used to illustrate a point,articulated interior monologues or “self-conversations” (Plummer, 1995, p.57), andongoing stories that appeared andreappeared in the interviews. It issurprising that each separate form of story seemed to be organized withregard to historically generated plots that could be identified and used foranalysis. Two sample stories from the narratives make this point. Both con-sisted of what Lieblich et al. (1998, p. 88) and Polkinghorne (1988, p. 15)termed “progression of the character” plots, where the hero advancestowarda goal. Lily’s narrative, forexample,enthusiasticallytold in a classic story for-mat(withabeginning,amiddle,anend,andevenamoraltothestory),burstsinto the comic plot (Lieblich et al., 1998, p. 88) progression of a learner in her

classroom:

C . . . is this little hell raiser. Everyone’s gotproblemswith him. He takes paper. He neverlistens but he’s clever, so I don’t mind so much if he keeps himself busy with other thingsbecauseIknowhewillgettheworkdoneinlike3minutesflatbecauseheisveryclever.Sonow I’vegot the problem. Theytakea blank piece of paper and I see him startingto drawlittle things and he’s like clipping and you know . . . looks like he’s in the art and cultureclass.I’m thinking to myself,“Leave him, he’s quiet,”but I keep my eyeon himnow.I’mtalking to thekids andthe kids aren’t listening . . . suddenly I seelike he’s takinga mirrorout of his bag and I thought, “Well, he’s keeping himself busy and he’s not murderingsomeone else, so I am happy.” Suddenly he starts taking glue and he starts pressing thestuff on and now looking, looking at a vampire. . . . He went around the school being avampire for the whole day. . . . And it’s just because he is so clever. You can actually seethathecanmakeagreatsuccessofhislifeifhegetshisbehaviorright . (LilyInterview3)

Eventhough theprotagonistof thestory hasbehavedstrangely, thestorypro-vides insight into Lily’s thinking as sheperceives theepisode as “comic.”Theevents in this story could actually be either tragic or comic. It is Lily’s comicconception of the plot that molds the description of the learner, determinesthe choice of events to retell, and characterizes their meaning. Identifying,categorizing, and naming the evident personal logic of the plot connects theeventsof thestories and seems to lend a predictabilityandnaturalcredibilityto theculminationof thestory that is reflected in themoral:Despite the inap-propriate behavior, a clever child can succeed.

In a contrasting and less structured story type, an interior monologue or“self-conversation,” Rose reveals her thinking about herself and appears toperceive her own experiences as a “romantic” progression where the heroovercomes a struggle(Lieblichet al., 1998). Roseanswers affirmatively whenasked if she feels herself developing as an educator:

So the first, last quarter for me being in the school, I’ve developed in the sense of try to

manage. . . tobe able tomanagemy time, beorganized, beableto speak out,be ableto say





17/23

topeople,“OK, thisis whatI want,”andstick toit!I think I’veimproveda lot . . . evenas frighteningas it is because it can like . . . build my confidence. I can be able to speak to people. (Rose Interview 1)

Rose’s monologue describes an ongoing series of developing skills that areconnected in their movement toward the goal of increasing her confidence.Rose’s retelling of these particular thoughts reveals a plot with herself as thecharacter who progresses by overcoming some of the obstacles that shedescribed in earlier interviews. There is also an underlying suggestion thatfor Rose, one of the outcomes and perhaps a purpose of the experiences of learning to be an educator lies in that advancement. In addition, the plotsdescribedas chroniclesof theprogressionof a character appearedto bepartic-ularly relevant and attractive choices for researchingthe experiences of thesepreservice educators. The young people in this study are deeply concerned

with the plot of their own professional progress and spoke often about it.Their perceptions of gaining confidence or understanding a learner’s behav-iorare connectedto andtherefore meaningful inthatprogress.Theanalysisof thestoriesandtheir plots offeredan opportunitytoshare withthem a glimpseof thepersonalmeaningof theirown comedic, tragic, andheroicstrugglesforsuccess in learning to be an educator.

Identifying themes, or “universal statements” (van Manen, 1998, p. 107) inthe narratives was undertaken by closely examining the collection of narra-tives and revisiting the results from the application of all of the analyticalmethods clusters to the data. Perhaps because of the abstract or summativenature of the search for themes or because of a misinterpretation of the lan-guage of the questions, a direct approach was never successful. Expecting toelicit a series of brief and succinct but definitive statements that wouldexpress the narrator’s personally constructed sets of meaning about becom-

ing educators, Lily and Rose were asked questions such as

R: Doyouhaveapictureinyourmindofwhatyouwilllooklikewhenyou’rereallyteaching?Lily: No. (Interview 3)

Nowhere in the texts were there concise statements of universality from thenarrators that could be regarded as themes. Lacking evidence of historicallyor narrator-generated themes, recognizing themes in the narratives again

became a complicatedtask. Gatheringevidence from the images, the playingoutof plots, reviewing thecontent of thediscourses and theemphasis placedon particular expressions and the selected retelling of critical episodesresulted in tentative researcher-formulated themes for each of the narrators.Lily’s comic description of the “little hell raiser,” her emphasis on the impor-tance of her work as aneducator, and her description of the many roles of the

educator all seemed to support the following themes:





18/23

Children have potentialThediscipline is nonexistingsometimes but thechildrenis [sic] still...there’ssomuch

potential in there. (Lilly Interview 1)SoIthinktomyself:Alotofthemrealizethattheycandoanythingtheyputtheirmindsto and I feel that’s important for me. (Lily Interview 3)

All work is importantThey are asking: do you think there’s a occupation that’s more important than otheroccupations. Andtheyactually do think that it’s more importantto be a doctorthan tobe a gardener. And what they don’t realize is that it is work that is important. It’s notwhatyou dothat’simportant. Ifyou work,anyone thatworkis onthe samelevel . . . towork is a noble thing. (Lily Interview 3)

Inthenarratives of Rose, suggestions of a different butequallydeeplyheldset of themes are present in the questions she asked after the death of her sis-ter, inherdislikeof theteacherrole,andin herexpressed perception ofherself

as a person who is gradually progressing toward her goal:

A good teacher is not playing a role but is authenticBeing a good teacher to me is not about . . . it’s reflecting what is inside. It’s not about

you goingand go and get all this nice words from the . . . Internetand give them,but it’s for you, not you’re really helping them but you’re making them think every single day. And all these things that we live in, we put them together and we live with them . . .they’re not only learning about the facts but they also learn about . . . i t is where westarted from. (Rose Interview 2)

Children learn by asking and answering their own questionsIt’s them alwayscoming andasking questions, digging deep . . . and. . . andmoreinter-ested in the Khoi thanjust, OK, fine,we did thisboringthing.. . .”I enjoyquestions. I don’t give them answers. (Rose Interview 2)

Both of these sets of themesseem to express inbroad, universal statementsthe personal idiosyncratic views of the narrators concerning the deeper

meanings of the experiences of learning to become an educator.Because of the increased risk of misinterpretation using this method, fur-

ther support was gathered in a “reality check” in which each narrator wasshown theinterpretationsand asked toread,correct, or clarify theanalysis sothat theoutcome wasa negotiated effort(Lincoln& Guba, 1985, p. 211).Mostpersonally satisfying was a positive reaction from thenarrators that theanal-ysis had produced an accurate and approved-of representation of their“voices.” Both Lily and Rose expressed astonishment at the discoveries fromtheir own words. Lily read each of the themes and commented as she read:“Ditis waar [This is true];I agree onehundred percent” (LillyInterview 7).It wasalso satisfying to learn that the ideas that came from identifying the themeswere ofvalue tothe narratorsas Rose said,“I like it.Youare helping metoreflect”(RoseInterview 2).After reflectingwiththe narrators ontheapplicationoftheliterary criticism methods, it became possible to construct Table 3, in which

the interrelatedness of the input actions and possible outcomes could besummarized.





19/23

645

T a b l e 3

L i t e r a r y A n a l y s i s M e t h o d s C l u s t e

r



C l u s t e r

M e t h o d

( I n p u t A c t i o n )

( P o s s i b l e O u t c o m

e )

R e f e r e n c e

L i t e r a r y

c r i t i c i s m

a n a l y s i s

I n d i v i d u a l w o r d a n a l y s i s

* f i g u r a t i v e l a n g u a g e

* i d e n t i f y i n d i v i d u a l e x a m -

p l e s o f f i g u r a t i v e

l a n g u a g e : m e t a p h o r s ,

s i m i l e s , c o m p a r i s o n s ,

i m a g e s

* a n a l y z e a b s t r a c t a n d

s y m b o l i c l a n g u a g e

* e v o k e s v i s u a l i m a g e s t h a t

t r a n s c e n d l a n g u a g e

* p o s s i b l e m u l t i p l e i n

t e r p r e -

t a t i o n s o f i m a g e s

* i m a g e s s u p p o r t i n t e r p r e t a -

t i o n o f m e a n i n g

P o l k i n g h o r n e ( 1 9 8 8 )

P l u m m e r ( 1 9 9 5 )

L i e b l i c h , T u v a l - M a s h i a c h , &

Z i l b e r ( 1 9 9 8 )

v a n M a n e n ( 1 9 9 8 )

E i s n e r ( 1 9 9 8 )

B r u n e r ( 1 9 8 6 , 1 9 9 0 , 2 0 0 2 )

W a l k e r ( 2 0 0 3 )

W h o l e t e x t a n a l y s i s

* p l o t

* t h e m e

* i d e n t i f y l i t t l e s t o r i e s ,

v i g n e t t e s , s e l f -

c o n v e r s a

t i o n s , a n d

o n g o i n g

r e a p p e a r i n g

s t o r i e s

* i d e n t i f y c o n n e c t i n g l o g i c

o f s e q u e n c e o f

e v e n t s

* i d e n t i f y u n i v e r s a l s t a t e -

m e n t s i n

t h e n a r r a t i v e s

* r e a l i t y c h

e c k

* p l o t c o n c e p t i o n i n d

i c a t e s

n a r r a t o r ’ s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n

o f m e a n i n g

* r e s e a r c h e r g e n e r a t e

s

t h e m e s u s i n g v a r i e t y o f

e v i d e n c e t y p e s

* r i s k o f m i s i n t e r p r e t

a t i o n

* t e m p o r a l n a t u r e o f

t h e m a t i c e x p r e s s i o n s

P o l k i n g h o r n e ( 1 9 8 8 )

P l u m m e r ( 1 9 9 5 )

W a l k e r ( 2 0 0 3 )

L i e b l i c h e t a l . ( 1 9 9 8 )

v a n M a n e n ( 1 9 9 8 )

E i s n e r ( 1 9 9 8 )

B r u n e r ( 1 9 8 6 , 1 9 9 0 , 2 0 0 2 )

L i n c o l n & G u b a ( 1 9 8 5 )




20/23

SUMMARY OF THE PROCESS

Using all three of the narrative analysis methods clusters is essential toproduce a balanced and rigorous examination of the narratives. No matterwhat decision has been made in theperformative cluster regarding the inter-viewmethod,both thestructural analysisand literarycriticismmethods clus-ters havea definite functionin providing credible evidencefor interpretationof the collected data. From my experiences, the procedure recommended asmost logical is to begin theanalysis with a wholetext examinationof thenar-ratives using content and discourse analysis to determine the patterns andrepetitions of topics to yield the full sense of the meaning of the narratives.Then an individual word analysis followed by a literary criticism analysis of the details in the narratives provides evidence to support and validate the

total interpretation.Despite my increased confidence in the believability of the analysis, reli-abilityof interpretationstill remainsa concern.Withtime andthrough experi-ence,people growandchange. Thedurationof thebeliefsexpressedinthissetof themes is uncertain. Increasing the difficulty is the reciprocal effect of theimpact of the themes on the meaning of experiences and the experiences’impact on the formation of beliefs. However, as a result of my experienceswithnarrative inquirymethods, I concur withBruner (1986) whomaintainedthat the narration is not the meaning itself but at best, is a “guide in a searchfor meaning among the spectrum of possible meanings” and, thus, perhapsrepresents a “truefornow” reliabilitythat hasa contextualusefulness(p. 25).

CONCLUSION

My experience of tryingto make sense of narrative inquiry generatedsev-eral points for continued reflection. First is the essential awareness that as anovice researcher, I needed to learn as much as I could about the methodsthemselves both in the functional and the analytical domain. Organizing themethods into clusters enhanced my experience by providing a practical andcomfortable approach for their application to my data. Developing a schemeof approach to themethods of narrative inquiry gave me a frameworkwithinwhich I could document my experiences as they occurred. Clustering themethods provided the descriptive attributes that allowed me to think aboutthe large number of individual methods in terms of groupings of characteris-tics. As the characteristics of the groups of methods were identified, I couldexamine the uses and the underlying assumptions of the groups of methodsand compare and contrast them. The comparisons reveal that the clusters of

methods, although diverse in the specific concentration of focus, were alsosimilar in many ways. For example, the methods appear to be productivewith a variety of story types, could be used preinterview or postinterview,





21/23

andcould be applied towholeor partial texts.Eachof theclusters of methodsshows a level of flexibility in itsvarying degrees of specificity of analysis thatallows for global or detailed investigations of the narratives as the contentdictates. The methods also provide a bank of evidence for the formation andsupport of interpretive analysis and seem to expose a richer interpretation of the experiences of learning to be an educator through the revealed thoughtsandfeelings of the narrators. In thefirst cursory readings, the interviews hadseemed to be simply superficial descriptions of the participants’ experiencestold in colloquial language. Later, rereading the narratives from the perspec-tivesof eachof theclustersof methodsencourageda deeper understanding of their meanings. From the analysis grew an appreciation of the sometimes-embedded expressions of the motivations, aspirations, attitudes towardevents, and guiding beliefs of the narrators.

Second is the recognition of the importance of researcher integrity andtransparency in a narrative analysis investigation. Issues such as the influ-ence of interview stance, the analysis and interpretation of the data, theimpactof thechoiceofnarrators andlanguage differences,and mattersof reli-ability, credibility, and trustworthiness arenot as yet unequivocal. Because of the lackof clear andstandardizedresearch guidelines, conducting a narrativeanalysis investigation appears to be an individualized effort. As a noviceresearcher, it was of particular benefit to experience, reflect on, and describemy own journey through the study.

Finally, a questionfor reflection arises:Ofwhatuse arethe resultsof apply-ing multiple, carefully chosen varieties of narrative analysis methods to thedata in a study? Through my experiences, I have come to consider that theresults of using the methods appear to be relevant and appropriate in educa-tional research where much of what is experienced in the classroom is com-

plex and difficult to express directly. Using the clusters of methods helps todelve into the complexity, describe experiences from the perspective of theparticipants, and allow thecompelling voices of thenarrators to be heard. Atthe same time, using the clusters of methods generates an understanding of circumstances that is composed of an accumulation of examinable evidenceand analytical methods that is available for critical review, further interpreta-tion, or replication.

REFERENCES

Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress.

Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. London: Harvard University Press.Bruner,J. (2002). Making stories: Law,literature, life. NewYork:Farrar Strauss& Giroux.Bullough,R. V., & Pinnegar, S. (2001). Guidelinesfor qualityin autobiographical forms

of self-study research. Educational Researcher, 30, 13-21.





22/23


23/23

DorotheaM. deKockis associateprofessor incurriculumstudiesat theFacultyof Education of the University of Pretoria. The focus of her research is teachereducation. She is the designer and coordinator of an innovative 1-year school-based teacher education program.


rogan & kock. 2005. methodology and methods of narrative analysis

Documents