With the beginning of the analytical process the descriptions and transcripts compiled by the researcher “become textual objects” (Emerson et al. 1995: 143) which have to be treated “as if they had been written by a stranger” (Emerson et al. 1995: 145). Meaning in the data can then be created through the method of open coding. Emerson et al. describe this process with the following words:

“From close, systematic attention to the fieldnotes as data, the ethnographer seeks to generate as many ideas, issues, topics and themes as possible” (1995: 166).

In practice this means that the researcher describes incidents and aspects in the data with short notes which “identify themes, patterns and variations” (Emerson et al. 1995: 144). With the help of these notes, or codes, the incidents are then categorised into bigger meaningful groups. While doing so, the ethnographer tries to “capture as many ideas and themes as time allows” and to “stay close to what has been written down“, as Emerson et al. describe it (1995: 151). Thus, whenever possible, I used terms as names for my categories which the participants themselves use or at least understand. For example, the category which I created to collect aspects of what I perceived as interactional classroom behaviour is called “sharing knowledge“, a term used by multiple participants.

After I created the categories I wrote an integrative memo for each one. For more information on memos, please click here.

To get back to the overview over all categories and their memos, please click here.