The process of analysing my recorded interview involved making a decision of what approach to take with regards to the method I chose. Analysing ethnographic and qualitative research data often happens at the same time as data collection. During the process you return to the data often and each time you do, you go more in depth and uncover new findings. It is a process that requires a lot of time for review and reflection.

There are a few ways to analyse qualitative data:

• Content analysis – what are the participants saying?
• Thematic analysis – what themes/topics are being discussed?
• Discourse analysis – how are people saying things? What words/language is used?

I will be breaking up the interview into four main elements in order to analyse the data and present my findings:

1. Focus questions related to specific elements of the research question
2. Identifying and coding themes/categories
3. Comparing participants responses
4. Linking themes/responses to existing theory
5. Interpretation – what does the data mean?

Focus questions:

• How are black academics with disabilities currently represented in educational settings?
• How is disability perceived by myself?
• How is disability perceived by the participants?
• What impact could an increased visibility have on students?
• Does the qualitative data support the views of the participants?

Coding themes/categories that I have identified so far:

• Relationships
• Memories
• Associations
• Language
• Stereotypes
• Emotions
• Behavior
• Conciousness
• Perspective
• Acknowledgement
• Spectrum
• Attitudes
• Coping mechanisms
• Visibility
• Stigmas
• Vulnerability

These are the main categories that I have drawn from my initial primary coding of the data so far. I will be looking at each one and determining their importance and meaning within the context of this research project. These codes will then be coded again to create higher level themes within the data – the process is much like breaking down everything into blocks and then building those blocks back up again to create a more complex picture.

Comparing participants responses:

Participant responses can be compared in several ways such as separately by question, topic or time period. Each response can then also be reviewed and compared holistically and similarities/differences can be identified between the individual responses.

Linking themes/responses to existing theory:

I will be looking at the themes that I have identified and exploring whether or not there are any patterns or links to existing theories. Do the participants’ responses agree or disagree with any of the evidence collected from the quantitative data?

Interpretation:

What does the data actually mean and how can it inform my conclusions? Is it even possible for me to come to a solid conclusion based on the analysis of this data alone? 

There is no one specific way to analyse qualitative data – as stated at the beginning, the more you return to it, the more you uncover. Each time the data is looked at, new patterns emerge which can lead to different conclusions and interpretations. 

References:

FitzGerald, E., 2012. Analysing video and audio data: existing approaches and new innovations. [online] Available at: www.researchgate.net/publication/236616317_Analysing_video_and_audio_data_existing_approaches_and_new_innovations [Accessed 14 March 2021].

Knoblauch, H. and Schnettler, B., 2012. Videography: analysing video data as a ‘focused’ ethnographic and hermeneutical exercise. Qualitative Research Journal, pp.334–356.

Lacković, N., 2018. Analysing videos in educational research: an “Inquiry Graphics” approach for multimodal, Peircean semiotic coding of video data. Video Journal of Education and Pedagogy,.

Saldaña, J., 2009. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. 1st ed. Sage.

The analysis workshop led me to think of all the different ways I need to approach my own analysis of my research interview and how it relates to the research question. My question calls for an open discussion on personal thoughts and preconceived ideas, so I’m very mindful of how I use the information gathered to present my thoughts and findings.

The interviews took place on Saturday 13th March 2021 and the participants were asked to share their thoughts on the research question. They were both sent 3 questions in advance to think about and prepare them for the session.

Although both participants know me well, I think there was definitely a little in trepidation at the start and I think this was due to them both being aware of how important the project is to me. I reassured them both that the conversation would be very relaxed and open and that there was nothing to worry about. It was interesting to see though, because I have very open and honest relationships with both participants, so perhaps it was the setting (via Zoom) or some other factor that made them both feel a bit more uptight at first.

I had sent the prompt questions in advance, but unfortunately neither of them had had a chance to go through them properly, but this may not have been such a bad thing as it meant their thoughts and responses were not rehearsed. I was happy to remind them both of the questions and the discussion flowed well. It was very interesting hearing what their perceptions of ‘disabled’ were and also hearing their perceptions of my own disability, as this is a topic I have spoken about with them both separately, but never in front of other people.

Both participants shared with me what they thought of when presented with the word disabled and the reasons for thinking that way:

“So yeah, I think the simple answer when I hear the word ‘disability’, the first thing that comes to my mind is a wheelchair – mainly because over the years, decades, when you hear the word ‘disabled’ it’s always the wheelchair icon represented that means disabled and maybe anything else isn’t seen as disabled. But I think maybe they’ve chosen that because it’s probably the most visual, easiest one to kind of, share, possibly?” 01:50 – 02:16

“When I think about disability I think about something that was the kind of, reality of when we were young. I’m now close to, y’know, a couple of years to being 50, so in the 70’s when you thought about disability, you thought about ‘wheelchair’, yeah?” 03:02 – 03:25

When asked about their thoughts on my own physical disability, both participants had similar responses:

“When I met you, the first thing that I thought of, y’know was, I saw your hand – I’m not gonna pretend I didn’t see your hand. I saw your hand, but when I saw your hand, I didn’t think, “Oh, I’m talking to a woman with a disability” I just didn’t think that. It was something that you brought, it was a word that you brought into the conversation as I got to know you, but I never thought of that.” 04:02 – 04:28

“We can laugh about it and talk about it coz, y’know, it’s what you do. You can’t change anything about it. You have to own it. I think that the more you own, when someone has a disability, the more you own the disability, it doesn’t define you.” 12:17 – 12:26

One of the participants also lives with a speech impediment, which led us to discuss the spectrum of disability and what people actually perceive to be one. When asked about the representation of black people with disabilities in his workplace, he initially said there was none, but then commented that perhaps he was the representation – a comment that threw me a little because I have never perceived a speech impediment to be a disability.

“I don’t see disability around the workplace much anyway, so having the disabled representation in the first place layered in with different ethnic groups, it’s brought down even more, but I know the focus of this conversation is to do with being black and disabled, so the answer is I haven’t seen it – unless I am the black person with a disability in the workplace.” 23:59-24:22

Overall, the discussion went well and opened up conversations that were continued after the recording ended. I am looking forward to analysing the recording in more detail and possibly taking some of the points raised into further discussions, both in the teaching environment and my own art practice.

My research project focuses on race and disability in both the arts and educational settings. These are all circumstances in which I am fully involved, being a black artist with a disability working in both the art and education sectors. A lot of what I want to explore was already covered in the elective units from the first part of the PGCert.

The Inclusive Teaching & Learning unit led me to explore my own experiences whilst at the same time being made aware of the experiences of others. It also exposed me to data that highlights the disparities in the education sector. Some key texts that I looked at were:

• Art for a few – Exclusion and Misrecognition in Art and Design Higher Education Admissions, Burke and McManus
• Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire
• Disabled People – The Voice of Many, Shades of Noir
• Staying Power – The career experiences and strategies of UK Black female professors, Rollock

Through the recommended reading (as well as other external texts) it became more apparent to me that the need for representation of marginalised groups is something that is necessary for both students and academics. I am also aware that there are changes that have been made with regards to the language used to refer to people with disabilities. I feel that the information I have been able to research will be useful in both the interview and in my analysis of it as I will be able to discuss the facts with my participants and get an insight to their opinions and thoughts on them.

As I continue with my SIP research, I have started to look at the impact of the relationships I have with my participants as well as the power dynamics behind the interview process. My research project touches on some personal and sensitive topics and both my participants know me personally – will this affect the way in which they voice their opinions? Will my relationship with either of them be different afterwards?

I was informed about a series of podcast interviews that Louis Theroux had been conducting on his Grounded podcast and one of them involved and interview with his cousin, Justin Theroux. He (Louis) made a point of disclosing their relationship at the start of the podcast, as well as little nods to their family ties throughout the interview. It enabled the listener to not only get an initial understanding of their relationship, but also helped with setting the tone of the interview, which was very relaxed and open.

I will be looking at analysing my data in the following ways:

• Recorded data – analysing the recording as a whole
• Body language – looking at how the conversation affects participants body language
• Transcript text – analysing the interview transcript

Due to the nature of auto ethnography research, my analysis will most probably require all of the above areas to bel looked at separately and as a whole. My hope is that we are all close enough to be able to speak quite openly and comfortably about the topic, but I am still very much aware of the need to disclose these relationships from the start, especially for anyone who may see the recording or transcript outside of the interview setting. It will give more context to the conversation and hopefully enable people to be comfortable with the manner in which the topic is discussed.

I decided to create an infographic that summarises my insights from the reading I have done on autoethnography and my reasons for choosing it as a research method:

From the reading I have done on the subject, I am going to focus on the following papers/journals in particular:

• Autoethnography. The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods, Tony Adams, Carolyn Ellis & Stacey Holman Jones, 2017
• Easier Said than Done: Writing an Autoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Methods,.Sarah Wall, 2008
• Analytic Autoethnography, Leon Anderson, 2006

Adams, Ellis & Holman Jones state that in order to understand autoethnography, the researcher must work at the intersection of autobiography and ethnography. When writing in an autobiographical context, we draw on our own memories and experiences in order to tell the story ourselves from a personal point of view. Ethnography requires us to participate in a culture or experience for an extended amount of time and include other peoples’ thoughts and feelings on that experience in our research. When these two methodologies are combined, the experience becomes more than just voyeuristic, it becomes a  more involved and personal contribution to the research.

“First, given the focus on personal experience, auto ethnographers speak against, or provide alternatives to, dominant, taken-for-granted, and harmful cultural scripts, stories and stereotypes (e.g., Boylorn, 2014). Autoethnographers offer accounts of personal experience to compliment, or fill gaps in, existing research.”

Adams, Ellis & Holman Jones, 2017

The nature of my research project means that I am reflecting on race, sex and disability, and my experience of being at the intersection of all 3 things. Although my experiences across these 3 areas are not unique to myself alone, using autoethnography as my research method allows me to make my experiences more visible, relatable and accessible to people outside of those areas. 

“We believe that the accessibility of autoethnography makes such attention possible; it is a method researchers can use to engage both academic and non-academic audiences.”

Adams, Ellis & Holman Jones, 2017

As an artist, my preferred communication method has always been visual and choosing this type of research method allows me to share my findings in a way that is creative, empathetic and more accessible to those outside of an academic setting. I am also very ‘present’ in my own work, be it via making the process visible or the subject itself. I have always felt it’s important to be a visible, active part of my work, an approach that is quoted by Anderson (2006) where he talks about the duality of the autoethnographer’s role:

“By virtue of the autoethnographer’s dual role as a member in the social world under study and as a researcher of that world, autoethnography demands enhanced textual visibility of the researcher’s self. Such visibility demonstrates the researcher’s personal engagement in the social world under study.”

On reflection, this probably isn’t the first time I have taken an autoethnography-style approach to a project. Most of my own art practice is based on my personal lived experiences and these experiences are reflected in the work I produce. I have naturally gravitated towards creating pieces that force me to look at myself, understand and unpack my own experiences and most importantly, accept them for what they are. In the case of my SIP, the only difference is that my research will also involve the thoughts and opinions of other people. This places a lot more responsibility on myself as a researcher. From an ethical standpoint, I now have to take into consideration how my participants’ involvement will impact not only myself, but them as well and I can openly admit that like Sarah Wall, I too made an initial assumption that ethical consideration would not be a priority:

“At the outset I naively assumed that writing about my experience eliminated any need for ethical consideration, although I was limiting my conception of ethics to that which is governed by traditional research ethics approval processes in academic settings.”

Wall, 2008

Although I am conveying the narrative primarily from my own perspective, the involvement of participants who know me personally means that there is the possibility of disclosing information that may be considered private. Wall also asks a very important question with regards to ethics in autoethnography:

“Does the deeply personal nature of my work distort my ability to judge its ethical sensibilities?”

Ultimately, my goal is to share a narrative based on a lived, personal experience with input from others who have experience of the areas I am covering. I am now realising that the research goes beyond simply my own story and how I am portrayed. Also have participants input to consider as well as the possibility that I may potentially be representing a marginalised intersection of my community.

During the first SIP workshop we looked at different methods of enquiry. I had already begun to explore various research methods in order to make a decision on which one would be best suited to my project and I had decided that taking an autoethnographic approach would be the most appropriate way to go about it.  According to the definition on Wikipedia, autoethnography is described in the following way:

“Autoethnography is a form of qualitative research in which an author uses self-reflection and writing to explore anecdotal and personal experience and connect this autobiographical story to wider cultural, political, and social meanings and understandings.^[1][2] Autoethnography is a self-reflective form of writing used across various disciplines such as communication studies, performance studies, education, English literature, anthropology, social work, sociology, history, psychology, theology and religious studies, marketing, business and educational administration, arts education, nursing and physiotherapy.”

My project is largely based on my own personal experience of being a disabled person, so this method of research places myself in the position of participant as well as researcher, with my lived experience giving me the advantage of being able to relate to other participants and carry out my research in a much more personal and sensitive manner.

I have had the opportunity to read a number of articles based on Autoethnography which have helped me to further understand what it is and how using this method will enable me to carry out my research. I wanted to first understand the advantages and if there are any potential limitations to choosing this method for my project. I came across an article written by Mariza Mendez for the Columbian Applied Linguistics Journal where she analyzes and reviews some of the existing research and literature on autoethnography and it’s advantages, limitations and criticisms of this research method since it was first introduced in the 1980s. One of her observation is that:

“It seems that there are no formal regulations regarding the writing of an autoethnographic account since it is the meaning that is important, not the production of a highly academic text.”

Mendez, 2013

I always felt that my research project would be carried out in a creative format – I never really considered working in any other way. Personally, I tend to struggle a lot with reading great long essays and reports and unless the reading is directly targeted at something I can relate to, I find it very hard to keep focused. My research project focuses mainly on my own disability, my experience as a black disabled female and the thoughts of my peers and those who are close to me about what the visibility of individuals such as myself means in the context of the art world and in educational settings. I liked the idea of a more creative, personal research method for the very same reasons Mendez states below:

“…evocative autoethnography aims toward researchers’ introspection on a particular topic to allow readers to make a connection with the researchers’ feelings and experiences.”

Mendez, 2013

The subject itself has the potential to be quite emotive as it draws on personal experiences and the creation of a piece of artwork (sculpture) that embodies those thoughts, so it is important to understand the implications of allowing myself to be so vulnerable for the purposes of a research project. But with openness and vulnerability also comes several advantages to using this method. Firstly, I am the focus of the project and have complete access to all my own thoughts and experiences needed to draw from for my research, however Mendez states that this advantage can also create limitations:

“It is this advantage that also entails a limitation as by subscribing analysis to a personal narrative, the research is also limited in its conclusions.”

Mendez, 2013

In the case of my own project, I do not agree with this statement as I believe what I want to explore has the potential to produce many other research options and conclusions (such as exploring social & medical models of disability, the implications of labelling, taboos & stigmas surrounding disability in African & Caribbean cultures etc…) I do strongly believe that personal narratives are much more relatable and offer readers the opportunity to empathise and connect with both the researcher and the subject on a more personal level. Not only are they being presented with a topic they may not ordinarily have explored, it becomes more human and less disconnected.

There are, of course, ethical implications to take into consideration. Mendez poses the question as to whether or not we should ask consent from the people involved in an autoethnographic narrative and my response is absolutely!  The fact that the research may be of a personal nature and involves other people means that a duty of care must be taken to ensure those involved (not just the researcher) are protected. Clarity about what will be required of participants  and the intentions for the research must be made clear from the start. Taking a creative approach to research does not absolve the researcher from their ethical responsibilities to all involved.

I wanted to start collecting thoughts and opinions on the word ‘disabled’ so I decided to make a post on Instagram as a starting point and ask people what the word meant to them. The video I posted shows myself working on the sculpture I am creating to coincide with my this self-initiated project:

I tend to engage quite well with the followers I have on Instagram and many of them are aware of the fact I have ABS (Amniotic Band Syndrome). Although I don’t know everyone personally, I feel I have built up enough of a profile to make people feel comfortable with sharing their thoughts and opinions. The caption under the video reads as follows:

I tend to engage quite well with the followers I have on Instagram and many of them are aware of the fact I have ABS (Amniotic Band Syndrome). Although I don’t know everyone personally, I feel I have built up enough of a profile to make people feel comfortable with sharing their thoughts and opinions. The caption under the video reads as follows:

“If you’d have told me 5 years ago that I’d be making a blinged-out sculpture of my right hand, I probably would have laughed & told you to f**k right off. 5 years ago I still hadn’t REALLY accepted its appearance as being worthy of any sort of acknowledgement, let alone a full on & incredibly visible sculpture concept. I guess this is one example of personal growth. It’s also made me realise the importance of owning a [dis]ability whilst fully celebrating that fact that I am more than able. It’s opened conversations around the use of the word [dis]abled and what it means to people in my life. I’d love to hear your thoughts – what does the word [dis]abled mean to you?”

I made sure to include the hashtags #amnioticbandsyndrome, #blackdisabledcreatives & #luckyfinproject (Lucky Fin Project is an organisation that highlights the profiles of people with limb differences). Although my own exploration of ABS is a very recent thing, I have found that through making my own case visible, I have come across many more people with the same or similar conditions. Some of the responses I received are below:

It’s always interesting to hear other people’s perspectives, especially as in my case, the recent realisation an acceptance of ABS has led to me wanting to explore it more, but in a very visible way. It has also meant that in doing this, I’m more aware of the lack of visibility of black disabled people (primarily women) in both the mainstream arts scene and within arts educational settings. I do anticipate that the journey this will take me on probably won’t end with the completion of the sculpture – it may, in fact, be just the beginning.

My Self Initiated Project looks at the effects and implications of the use of the word ‘disabled’, primarily in the context of the arts. My aim is to create an exploration of the importance of representation of the intersection of race, gender and disability (myself being black, female and disabled) and document my thought process and changing perceptions about the term ‘disabled’. This is something that I had not really considered much prior to starting the PGCert. During the first part of the programme, the Inclusive Teaching & Learning unit looked at disability as one of the topics and it was via those studies, reading materials and references that I began to consider the implications of potentially allowing myself to be labelled disabled.

My aim for this project is to film a short documentary with commentary from myself & interviews with others who know me professionally, creatively, personally and who also share the same disability as me, whilst simultaneously creating a piece of artwork derived from my thoughts and conversations. The final piece is both a reflective piece of film and a sculpture created specifically for the project. 

The project itself will be an autoethnographical endeavour. I felt it was important to go about it this way as it makes me both the researcher and the participant and I will be using both self reflection and personal experience to try and express my views on a protected characteristic within a personal context.

Things to consider:

• Ethics in relation to the project – although my thoughts and comments will be my own, I am very aware of the underrepresentation of people like myself, therefore I need to be aware that should this project be published publicly, it may be used as a research model or representative material for a wider audience.
• The involvement of other participants – as my research for this project is both qualitative & observational, I have a responsibility of care towards those who have agreed to participate and share their thoughts on camera (I will be referring to the BERA Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research)
• Disability models – there are several models of disability and I will be exploring some of them to see how they relate to myself & also get feedback from my participants on their views.

I haven’t thought of a title for this project just yet, as I feel it may change several times before I’m happy with it.