This paper offers one approach to helping
others to make sense o f textual data. The
Teaching the
analysis of textual
data: an experiential
approach
Philip Burnard
Philip Burnard
PhD, MSc, RGN, RMN,
DipN, CertEd, RNT, Reader
in Postgraduate Nursing
Studies, University of Wales
College of Medicine, Heath
Park, Cardiff
(Requests for offprints to PB)
Manuscript accepted 28 April
1995
Nurse Education Today(1996) 16, 278-281
As qualitative research methods become
more refined, so there is an increasing
need to teach data analysis methods. This
paper offers a group method - based on
experiential learning principles - for
teaching the analysis of textual data.
Terms are defined, an outline for a
preliminary theory input is offered and
then the group method, itself, is
described. Variants of the method are
also described and various objections to
the method are addressed.
INTRODUCTION
Although the field of qualitative research is
divided up into various approaches and schools
of thought, what binds them together is the
need to find patterns, similarities and differences
in textual data (Leininger 1985, Hakim 1987).
Thus, even though there may be differences of
philosophy and, sometimes, of method, the
need to make comparisons between passages of
text, to contrast and to find groupings is
paramount (Abrahams 1984, Ashworth et al
1986, Miles & Huberman 1994).
While there have been many papers and
book chapters describing the idea behind tex-
tual ~nalysis, there have been far fewer
describing how textual data might be analysed
(Field & Morse 1985, Munhall & Oiler 1986,
Burnard & Morrison 1994). There have been
debates about whether or not the analysis of
data is always a qualitative issue, and debates
about the whole issue o f making decisions
about choosing between qualitative and quan-
titative approaches to answering research
questions (lick 1983, Dully 1985, Bryman
1984, 1988).
© [ 996 PearsonProfessionalLtd
approach offers a method of helping people in
groups. Indeed, the approach depends on the
group approach. The method draws on the stu-
dent-centred, experiential principles o f experi-
ential learning - learning by direct experience,
through taking an active part in the learning
process (Kitty 1983, Kagan et al 1986, Bumard
1995). First, though, some stipulative defini-
tions and descriptions.
The paper is concerned with textual data.
These will often have been generated as tran-
scripts of interviews. This need not, necessarily,
be the case. Textual data could be represented,
also, by field notes, memos or even passages
from essays, diaries, stories and so forth
(Sommer & Sommer 1991). The point is that
what is being analysed is words on paper. Such
analysis raises its own problems. First, textual
data is nearly always divorced from context.
The interview transcript is no longer very
much to do with the interview itself. This
'divorce' between event and transcript raises a
range of methodological problems that are
beyond the remit o f this paper but which
should be addressed (Brymau 1988). Second,
reading textual data involves interpretation (Shye
1978). Such interpretation may be at a 'surface'
level - of understanding the words used. Or it
may be at a 'deeper' level - in which case the
researcher has to 'make sense' of the data.
These points, again, are beyond the immediate
remit of this paper but should be addressed by
the researcher (Taylor & Bogdan 1984).
Sometimes, the way in which data are col-
lected indicates the most appropriate way of
analysing them. A tightly structured interview
schedule, for example, offers the opportunity to
bring together all respondents' 'answers' to each
question. This sort of analysis is similar to the
analysis o f questionnaire data. All the researcher
is required to do is to identify all responses to
question 1, question 2, question 3 and so on.
Semi-structured or unstructured interviews,
in which the researcher does not ask the same
questions of each respondent, do not produce
the same level of structure in the data. There-
fore, other means have to be found in order to
make sense of those data.
The type o f analysis discussed in this paper is
content analysis (Krippendorf 1980, Berg i989).
That is to say that the researcher explores tex-
tual data with a view to grouping together sim-
ilar types of utterances and ideas. Drawing from
the considerable literature on the content ana-
lysis of qualitative research data (see, for exam-
ple, Berelson 1971, Knafl & Howard 1984,
Polit & Hungler 1991, Miles & Huberman
1994) the following stages of content analysis o f
textual data may be identified:

1. The data are read through by the researcher
and headings or categories are identified
which can account for all o f the issues that
are discussed in the data;
2. The data in interview transcripts are then
divided up by the researcher to fit under the
headings or categories. In this state, all o f the
data should be accounted for by the catego-
rization. If this is not the case, then the cate-
gory system should be revised;
3. A report is written in which the headings or
categories form the subheadings o f that
report. U n d e r each o f these subheadings,
verbatim sections o f the interviews are
offered as 'illustrations' o f that particular cat-
egory. Also, the researcher may offer ' c o m -
mentary' on the category and its illustra-
tions. A n example o f such reporting is
shown in Box 1.
The aim, then, in this form o f content anal-
ysis, is to identify the key issues in data. The
problem for new researchers is finding a way o f
identifying those key issues. Whilst, as we have
seen, categories are not so difficult to identify
when the same questions are asked o f each
respondent, the process becomes more compli-
cated when unstructured data arises out o f
unstructured interviews.
PRELIMINARIES
The aim o f the method described in this paper
is to enable a group o f students or researchers to
learn a way of analysing textual data. Certain
preliminary activities are necessary before the
group meets. The facilitator o f the group must
prepare copies o f 'chunks' o f textual data.
These may be copies o f 3 or 4 pages o f inter-
view transcripts or they may be copies o f text
Teachinganalysisof textual data 279
that the facilitator 'composes' especially for the
purpose. It is probably best if the text is contin-
uous and not divided up by headings and sub-
headings. The text should also be typed in such
a way as to allow the provision o f a wide, right
hand margin on each page.
THE PROCESS
The group meets and the aim of the meeting is
identified. The facilitator offers a short theory
input about the nature o f content analysis by
themes or meaning. The following stages are
described by the facilitator.
Stage I
The text is read through by the researcher and
'open coded'. Here, the researcher notes single
words or short phrases, in the right hand mar-
gin, that summarize passages o f data. The words
or phrases should account for all o f the data.
Stage 2
The words and phrases are grouped together
and, if necessary, 'reduced'. R e d u c t i o n of the
words and phrases involves crossing out repeti-
tions and similar words and phrases so as to p r o -
duce a list o f headings that account for all o f the
data in the transcript. Custom and practice sug-
gests that no more than 12 headings should be
used.
Stage 3
Each o f the 'final' set o f categories is allocated
a co[our and each colour represents that o f a
fluorescent marking pen. Those coloured
marking pens are then used to mark up the
transcripts and, in this way, the entire tran-
script is divided up into categories. After the
transcript has been marked up in this way, the
researcher uses scissors to cut up the various
coloured sections. These cuttings are then
collected together and the researcher pastes
them, in their groups, onto pages o f A4
paper. In this way, the researcher has a c o m -
plete, grouped set o f pages, containing all o f
the analysed transcript.
Stage 4
After this analysis has taken place, the re-
searchers task is to answer the 'so what?'
question and to offer explanations for the
groups that have emerged. It is at this stage
that theory may or may not ' e m e r g e ' from the
analysed text.
280 NurseEducationToday
GROUPWORK
Once this exposition has been offered by the
facilitator, he or she issues the copies of the
transcripts that were prepared earlier. Each
member of the group then works, individually,
to 'open code' the transcripts and works
through the transcript, jotting words and
phrases in the right hand margin of the tran-
script.
W h e n this has been completed, the mem-
bers of the group divide into pairs and discuss
their open coding. This stage of the activity is
aimed at the pairs reaching some agreement
about the words and phrases that are used to
describe the data. It should be noted that the
aim is not to identify complete agreement
between pairs of group members. Instead, the
pairs work as co-facilitators and encourage each
other in the task. There is no reason why con-
sensus should be achieved.
After the pairs have completed their task,
the larger group reconvenes and the pairs
describe both the processes that they went
through to achieve the open coding and the
words and phrases that emerged. Group discus-
sion can then lead to a further refining of the
category system. The final aim should be to
produce an agreed list of categories that can be
used to 'mark up' the transcripts. Those cate-
gories are then allocated colours, and sets of
pens are handed out to members of the group.
Group members, in this part of the activity,
work in small groups and mark up the tran-
scripts with the coloured pens. W h e n this has
been completed, the marked up transcripts are
passed around the group, and group members
compare and contrast the ways in which they
have marked up the transcripts. This process
can lead to further discussion about how a
researcher may or may not categorize data.
A final discussion should lead to agreement
about the categories and the way in which the
transcript is finally marked up. During a break,
the facilitator may cut up a finally agreed
marked up transcript, paste the pieces onto A4
sheet and hand out a completely analysed tran-
script.
W h e n this process of analysing data has been
completed, the issue of the validity of the analy-
sis remains. To some extent, the validity issue is
dealt with by carrying out the analysis 'in the
round'. Indeed, it might even be argued that
the method described here could be used on
'real' data in a 'real' research project. However,
other validity issue remain and must be
addressed during any discussion of qualitative
data analysis. Miles (1979) sums up some of the
problems that were highlighted at the begin-
ning of this paper:
The most serious and central difficulty in the
use o f qualitative data is that methods o f
analysis are not well formulated. For quanti-
tative data, there are clear conventions the
research can use. But the analyst faced with a
bank of qualitative data has very few guide-
lines for protection against self-delusion, let
alone the presentation o f unreliable or
invalid conclusions to scientific or policy-
making audiences. H o w can we be sure that
an 'earthy', 'undeniable' 'serendipitous'
finding is not, in fact, wrong? (Miles 1979,
p581).
Although this was written 16years ago, it is
arguable that all of these points still apply. The
nature of qualitative data analysis is inherently
subjective and thus open to 'mistakes' o f vari-
ous sorts. Hopefully, as we have seen, the prob-
lem o f 'self-delusion' that Miles refers to might
be addressed by working at analysis within a
group context.
VARIATIONS
The general approach described here can be
used in various other formats. First, a research
supervisor may work through the stages
described, above, during a tutorial or supervi-
sion meeting. Second, pairs o f students could
be encouraged to work through the stages,
themselves and then report back to a lecturer or
supervisor.
Next, the method could be adapted for use
in a computer laboratory. In this version, the
initial mini-lecture would be given. It would
then be followed up by work on a network of
computers. Each student might use a wordpro-
cessor to annotate a prepared piece of text on
screen. The initial, 'open codings' could be
passed to other students on the network and
each person's work could be seen by each other
person in tile group. Finally, a form o f consen-
sus as to what might constitute a list of category
headings could be agreed. These headings
could then be applied to the text by each stu-
dent using a 'cut and paste' procedure within
their word processors.
OBJECTIONS
Various objections to this method may be
raised. First, it might be argued that the process
is too 'mechanical' and that 'real' qualitative
analysis takes time and a certain 'immersion' in
the text. While this is true, the fact remains that
students must start somewhere and must learn

the more 'mechanical' aspects of open coding
and categorization of data.
A second objection might be that the group,
by its very nature, is forced into consensus.
While this may happen, what is more likely to
happen is that students find that m a n y o f their
n u m b e r c o m e up w i t h different lists o f cat-
gories. Learning this as a group reinforces the
subjective nature o f qualitative data analysis and
the sensitive facilitator will allow and e v e n
encourage diversity in this area. T h e r e is rarely
one right w a y to analyse textual data, unless a
very mechanical f o r m o f c o n t e n t analysis is
used in w h i c h words and phrases are counted.
T h e m e t h o d described here, identifies b o t h the
problems and the richness o f the process o f
content analysing textual data.
A third objection may be that the m e t h o d is
t i m e - c o n s u m i n g . This is a fact. Learning to
analyse data takes time. H o w e v e r , it may take
m o r e time in o n e - t o - o n e learning situations.
T h e group format may, in the end, be m o r e
e c o n o m i c a l o f time.
A fourth objection is that the process is, n e c -
essarily, reductionist. C o n t e n t analysis, o f the
type described here, involves the breaking
d o w n and reporting o f ' p a r t s ' o f i n t e r v i e w tran-
scripts. At no p o i n t is the whole o f the transcript
offered to the reader (unless as an appendix at
the back o f the research report). This is, indeed,
a limitation o f the m e t h o d and one that cannot
be easily addressed by this type o f data analysis.
O t h e r forms o f analysis, such as p h e n o m e n o -
logical analysis (see, for example, A s h w o r t h et
al 1986), are available w h i c h address this issue.
T h e researcher w h o prefers to analyse single,
' w h o l e ' transcripts is probably better advised to
use such methods.
CONCLUSION
This paper has described one method o f teach-
ing qualitative textual data analysis to a group of
students using an interactive, experiential learn-
ing process. T h e paper has s h o w n h o w the g e n -
eral principles o f the m e t h o d can be used in
other contexts. Various objections have b e e n
raised and addressed.
REFERENCES
Abrahams P 1984 Evaluating soft findings: some
problems of measuring informal care. Research,
Policy and Planning 2(2): i 8
Ashworth P D, Giorgi A, de Koning A J J (eds) 1986
Teaching analysis of textual data 281
Qualitative research in psychology. Proceedings of
the International Association for Qualitative
Research, Duquesne University Press, Pittsburgh,
PA
Berelson B 1971 Content analysis in communication
research: Free Press, Glencoe, IL
Berg B L 1989 Qualitative research methods for the
social sciences. Allyn and Bacon. New York
Bryman A 1984 The debate about quantitative and
qualitative research: a question of method or
epistemology? British Journal of Sociology 35:
65-92
Bryman A 1988 Quantity and quality in social research.
Unwin Hyman, London
Burnard P 1995 Learning human skills: an experiential
guide for nurses, 3rd edn. Butterworth-Heineman,
Oxford
Burnard P, Morrison P 1994 Nursing research in action.
developing basic skilIs, 2nd edn. Macmillan, London
Dully M E 1985 Designing nursing research: the
qualitative-quantitative debate. Journal of Advanced
Nursing 10:225-231
Field P A, Morse J M 1985 Nursing research: the
application of qualitative approaches. Croom Helm,
London
Glaser B 1978 Theoretical sensitivity: advances in the
methodology of grounded theory. Sociology Press,
Mill Valley, CA
Glaser B, Strauss A 1964 The discovery of grounded
theory. Aldine, New York
Hakim C 1987 Research design: strategies and choices in
the design ofsociaI research. Alien and Unwin,
London
Jick T D 1983 Mixing qualitative and quantitative
methods: triangulation in action. In: van MaanenJ
(ed). Qualitative methodology. Sage, Beverly Hills,
CA
Kagan C, Evans J, Kay B 1986 A manual of interpersonal
skills for nurses: an experiential approach. Harper
and Row, London
Kilty J 1983 Experiential learning: human potential
research project, University of Surrey, Guildford
Knafl K A, Howard K J 1984 Interpreting and reporting
qualitative research. Research in Nursing and Health
7:17-24
Krippendorf K 1980 Content analysis: an introduction to
its methodology. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA
Leininger M M (ed) 1985 Qualitative research methods
in nursing. Grune and Stratton, New York
Miles M B 1979 Qualitative data as an attractive
nuisance. The problem of analysis. Administrative
Science Quarterly 24:59~601
Miles M B, Humberman A M (1994) Qualitative data
analysis, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
Munhall P L, Oiler CJ 1986 Nursing research: a
qualitative perspective, Appleton-Century-Crofts,
Norwalk, CT.
Polit D F, Hungler B P 199t Nursing research, 4th edn.
Lippincott, Philadelphia
Shye S (ed) 1978 Theory construction and data analysis
in the behavioural sciences, jossey-Bass, San
Francisco
Sommer R, Sommer B B 1991 A practical guide to
behavioural research: tools and techniques: Oxford
University Press, Oxford
Taylor S J, Bogdan P,. 1984 Introduction to qualitative
research methods: the search for meanings. Wiley,
New York