# data[].attributes.body
In qualitative research validity means that research findings are accurate and plausible, this is done through a variety of means, including triangulation, member checking, and external audits. Reflexivity is when a researcher takes the time to evaluate their own background, biases and beliefs. This component is very different than quantitative research, which historically attempted to remove researcher bias as much as possible. I have noticed in recent quantitative papers that researchers also make a point of providing their positionality, while this does not necessarily mean the researcher is providing their own biases, it does leave this up for interpretation for the reader.

# data[].attributes.headline
Gary & Paola's Amazing AI Activity Padlet

# data[].attributes.subject
Gary & Paola's Amazing AI Activity Padlet

# data[].attributes.body
I thought the way that this chapter was laid out was really helpful in understanding the different prompts and subsequent memo.

# data[].attributes.body
Validity checks in qualitative research include things like member checking, triangulation, and maintaining a clear audit trail. These are still an important process to include in qualitative research. I will likely lean into member checking.

# data[].attributes.body
In African-centered women’s use of qualitative research, we strive to shift conversations on the lives of Black women away from mere conversations on victimization and powerlessness to piecing together the representations of our lives as a mosaic of intellectual creativity and a praxis of resistance (Evans-Winters, 2019).

The "mosaic of intellectual creativity" highlights the ways in which Black women are not only survivors but also creators, thinkers, and agents of change.

Loved this read!

# data[].attributes.body
The nature of your central and related research questions—and thus the answers you seek will strongly influence specific coding choices you make (Saldaña, 2021).

I liked this sentence because a lot of the time, it depends on your RQs, frameworks, etc for how you choose to code. The process of coding is not simply about assigning labels to data, but about ensuring that these labels meaningfully reflect the research objectives.

# data[].attributes.body
I like to say, "When in doubt, write it out."

Keeping a journal of memos is helpful, they can be free-flowing thoughts that come to mind or more structured. Do not rely on mental notes to self.

# data[].attributes.body
Saldaña writes, "Some forgo coding of data altogether to rely on phenomenological interpretations of the

themes in and meanings of texts..." Interested in hearing more about this to gain a deeper understanding of different methods available.

# data[].attributes.body
Before reading this chapter, I had not given much thought into the different parties that can assess validity. Validity can be accessed through the eyes of the researcher, participants, readers, and/or reviewers of studies through the following strategies:

Triangulation

Disconfirming evidence

Reflexivity

Member checking

Prolonged engagement in the field

Collaboration with participants

External audit

Rich description

Peer debriefing

# data[].attributes.body
Evans-Winters uses a mosaic to conceptualize Black feminist thought as it highlights the various experiences that mold an identity. This approach values knowledge from culturally and historically relevant sources such autobiographies, sounds, narratives, art, tales, etc. The generation of qualitive researchers using this approach can re-construct the perceptions of Black woman and their community.

# data[].attributes.body
I find myself most drawn to In Vivo coding. I feel that it offers the researcher (and reader) a closer insight into participant perspectives and contributes towards rich description. I’ve always enjoyed reading studies that utilize this coding method as it speaks to my narrative inquiry approach.

# data[].attributes.body
Detailed and reflective memos aid in a researcher’s analysis by documenting their processes and how patterns or themes emerged from the data. I believe memos offer a more tangible way for researchers to understand the data and engage in reflexivity.

# data[].attributes.body
I wonder how the findings would have differed if the authors focused on schools that were not already meeting external school achievement standards. From a critical standpoint, there is more explore to about how teachers (rather than principals) navigated internal and external accountability measures as they have direct/day-to-day influence on student learning.

# data[].attributes.body
Is it possible to think about indigenous methods as well? One text that comes to mind is Research is Ceremony as well as Indigenous Methodologies by Kovach.

# data[].attributes.body
Reading this study was very disturbing to me as an educator. To see schools that have really needed to buy into the neoliberalization of their day to day practice. It just all became a numbers game for these teachers and leaders. I wonder what relation this study has to the cheating scandals that occurred and were made public around the same time. I remember reading some very interesting embedded type articles of coverage by Mother Jones while at a school in the mission district in San Francisco. A supposedly 'failing' school that had been marked by nclb yet on the ground reportage painted a very different story as students considered the label their school had received while also taking into account their day-to-day activity.

Also interested in the way in which a discourse on professionalization is created here in relation to teaching and it reminded me a lot of Moten and Harney's discussion of such in relation to the University in The Undercommons. I do not believe that professionalization of teaching leads to the type of study I want to be a part of.

# data[].attributes.body
In Chapter 4 of The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, Johnny Saldaña emphasizes the importance of selecting an appropriate First Cycle Coding Method as a foundational step in qualitative research. He argues that coding is not merely a mechanical task but an interpretive process that shapes the depth and direction of analysis.

One key takeaway is that no single coding method fits all research designs. Instead, the selection process depends on multiple factors, including the research question, data type, and epistemological stance of the researcher.

Saldaña also highlights the iterative nature of coding, stressing that researchers often revise, combine, and refine codes as patterns emerge. He underscores the need for critical reflexivity, reminding researchers that their own perspectives inevitably influence how they interpret and assign codes.

A critical question arises from Saldaña’s discussion: How do researchers balance structure and flexibility when selecting and applying coding methods, ensuring both rigor and openness to emergent themes?

# data[].attributes.headline
The Power of Analytic Memos in Qualitative Research

# data[].attributes.subject
The Power of Analytic Memos in Qualitative Research

# data[].attributes.body
In The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers, Saldaña emphasizes the critical role of analytic memos in bridging data collection and analysis. Analytic memos are not just a researcher's notes; they are a space for deep reflection, pattern recognition, and meaning-making. Saldaña argues that through writing memos, researchers move beyond mere description and into interpretation, making connections between emerging themes and broader theoretical frameworks.

This raises an essential question: Can any qualitative analysis ever be truly objective, or are all interpretations inherently shaped by the researcher's perspective?

# data[].attributes.headline
Implementing Validity Checks in Qualitative Research

# data[].attributes.subject
Implementing Validity Checks in Qualitative Research

# data[].attributes.body
One of the key arguments in this chapter is that validity is not about proving objectivity but about demonstrating credibility and transparency. The use of triangulation—incorporating multiple data sources, perspectives, or theoretical frameworks—helps researchers cross-verify their interpretations. Meanwhile, member checking ensures that findings remain authentic to participants' experiences, although this process can sometimes be complicated by evolving viewpoints.

However, one of the challenges of validity checks is navigating conflicting data and perspectives. When negative cases arise—data that contradicts emerging themes—should researchers incorporate them fully, or is there a point where outliers distort the overall analysis?

How can we balance participant voice and researcher interpretation to ensure validity without compromising analytical depth?

# data[].attributes.body
Participants can be asked to review the themes or stories the researcher developed. How much time is spent in the field studying the participants can impact the accuracy of codes, themes and the story line. Participants can also be asked to collaborate in the study which builds stronger buy-in. This does not seem objective to me.

# data[].attributes.body
I loved her comment in the introduction about enjoying reading traditional academic studies, but she also finds pleasure in reading non-traditional studies. This begs the question: How much leeway do we have in writing qualitative research papers? So far, academic writing seems structured with a framework that has to be followed.

# data[].attributes.body
The Saldana book profiles 35 specific coding methods—and they aren't the only ones. Further, the author says there is no single best way to code data. My takeaway is to use a coding method that you find comfortable. Try other methods. Experiment.

# data[].attributes.body
The ultimate goal is to get accountable practice within the school. So, why not get even more granular and say the classroom? After all, learning outcomes happen between the teacher and the student. And this interaction is at the classroom level.

# data[].attributes.body
Codes written in the margins are labels that need to be analyzed. Until they are analyzed, they are meaningless. I use a version of this when categorizing thousands of haiku poetry I have written. They are categorized into themes, then chapters, then books.

# data[].attributes.body
Knapp and Feldman's study highlights how school leaders internalize externally imposed accountability expectations and reshape internal school culture to align with these demands. Knapp and Feldman suggest that researchers should look beyond formal policies to explore how leaders and educators actively construct meaning, integrate, and ultimately shape the organizational culture.

This perspective aligns with interpretive and constructivist frameworks in qualitative inquiry, where meaning is co-constructed through interactions and mediated by institutional and social contexts.

# data[].attributes.headline
Memo writing prompts and researcher reflection

# data[].attributes.subject
Memo writing prompts and researcher reflection

# data[].attributes.body
Prompts to help stimulate memo writing, provide researcher documentation and reflection.

1. Descriptive summary of the data

2. How you personally relate to the participants and/or the phenomenon

3. participants actions, reactions and interactions

4. routines, rituals, rules, roles and relationships

5. what you find intriguing, disturbing or surprising

6. code choices and their operational definition

7. emergent patterns, categories, themes, concepts, assertions and propositions

8. possible networks and processes (links, connections, overlaps, flows) among the codes, patterns, categories, themes, concepts, assertions and propositions

9. an emergent or related existing theory

10. any problems with the study

11. personal or ethical dilemmas with the study

12. future direction for the study

13. synthesis of the analytic memos generated thus far (metamemos)

14. tentative answers to your study's research questions

15. passage drafts for the final report of the study

# data[].attributes.body
The Researchers Lens:

The following approaches resonated with my approach to validating research:

Triangulation: building evidence from different sources to establish themes in a study, and Reflexivity: reflecting on how the experiences and backgrounds have an impact on shaping participants and researchers accounts.

# data[].attributes.body
I appreciated the connection and mentoring of Bhattacharya and Evans-Winters ways of acknowledging the relationship and impact on her research. In particular, I appreciated Evans-Winters way of describing how her research uses the written and oral words to mentally place the reader in the physical environment where the study took place, and sophisticatedly breathe life into participants personal histories and commentary in ways that emotionally connect the reader to the research subject.

Evans-Winters beautifully describes Black Women's way of knowing and prioritizes discussions around Black Women's concerns with research, how we consume and produce knowledge, and how we choose to disseminate it.

Evans-Winters discusses "playing with text," "mother speak," "unveiling the mask" and exploring ways Black Women use their tools to navigate across different cultural communities and framing this deeper look as a "mosaic."

I resonated deeply with Evans-Winters overview of the phenomena that occurs when questioning the validity and ways to authenticate Black Women's stories. I appreciated Evans-Winters charge to make the concerns of Black Women, the concerns of research.

Finally, I found the following to be a great summary in how we can approach researchers and the researched within marginalized voices: "Life becomes data. Data becomes praxis. Praxis becomes awareness and awareness becomes critical consciousness."

# data[].attributes.body
I appreciated the summary of ways to consider identity:

Identity is a state of being. State of becoming. An accumulation of one’s past. How we envision ourselves in the present and our possible selves in the future. Your individual sense of self. How you are similar to and different from other people. A label. A symbol or metaphor. Composed of personal stories you tell, or composed of the dialogic, interpersonal relationships you have.

Identity is real and illusory. It can be ascribed by someone to someone else, yet that identity attribution can also be resisted. Personality is what you attribute to others, but identity is what you attribute to yourself.

Some say it is what you do, what you value and belief, and how you perform.

Others say it is what you own and consume. Some say identity can be categorized, holistic, constructed, projected or composed of multiple and shifting forms of different social contexts. Cultural. Political. Psychological. Sociological. All of the above and even more. Identity exists by how it is defined.