Transcribing is the most difficult process to make data apprehensible
and comprehensible for the declarations and fermentation of meaning. For this
post, I am going to interpret Saldana’s The
Coding Manual (2009) in terms of other ideas.
Who is coded?
Coding can
be done by alone, or collaborative. I personally prefer coding data from
multiple gaze and lenses to make
unsure and create practical / ethical approaches towards not only the nature of
data, but also the existence of subjects who are potentially of a relative autonomous
as interpreter and coder. The way in which we can create many different correlations
for coding the data and creating the codes by the multiple gazes. In spite of
the fact that there should be at least two-different approaches to check and
frame the meaning for the shared codes, the problem can be grounded itself on
the questions for the subjects who are defined as coders. In other words, the
every combinations as team could be disregard one of the possibilities in terms
of cultural, gender, theoretical, methodological and sociological differences.
How is coded?
As far as I
have read and looked at literature, most of the coding strategies are based on
Words. The one which I saw in MAXQDA’s web page and I read our course book is based on the emotional
symbols, which is defined as emoticode.
300 emoticons and symbols are ready to use for coding the data. This strategy
can be very important for crossing the boundaries resulting from the cultural
and language differences. Colour types are used for coding too. The problem
here is that the binary relations between encoder and decoder enable us to contemplate
in a defined area. Sometimes, I feel that these closed relations and symbols.
Zulfukar, I'm really interested in your idea around 'multiple gazes'. When you say 'subjects', who are you referring to?
ReplyDelete