Following the reading out of the themes, a participant queried “with those themes do you try and condense them a bit when you write up your thesis or do you just write up all those themes?” I replied:
We decide what we are going to do with all those themes now. If it was just little me yeah … I think it’s amazing data and it’s up to the group if that’s what you want to do or if you want to send me back and say Suzie compress them so be it
going back to my original thing I will certainly help and advise and facilitate
as much as I know about the research process but we decide what we want to do”. Another participant said “you could do grouping of things …. look at domains and lump some of them whichever theorist”.
Coghlan and Brannick (2005) state:
In action research the members of the client system are co-researchers as the action researcher is working with them on their issue so that the issue may be resolved or improved for their system and a contribution be made to the body of knowledge. (p. 11)
As the group decided what to do with all 24 themes, some of the participants again queried my intention for the research. I used the opportunity to reiterate the principles of action research as being ones of participation and democracy. A participant contested that tying the themes to a theorist would be restrictive saying “I think that’s boxing it [the themes] in a bit”. Another agreed, stating:
That’s perfectly fine but if you have such a wealth of information to be able to create something of your own from this rather than relate it back to a theorist who has been out there forever and you are bringing something new to it … it seems a shame to squeeze it into a box of someone else’s.
Two of the participants then questioned my intention for the collection of themes related to the role of CNL. One asked “but when you finished doing all that and analysed it all did you have your own thoughts?” Before I had answered another asked “do you have any