Data and Methodologies

  • Yongjian LiEmail author
  • Fred Dervin


This chapter describes the data and methodologies used. A specific form of discourse analysis, called dialogism, is presented. It allows us to ‘delve’ deeper into the respondents’ discourses in order to identify potential contradictions, and ‘white lies’. Our assumption is that discourses on Finnish education are so complex that we needed a tool that allowed us to explore its different facets. We remind our readers that the collected data will only provide us with an entry point into some aspects of CPD and that we do not aim to generalise for the entire country.


Finnish Education Autoethnography providersProviders Auditory Choice Signature Dialog 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Åström, F. (2014). The context of paratext: A bibliometric study of the citation contexts of Gérard Genette’s texts. In N. Desrochers & D. Apollon (Eds.), Examining paratextual theory and its applications in digital culture (pp. 1–23). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.Google Scholar
  2. Bakhtin, M. M. (1982). The dialogic imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brinkmann, S. (2014). Interview. In: Encyclopedia of critical psychology (pp. 1008–1010). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brinkmann, S. (2016). Methodological breaching experiments: Steps toward theorizing the qualitative interview. Culture & Psychology, 22(4), 520–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Clarke, D. L. (2014). Analytical archaeology (Vol. 13). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Dervin, F. (2008). Métamorphoses identitaires en situation de mobilité [Identity metamorphosis in mobility contexts]. Turku: Turku University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dervin, F. (2016). Interculturality in education: A theoretical and methodological toolbox. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  8. Ellis, C., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P. (2010). Autoethnography: An overview. Historical Social Research/Historische Sozialforschung, 273–290.Google Scholar
  9. Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Freeman, M. (2004). Data are everywhere: Narrative criticism in the literature of experience. In C. Daiute & C. Lightfoot (Eds.), Narrative analysis: Studying the development of individuals in society (pp. 63–81). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Gillespie, A., & Cornish, F. (2010). Intersubjectivity: Towards a dialogical analysis. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 40(1), 19–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. hooks, B. (1994). Outlaw culture: Resisting representations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Kiesinger, C. E. (2002). My father’s shoes: The therapeutic value of narrative reframing. In A. Bochner & C. Ellis (Eds.), Ethnographically speaking: Autoethnography, literature, and aesthetics (pp. 95–114). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.Google Scholar
  14. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2008). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Rapley, T. J. (2001). The art(fulness) of open-ended interviewing: Some considerations on analysing interviews. Qualitative Research, 1(3), 303–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Roulet, E. (2011). Polyphony. In J. Zienkowski, J.-O. Östman, & J. Verschueren (Eds.), Discursive pragmatics (pp. 208–222). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  17. Slaughter, S. (2014). Foreword. In B. Cantwell & I. Kauppinen (Eds.), Academic capitalism in the age of globalization (pp. vii–x). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland
  2. 2.Department of Teacher EducationUniversity of HelsinkiHelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations