30
E. Data Analysis Techniques
In this section, the writer presented the steps in analyzing the data. The steps consisted of transcribing, data reduction, data display, and data analysis
Miles and Huberman, 1994. The information about each step was described in the following page:
1. Transcribing
In this study, the writer collected the data in the form of recordings. The writer recorded the debate activities. Since they were recordings that contained
speeches, it was simply impossible for the writer to remember all the details in the recordings. Due to this restricted ability, the writer transcribed the data into a
written form. Silverman 2005 supported by stating that depending on our memory, a person could only summarize what different people said. But, it was
simply impossible to remember such matters as pauses, overlaps, in breaths and the like.
Transcribing the recording data was beneficial for the writer to help her in analyzing the data. It was because the recording data could be replayed and the
transcript could be improved and completed Silverman, 2005. The data transcript covered all the speeches of the debaters during the debate activities.
Moreover, the transcript of the recorded data was helpful for the writer since it helped the writer to remember all the speeches in the debate activities.
Furthermore, the writer used the transcript as the main data to analyze. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
31
The writer spent two weeks to transcribe the recorded data in the first debate session. She did it by listening and watching the video. Then, she wrote the
transcript for each speaker in one debate session. Sometimes, she also replayed the recording in order to complete some blanks in the transcript. She did the same
steps for the second debate session and it also spent for about two weeks.
2. Data Reduction
After transcribing the data, the writer continued with the data reduction step. It was aimed to select data whether it was valuable or not. In short, this
process helped the writer to eliminate unimportant utterances in the transcription. Data reduction was done to select, focus, simplify, and transform the data appear
in the transcriptions Miles Hubberman, 1994. The writer also made coding for each debater and also kinds of gambits.
This coding was used both in the first and second debate session. It was helpful for the writer to identify the debaters. The writer coded the debater as follows:
GOV S1: Government team, First speaker GOV S2: Government team, Second speaker
GOV S3: Government team, Third speaker OPP S1: Opposition team, Fist speaker
OPP S2: Opposition team, Second speaker OPP S3: Opposition team, Third speaker
32
Since there were many expressions in each kind of gambits, the writer made coding for the kinds of gambits. This coding helped the writer to analyze the
gambits were used by debaters was belonged to. The following part was the coding for kinds of gambits:
OG: Opening Gambits LG: Linking Gambits
RG: Responding Gambits After coding the data, the writer identified the gambits used in the
utterances by using table as follows:
Table 3.1. Table of Coding
Speaker Kinds of gambits
OG RG
LG GOV S1
OPP S1 GOV S2
3. Data Display
Kategori