Methodological note

The thematic analysis of the 119 submissions was conducted according to the six-step process outlined by Maguire and Delahunt (2017)1:

1. Familiarisation (reading the submissions in full)

2. Coding (re-reading the submissions and assigning codes according to emergent themes)

3. Generating themes (developing a list of themes)

4. Reviewing themes (re-reading the submissions and removing overlapping themes, redefining themes and identifying items not captured)

5. Defining the themes

6. Write-up.

Given time constraints, a team of four REU staff conducted the analysis over a two-week period, from 23rd November to 14th December, 2020. Each team member was assigned a list of submissions, which were then thematically coded in a uniform manner using MS Excel. The team discussed and cross-checked each team member’s coding and emergent themes, before agreeing on the final list of overarching themes and sub-themes. The analysis was inductive in nature, with themes emerging from multiple readings and through discussion across the research team. The themes were divided among the team and relevant submissions assigned, in order that each team member led on drafting the assigned thematic sections. Quality assurance was undertaken by the team members themselves, REU management and the REU Head of Unit. The written report therefore reflects this collaborative process.

The goal of this report is to give the reader an overall sense of the range of issues and themes, which are reflected in the submissions, but also to guide the interested reader to the submissions of most direct relevance to them.

1 Maguire, M., and Delahunt, B. Doing a Thematic Analysis: A Practical, Step-by-Step Guide for Learning and Teaching Scholars. Aishe-J, Vol 9, no. 3 (2017). Available at: https://ojs.aishe.org/aishe/index.php/aishej/article/view/335/553