Coding Interview Data Together: A Class Activity for Qualitative Methods
Students code four short interviews in groups of three, compare where their coding differs, and revise a shared codebook. It fits in one class meeting plus a week of homework. Most of the learning happens in the comparison, when two students apply the same code to different passages and have to explain why.
| Audience | Graduate or advanced undergraduate qualitative methods courses |
| Class time | One 75 to 90 minute session, plus an optional follow-up |
| Homework | About 3 hours over one week |
| Instructor prep | About 5 minutes in CollabCoder |
| Cost | Free for the instructor and every student |
| License | CC BY 4.0. Adapt it, remix it, share it. Credit Josh Herron. |
By the end, students will be able to:
- Apply codes from a codebook to interview data and justify each application.
- Compare their coding with a peer's and locate the passages where they disagree.
- Revise a code definition based on evidence from the data.
- Write a short analytic memo that moves from codes toward a theme.
Students can do the whole activity on a phone, in the browser or the free iPhone app, so nobody needs a laptop to take part.
The four transcripts are fictional composites written for teaching. They follow students describing a semester of online courses, a topic most students can read without background.
Instructor setup
- Create a free account at app.collabcoder.ai.
- On your dashboard, click Use the teaching kit. CollabCoder creates a project with all four interviews and the starter codebook already loaded.
- In the Use this project in a class section, name the class, choose Students code in groups, pick Groups of 3, and click Create class.
- Copy the link from the class page and post it in your LMS. Students can also type the six-character code on their dashboard.
Groups fill in the order students join. If you want to set the groups yourself, have each group join together during class, one group at a time. When everyone is in, click Close to new students.
The class page lists every student with how many passages they have coded and when they last coded. Open takes you into any group's project. Export all coding (CSV) gives you one spreadsheet with every coded passage, tagged by group and student.
Prefer your own data? Create a project, add your documents and codebook, and turn that project into a class the same way.
Session plan
Students watch you code, then code on their own before they compare. To code independently in a shared group project, each student switches off teammates' highlights under Visibility in the right sidebar of the document viewer, then switches them back on to compare.
| Time | Activity | What students do |
|---|---|---|
| 10 min | What coding is | Listen. You define a code as a label for meaning, and show the difference between a descriptive code ("technology") and an interpretive one ("technology as a barrier"). |
| 10 min | Demo on Interview 1 (Maya) | Watch you code three or four passages and say out loud why each code fits. |
| 5 min | Join the class | Open the link, create an account, land in their group project. |
| 25 min | Code alone | Open Interview 2 (Daniel), switch off teammates' highlights, and code the whole transcript with the starter codebook. |
| 25 min | Compare | Switch teammates back on. Find three passages where the group disagrees. For each, decide whether the problem is the passage or the code definition. |
| 10 min | Debrief | Each group reports one code definition they would change and the passage that convinced them. |
For homework, groups code Interviews 3 and 4 with their revised codebook, and each student writes a memo.
Practice mode. Every kit interview includes a model coding with reasoning for each passage. After students have coded and compared with their group, they can click Compare with expert in the document viewer to see where their coding matches and read why the expert coded each passage the way they did. A few passages are left uncoded on purpose because none of the starter codes fits, which sets up the codebook revision conversation. Students working on their own can use it the same way.
An optional second session works well a week later. Put two groups' exports side by side and ask the class why the same codebook produced different patterns. That conversation leads straight into reliability and the question of when coder agreement matters at all.
Student assignment
Copy this into your LMS and replace the bracketed parts.
Coding interview data together
You'll code four short interviews with two classmates in CollabCoder, a free browser-based coding tool. Join the class with this link: [paste class link]. Create an account with your school email, and your group's project opens right away.
In class. Code Interview 2 on your own first. In the document viewer, switch off your teammates' highlights so you can't see their choices. When everyone is done, switch them back on and compare. Find three passages where your group disagrees, and for each one decide whether the passage is ambiguous or the code definition is unclear. Change the definition in the codebook if you agree it needs it.
This week. Code Interviews 3 and 4 with your group's revised codebook. Code on your own, then compare, the same way you did in class.
Memo (500 to 750 words, due [date]). Pick one code and follow it across all four interviews. Describe how participants talk about it, quote at least three coded passages, and explain one change your group made to its definition and why. End with one possible theme the code points toward.
Your instructor can see your group's project. Coding is graded on completeness and fit, so disagreement with your group won't cost you points. A well-argued disagreement is useful material for your memo.
Starter codebook
Six codes are enough to start and loose enough to argue about. Isolation and Peer connection overlap on purpose, and so do Flexibility and Structure and routine. Those overlaps produce the disagreements the comparison step depends on.
| Code | Definition | Use when | Don't use when |
|---|---|---|---|
| Isolation | Feeling alone or cut off from classmates | The participant describes the absence of people | The participant describes a connection that worked (use Peer connection) |
| Peer connection | Relationships with classmates that support learning | Study groups, group chats, breakout groups that lasted | Required discussion posts with no real exchange |
| Flexibility | Benefits of controlling when and where to study | Time-shifting, rewatching, fitting school around work | Lack of structure described as a problem (use Structure and routine) |
| Structure and routine | External cues that organize the week | Deadlines, weekly messages, schedules the participant relied on | Routines the participant built entirely alone |
| Technology barriers | Connectivity, device, or platform problems that got in the way | Dropped calls, phone-only access, confusing course sites | Technology that worked fine |
| Instructor presence | Signs that an instructor was paying attention | Feedback, check-ins, messages, office hours | Course materials with no sign of the instructor behind them |
The kit button loads these codes for you. To add them to another project, click Bulk Import Tags and paste:
Isolation: Feeling alone or cut off from classmates Peer connection: Relationships with classmates that support learning Flexibility: Benefits of controlling when and where to study Structure and routine: External cues that organize the week Technology barriers: Connectivity, device, or platform problems that got in the way Instructor presence: Signs that an instructor was paying attention
Rubric
The assignment is worth 20 points. Score coding from the class export, where each student's passages are listed under their name. Agreement with the group is not a criterion.
| Criterion | Strong (5) | Developing (3) | Missing (0 to 1) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding coverage | All four interviews coded, with codes applied wherever the definitions fit | Two or three interviews coded, or long stretches left uncoded | One interview or less |
| Fit between code and passage | Passages match the code definitions, and borderline cases are flagged with a note | Most passages fit, with a few that stretch the definition | Codes applied with little connection to their definitions |
| Codebook revision | Memo explains one definition change with a specific passage as evidence | Change described without evidence from the data | No change discussed |
| Analytic memo | Follows one code across interviews, quotes three or more passages, and ends with a plausible theme | Summarizes coded passages without moving toward a theme | Missing, or retells the interviews |
Notes count. Students who attach a note to a borderline highlight ("could be Isolation, but she frames it as a choice") are doing the reasoning the course is after.
Data: four interview transcripts
All four participants are fictional. The kit button adds them to your project, so you only need these if you're using another tool or printing them.
Interview 1: Maya (second-year student)
Interviewer: Thanks for making time. Can you start by telling me what a typical week looked like when your courses moved online?
Maya: Sure. The biggest change was that nothing had a fixed place anymore. I used to go to the library between classes and that was where studying happened. At home I was doing readings on my bed, in the kitchen, wherever. It took me most of the first semester to build any kind of routine.
Interviewer: What helped with that?
Maya: Deadlines, mostly. If a discussion post was due Thursday I would do it Thursday. The flexibility was nice in theory, but in practice I needed something external to push against. One instructor sent a short message every Monday saying what the week was for, and that course was the one I kept up with.
Interviewer: You mentioned the flexibility. Were there parts of that you liked?
Maya: Definitely. I work twenty hours a week, so being able to watch a lecture at ten at night was a real benefit. And I could rewatch things. In a lecture hall if I missed a point it was gone. Online I could pause and go back. I probably understood the statistics course better online than I would have in person because of that.
Interviewer: What about the social side?
Maya: That was the hard part. I did not know anyone in my classes. In person you end up talking to the people next to you and that turns into a study group. Online there was a discussion board, but nobody really talked there, we just posted what we were required to post. I felt like I was taking the course alone even though there were forty other people in it.
Interviewer: Did that change over time?
Maya: A little. One course used small breakout groups that stayed the same all semester, and by the end I knew those four people. We had a group chat. That made a big difference. But that was one course out of five.
Interviewer: Were there technical issues?
Maya: My internet at my parents' house was unreliable. I got kicked out of a live session during a presentation once, which was embarrassing. And some of the course sites were hard to navigate on my phone, which is what I used most of the time because my laptop is old. I would say the technology was a barrier maybe once a week, enough that I planned around it.
Interviewer: If you could change one thing about how your courses were run, what would it be?
Maya: More of those small stable groups. The content was fine. What I missed was people.
Interview 2: Daniel (adult learner)
Interviewer: You chose an online program on purpose. Why?
Daniel: Honestly it was the only way it was going to happen. I'm thirty-eight, I work full time in logistics, and I have two kids. A campus program would have meant quitting my job. Online meant I could do coursework after the kids were in bed, usually nine to eleven.
Interviewer: How did that schedule work in practice?
Daniel: Some weeks great, some weeks not at all. When work got busy, school was the first thing to slide. I'd tell myself I'd catch up on Saturday and then Saturday would fill up too. The courses that saved me were the ones with something due every few days. A big paper due at the end of the term was dangerous for me.
Interviewer: Did you feel connected to other students?
Daniel: Not really, and to be fair I didn't try. I'm not looking for friends at this point in my life. I wanted to get through the material. When a course made us do group projects I mostly found it frustrating, because coordinating with three strangers in three time zones took more time than the actual work. There was one guy in my accounting course, though, also a dad, and we started texting each other before exams. That helped more than I expected.
Interviewer: What about your instructors?
Daniel: Mixed. One professor recorded a short video every week where she talked through common mistakes from the last assignment. You could tell she'd actually read our work. Another one I never heard from at all. Grades just showed up in the portal with no comments. I'm paying for this, so that bothered me.
Interviewer: Any technology problems?
Daniel: Not much. My work laptop is solid. The proctoring software for exams was a pain, it flagged me once because my kid walked into the room.
Interviewer: Looking back, would you do it again?
Daniel: Yes. I wouldn't have a degree otherwise. But I'd tell people that flexible doesn't mean easy. You have to build the structure yourself or find a course that builds it for you.
Interview 3: Priya (international graduate student)
Interviewer: Where were you living during your online year?
Priya: At home in Pune. My visa was delayed, so I started my master's program from India. The university was on Eastern time, which is nine and a half hours behind.
Interviewer: How did the time difference affect you?
Priya: Live sessions were at two or three in the morning for me. The recordings were posted, so technically I could watch later, but in two courses participation in the live session was part of the grade. I stayed up for those. I was exhausted most of that semester.
Interviewer: Did your instructors know about this?
Priya: I emailed all of them. One wrote back the same day and said I could submit a written reflection instead of attending live. Another said the policy was the policy. The first one also checked on me again in October, just a two-line email asking how I was managing. I still remember that.
Interviewer: What was it like with your classmates?
Priya: There were five of us studying from India and Bangladesh, and we found each other in the first week. We made a WhatsApp group. We would watch recordings at the same time and message about them, and before deadlines we would read each other's drafts. Honestly that group got me through. I felt more connected to those four than to anyone in the live sessions.
Interviewer: Any technical difficulties?
Priya: Some of the library databases blocked access from outside the US, so I needed the university VPN, and it disconnected often. Power cuts happened a few times during the monsoon. I kept a charged phone as a backup hotspot.
Interviewer: What would you tell the program to change?
Priya: Make the live part optional, or offer a second session time. The content was very good. The schedule was built for people who live there.
Interview 4: Marcus (transfer student)
Interviewer: Tell me about your situation when your courses went online.
Marcus: I had just transferred from the community college. I live about forty minutes outside town, and we don't have home internet, just my phone. So I did most of my classes on a hotspot, sitting in my truck in the parking lot of the public library when it was closed.
Interviewer: That sounds hard.
Marcus: It was what it was. The bigger problem for me was nobody telling me what to do when. At the community college, my instructors were on top of us. Here, a course would open on Monday and that was it, everything was just there. I didn't know how to pace it. I fell behind in biology in the first three weeks and I never caught up. I ended up withdrawing.
Interviewer: Was there anyone you could ask for help?
Marcus: I didn't really know anybody. My parents didn't go to college, so they couldn't tell me what was normal. I didn't want to email professors because it felt like bothering them. Then my history professor called me. Actually called my phone, after I missed two assignments. She asked if everything was okay and helped me make a plan to catch up. I passed that class with a B.
Interviewer: What made the difference in that class?
Marcus: Knowing somebody noticed. And she gave me a calendar with every due date on one page, which sounds small but I put it on my wall.
Interviewer: Did you connect with other students at all?
Marcus: Later in the year, a guy from my history class started a Discord for the course. I mostly lurked, but it was nice to see other people were confused about the same things. It made it feel less like it was just me.
Interviewer: If you could change one thing?
Marcus: Have every class give a calendar on day one. And tell transfer students it's okay to email professors.
Set up the kit in CollabCoder
Free for you and your students. Click "Use the teaching kit" on your dashboard, then create a class.
Open CollabCoderCoding Interview Data Together by Josh Herron is licensed under CC BY 4.0. Questions or adaptations you'd like to share: hello@collabcoder.ai.