Arts Advocacy

Report prepared by Dr. Benjamin C. Helton, Case Western Reserve University and Dr. James Weaver, NFHS

Method

The success of the 2022 NFHS Educators Satisfaction Survey (ESS) prompted us to continue the project in subsequent years to track educator attitudes and needs longitudinally. Moving forward, and with many thanks to the College Band Directors National Association for helping us launch this endeavor, we decided to focus on secondary music educators in order to plumb the “National Mood” (Kingdon, 2011) of secondary music educators. The purpose of the present survey was to identify the start of any potential trends in data and explore more geographical distinctions within the data. We composed the following research questions to guide our inquiry: 

1. How have program enrollments continued to recover from extraneous factors (like COVID-19) and adapted to contextual educational realties? 
2. What types of teacher dispositions and/or attitudes foster growth in individual programs and the music education profession in general? 
3. How do recent state-wide policies (i.e. “Divisive Concept Laws”) affect how secondary music teachers view their own value within and the future of their profession? 

2023 Educators Satisfaction Survey Instrument 

Following the results and suggestions by the 2022 ESS, we administered a similar survey to the same population in the Fall of 2023. Most survey items remained unchanged in order to track certain results longitudinally, but we altered some individual items slightly for both clarity and data normality purposes. For example, the survey items meant to measure music teacher feelings of support and optimism stayed the same to ensure data integrity between survey cohorts. However, we modified survey items that received response scores > 4.5 to create more variance in responses. The item wordings in response to the prompt “Why did you become a music educator” yielded the most skewed responses in the 2022 ESS. To create a less biased question in the 2023 ESS, we changed the prompts “To positively impact students’ lives” and “To pass on my love for music through education” to “To help students explore their own love of music” and “To share my personal love of music through teaching” respectively. 

The other addition to the 2023 ESS was qualitative, open-ended responses. These questions allowed participants to speak freely and anonymously about their own perspectives regarding issues in the profession and to share more details about their survey item responses. While related to the quantitative Likert scale responses, we kept the analysis of the qualitative data separate from the analysis of the quantitative data to preserve the epistemological integrity of both methods (Greene, 2007). Further, this technique allows for the purposeful “blending” of distinct results to systematically address complex research questions (Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2006). 

Quantitative Analyses 

Data collection occurred in the early Fall of 2023 by disseminating an online version of the ESS to music teachers connected to NFHS member state associations. We received responses from 50 (including Washington D.C.) of the 51 states. Once data were cleaned, we performed both descriptive and inferential quantitative analyses using IBM SPSS 29. Initially, we sought to broadly describe the sample in a similar way as the 2022 ESS and find the participants’ self-reported program enrollment trends. These results can be seen in Table 1. It is to be expected that small changes occur between data collections and are often inconsequential to the larger study, but the exact changes to enrollment trend are included. Those changes show that enrollment trends are beginning to stabilize following an unpredictable and difficult time, likely related to returning to more familiar school schedules and fewer school-wide shutdowns related to COVID-19. Other descriptive statistics for the sample and individual item responses can be seen on the 2023 NFHS ESS interactive dashboards, which can be broken down by activity and state.  

Table 1 

Demographic Percentages of 2023 ESS Participants 

Teaching Assignment	%	Teaching Level	%	Years Teaching	%
Band	41.1	High School	39.5	1st Year	3.0
Chorus	21.1	Middle School	26.2	2-5	12.8
Orchestra	9.3	Elementary School	25.3	6-10	16.0
General	26.0	K-12	9.0	11-15	13.5
Other	1.7			16-20	15.1
Missing	.8			21-25	14.5
				26+	25.1

School Type	%	School Enrollment	%	Program Enrollment Trend	% (2022 Change)
Public	89.9	1-250	10.8	Decreased Substantially	5.5 (-7.4)
Private (Parochial)	5.9	251-500	27.3	Decreased	9.5 (-.8)
Private (Secular)	2.2	501-1000	31.6	Decreased Slightly	14.4 (-3.3)
Charter	2.0	1001-1500	13.8	Stayed about the Same	18.4 (+2.1)
		1501-2000	9.6	Increased Slightly	26.6 (+5.9)
		2001-3000	4.0	Increased	14.4 (+5.6)
		3001-4000	2.6	Increased Substantially	5.3 (-2.0)
		4001+	1.6	N/A	5.5 (+.7)

Inferential Analyses 

We utilized two psychometrics for dependent variables in a larger inferential analysis of the quantitative data. The first measured optimism using the established instrument, the Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS) (Watson et al., 1998). The second combined multiple survey items that reflected feelings of support. For brevity, we will call these Optimism and Support throughout this report. After performing a battery of normality tests and eliminating, items with overly skewed or kurtotic responses (|X| > 3), we analyzed the remaining survey items using an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to reduce the items to their respective metrics (Miksza & Elpus, 2018). The individual items that loaded onto a single latent factor (x > .5) were then averaged together to create a single score reflecting either Optimism or Support. This process converted our ordinal Likert data to less error-prone scalar data. 

The EFA for items reflecting Support returned a Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin Measure of Sampling Adequacy of .935 and a Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity of χ² = 15,889.15, p < .001. This sample adequacy and independence indicated that the component matrix did not need to be rotated to produce reliable factors. Twelve of the fourteen items shared one strong eigenvalue (λ = 5.92) and had a Cronbach alpha of α = .90. Those twelve items were then averaged together to produce one Support score for each respondent M = 3.72 (SD = .80). 

The EFA for the PANAS items returned a Kaiser-Meyer-Oklin Measure of Sampling Adequacy of .833 and a Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity of χ² = 6,892.51, p < .001. This sample adequacy and independence indicated that the component matrix did not need to be rotated to produce reliable factors. Six of the seven items shared one strong eigenvalue (λ = 3.40) and had a Cronbach alpha of α = .82. Those six items were then averaged together to produce one Optimism score for each music teacher M = 3.71 (SD = .81). 

We explored differences in Support between sub-groups using a factorial ANOVA to help strategize advocacy efforts as well as generate more specific questions regarding the national music education climate. Group differences were significant, none were substantial enough to warrant distinctions in advocacy efforts or generate additional questions. For example, we observed a significant difference (p < .01) in Support between public and private (parochial) school music teachers after using a Bonferroni correction model. But the practical difference was that public school teachers felt an average of .27 points more supported than their private (parochial) colleagues. Similarly, we found a significant difference in Support between teachers who indicated their enrollment numbers “decreased substantially” and the other options (p < .01). The largest practical difference, though, was that teachers who reported a substantial decrease in enrollment indicated feeling .42 points less supported than those whose programs moderately increased. Along this pattern, we found no substantial or significant differences between Support scores based on participants’ school sizes, years teaching, school locales based on United States Census designations, genders, races, or whether a respondent taught in a state that recently passed “Divisive Concept Laws.” 

We found similar results when calculating the same factorial ANOVA but changing the dependent variable to Optimism. Even fewer significant Optimism differences emerged between the same sub-groups. The only significant and substantial finding was differences in Optimism between enrollment trends, which can be seen in Table 2. 

Table 2 

Significant Differences in Optimism Between Enrollment Trends 

Enrollment Trend	Optimism (SD)
Total	3.71 (.81)
Decreased Substantially	2.96 (.79)
Decreased Moderately	3.27 (.80)*
Decreased Slightly	3.49 (.78)*
Stayed the Same	3.76 (.75)*
Increased Slightly	3.77 (.77)*
Increased Moderately	4.11 (.64)*
Increased Substantially	4.17 (.71)*

Unsurprisingly, participants who recently saw a substantial decrease in their enrollment tended to be less optimistic than the other subgroups. This difference was also observed when controlling for school size, school type, and US Census locale. Given very few substantial differences in Support and Optimism between groups, we saw little reason to create crosstabs or additional subgroups for any further analysis.  

The final part of the quantitative analysis involved calculating Pearson Product Moment correlations for both Optimism and Support as well as item responses for whether an individual is satisfied with their role as a music educator and whether they would advise a friend or student to enter the profession. Those relationships can be seen in Table 3. 

Table 3 

Pearson Product Moment Correlations Between Variables

	Optimism	Support	Satisfied	Advise
Optimism		.549*	.550*	.412*
Support	.549*		.683*	.488*
“Satisfied”	.384*	.550*		.598*
“Advise”	.384*	.488*	.598*

These moderate-to strong correlations suggested clear and distinct relationships between variables. While we cannot infer causality through individual relationships, we can infer a potential direction of effect to guide the future recruitment of music teachers. Support was more strongly correlated with “Satisfied” and “Advise” than Optimism. This result indicated that Support is a more important factor for teachers than their general attitude toward the future when recommending others join the music education profession. Advocates looking to bolster music teacher recruitment may be better served to help with current teacher retention through local support than trying to affect attitudinal variables like Optimism. 

Qualitative Analysis 

In addition to the demographic and Likert-scale data, we collected open-ended text responses from participants. Four open-ended questions asked participants to describe their experiences and thoughts they felt were unmeasurable by the other survey items. Using MAXQDA24 coding software, we first tagged responses as having positive, neutral, or negative sentiment. Next, we used structural coding strategies to identify broad patterns among individual questions as well as specific participants’ responses to each question (Saldaña, 2016). This coding method allowed us to “categorize the data corpus to examine comparable segments’ commonalities, differences, and relationships” (Saldaña, 2016, p. 98). Finally, we pulled exemplar quotes from each code to create holistic descriptions of the emergent themes. Structural coding lends itself well to hierarchal quantitative analyses and dives deeper into subsets of responses. But given that the quantitative analysis of the survey found few significant or substantial differences, we treated the qualitative data as a singular set. 

Satisfaction with decision to enter the music education profession 

The most prominent responses to the first question were some variation of “I love my job” or “I wouldn’t trade it for the world.” Of the 2,008 qualitative responses, only 127 or 6.3% were tagged with a negative sentiment. Qualifying statements often accompanied the positively valanced responses. For example:  

It is rewarding and humbling in many ways. I did not anticipate how challenging it would be, or the extent of the amount of extra time and focus it would drain from me. I like my career, but I feel stretched very thin. 

And:

I’ll be honest, the pay sucks and sometimes the hours are tedious, but it is amazing seeing the students grow through performance and practice every year. 

And:

I am happy to be a teacher, but many items not listed above (concerning recently passed laws, difficulty of life-work balance, and frustrations with booster organizations) have made it difficult to be completely content with my choice to pursue music education. 

These types of responses reflected a resilience and optimism for the music education profession as a whole despite challenges with work/life balance, salary expectations, and influence from outside entities. Notably, the current political environment and the prominence of Divisive Concept Laws (DCLs) weighed on some participants who claimed those issues weakened the professional status of teachers:  

I felt very different about the profession of teaching before the political divide from the 2016 and 2020 Presidential elections and the fall out since. The profession of teaching is not as prestigious and revered as it used to be. There are many many times I now feel like a glorified babysitter. I can no longer teach the actual history and impact of the music from a cultural perspective without being told that I am pushing a political agenda. I must deny the impact and significance of racism and many other social conflicts that permeate the music of our past. I became a teacher to make a difference; I now feel silenced. 

While responses related to DCLs or related political tensions tended to show resistance or reluctant tolerance, some respondent expressed more fatalist tones. These strong negative sentiments tended to be isolated and focused more on economic factors, not social ones: 

Teaching was hard when I started in 2001. It is impossible now. I can’t wait to get out. I take a pay cut every year to keep my job. Then insurance goes up after a pay cut. 

Extreme situations in the responses were rare. But when they occurred, similarly negative responses to the other questions accompanied them. Broadly speaking, the data indicated that the altruistic spirits of music teachers tended to endure following the brief period of extreme personal and professional hardship caused by COVID-19.  

Reasons given to explain a particular sentiment continued to be both contextual and individualistic. However, the direction of the sentiment remained unclear. Does teaching in difficult/stressful situations create pessimistic/stressed teachers or is it the other way around? Conversely, do teachers with more positive attitudes tend to teach in more favorable situations or do their attitudes motivate them to seek and retain supportive stakeholders? 

Satisfaction with current position 

Participants wrote in more detail about their current positions than when asked about their satisfaction with their decision to become music educators. These additional nuances meant grouping specific codes more by mentions of stakeholders than other aspects of somebody’s job appointment. At times, responses were chronic complaints an individual had with their current position. Some examples included participants lamenting about their “smartboard project with a dying bulb” or “students disrespecting the musical equipment” or how they are “no longer willing to put in [uncompensated] extra time.” Still, and despite the rare reference to “burnout,” responses to this question tended to reflect a tolerant, enthusiastic complacency among most music teachers. 

Another key theme throughout the responses was support or lack thereof. Respondents tended to harbor negative will toward administration, who tended to be described as either “clueless” or “apathetic” toward the music program. In contrast, positive impressions of administrators, of which there were more than a few, described support in the form of curricular flexibility and response to the general needs of a program (i.e. technology, budget, and professional development). When administrative presence was – at times, understandably – scarce, respondents mentioned the surrounding community, parents, and/or booster programs as their surrogate sources of encouragement. A first-year music teacher shared:  

I have a somewhat supportive admin going into year 1. They are just super busy so they leave me to do a lot of extra work with little assistance. I have yet to have major conflicts with them. The community is great and very supportive. I have met some of the parents and they seem excited to watch their students do music. 

The current political and education policy environment, represented by DCLs, influenced some participants’ attitudes about their current position. These recent policy changes added a geographical consideration to whether a teacher was satisfied with their jobs and how those DCLs affected their classroom. One respondent wrote: 

It has become tougher to maintain discipline and strong standards in an educational system that vilifies educators and gives power to parents with motives that are not geared toward creating the best educational environment for ALL students. 

Still, most mentions of policy, politics, or “the system” reflected the teacher’s annoyance and then refocused on their professional duties instead of viewing the current educational environment as uniquely turbulent. Further, no respondent indicated that the political climate was pushing them out of the profession. As one respondent opined: 

Every Job has its challenges. Every School has its challenges. I will not supply any more information because I believe my building administrators are overworked and underappreciated. Any support I feel I may not get from them, I do not believe it is because they do not care, but because they are overwhelmed themselves. Public Education has many broken systems thanks to politics. The government needs to get out of the way and let the educators do the job we are hired to do and not bound us by unnecessary law and regulations. 

The final theme for this question reflected a reshuffling of professional and personal priorities following the pandemic. Some teachers viewed the shutdowns as an impetus to achieve better work/life balance while still providing opportunities for their students. These teachers also tended to take personal responsibility for their own happiness. One participant shared: 

Ever since the pandemic, I have been pickier about the amount of time outside the contract day that I give to my profession. Since returning to in-person teaching, my personal life has received more attention than before the shutdowns. 

In general, responses to whether participants were satisfied with their current position reflected considerable contextual nuance. Specific factors comprising teachers’ satisfaction included district policies, state policies, administrator presence, community support, work/life balance, compensation, retirement benefits, and parental interactions. Each of these factors had both positive and negatively valanced attitudes depending on a teacher’s context. Encouragingly, responses contained very few mentions of “burnout” or a desire to leave their current position – or the profession as a whole. Instead, teachers generated personal strength and motivation from their students. 

What makes one optimistic for the future 

Unlike the other questions, responses to the question “What is one thing that makes you optimistic about the future of your program?” tended to be homogenous. Respondents shared that both individual student and program growth gave them reason to be optimistic looking forward. Some teachers imparted that their programs have either fully recovered from the shutdowns or are seeing larger numbers than before the COVID-19 pandemic. By focusing on students, some teachers were able to find levity and hope, even in some challenging situations. As one teacher quipped: 

I always hope that a new administrator will come along with a genuine love of music and will allocate funding to the music department. It doesn’t seem likely, though, but I still keep the dream. 

Advising colleagues to apply for positions in music education 

As we mentioned above, participants’ response sentiment tended to be similar across all four open-response questions. So, if a teacher had a negatively valanced response to the question about their satisfaction with their current position, they very likely wouldn’t advise a student or colleague to enter the music education profession. Teachers whose responses were tagged as having positive sentiment leaned toward enthusiastically recommending someone enter the music education profession. These polemic extremes represented outliers in the overall data, though. The most prominent theme among the responses was a qualified “yes” or, as one teacher described “only if the teacher goes in with their eyes wide open.” As one example: 

It’s tough, man. The hours are long, the budgets are tight. The salary is laughable. I don’t discourage students from pursuing a career in music education, but I don’t sugarcoat the realities I face every day either. I’ve only been teaching since 2020, but I’m facing burnout that teachers twice my age experience because this career has just been pulling more and more out of me each year. The other teachers assure me that it will get better when things go back to normal, but when is that going to happen? I think my issues all stem from teaching as a profession, not necessarily the subject that I teach. The subject I teach is really what is keeping me around.  

Other times, teachers cited specific policies, like DCLs, or related statewide political concerns when hedging their recommendations for potential future music teachers: 

The frustrations and major issues I have had with my music program’s booster organization has served as one of the biggest deterrents. Additionally, the recent laws and restrictions passed by the [Governor] administration make me very unmotivated to continue to work in a state that does not and will not support all the children it is obligated to serve. Lastly, justification to seek an occupation in another field are highlighted by the low salary and increase rate for faculty and educators. In a state with increasing inflation, this career may become unfeasible for many people with more difficult financial situations. That said, I WOULD advise others to apply only if they acknowledge the many issues and problems with the state and county education systems, and believe that the reward from watching students grow musically and as individuals outweighs the high cost.  

More broadly, participants’ hesitance to recommend their profession to others did not focus on issues specific to music education, but more on concerns for all members of the teaching profession. They often expressed more uncertainty and confusion regarding the political environment than frustration or outright anger. For example: 

It’s less about music education and more about education in general. I’m nervous for anyone considering education as a profession until the current political climate changes. We are banning books right now, y’all. This is a strange strange strange time. 

Despite some reports of challenging educational environments, the majority of respondents who answered this question would recommend students and colleagues enter the music education profession. It should be noted, though, that this result merely represents the broad patterns among these respondents and cannot be generalized beyond this set of data. 

Blended Analysis and Recommendations 

The comprehensive study of the 2023-2024 NFHS Teacher Satisfaction Survey is a combination of quantitative and qualitative data that provides a holistic view of the current landscape of music education. This blended analysis enables us to discern subtle trends and undercurrents that may be less apparent when examining these data sets in isolation. Our approach not only ensures the integrity of the individual data analyses but also allows us to leverage the distinct strengths of each method, leading to more informed and nuanced recommendations for the field of music education. 

Key Findings 

The study revealed several critical insights, with support and optimism emerging as central themes influencing music educators’ professional satisfaction and their propensity to recommend the field to others. 

1. The Role of Support: Support from various stakeholders—including administrators, communities, and educational institutions—is fundamental to music educators’ experiences. Our analysis indicated varying levels of support that correlate significantly with overall job satisfaction and the likelihood of recommending a career in music education. Notably, community support often outweighed administrative support, primarily due to budget constraints that limited administrative capacity. 
2. Optimism and Support Correlation: A robust correlation existed between the levels of optimism music educators felt and the support they perceived. Support, however,  predicted job satisfaction more than general optimism. This finding suggests that, while a positive outlook is important, tangible, actionable support from the immediate community and administration has a more direct impact on educators’ job satisfaction and their advocacy for the profession. 

Recommendations 

Based on the study findings our recommendations focus on enhancing the support structures and overall environment for music educators, ensuring they have the resources and backing needed to thrive in their roles. Each recommendation is designed to address specific areas identified in the findings, providing a multifaceted approach to improving music education. 

1. Strengthening Local Support: 
   • Professional Development and Resources: Increase investments in professional development programs specifically tailored for music educators. These should include training in the latest educational technologies, innovative teaching methods that cater to diverse learning styles, and effective classroom management techniques. Furthermore, creating opportunities for music educators to attend state or national conferences or partake in continuing education opportunities can help them stay at the forefront of educational trends and methodologies. 
   • Community Engagement Initiatives: Enhance and broaden community engagement efforts that link music programs with local businesses, cultural institutions, and community groups. One effective approach would be to partner with local members of the National Association of Music Merchants (NAMM). Collaborating with NAMM members in the community can bring numerous benefits. For schools, it provides access to expertise in music products and technology, potential donations or discounts on musical instruments and equipment, and guest speakers who can offer students insights into the music industry. For NAMM members, these partnerships can enhance their community presence, create direct marketing opportunities, and foster goodwill by supporting educational initiatives. Additionally, these collaborations can offer unique performance opportunities for students and contribute to the professional development of music educators by keeping them updated on the latest music technologies and industry trends. This symbiotic relationship not only enriches the educational experience for students but also strengthens the community’s cultural landscape. 
2. Advocacy and Policy Engagement: 
   • Coalition Building: Facilitate the formation of coalitions among music education organizations to unify their voices in advocating for supportive policies. These coalitions should work to influence local, state, and national education policies that directly impact music education, focusing on securing sustainable funding, equitable access to music education, and recognition of the arts as a critical component of the curriculum as it is listed as a core content area in the ESSA federal education law. 
   • Ongoing Research and Advocacy: Commit to ongoing research efforts that document the benefits of music education, aiming to strengthen the case for music in schools. This research should be widely disseminated to policymakers, educational leaders, and the public to raise awareness and support for music education. Highlighting studies that show the positive impacts of music education on student achievement, social skills, and community cohesion can be particularly persuasive. 
3. Support for Mental Health and Well-being: 
   • Establishment of Support Networks: Create support networks that offer both peer support and professional counseling opportunities tailored to the needs of music educators. These networks could facilitate regular meet-ups, mentorship programs, and online forums where educators can share experiences, resources, and coping strategies. 
   • Enhanced Administrative Support: Administrators should be trained to recognize and actively support the specific needs of music educators. This includes not only providing the necessary resources and budget allocations but also integrating music education fully into school development plans and community outreach programs. 
4. Improving Communication and Feedback: 
   • Implementing Feedback Mechanisms: Schools should implement structured and regular feedback mechanisms that allow music educators to voice their needs and concerns effectively. Ensuring that educators’ voices are heard and acted upon can significantly improve job satisfaction and professional engagement. 
5. Increasing Financial and Material Resources: 
   • Securing Funding: Actively seek external funding opportunities, such as grants from arts foundations, government arts agencies, and private sponsors. These funds should be targeted not just for basic program needs like instruments and sheet music, but also for innovative projects like interdisciplinary arts initiatives and technology integration in music education. 
   • Resource Allocation: Ensure equitable distribution of resources across all school music programs, addressing disparities that might exist between different schools or districts. This includes fair access to quality instruments, performance spaces, and technology that can enhance the educational experience for all students. 

The findings from this study underscore the complex interplay between support structures, policy advocacy, and resource allocation in the field of music education. This research highlights how robust support systems not only enhance the job satisfaction of music educators but also increase their propensity to endorse the profession to future music educators, but also increase their own levels of retention. 

To elevate the quality of music education effectively, it is imperative that the infrastructural support underlying this discipline is strengthened. By fortifying support mechanisms, we can provide educators with comprehensive backing from administrative entities and the broader community. This support extends beyond mere emotional or moral encouragement and encompasses tangible assets such as access to contemporary pedagogical resources, opportunities for continuous professional development, and a network that recognizes and addresses the distinct challenges inherent in music education. 

Advocating for supportive policies is crucial in shaping the landscape of music education. Legislative frameworks and educational policies that recognize and enhance the value of music education can create significant improvements. Policies designed to ensure sustained financial support, equitable access to high-caliber music education, and the integration of the arts within broader educational curricula are indispensable. Such policies not only secure essential resources but also affirm the integral role of music education in cultivating culturally proficient and well-rounded individuals. 

Enhancing the allocation of resources is of paramount importance. It is essential that these resources are not only ample but are distributed equitably to mitigate disparities across educational settings. Strategic investment in musical instruments, technological advancements, and the development of dedicated spaces for music education can profoundly enhance the student learning experience and create environments where educators can thrive. 

As we prioritize these focal areas, we advocate not only for the advancement of music education but also for the cultivation of a vibrant future that resonates with the values and needs of both educators and their communities. This commitment to enhancing music education is essential for fostering a new generation of individuals who value culture, creativity, and community—attributes that are increasingly invaluable in our interconnected global landscape. 

References 

Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. Jossey-Bass.  

Kingdon, J. W. (2011). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies (Updated 2^nd ed.). Longman. 

Miksza, P. & Elpus, K. (2018). Design and analysis for quantitative research in music education. Oxford. 

Onwuegbuzie, A. J. & Leech, N. L. (2006). Linking research questions to mixed methods data analysis procedures. The Qualitative Report, 11(3), 474-498. http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR11-3/onwuegbuzie.pdf &nbsp;

Saldaña, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3^rd ed.). Sage.