A document analysis is a systematic process of reviewing existing qualitative documentary evidence to answer specific evaluation questions. The types of documents reviewed will depend on the evaluation focus. Document analysis is rarely used alone; it is typically combined with other data sources (for example focus groups or interviews) to substantiate the content and use of the documents being analysed.

A document analysis allows:

• an efficient way to collect data with minimal time or disruption, using existing, accessible documents
• for a focus on historical data or trends through available documents
• for the creation of a context or narrative base for quantitative data (for example analysing a scope and sequence or teaching program to explain changes in school-based assessment results for a cohort).

Document analysis can be used to determine:

• Evidence of activity: for example, reviewing stage or faculty meeting minutes to identify how and what information about curriculum implementation (phases, journeys, role responsibilities, KLA/ subject matter details) is discussed.
• Evidence of process quality: for example, reviewing the faculty, stage or school wide process for developing scope and sequences, teaching and learning programs or assessment materials. This can determine whether steps are relevant, concise and sequential for staff to follow.
• Evidence of impact: for example, by triangulating professional learning attendance records and feedback with teaching and learning program documents, to demonstrate adequate planning to improve understanding of curriculum changes.

To undertake a document analysis follow this 3-step process:

1. Identify: determine data relevant to your evaluation question; determine how you will record the relevant data you are looking for in each document, this could be through colour coding and highlighting pre-determined criteria; record in a template or use a consistent method of recording the frequency of statements related to the criteria.
2. Read: dig deeper to identify relevant patterns in the text; categorise or code words or phrases according to the agreed criteria
3. Interpret: review the categorised data to reflect on what the documents are showing; summarise key themes or patterns; record any other relevant factors (author of the document, who contributed, who did not to determine any voices that may be missing); work collaboratively with colleagues to review interpretations of any words or phrases that are complex to code; annotate documents where necessary to show clear alignment to the coding process; tally the reference/s made to each criteria; consider overall frequencies or average frequencies of criteria to enable comparisons, and; note the facts and consider whether the data is providing new or emerging themes or aligning with existing knowledge.

• Plan evaluation questions and carefully select relevant, existing documents to review.
• Consider the use of open-ended questions to support deeper analysis.
• Keep the scope focused by using specific criteria to evaluate documents that align with your evaluation question or inquiry.
• Allocate time for team members to collaborate during the document analysis process.
• Involve those conducting the analysis in the planning phase to ensure inter-rater reliability (consistency across individuals in measurement).
• Collaborate with team members to compile a list of documents to review, which may include:
  • scope and sequences
  • learning sequences or units of work
  • lesson plans or teaching and learning strategies
  • work samples
  • meeting minutes (faculty, stage, executive)
  • procedure documents or policies
  • professional learning records.
• Consider using a sampling strategy if reviewing a large number of documents, such as a representative sample across faculties, stages, or student groups.
• Seek permission before analysing documents and inform staff of the review’s purpose and how data will be used.
• Duplicate documents for review so annotations or coding can be made on copies, not original documents.