As has been noted, it may be necessary in the future to inform and link the observations and conclusions gleaned from this research with other, perhaps as yet undiscovered or yet-to-be-written research that emerges in the field of teacher practice as it is framed by these research questions. It is hoped that it also becomes possible to develop further understanding of the theory and practice of education.
Over a long but fruitful period of data analysis of the teachers’ responses, I used a range of approaches. I took an inductive approach to determine the key threads, emerging patterns, trends, and a deductive approach to identify inconsistencies, gaps, possible contradictions, confusions, and emphases, in order to discover new considerations that might need to be addressed and collated. I bundled the responses in different ways, looking for implied meanings, and carefully attempting to discern the full meaning of responses. I analysed content by means of collaborative analysis and validation based on the teachers’ responses, carefully clarifying coherent pictures of classroom practices; I included some comparisons of classroom practice – all from the content of the Questionnaire. Careful, deep analysis occurred as I strove to fully understand the implications of these observations and my conclusions regarding them. Evidence of certain categories of educational practice began to emerge.
To address the Questionnaire responses thoroughly, one question at a time, I read, understood and reflected on each response, until I was certain that I had discerned (to the best of my ability) the intent and full details of the participant’s answer – as many times, the participant answered briefly or in note form. This was followed by comparing the various responses to each
that I had accurately detailed where agreement and disagreement existed. This was followed by another bundling process in which sections of the Questionnaire were aggregated, thus providing a manageable understanding of responses, differences, contradictions, gaps, confusions, concerns and, sometimes, where no information had been entered.
By quantifying the data at this stage, I was able to construct graphs which gave a visual representation of the teachers’ experience and practice. This was the only time that the quantitative process emerged within the investigation and was followed by extensive comparison, analysis, and discernment towards the generation of qualitative conclusions. By dint of the completion of these elements, it became possible to identify hesitations, confusions, concerns, and silences. These results are shown in detail in Chapter 4.
I requested responses from three practitioner-experts in the teaching of thinking skills, (one in the UK, one in NZ and one in Australia) and these were examined in detail. All three had been sent a copy of the Questionnaire, and each chose to respond to the different sections with a general comment, rather than to the individual questions appearing under each of the sections. This triangulation of data sources – my personal practices and learnings, the details provided by the teacher-participants, and the opinions and elucidations of the practitioner-experts – provided content that, on analysis, was expected to yield observable national similarities and differences, leading to a space for critical conclusions and observations. It was expected that the specific comments and insights of the teachers would elucidate current practices relating to the teaching of thinking skills. The results yielded more than had been anticipated; these elements are explored in Chapters 6, 7 and 8.
I chose to analyse personally the data provided by the respondents. It became immediately apparent that the colleagues in all three countries had assumed that another teacher (me) would understand their responses, whether summarised or elaborated upon. In the interests of accuracy, understanding
and transparency, then, I paid careful attention to the varying levels of detail provided by the respondents. Many gave brief answers, apparently expecting that their notes would be sufficient for the purposes of the research project. I took time over the analysis and inspection of the responses – regardless of their length – to be certain that my interpretations were reliable and valid. Because the bundling of comment and references given by participants was undertaken personally and not by an ICT package, I was able to consider the possible implications contained in the brief, succinct responses. Each and every response was taken into account; the detailed responses and outcomes are reported in Chapter 4. Where there was perceived ambiguity, consultation with my thesis supervisors resulted in agreement as to the ultimate interpretation. Each section of the Questionnaire was given individual attention; conceptual cross-links between sections were established and verified. A graphical representation of the frequency of different responses to each section of the Questionnaire is provided in Chapter 4.
Hesitations, confusions, concerns and silences
Careful inspection and interrogation of the responses was then undertaken to establish a teachers’ perception profile that included their hesitations, concerns, confusions, and silences. In this way links and connections between the sets and sub-sets of research questions were located; contradictions and assumptions were detected; various terminologies were checked for consistent application by respondents from the three countries; and thus the findings were validated by internal triangulation. I became confident that conceptual connections and links were present between the list of hesitations, confusions, concerns and silences, and my research questions. Those connections and links emerged, in various ways, in the synthesis of understanding. The list could also be used as a stepping-off point for the wider study program I now set myself, and from which the Literature Review and the accompanying Bibliography emerged.
I found I could delve into my own experiential learning and formal qualifications at will and at length to make connections; to find links; to overlay elements from each of the research sources in order to identify any contradictions and assumptions, if they existed; and to identify what my ‘researcher voice’ would provide as the theory unfolded, as the various instrumental tools were applied, and the recommendations that followed were clarified.
I soon recognised that, despite respondents having had an opportunity to register their views in detail in each section of the Questionnaire, these hesitations, signs of confusion, underlying concerns, and silences were concerned with contemporary issues in education in Australia, New Zealand and the UK. My own experience of the writings of leading educationalists and philosophers had focussed my thinking on an understanding of virtues, values and ethics. I had already begun the process of the analysis and synthesis of my studies, integrating relevant contexts and compiling an understanding of the work of Wilson, Lipman and Vardy as preparation for my own practice of teaching thinking skills to secondary students where I taught different subjects and different topics. I became aware that, surprisingly, this was not the case for the majority of the teachers who had completed the Questionnaire. This was particularly unexpected in the case of teachers from my school, as I had initiated a focus on Wilson, Lipman and Vardy in a number of professional development activities over the previous five years.
It became evident that teachers were not prioritising the development of thinking skills for the purposes of teaching about virtues, values and ethics. I realised that I needed to support teachers as their understanding of these elements emerged. These steps are discussed in Chapter 4.
My comprehensive analytical framework: two aims
My extensive Questionnaire produced a considerable variety of interesting strategies and approaches. I chose as my first aim to list, compare and
contrast these – for better understanding of the practice of the teaching of thinking skills – by developing an analytical framework that integrated my three chosen educational formats:
Wilson’s Moral Components List – a compendium of moral concepts which encompass virtues education (Wilson, 1987) and a focus on moral thinking skills (Wilson, 1987).
Lipman’s Philosophy for Children – focus on Community of Inquiry discussion skills like questions, hypotheses, assumptions (Lipman, 1993a; Splitter & Sharp, 1995).
Vardy’s Five-Strand Approach to Religious Studies and Values Education – a complete concept (Vardy, 1998) that integrates rigorous studies regarding Christianity, studies regarding Comparative Religions, studies regarding Values, Virtues and Ethics, with particular relevance only to Year 11 and 12 curricular studies in secondary school.
My second aim was to either confirm or deny the legitimacy of my early understandings of virtues, values and ethics, based on the responses of the participating teachers and experts.
Evaluation of all relevant criteria for this enterprise
Careful use of criteria for reliability and validity (Flick, 2002), as well as trustworthiness, credibility and dependability, provides authentic data for inspection, interpretation and evaluation. Taking account of the distinctive elements that Mark A. Constas (1998, pp. 36-42) outlines regarding the requirements of postmodern qualitative research, means recognising that the relevant criteria are nuanced very subtly. Reference to important distinctions made by both Constas (1998) and Thomas (2003) allowed me to understand how a synthesis of thinking skills would take place for me; to make sure that I understood the various methods required to address all the imperatives of my thesis research. As my conclusions and recommendations emerged, it became obvious that much that is practised today may need reshaping
The evolution of liberal education in the twentieth century has resulted in conflicting outcomes (Wilson, 1987), and educating children for good citizenship has resulted in the emergence of contradictions between what are regarded as rights and what are deemed responsibilities. Value-free and neutral teaching in classrooms has served Australian education well, but has left constraints upon teachers and students alike (Snook, 1975). While this kind of education brought with it knowledge of individual rights, it began an enterprise that was to eventually evolve into the beginnings of the ‘stakeholder society’ (Giddens, 1998; Howe, 2007). Significant trends based on a Third Way (Giddens, 1998); for citizenship, question how education prepares students for their uncertain futures. Splitter & Sharp (1995) argue that students will need broad thinking skills, to understand choices and engage in decision-making (Giddens, 1998). This development supports and advances my effort to refresh social frameworks and personal life situations. This aim is parallel to the reshaped theory of education displayed in Chapters 6, 7 and 8.
The reshaped theory of education rests particularly too on ‘paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences’ delineated in chapter 6 by Lincoln, Lynham and Guba (2011). They clarify the path of qualitative research that is emerging in my inductive writing. Also important is an over-arching ‘critical pedagogy ‘in qualitative research of the work of Kincheloe, McLaren and Steinberg (2011). The importance is the recognition of the clarification of experience as a legitimate source for learning, called bricolage (p. 167), defined as ‘an emancipatory research construct’ which includes the use of ethnographic methodology as a means of ‘self- understanding and self-direction’ (p. 171).
Looking forward...
The following three chapters report the results of my three data collection strategies:
• Chapter 3 reports my search for theory and voices in my Literature Review.
• Chapter 4 reports the findings of the Questionnaire and my personally designed pedagogical practices.
• Chapter 5 reports my auto-ethnographical retrospective.
By constructing the evidence gained from the Questionnaire, and then deconstructing the details of evidence given by respondents, I could reflect at a deep level on the concepts, the hesitations, the concerns, the possible confusions and even the silences emanating from this rich source. Reconstruction, through the modelling of inductive thinking patterns, has been carefully built into the reporting of all areas of the findings, the Literature Review, the logical emergence of conclusions and my recommendations, and the deliberate construction of a new theory (Chapter 6). Supporting these measures is the comprehensive auto-ethnographical introspective recounting my teaching and learning, which has unearthed new perspectives and emphases which, I contend, contribute towards planning for twenty-first century education.
In the first instance, the title of my thesis was Investigating Teachers’ Perceptions of their Teaching of Thinking. The investigation, which began with the same title, was conducted by the use of the Questionnaire as the instrument which would, when secondary school teachers’ voices were requested, be listened to, and be reported carefully and accurately, yield precise responses and indicate new knowledge from the coalface. Eventually, this process would lead to a new focus with an accurate title: Towards an Architecture for Teaching of Virtues, Values and Ethics.