Analysis of task performance

The strongest evidence for task performance is the facilitator’s response in Session 5. Here he firmly indicates that the bridge as designed will fail the task rules. The model designed (see Figure 4-12) bears little relationship to their experiments in Session 4, to the images and information provided in Session 2 or to the sketches and calculations made earlier. The key part of Session 5, where the model is reviewed in detail, is one of the excerpts selected for deeper analysis in Chapter Five.

Chapter Five

Multimodal Analysis of Students’ Meaning Making

5.1 Introduction

Chapter Four has partially addressed the process of analysing the nature of student interaction and meaning making. This chapter shifts the focus of that analysis by concentrating on the multimodal aspects of that process. In turn, Chapter Six will bring both strands of analysis together and will be combined with the material in the literature review (Chapter Two). As discussed in Chapter Four, the other goal of using activity theory was to identify specific sections of the PBL session that would then be analysed in closer detail using multimodal techniques.

Seven excerpts were selected for more detailed analysis. This approach follows the basic design suggested by Jewitt (2006) of using activity theory to explore the totality of an interaction and then selecting small sections that exemplify key shifting dynamics for more detailed exploration using a multimodal approach.

The first excerpt was selected as it sets out the key themes that are explored across the rest of the analysis. The other excerpts allow a focus on shifting aspects of students’ problem solving and use of the multimodal resources. In addition, the excerpts selected capture the transition of the facilitator’s role from facilitating the students’ understanding to a very direct engagement in what needs to be done to carry out the task and critique the final product. The excerpts are selected from across the five recorded sessions and are summarised in Table 5-1.

Table 5-1: Selection of excerpts for closer analysis Excerpt # (Section No.) Session # Time* Focus

1 (5.2.1) 1 01.25-04.00 Facilitator-led, focus on theory behind bridge design task

2 (5.2.2) 1 24.27-27.38 Interaction within student group, focus on theory behind

bridge design task

3 (5.2.3) 1 54.21-56.27 Group-facilitator discussion, shift of focus from theory to

model building task

4 (5.2.4) 2 30.50-36.15 Interaction within student group, followed by a group-

facilitator discussion; shift of focus from theory to model building task

5 (5.2.5) 3 08.26-13.10 Shifts from student group, to facilitator’s input to

group-facilitator discussion. Most of the focus is on the theory behind the bridge design

6 (5.2.6) 4 19.47-23.26 Two of the students discussing how to build the model

7 (5.2.7) 5 22.20-26.40 Group-Facilitator discussion focussed on the model

designed between sessions 4 and 5

*Beginning and End times as per camcorder’s timer, with range corresponding to minutes and seconds into the session; the times coincide with the duration of the session, beginning with 0.00.

The first excerpt shows the facilitator adopting a traditional role in the PBL framework of presenting information that the students will use to scaffold their learning as they deal with the task. The second and third excerpts show various modes of interaction between the students and the facilitator and within the student group as they tackle the theoretical aspects of the bridge design. This alternation between in- student group interaction and interaction with the facilitator is repeated in Excerpts 4 and 5, but at this stage the focus is more on the practical design of the bridge model rather than the underlying theory. Excerpt 6 is atypical (as was the whole of the fourth student session) in that only two students are present and the focus throughout was on model building. The excerpt shows both the process of using tools to construct meaning and their planning as to how to complete the task. Excerpt 7 is again mostly concerned with student-facilitator interaction and forms a review of the work undertaken in Session 4 (and subsequently when one of the students worked on the model in his own time).

The selection of excerpts is done on the basis of several criteria. The researcher sought to capture the flow of the entire PBL class, hence the focus on the facilitator’s initial presentation; on the students’ (facilitator-assisted) meaning making, first in

terms of theory and then in terms of the model design; on an aspect of the session (the third) when only two students were present but actively engaged in testing possible model structures; and on the final session (the fifth) where the facilitator was involved in reviewing this work. There is a balance between facilitator-led excerpts, those that just involve the student group and those that see interaction between the student group and the facilitator (as discussed in Chapter Four). Finally, the individual selections or excerpts (called ‘blocks’) were kept to around 3-4 minutes to allow detailed analysis (O’Halloran & Smith, 2011) and were chosen to meet all the above criteria, but also as particularly rich instances of multimodal problem solving (the analysis that underpins Chapter Four was invaluable in allowing this selection).

In summary, across this selection of excerpts, it is possible to track the shift of focus from underlying theory to model building, the changing approaches to problem solving by the students and the shifting relationship between the student group and the facilitator.

As discussed in Chapter three (3.2.2.2 and 3.2.2.3), the students gave their approval to be videotaped as they carried out this task. As far as possible, their identity has been kept confidential, but a number of images are included that show their body posture and interaction. This is inevitable given the need to provide evidence, especially for the non-verbal element to their meaning making.

5.2 Analysis of individual excerpts