My research is a longitudinal qualitative case study of my BFC classroom. Bassey (1999: 47) describes case study together with experiment and survey as a 'study of singularity into particular events'. He goes on to qualify case study:
An essential feature of case study is that sufficient data are collected for researchers to be able to explore significant features of the case and to put forward interpretations for what is observed. Another essential feature is that the study is conducted mainly in its natural context. [...]
Case study is a study of singularity in depth in natural settings. (Bassey, 1999: 47)
Case study is mainly conducted in its natural setting: All of my data are based upon the exploration of my BFC classroom by myself, some of my learners and my headteacher. Bassey sums up case study as 'a study of singularity in depth in natural settings'. My research is singular as it is entirely based on the study of my BFC classroom. It is in
depth as it takes into account factors such as the content, the learners, the teacher and
interaction between the teacher and the learners. It is situated in its natural setting as it is classroom-based research.
It is worth exploring the notion of singularity in more detail. Cohen and Manion (1989) describe the role of the case study researcher as follows:
[...] the case study researcher typically observes the characteristics of an individual unit - a child, a clique, a class, a school or a community. The purpose of such observation is to probe deeply and to analyse intensively the multifarious phenomena that constitute the life cycle of the unit with a view to establishing generalisations about the wider population to which that unit belongs.
(Cohen and Manion, 1989: 124-125)
As a case study researcher I have observed the unique characteristics of my BFC classroom, i.e. my research is singular. My purpose was to probe deeply through the use of my research instruments. However, it is important to reconsider carefully if 'establishing generalisations' (Cohen and Manion, 1989: 125) should be the aim of case study research. As Stake (1995: 12) points out:
It is not uncommon for case study researchers to make assertions on a relatively small database, invoking the privilege and responsibility of interpretation. To draw so much attention to interpretation may be a mistake, suggesting that case study work hastens to draw conclusions. Good case study is patient, reflective, willing to see another view of the case. An ethic of caution is not contradictory to an ethic of interpretation.
It is with this ethic of caution proclaimed by Stake that I approach my case study research and - in the context of putting my theory of practice into practice - my research instruments by being aware of their strengths and limitations.
Bassey (1999: 69) comments on methods of data collection in case study research as follows:
Case study research has no specific methods of data collection or of analysis which are unique to it as a method of enquiry. It is eclectic and in preparing a case study researchers use whatever methods seem to them to be appropriate and practical. One study may predominantly use questionnaires, another interviews, another observations and another documents - and within each of these descriptions there are endless variations. I urge researchers to be creative and adventurous in their choice of data collection methods. doing so they should be governed not by traditional views of data collection but by considerations of research ethics.
(Bassey, 1999: 69)
As pointed out before (Figure 1), 1 have used a teacher-researcher diary, focus group interviews and one individual interview as the appropriate and practical instruments for my research. Sometimes, I was creative; sometimes, I was adventurous. And things did go wrong. But again, this may be another strength of case study research - it is flexible enough to take into account the unpredictable and views conflicting data as a means to achieve greater depth.
Stake (1995: 135) describes qualitative case study also as 'highly personal research.' He explains this further:
Persons are studied in depth. Researchers are encouraged to include their own personal perspectives in the interpretation. The way the case and the researcher interact is presumed unique and not necessarily reproducible for other cases and researchers. [...]
The researcher will choose how personal to be, how qualitative to be, what roles to play. (Stake, 1995: 135)
My research is personal because my research data have either been written by myself through my teacher-researcher diary or produced as a result of the interviews conducted with some of my learners and my headteacher.
Stake (1995: 133-134) describes the 'case' in the following maimer:
The case [...] is a special something to be studied, a student, a classroom, a committee, a program [...]. The case to be studied probably has problems and relationships, and the report of the case is likely to have a theme, but the case is an entity. The case, in some ways, has a unique life. It is a something that we do not sufficiently understand and want to - therefore, we do a case study.
(Stake, 1995: 133-134)
The 'special something' 1 studied was teacher-learner interaction in my BFC classroom. The 'problems' could be viewed on a general level as looking at how to implement CLIL within the context of the BFC. 'Relationships' refer in my case study to relations between the learners, the teacher and the curriculum. They also refer to relationships between classroom management problems as a novice teacher and teaching the Foundation Course curriculum in French. As a teacher-researcher, I wanted to know more about these problems and relationships. In order to understand interaction in my BFC classroom, it was 'important to seek out and present multiple perspectives of activities and issues, discovering and portraying the different views.' (Stake, 1995:
133-134) As a teacher-researcher, I studied for two years my teaching and its effectiveness on the learners. This implies that my research is subjective. Stake comments on subjectivity:
We recognize that the case is subjective, relying heavily on our previous experience and our sense of worth of things. We try to let the reader know something of the personal experience of gathering the data. [...] We seek an accurate but limited understanding.
(Stake, 1995: 133-134)
This subjectivity is part of my research as I researched myself, my classroom and my learners as a teacher-researcher. Data collection was personal - reflecting on my
teaching, CLIL learning and the problems and relationships related to CLIL learning and teaching. My understanding is 'accurate but limited' due to my positioning inside my research as teacher-researcher. Stake (1995) goes on to argue that 'the researcher will choose how personal to be, how qualitative to be, what roles to play'. (Stake, 1995: 134) These choices are nevertheless guided by criticality. Being critical about my subjectivity requires self-reflection or - to pick up Schon's (1991) argument - to be reflecting in action and on action on my teacher-researcher roles. These roles overlap and cannot be separated from each other as I was both teacher and researcher at all times. Stake (1995) describes case researcher roles:
The case researcher plays different roles and has options as to how they will be played. The roles may include teacher, participant observer, interviewer, reader, storyteller, advocate, artist, counselor, evaluator, consultant and others. Although the rules of research oftentimes seem prescribed and restrictive, the styles researchers follow in designing, studying, writing, and consulting vary considerably. Each researcher consciously or unconsciously makes continuous decisions about how much emphasis to give each role.
(Stake, 1995: 91)
At any point in my research 1 played all of these roles:
• I was a teacher - literally. 1 taught for two years (from September 1998 until July 2000) a Year 7 Bilingual Foundation Course class.
• I was a participant observer through my teaching and keeping my teacher-researcher diary.
• I was an interviewer when supplementing my own data with interview data from my own learners (and from the headteacher).
• I was and am still reader, storyteller, advocate, artist, counselor, evaluator, consultant.
These roles are overlapping. I may have been more of one or the other at some point in my research. However, I will never have been just in one role. The involvement in all of these roles means that my research is not value free. Stake argues in favour of research not being value free:
Research is not helped by making it appear value free. It is better to give the reader a good look at the researcher. Often, it is better to leave on the wrappings of advocacy that remind the reader: Beware. Qualitative research does not dismiss invalidity of description and encourage advocacy. It recognizes that invalidities and advocacies are ever present and turns away from the goal as well as the presumption of sanitization.
(Stake, 1995: 95)
I have given 'the reader a good look' at my roles as teacher-researcher in Chapter However, I have not yet described the 'tool' that has enabled me to take a good look at myself as teacher-researcher: the use of a jazz metaphor. I examine my use of a jazz metaphor in the following section, before 1 present my research tools: my teacher- researcher diary and my (focus group) interviews, in more detail.