CCE at Macro Level

In this section, I explain the method utilised in analysing the concept of CCE at the macro level. Accordingly, this begins with discussion on the documents used in this research, the reasons for choosing them and the way these documents were analysed.

Documents Analysis

As illustrated in Figure 4.3, this research began with the analysis of CCE documents as this step was seen ‘as meaningful and appropriate in the context of the research strategy’ (Mason, 1994 : 103). In addition, Silverman (2001) asserted that ‘the choice between research methods should depend upon what you are trying to find out (p. 1)’. Due to this, in this study, document analysis was used in answering one of the research

Teacher’s Intentions and Beliefs Official aims and objectives of CCE

Content Content Methods Methods Intended Level Implemented Level

questions that is on the conceptual difference of CCE in Malaysia and in England. This analysis compared the published CCE curriculum in Malaysia with the curriculum in England. Thus, the comparative curriculum analysis in this study intends to compare these documents with documents from England in order to look at the differences and similarities that exist among educational systems, particularly in relation to the concepts of CCE in Malaysia and England and to identify the implications of these differences to the implementation of CCE particular in Malaysia (Sasaki, 2004; Marginson and Mollis, 2001; Hantrais, 1995; Bereday, 1964). In this study, England is chosen as citizenship education compared to other countries particularly in Malaysia, has been widely researched (Keating et al., 2010; Crick, 2007; Frazer, 2007; Kerr et al., 2007; Lockyer et al., 2003, Kerr et al., 2002; Crick et al., 1998).

Comparative education research looks at both the differences and similarities that exist among educational system practiced in two or more countries or regions (Marginson and Mollis, 2001; Sasaki, 2004; Hantrais, 1995; Bereday, 1964). Besides searching for explanation for these identified similarities and differences, for sociologists, the purpose of comparative education is also to gain a better understanding and awareness of other social entities in different national settings (Hantrais, 1995; Sasaki, 2004). According to Bereday (1965), comparative research or cross-national comparative research served for two purposes which are

‘first, to deduce from the achievements and the mistakes of school systems other than their own and second, to appraise educational issues from a global rather than an ethnocentric perspective, or in other words, to be aware always of other nations’ points of view’ (p. 6).

Thus, by conducting a systematic comparison between Malaysia’s concept of CCE with the concept in England, I not only could understand Malaysia’s concept better but also

understand and be aware of the concept used in England. This could also provide a ‘yardstick’ to assess Malaysia’s education system, providing a way to view other

education practices and procedures (Philips and Schweisfurth, 2007). As stressed by Bereday (1965 : 6), ‘to understand others and to understand ourselves is to have in hand the two ingredients of comparison’.

Even though McCulloch (2004), Prior (2003), Bauer (2000), Mason (1996), and Scott (1990) argued that document analysis has not been a favourable research method for the social scientist, it was also utilised in this research as the knowledge or data derived from analysing official documents could also be used with other methods of data collection (Fitzgerald, 2007; Mason, 1996). Thus, in this study, CCE documents were analysed in order to understand the concept of CCE at the macro level and set against teachers’ interviews and lesson observations to gain narration from different perspectives (Fitzgerald, 2007; Mason, 1996). Moreover, by analysing documents produced at the macro level, especially the documents which are officially used in Malaysia, could help ‘to determine the extent to which policy and practices at institutional level reflect the agenda of these established bodies’ (Fitzgerald, 2007 : 278).

Since 2005 CCE in Malaysia has become a compulsory subject for stage two primary school students and for all secondary school students. Due to this, in this research, citizenship curriculum documents in England was chosen to be compared with the Malaysia curriculum documents as in England, citizenship is a statutory subject for students in Key Stages 3 and 4. In order to make a more relevant and reliable comparison between these two curriculum documents, it was decided that the Key Stage 4 curriculum would be analysed. For the Malaysian curriculum, Form Two to Form Four curriculum documents were analysed. This was because as shown in Figure 4.5, secondary students, Form One to Form Five, in Malaysia are aged from 13 to 17 years, while in England Key Stage 4 students are aged 14 to 16 years.

Figure 4.5: Students Age Difference in Malaysia and England Education System

Malaysia Students’ Age England

Primary School 11 11

Key Stage 3

12 12

Secondary School (Form 1 (13 yrs old) – Form 5

(17 yrs old)) 13 13 14 14 15 14 Key Stage 4 16 15 17 16

In ensuring the authenticity and credibility of the documents analysed (Scott, 2004; 1990), these documents were obtained from recognised sources. Malaysia’s documents

were obtained from the Head of CCE in Curriculum Development Department (CDD) while the textbooks used in the school curriculum were bought from the authorised book distributors. This officer was met during my visit to Malaysia to pilot the CCE teacher’s interview schedule. For England’s related documents, some documents were bought from QCA while others were printed from the NFER websites. Accordingly, the official documents that were analysed in this study are as shown in Figure 4.6.

Figure 4.6: Documents Analysed

Malaysia CCE Integrated Secondary School Curriculum (KBSM) prepared by

CDD

CCE (KBSM) Teaching Syllabus for Form 2 prepared by CDD CCE (KBSM) Teaching Syllabus for Form 3 prepared by CDD CCE (KBSM) Teaching Syllabus for Form 4 prepared by CDD CCE and Moral Education Teaching and Learning Techniques

prepared by CDD

Secondary School Assessment Guide for CCE prepared by CDD CCE Circulars

CCE (KBSM) Textbook for Form 2 prepared by Textbook Division CCE (KBSM) Textbook for Form 3 prepared by Textbook Division CCE (KBSM) Textbook for Form 4 prepared by Textbook Division

England Citizenship Programme of study for key stage 4 published by QCA, 2007

Citizenship The National Curriculum for England key stages 3 - 4 published by DfEE and QCA

Work-related learning at key stage 4 published by QCA

Citizenship at key stages 1 - 4 Guidance on assessment, recording and reporting published by QCA

Bryman (2004) stated that documents comprise data derived from various sources; in the form of ‘text-based documents’ or ‘non-text based documents’ (Mason, 1996 : 103) that is text in the form of written materials and in the form of audio and visual materials (Scott, 2004). Hence, other than the documents listed above, citizenship documents for England were also obtained from the TeacherNet website (http://www.teachernet. gov.uk/). I also analysed relevant information from this website as this information was considered as reliable and authentic as it was published by a department authorised by the government. Moreover, this was considered as relevant to the research as ‘all statutory guidance and legislation published on this site continues to reflect the current legal position’ (http://www.education.gov.uk/help/About Content). The CCE textbooks; also termed as modules; were also analysed as schools in Malaysia were also supposedly bound to use textbooks prepared by the Textbook Division. Consequently, it was also necessary to analyse these textbooks as they reflect the purpose of CCE as intended by policy makers at the macro level.

In analysing the documents, comparative curriculum analysis was carried out in stages. Data analysis began by identifying the questions that needed to be answered in analysing the documents and by identifying the specific objectives of analysing them. Taking the suggestion of Bazerman (2006 : 79), focused questions were prepared in order ‘to identify and categorize data’. As ‘codes need to be derived theoretically and to reflect the purpose of the research’ (Bauer, 2000 : 140), the literature review in Chapter Three was used in identifying these questions and objectives. This process, referred to as deductive category application (Marying, 2000), was used as a guide in preparing the coding categories in analysing these documents. Accordingly, the main objectives of document analysis were to look at:

1) the concept of citizenship and citizenship education that are put across in the school

curriculum;

2) the key contents that are being promoted in the intended curriculum; and

In the first reading, documents from these two countries were read separately and analysed using the qualitative content analysis approach in which all themes that appeared to answer the predetermined questions and objectives were highlighted and coded. This approach was adopted as it allowed for more flexibility in analysing the texts (May, 2001). These documents were then reread with me immersing myself in the text to allow for other themes to emerge. These new themes were then identified and analysed to determine whether they represented new categories or could be subcategories of existing codes. Later, the analysis of documents from both countries were compared where similarities and differences that existed between these two curriculums were identified and discussed (Philips and Schweisfurth, 2007). However, in order for the analysis to be meaningful, the analysis also considered the context of the document, that was, the intended content of the document, who the author was and the purpose of writing the document, and on the received content of the document, that was, the meaning of the text as conceived by the reader (Scott, 1990).

In facilitating the procedure of analysing documents, I utilised Fitzgerald’s (2007) example of a documentary analysis tool which involved three columns; source, text and coding. Any important quotation from the analysed document was located in the text column to assist in making decisions on representativeness, meaning and credibility (Scott, 1990). The emerging key themes identified and coded meanwhile were placed in the coding column. These key themes were also ‘devised from multiple readings of similar documents as well as the relevant literature’ (Fitzgerald’s, 2007: 290). In comparing and coding documents in two different languages, I also took Stemler’s (2001) advice that ‘each word may not represent a category equally well’ (p. 2) and ‘some words may have multiple meaning’ (p. 3).

Philips and Schweisfurth (2007) further highlighted that comparative analysis should consider the problem of ethnocentricity, language and units of analysis. In the problem of ethnocentricity, I was reminded to ‘be aware of ourselves looking at an educational phenomenon in another country and to neutralize as far as possible the preconceptions our individual backgrounds have formed in us’ (Philips and Schweisfurth, 2007 : 94). As all of the Malaysia’s documents analysed in this research were written in the Malay language,

language was another problem faced in analysing and comparing these documents, as not all words could be directly translated to English language as this direct translation might lead to different concepts or meanings (Philips and Schweisfurth, 2007; Peterson, 2005; Sasaki, 2004). Indeed, there were times when I found it ‘hard to find equivalent phrases’ (Peterson, 2005 : 269). Philips and Schweisfurth (2007 : 95) further warned about the ‘tendency…to regard the nation-state as the basic unit of analysis and comparison’. Similarly in this study, Malaysia is not being compared to the United Kingdom but to England, which has its own education system. Moreover, in comparing the documents, the CCE curriculum and not the nation-state was the unit of analysis. This chapter will next move to discussion on the methods utilised in gathering data from those at the micro level.