It [feedback] has to fit the kid and more to their learning needs (Debra).
As noted, the purpose of this multiple-case study is to investigate the beliefs and formative feedback practices present in a primary teacher’s writing lesson. As Seidman (2006) suggests, creating a profile from interviews through the words of the participants supports the presentation of context, clarifies intentions, and gives a sense of process that is essential in a qualitative analysis. In the next three chapters, I provide a comprehensive description of each participant teacher in their own context. The description of the participants’ profiles is based on researcher observation, pre and post-observation interviews, document and field note analysis, and the participant’s school website.
Each case description in chapters Four, Five, and Six is presented in the following order: it begins with an introduction to the participant teachers’ background, the schools they work in, their professional development, and their learning and their teaching practice. A brief background on their experience and qualifications prior to becoming a teacher is also included. This is followed by a description of their writing practices and feedback based on the observation, then a description of themes that emerged from analysis of the teacher’s practices. Chapters Four, Five, and Six provide a comprehensive description of the participant teachers’ beliefs and teaching practice.
Introduction to Debra
Debra (pseudonym) was a of Pakeha/New Zealand descent. Background, education, and teaching experience
At the time of interview, Debra had been teaching in School A since she completed her Bachelor of Teaching. She had five years of teaching experience in School A at the time of research.
At the time of the study, School A was a decile 5 contributing primary school, and worked towards enhancing teachers’ knowledge through teacher professional development, which included building a collegial culture and maintaining a shared focus on improving achievement by “discussing and exchanging ideas” (DI). Teachers were encouraged to engage in self-review using research and best practice models to increase student outcomes. In practice, this involved “regular staff meetings watch[ing]
achievement targets are recorded as analysing data to inform teachers’ decision- making and “to improve [their teaching] practice on reading and writing” (DI).
Specifically, the school set academic and social goals for each student by requiring teachers to evaluate student performance. These evaluations were intended to enable teachers to monitor students’ progress against these goals and “identify the next step they need to take in their learning” (DI). The teachers in the school worked together to design and implement a school-specific curriculum that integrated learning areas, key competencies, principles, and values (D1).
Professional learning and development
School A made resourced professional learning and development for teachers, as the school worked in a “cluster with other schools” (DI). The school’s leadership and teachers were required to “look at research and discover the thing that makes the biggest difference to the kids” and then to work on getting professional development in the identified area (DI).
Debra had attended 2 years of professional development on reading and at the time of research the “school was just getting into the professional development on teaching of writing” (DI). Literacy leaders worked with the teachers and would sit “in the classroom observing” them (DI). Teachers then had the opportunity to get “good feedback from literacy leaders about their teaching practices and how to improve them” (DI).
Since undertaking professional development, the teachers had practised “video recording their teaching practices and reflecting on them” (DI). At the time of research, the professional development program was focused on how to give feedback to students. Debra reported that this was because when the literacy leaders asked teachers to define feedback and “not one teacher knew the definition of feedback or how to give feedback” (DI). Since then, the professional development program in the school had centred on feedback. Debra commented that she “was getting the hang of providing oral feedback to students” and felt that “oral feedback was much more difficult” than she originally thought (DI).
Debra’s classroom
Debra’s classroom provided an interesting mix of students. Debra’s class was a combination of 65% of students with English as their first language and 35% students who had other languages as their native tongue, including Somali, Tongan, Tagalog, Gujarati and Samoan.
I provided Debra an overview of how I would like to carry out the research and arranged dates and times for interviews and observations. She introduced me to her students. I was then able to explain my research to the students and answer their questions, and to distribute consent forms. Debra then provided me her with class roll and lesson plan. Based on Debra’s timetable and our initial discussion, we agreed that each observation would be directly followed by a post-observation interview during the school lunch break. She chose three consecutive days for observation as she said she only took three or four days to complete one writing topic because she had to conduct writing lessons as her “principal checks to know we do our writing every day” (DI). Debra was a serious teacher both during the interviews and observations and did not joke with her students.