Classroom Observations

Creswell (2009: p.182) classifies observation into five groups, these include; observation conducted as an observer, as a participant, taking the role of a participant more than an observer, engaging more time as an observer than as a participant, and at first an outside observer and later as an outside observer. In this study, observation was intently done as an observer. This means that I took note of every detail in unused settings and I made proper use of such details as a compass to its users. Wragg (2012) indicated amidst other forms of observation, watchful classroom observation can be used to light up unfamiliar events. The observation took place in classroom setting. It is in light of this, that classroom observation in this study was considered as a place that opens up acquaintances and originality.

Furthermore, Wragg stresses the important of each classroom observation methods allying with its purpose. Hence, I examined the unfamiliar translanguaging practice of first year bilingual students at UWC (a monolingual English setting). In my current study, closed classroom observations are particularly meant to examine various translanguaging strategies of the bilingual student and the pattern of use of the mentioned strategies by the research participants during academic collaboration, in this case is the observed classroom. Two (2) tutorial groups were observed and randomly selected based on participants’ two languages: Isi-Xhosa and English and Afrikaans and English group. Eight (8) observations were conducted on two (2) tutorial groups, four (4) times each. The observation period was four weeks, and in a week, each group meets once for tutorial classes. That means two (2)

71

observations for a week. It was assumed that classroom observation will enable me pay close attention to seemingly unusual language experiences, watch and listen attentively in the research space. This is because any information is important in forming discussion (Neuman, 2006).

The tutorial time allotted to each module is an hour. This tutorial module is not an exception. The classroom observations were used to investigate the translanguaging strategies of bilingual student, the patterns of use of these strategies if any and lastly, to examine the real classroom practices of bilingual students and their variance with the university language policy. It was quite challenging for me to see the real classroom practices of students especially in terms of language use. I had eight Isi- Xhosa students out of the total of twenty I observed. These eight participants, despite their voluntary participation did not make use of their first language either amongst other bilingual students or with their tutors. They actually became introverted when the tutorial began. The observation was audio recorded and field notes were also taken. The recorded information was all transcribed and translated accordingly. In the case of missed conversations in recordings due to semantics, field notes were used to compliment what was lost. Only during two tutorial sessions did students made use of their first and second language out of eight observed tutorial sessions. The languages used were English and Afrikaans. The use of these languages was strictly during the students’ classroom interaction. It was observed that participants that used both languages used it to clarify and understand concepts or confirm what the tutor said. I had a routine where I arrive each week at tutorial classes before the tutors and students arrived. It allowed me the opportunity to familiarize myself with the students. Also, out of the two tutorial classrooms, five students are coincidentally my students. I tutored them in another module in the Faculty of Education (EDC 101- Educational practice). These known students informed other classmates that I am/was a tutor. This caused some of students to be relaxed while others were cautious of my presence despite the fact that I was seated at the last row.

I used two to three small audio recorders to record the happenings in the classroom, in particular during the learning process of the research participants. I did not rely absolutely on the audio recorders because of unforeseen technicalities that might occur. Hence, personal note taking was considered important. The reason for the consideration was that it helped me

72

to record actions in readable form. In fact, it was the personal notes that were used as an alternative source of information after the data collected from the observation was transcribed. The normal seating arrangement was two students per table but it was not compulsory to adopt the arrangement to all tutorial sessions. There was room for a higher number of students per table depending on the task for different tutorials. For each weekly observation, the seating position of students changed. This was so because I did not want students to be overly conscious of the investigation which might have lead them to be uneasy during tutorials and as a result they may not have behaved naturally in their classroom setting. In the first two weeks of classroom observation, participants were left alone to choose their seat. As a norm they sat in two’s at a table. At the two observed tutorials, most were friends seated together while few others were simply classmates for that module only. It was noticed that students who voluntarily participated were reluctant to use another language apart from the language of Medium of Instruction (MOI). I specifically re-arranged the tutorial classes such that four students per table were tactically asked to sit together in week three’s observation. The arrangement was deliberately done to facilitate bilinguals of the same two languages, and proximity. During the last and fourth week, the students were seated in twos when the tutor’s kindly asked them to seat as mixed gender pairs. The pairing was based on language competency of the MOI, the same other language (Afrikaans or Isi-Xhosa) and individual understanding of basic academic concepts and tasks.