Within the context of action research, there are three approaches which researchers can use when collecting data, which lend themselves positively to my intended research. These three approaches are ‘experiencing’, ‘enquiring’ and ‘examining’. ‘Experiencing’ as an approach entails the use of observation, where the researcher seeks to gain an understanding of “the variables, participants and other phenomena” (McMillan & Schumacher, 2010, p. 448). During ‘enquiring’ the researcher could use interviews, questionnaires and tests to obtain new data, while ‘examining’ involves document and artefact reviews of data that have already been collected (McMillan & Schumacher, 2010, p. 448).
38 With regard to my position as the researcher in relation to the participants, the balance of power favoured the educators. Unlike collaborative action research and participatory action research, I did not participate in any teaching at all. The educators themselves were at the centre of the action, while I remained a sole, impartial observer.
The following description of the data collection tools describes the qualitative methods that were used, as well as the above action research approaches, namely “experiencing, enquiring and examining.”
3.6.1 Initial Questionnaire
The questionnaire (Appendix, 1) is comprised of fifteen statements regarding differentiated instruction to which the educators responded, by selecting from a scale, which ranges from ‘never’; ‘seldom’; ‘sometimes’; ‘often’; ‘always’. This questionnaire served as a baseline assessment to elicit the six participants’ understanding of differentiated instruction and how they purport to implement differentiated instruction in practice. In the following chapter, the outcome of the questionnaire, which in turn serves as the initial testimony of the participants, is discussed in relation to what was observed in practice.
3.6.2 Preliminary Interviews
The preliminary interview (Appendix 2) consists of fourteen, open-ended questions. These questions aimed to elicit qualitative data, based on the prior knowledge, practical experience and personal opinions of the Grade 7 educators, with regard to differentiated instruction. Therefore, the preliminary interviews provided the participants with the opportunity to expand upon their original accounts provided by their responses to the questionnaire.
3.6.3 Classroom Observation
Classroom observation took place over the first two weeks in August during the third term. It was important to guard against preconceived ideas and bias as potential problems and to also place what was observed within its organisational and/or curricular context (Bell, 2005). Prior to the commencement of classroom observations, letters requesting permission for the researcher to observe and audio record in the classroom, from both the Grade 7 learners and their parents were delivered to the schools and distributed to the learners. The signed consent forms were then collected and stored. The terms relating to anonymity and confidentiality, stated in the letter to the learners and their parents, were upheld. A schedule to observe lessons was arranged with the educators beforehand and there were no interruptions with regard to the delivery of the lessons, curriculum coverage and preparation for the ANA (Annual National Assessment) exams whatsoever. Apart from Participant Two (total lessons observed was two, one hour English lessons) each participant was observed for a total of at least three, one hour lessons. Qualitative, field notes were written during lesson observations, to supplement the checklist, discussed below.
39 3.6.3.1Classroom Observation Checklist
The checklist (Appendix 3) is comprised of eighteen behaviour indices and is adapted from the questionnaire in the article by de Jager (2013) and the REACH Inventory, originally devised by Rock, Gregg, Ellis and Gable (2008). Examples of the behaviour indices included are: scaffolding, multilevel teaching, adjusting pacing, providing visual supports and flexible grouping. Directly upon each lesson observation, the researcher would record which behaviours were observed and make comments. The recordings marked on the observation checklist and the handwritten field notes were then typed and stored electronically as summaries of each lesson observed. In total, the field notes and checklist results of fifteen lessons were summarised. These summaries, in turn, formed the basis for the discussion during the post-observation interviews.
Upon completion of the classroom observations, post-observation interviews were conducted. Feedback was given by the participants; therefore the interview was not about an ‘expert’ researcher giving a critical evaluation. The aim was to consult with the participants with regard to accurately describing and reflecting on the action that was observed, in an objective, unbiased manner.
3.6.4 Post-Observation Interview
The post-observation interviews (Appendix 4) were audiotaped and were about thirty to forty-five minutes in duration. The interview consists of ten questions which served as points of discussion within the context of descriptive feedback relevant to the research sub- questions, stated in Chapter One. Therefore, the participants were encouraged to reflect upon their lessons within the context of how differentiated instruction was incorporated into planning the lessons and the differentiation strategies employed to respond to the needs of the learners that were identified during the lesson. Furthermore, the six participants were required to reflect upon how they differentiated assessment items, particularly with regard to class tests written by the Grade 7 learners, during the school observation period. At both full- service schools, at the time when school observation was taking place, the participants and their learners were also preparing for the Grade 7 English and Mathematics ANA exams. Hence, questions relating to the extent of differentiation observed in the ANA revision books for Grade 7 Mathematics and English were also discussed during the post-observation interviews.
3.6.5 Document Analysis
3.6.5.1 Lesson Plans
Both sceptism and empathy were adopted, as internal criticism, with the goal to “gradually gain more insight and detailed knowledge, so leading to a greater appreciation of the worth of the evidence from the documents” (Bell, 2005, p. 133). The data gleaned from the interviews and classroom observations were supplemented by an analysis of the lesson plans submitted by the Grade 7 Mathematics and English First Additional Language educators (Appendix
40 5A). Seven criteria, based on the “Unit Planner Template” in van Garderen and Whittaker (2006, p. 17), were used to analyse the lesson plans. During the course of this research, the six participants, as educators teaching at full-service schools, were expected to base their lessons on the plans provided by the Gauteng Department of Education. The Gauteng Primary Language and Mathematics Strategy (GPLMS) was implemented as an educator support intervention plan, in that province, in order to assist educators in full-service schools and poorly-performing schools, to bridge the gap between instructional practices and the demands of implementing the new curriculum (CAPS). As described by de Clercq (2014, p. 311) the GPLMS lesson plans are “standardised daily lesson plans with time frames for structured tasks and activities based on a weekly routine.” The aim of these lesson plans is to assist struggling educators with pacing their lessons for curriculum coverage and to change their teaching practices. As explained by de Clercq (2014, p. 312), “The idea is not to impart educators explicitly with greater knowledge of their subject matter or pedagogical content knowledge.” Furthermore, the GPLMS lesson plans can be utilised by coaches as both a tool to support educators, as well as a means of monitoring curriculum coverage (de Clercq, 2014).
3.6.5.2 Assessment Tasks
Application of differentiated instruction to assessment is a component of the research. Therefore, the six participants of the study were required to submit a copy of any tests and assignments, which the learners completed during the school observation period. The criteria (Appendix 5B) used when analysing the assessment and assignment tasks, are based on “Guidelines for Responding to Learner Diversity in the Classroom – Curriculum Assessment Policy” (DBE, 2011). Key aspects included in the twelve criteria are a variety of resources, using assistive technology, multiple intelligences, grade level curriculum standards, multiple entry points, four modes of presentation, concessions and items reflecting varying levels of difficulty (Bloom’s Taxonomy). It must be noted that the taxonomy referred to in the policy document (DBE, 2011, pp. 16-18) was a version of Bloom’s Taxonomy adapted from Dalton and Smith (1986) and not the revised edition by Anderson, Krathwohl, Airasian, Cruikshank, Mayer, Pintrich, Raths & Wittrock (2001). The fact that the criteria for evaluating the assessment tasks were based on the policy document, meant that the researcher used the categories, “Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis and Application”, from the older version of Bloom’s Taxonomy, for the purpose of this study.