Hoffman (1987), responding to the existing limited literature on grasping the knowledge of experts and professionals, summarised the main research methods used to explore expert knowledge in organisations; Hoffman and colleagues recommended unstructured interviews and analysis of documents in order to get initial information about who the main actors are, what their needs are, and for the researcher to gain familiarity with the content (Hoffman and Lintern, 2006). These are activities and exercises that aim to explore content essential to professionals, which could be complemented by observation during the real situation. In accordance with this information, I decided to take notes from observation during my field study along with asking questions (Hoffman, 1987). Polanyi (1962, 1967) described two dimensions
68 that characterised the knowledge in organisations: the first “knowing how to”; and the second “knowing about” based on facts and theories. Grant (1996) illustrated the first as a tacit knowledge that is explored through its’ application, observations and field notes to elicit tactical knowledge, interviews and conversations for more explicit knowledge. Moreover, the explicit knowledge aims to be described through conversation between the researcher and the participants or by the researcher observing the participants interacting. Hence, I have carried out participant observation with the intention of becoming involved in the settings, thereby gaining as much information as possible regarding their views on their own professional practice in relation to inclusion (Benjamin, et al., 2003). The data collection focuses on obtaining information from individuals about their interactions and the organization through their own observations, my observations, interviews and document analysis. Qualitative research aids the analytic and descriptive processes described by the participants about their day to day lives and furthermore ascribes meaning to this analysis. Through qualitative methods, I explored the richness and complexity of the phenomena based on the experiences of the participants (Bogdan and Biklen, 2006). Yammarino and Dansereau (2004) and Hitt, et al. (2007) recommended qualitative methods and tools for obtaining cultural and organisational information, as we try to do in this research. It is described by qualitative methods and involves looking at “natural treatment”, and how research results interrelate with the real status of things (Maton and Salem, 1995; Geels, 2002; 2004). This information is collected without interruptions and values all the aspects that could be presented physically or non- physically when the research was taking place. For this reason, it was important to conduct research over a long period of time and without any influence on the natural flow (Scott, 1980). Scott (1985) and Curry-Sontag (1996) have also supported, through numerous practical examples, the convenience of this methodological approach for special needs education research in different settings. In early childhood settings, it is the organisational status and its’ complexities (Honig, 1997) that make the implementation of organisational models possible.
I used archival records, interviews, physical artefacts and direct observation (Eisenhardt, 1989; Conklin and Hayhoe, 2011). This study aims to demonstrate, by behaviours observed and in-depth dialogue collected through interviews, the main actors’ own values, attitudes and beliefs and school culture, containing document analysis, interviews and observations of said school culture. Indeed, I assumed that
69 these behaviours are learned through socialisation and the interactions that took place during this process were vitally important.
The chosen approach requires a case study research method, presenting the data as a two case studies which I used to analyse the elements that influence the roles and professional development inside or outside classroom of nursery staff and organisational learning when implementing inclusive teaching practice for children with SEN identify specific aspects of each setting and determine those patterns of relationships relating to teachers, regarding professional learning and inclusion development. The case study approach enables the researcher to use different techniques and tools. A series of interpretative practices makes the world of the case study visible and transforms it into a series of representations in the form of observations, notes, records and documents (Daymon and Holloway, 2011). In this research, I aimed to be part of the cultural group, examining and being present in daily routines which gave me access to the social reality. This helped me to understand the circumstances surrounding the class participants and their capacity for social interactions with their teachers, meaning that information from the interviews complemented the data from the observations.
I was interested in participants’ perceptions based on personal experience, which varied according to their context (Christensen and James, 2000, p.219). The case studies were designed not only to collect information from direct observation but to also use a variety of materials to corroborate this information. I decided to use a method of instrumental triangulation (Meijer, et al., 2002) in order to obtain the maximum quality of data from several instruments (Altrichter, et al., 2009). To gain detailed and rich narrative as well as to understand the processes involved, I collaborated as a teaching assistant in both settings during a discontinuous period of time during the academic year. I decided to spend the first week simply observing how the class functioned before becoming progressively more and more participative. During this time, I started to take notes in relation to the culture of the setting. I also wanted to confirm that these settings and participants met the pre-established criteria for this research. This week of reflection helped me to understand the organisation of the setting initially. The Spanish setting was different from the English as I only received approval to conduct research in the 3-year-old class on condition that I only observed during class time. The Spanish teacher’s rationale for this condition was that the children’s behaviour would be disrupted by the presence of an unfamiliar teacher and that therefore it would be better if I interacted as little as possible. I fully respected
70 her opinion, deciding to follow her rules in order to further understand how she worked with her class. The UK teacher in contrast wanted me to help in many of their projects. I was happy being with this age group and she allowed me as much time with them as I needed (Yin, 2003a). To sum up, in one setting I was a non-participating observer and in the other depending on the activity I was participant and non- participant (Bordens and Abbott, 2008). These circumstances gave me the opportunity to experience the cases from different perspectives.
I planned two different visiting periods during the academic year. The first helped me to identify the major strategies that the families and previous teachers of children with SEN have taught to the teachers in the nursery. I learned about the strategies they initiated with those children at the beginning of the academic year. I understood the relationship among the different stakeholders in each setting. I experienced the routines in practices in both settings and discovered the processes among both cases.
4.4.1. PARTICIPANT OBSERVATIONS OF CHILDREN
AND
PRACTIONERS
The purpose of the unstructured participant observation used in both natural settings was to learn about the strategies those teachers were implementing and to recognize the organisational and classroom practices. I focused on understanding the relationship between teachers and children, and on understanding class and school routines to describe class activities, the significance of them and who is involved (VanWynsberghe and Khan, 2007).
I focused on how the classroom, playground and school was used, the ways in which the classroom was physically organised, which activities were implemented, how they were implemented and what their purpose was (Cohen, et al., 2007). Furthermore, I looked at how the stakeholders were organised in terms of leadership, autonomy along with the other roles and how they all interacted.
My role was active in the classroom activities I was asked to participate in. In situations where research participants were interacting, I wanted to capture the relationship dynamics and, especially when the participating children were interacting with the teachers, I focused on being both physically distant yet near in terms of observing and trying to make meaning of their interactions and behaviours (Schnell, 2002).
71 During the time I was recording, I focused on observing their ways of communicating, the tools used and the responses of the participants. I took notes on any situational clues, the occurrence of any unusual behaviour, the tools they were using to communicate and the content of their interactions (Hersen, 2004).
According to Symbolic Interactionism, any relation established with the goal of communicating offers both content and relationship (Schnell, 2002). Both were recorded by in-depth, detailed and descriptive narration of circumstances, in which I especially noted the consistency of these behaviours and drew inferences from this. Field notes were useful as they allowed me to determine whether what was said in the interviews matched with behaviours in the classroom (Ary, et al., 2009). I collected the information from the observations of both settings in the form of a diary of field notes including the time, place, duration and participants.
I was interested in observing class routines and I visited the settings several times in order to experience the timetables they ran and the professional relationships established. I used a diary, which includes research notes and is characterised by its unstructured format, also known as an unstructured requested diary, offering extremely contextualised experiences (Plummer, 2001). The data was recorded through disciplined and systematic observations representing the interactions of the selected students with the class teachers. To obtain the maximum information from my observations I wrote them down on paper; I deem these to be less intrusive than other tools (Graue and Walsh, 1998). The data from observations was transcribed directly onto a data collection coding sheet that helped me in subsequent observations of interactions between children and staff, was producing the field notes, the written account and versions of these versions of these words of others (Emerson, Fretz and Shaw, 2001).
4.4.2. ARCHIVAL SOURCES
Content analysis is the analysis and interpretation of recorded materials in order to learn about human behaviour. I am interested in looking at those policies created by the organization with the aim of implementing or facilitating inclusive practices. Documents, diaries, photos, portfolios and reports all show collection of information from the research participants and focus on both how the selected children are included and how the teachers record their own learning processes (Ary, et al., 2009). The following documents were collected and analysed from both settings: national, regional and school educational policy documents, annual plans for child inclusion,
72 professional profiles, and data from teacher observations, school documents, and pictures of the nursery settings, children’s portfolios and medical history records. As Blumer (1969) highlights, it is important to be careful in interpreting the information, as human facts can be interpreted in different ways depending of the reader characteristics. They should therefore be validated through consistency of information from the participants and a critical and intimate knowledge of the participants (Blumer, 1969).
The content analysis of documents is based on the analysis of field notes, school policies, memos, and student portfolios from those children for whom I have parental consent for my research. This information complements the data collected from the participants’ own observations of the interactions between staff and children (Anfara, 2002).
4.4.3. INTERVIEWS
The purpose of the interviews was to understand staff practices, their role and professional development of the school staff and the other participants in the process of children inclusion. The interviews were documenting reflection and decisions, they let me analyse the transitions of the information from “personal experience and intuition into public and accountable knowledge” (Coffey and Atkinson, 1996, p.191). I wanted to enter into a dialogue with the participants in which they could tell me about their own and shared practices through feedback on their experiences. This is based on the acknowledgement of a genuine participation searched following the Symbolic Interactionism (Hirschheim, Klein and Lyytinen, 1995). The interviews were intended to be intimate, flexible and open. I focused on a broad number of topics related to the information obtained from the literature review (see Appendix 1for the interviews template). I elaborated a list of topics and translated it into both languages. These topics were flexible and ordered differently according to the responses. I prepared a list of open topics to be used as guidelines; the exact questions were generated during the interview in relation to the participants’ answers (Scott and Morrison, 2005). I tried to adapt each interview to the participant (Herman-Kinney and Verschaeve, 2003). Principally in the second round of interviews, questions were used to elucidate the information from the participant observations (Herman-Kinney and Verschaeve, 2003). During the first week of the data collecting process, the main class teacher in the UK arranged a schedule of interviews.
73 At the beginning of each interview, I introduced the aims of my research, the anonymity of the data and I asked if they had any questions regarding these aspects. I also asked for permission to record with the tape recorder and to take notes. During the interview process, I turned on the tape recorder and I began my questions from the first topic. Using the tape recorder helped me to feel relaxed and enabled me to take the role of listener and to show interest in their responses, as it took the stress of needing to take fully detailed notes. I asked for examples of specific situations in each question. I wanted to convey to participants that I wanted to hear about their own understanding of their learning experiences. I tried to maintain a climate of empathy and respect; allowing natural pauses in the conversation and waiting for them to completely finish their answers before asking new questions (Davies and Dodd, 2002). I tried not to cut them short or jump from one theme to another, and when they did not understand a question I re-explained it as many times as necessary until it was understood. At the end of the interview I asked participants if they had any further questions or if they wanted to comment on any issues.