This study took the form of a multiple case study, in which four teachers from different schools were interviewed and samples of their learners‟ workbooks were analyzed. I have chosen to use a case study because I want to “investigate a contextualized contemporary phenomenon within specified boundaries” (Hatch, 2002, p.30). The Mathematical Literacy principle of contextualization is relatively new in South Africa, with the notion of „themes‟ and „relevance‟ associated with Curriculum 2005 in the GET band some 10 years ago, within the mathematical frame and incorporated in Maths Lit with social, life and mathematical frame. To engage in an effective investigation I had to have a specific boundary, that is focusing on four teachers teaching Maths Lit in grade 10. The individual teachers were selected on the basis that they were teaching grade 10 Maths Lit, and on the basis of differences in their knowledge and experience of Maths Lit. My sample of four teachers consisted of two sets of teachers; two teachers who have taught Maths Lit before and two who were teaching it for the first time, with all teachers willing to participate in the study having given their informed consent. I used this criteria based on the assumption that the teachers who had taught Maths Lit before would experience fewer problems with the concept of contextualization within Maths Lit and bring greater awareness of Maths Lit goals. In contrast, I expected that the teachers who had not taught Maths Lit would be less knowledgeable with Maths Lit principles and goals, and that their background knowledge might be more mathematically inclined as they were previously teaching pure Mathematics. At the same time, I wanted to investigate whether teachers who were teaching Maths Lit were able to select and use contextualized tasks in their classroom regardless of their teaching backgrounds and prior experience.
This data was collected during July 2009 (the first interviews) and September 2009 (Second interview) from four teachers who were selected from different schools; two schools are ex model C school, located in suburban areas and two are exDET schools located in the same district. Below is a table that summarizes the four teachers and Maths Lit teaching experience:
classification Teacher 1 Teacher 2 Teacher 3 Teacher 4 Type of school Ex-DET Ex – model C Ex –Model C Ex – DET Location of the
school
Experience of teaching Maths Lit Started from 2008, it was his second year
It was her first year in 2009 of teaching Maths Lit It was his second year of teaching Maths Lit started in 2008
It was her first year of
teaching Maths Lit in 2009
This table provides a breakdown about the teachers and their experience as Maths Lit Grade 10 teachers, indicating which teachers had prior experience of Maths Lit teaching and which were teaching it for the first time. It also indicates the type of school and the area where each teacher was located. I have chosen these schools as a sample that represented the type of schools that exist within the focal District. I chose this differentiated sample, not as the central focus of my research questions, but because there is an assumption that Ex model C teachers are better qualified, or are more knowledgeable that those in the ex DET schools, and that the quality of education offered is different based on this distinction. Whilst not central to the study, the teacher sample allowed me to gain additional insights into this issue.
The study was approached with the assumption that all these schools – given that they all fall under the Department of Education, - and which are therefore supposed to be implementing the same policy, aiming for the same ML goals would be organizing teaching and learning in their Maths Lit classroom in context driven ways, and thus, that the tasks selected should be contextualized. The study was also approached through, with awareness from the literature, that context driven teaching was likely to be present to different degree and with different agendas.
In each school the selected grade 10 teachers were interviewed and samples of their ML learners‟ workbooks were collected from three learners in each teacher‟s ML class. Overall therefore, I had a sample of 12 learners‟ books. The teachers were requested to provide 1 book from a high performing learner in their class, 1 book of the learner who was an average achiever and 1 book from the learner who was struggling. The rationale behind this criterion was to provide a window both into the nature and range of tasks (contextualized and non- contextualized) that learners had covered, the extent to which context was engaged with in learners‟ work with tasks, and to see whether there were differences in both these aspects based on learner attainment. I assumed that the inclusion of high performing learners would allow me access to most of the tasks that had been set, whilst the other two learners might have covered less.
Looking at learners‟ workbooks gave me an overview of the ways in which tasks presented by the teacher were solved by learners in the class – with the sampling, allowed me to see whether the same work was set across the class or whether the higher achiever received different work or additional work. In each book, I looked at the activities that were done in term 1 and 2, based on the fact that these were the two completed terms at the time of data collection.
My focus was on the tasks covered in terms 1 and 2. I selected terms 1 and 2 on the basis that many teachers in grade 10 do more work in term 1 and 2, with this reflected in district level work schedules also (GDE,2009). This did mean that by the time of collecting the data, term 3 and 4 work was not yet covered The focus on term 1 and 2 only does represent a limitation in terms of the data gathered for this study, in the sense that I could not have a complete picture of contexts used across a grade, but as stated already, work schedules showed more work being completed in these terms than later in other terms. To try and address this limitation, and given recurring reference to the district-level work schedule by participating teachers, the work schedule was analyzed as an emergent data source so as to be able to give the picture of the contexts that were advocated to be used throughout the year This schedule was provided to schools by the facilitators as part of planning and as one of the tools that teachers should use to assist them in teaching Maths Lit, by providing the topics to be covered, the context/ content to be used and the Learning Outcomes that are to be covered. In the work schedule I looked at the organization of the Learning Outcomes across the terms, and looked at the contexts included or provided for the teachers and how the work to be completed was distributed across the terms. This assisted in establishing if the principle of integration across Learning Outcomes was implemented and related to contextualization. It also provided information about the content that needed to be taught in Grade 10 Maths Lit classrooms.
I interviewed each teacher twice. In the first interview, relatively open semi- structured questions were used focusing on their understanding of Maths Lit, the context selected and used in the classroom, and the tasks given to the learners. In the second interview more structured questions were used with the focus on probing what had been seen in the learners‟ books.