Initial coding: Testing session transcripts

The coded testing session transcripts, as previously explained, are the transcripts of the six standardised literacy testing sessions observed and recorded at the school site. The data from the initial testing session transcript analysis were categorised into 39 different initial codes, which highlighted patterns of action and interaction at the classroom site of standardised literacy testing. Table 4-3, as follows, presents these codes and their numerical frequency across the six testing session transcripts.

Table 4-3

Testing session transcripts: Codes and frequencies.

Code

no. Code Descriptor Frequency

1 Presents tests in a positive way 3

2 Presents tests in a negative way 54

3 Presents tests as useful/helpful for students and learning 2 4 Presents tests as useful in the administration of learning

topics for teachers 4

5 Presents tests as isolated incidents or tools 23 6 Presents tests as not thoroughly utilised in student learning

or the administration of learning topics 9

7 Presents tests as problematically administered 44 8 Presents tests as potentially useful in student learning and

the administration of learning topics 13

9 Presents tests as positive incidents/tools but in a negative

way 5

10 Presents self as noncommittal, blasé or uncaring as to the

tests, their uses and/or their administration 26 11 Displays uncertainty as to the uses and administration of

the tests 17

12 Presents tests as beneficial for employment and post-

school 4

13 Presents tests as beneficial, specifically to student learning

outcomes 10

14 Presents tests as challenging and difficult 99

15 Presents tests as an indicator of learning progress 22 16 Over-identifies administration as feature/issue of tests 87 17 Refers to the administrative uses of test data 3 18 Refers to students as ‘client-base’, ‘clientele’ 1 19 Constructs student ability/interest as influential upon the

administration or running of tests 48

20 Presents or refers to the practice of tests as different to the

perceived ideal 21

21 Identifies classroom control as major testing element 139 22 Categorises/judges schools on behavioural issues based on

student catchment 6

23 Refers to student (poor) behaviour as influential on

delivery 42

25 Refers to/discusses non-/post-testing activities (daily report, report cards, post-testing silent reading,

questionnaires) 9

26 Refers to student skills 39

27 Presents self in position of power in test administration 7 28 Presents self in position of impotence in test

administration 25

29 Controls student behaviour 267

30 Explains researcher presence in room 9

31 Encourages student interest in tasks 35

32 Explains specific aspects of skills 4

33 Uses humour 31

34 Responds positively to student rudeness 12

35 Allows student to act as test-refusor, belligerent 25

36 Reads aloud test instructions 164

37 Offers help on tasks 142

38 Dismisses student test queries 52

39 Encourages student 17

Total 1535

The codes, as listed in Table 4-3 above, were teacher-oriented in order to capture and reflect the focus of this study on the ways that action and interaction took place while TT was administering the test sessions, and on TT’s expressed or implied standardised literacy testing experiences and perceptions regarding standardised literacy testing. There were 1535 distinct instances in total relating to the 39 codes. Highlights at this initial stage

included TT’s opinions on the tests, the ways the tests were administered in the classrooms and the data used, and the particular merits and flaws in the

standardised literacy test design, implementation and application. A number of codes referred specifically to behaviours particular to test administration, TT’s responses to student approaches to undertaking the tests, instructions given for

the students in taking the tests, and teacher-student interaction during test administration.

The spread of frequencies contained much interesting information for this stage of the research. The following Table, Table 4-4, lists the codes noted in the top ten most frequent instances across the interview transcripts.

Table 4-4

Testing session transcripts: Most frequent codes.

Code

no. Code Descriptor Frequency

29 Controls student behaviour 267

36 Reads aloud test instructions 164

37 Offers help on tasks 142

21 Identifies classroom control as major testing element 139

14 Presents tests as challenging and difficult 99

16 Over-identifies administration as feature/issue of tests 87

2 Presents tests in a negative way 54

38 Dismisses student test queries 52

19 Constructs student ability/interest as influential upon the

administration or running of tests 48

7 Presents tests as problematically administered 44

As highlighted in the above Table, ‘Controls student behaviour’ (code 29) was notable, particularly because of its frequency: it had by far the most common occurrence within the testing session transcript data. ‘Reads aloud test instructions’ (code 36) and ‘Offers help on tasks’ (code 37), too, indicate the importance placed during the observed test sessions of ensuring a smooth flow of test activities, the former code showing TT’s necessary compliance with the expectation upon him as administrator to explain tasks, the latter

showing his attempts to ensure that students understood and could complete the given test tasks. Similarly, ‘Identifies classroom control as major testing element’ (code 21) was notable for its frequency within the data transcripts, as fourth most frequent code, a code that too highlighted the importance for TT of controlling factors within the classroom that could disrupt or affect the test session. This is evidently important as the fifth most noted code, ‘Presents tests as challenging and difficult’ (code 14), noted 99 times across the six transcripts, suggests TT’s opinion about his students’ capacity to complete tasks without careful teacher oversight. Also noteworthy were the comparative frequencies of ‘Encourages student’ (code 39), at 17 instances, and ‘Controls student behaviour’ (code 29), the most noted code at 267 instances.

Each initial testing session transcript code, while related to others, was specific in its particular meaning. Codes 3, 4, 6 and 8 provided examples where different meanings could be indicated from seemingly minor wording differences. Codes 3 and 4 present TT’s opinion that standardised literacy tests were helpful or useful, but in two distinctly different areas of teaching and learning: for student learning progress (code 3), and for teachers’

administration of learning topics (code 4). Both codes 6 and 8, in contrast, referred to these two areas (student learning and teacher administration of learning topics), yet differed in what standardised literacy tests meant for those ends: potentially useful for these ends (code 8), or not thoroughly utilised for these ends (code 6). Codes 12 and 13 again retain their different foci through precise wording: while code 13 referred specifically to academic benefits of testing, such as improvement of student literacy skills, code 12 referred more

to broader, non-academic benefits from particular aspects of standardised literacy testing, such as personal gain or improved employment options for students.