Interpretivist perspective

As noted in Chapter 3 (Section 3.3 The researcher context), the analytical process for this study was guided by an interpretivist perspective. Interpretivism has been likened to “storytelling” (Greene, 2010, p. 63, emphasis in original) and it is this aspect of the research process that the researcher intended to capture through interviews and focus groups, all semi-structured and conducted in a spirit of respect and empathy in order to encourage the impulsive and free-flowing nature of the narrative, as recounted in participants’ voices. Qualitative researchers are cognisant that truth-seeking is only possible insofar as the meaning making of participants is revealed through their voices. As a result, discursivities produced by phenomenological researchers often “make use of poetic and literary language” (van Manen, 2014, p. 45), which serves to evoke the essence of the phenomenon described. Thus, data filtered by the researcher’s subjective experience and worldview, albeit bracketed, and examined in a process of reflective writing, generated inductive theory (Greene, 2010).

Interpretivist approaches are considered value-laden, imbued by the values and interests of the

researcher, not with the aim to elicit judgement but “to enrich human discourse” (Greene, 2010, p. 71) through heightened understanding. In this study, the researcher’s professional experience of the context was considered advantageous for interpreting the data. Inductive theory is considered grounded theory having been drawn from context-specific perspectives and firsthand observations during fieldwork. The notion of researcher subjectivity, also referred to as bias (Maxwell, 2010), may affect the analytical process if conclusions are drawn specifically to fit preconceived ideas or

hypotheses. However, qualitative inquiry allows for, and even encourages, the informed interpretation of results by the researcher (Maxwell, 2010, p. 281).

4.6.2.1. Attribution theory

The conceptual framework of attribution theory is pertinent to this study due to its examination of phenomenal causality, or the “beliefs about why a particular event or outcome has occurred” (Rudolph et al., 2004, p. 816), and will be outlined below.

In social psychology, attribution is the process by which individuals explain the causes of behaviour and events (Dong et al., 2013; Graham et al., 1995; Heider, 1944; McQuade, 1992; Weiner, 1985, 1991, 2008). Causal attribution has the capacity to empower individuals and promote a proactive stance on issues or circumstances, enhancing a sense of personal control. Alternately, attribution has the potential to curtail positive actions and lead to a negative state of mind, inducing a sense of reduced personal control. Therefore, the causal attribution used by teachers to explain incidents or events in the classroom matters.

Although literature offers different explanations for events related to human behaviours (Heider, 1944; Weiner, 2008), Heider found it useful to group explanations into two categories of attribution: internal (personal) and external (situational). In practice, these two types of attribution lead to very different perceptions, by others, of an individual engaging in a behaviour. Where attribution results in the placing of blame upon an individual, negative responses toward that individual can ensue. In educational contexts specifically, this can result in teachers applying deficit thinking, lowering their expectations and blaming students for “internal deficiencies or shortcomings” (Constantine & Sue, 2006, as cited in Brace, 2011, p. 27). Attribution retraining can assist teachers to distinguish between “maladaptive” attributions, and “instrumental” (Yang & Montgomery, 2011, p. 14) or “adaptive” attributions (Dong et al., 2013), potentially enabling teachers to use a strengths-based approach with students and to apply multiple causal attributions to explain academic success and failure.

Attribution, preferably adaptive and unassociated with the placing of blame, is important for attaining a proficient level of cultural competence. Yang and Montgomery (2011) recommended that future research seek to “determine the causal-comparative effect of causal attribution and attribution retraining on cultural competence” (p. 15) indicating that an understanding of the relationship between attribution and cultural competence is worth pursuing, and potentially expanding.

Nonetheless, that a relationship exists is indisputable (Bodkin-Andrews et al., 2012; Brace, 2011) and the interconnectivity of attribution and cultural competence is clear. The existence of cultural

competence has at its core personal characteristics such as tolerance, self-awareness and reflexivity, and a willingness to learn (Cain, 2014, p. 222). Attributions that are adaptive in nature, unlike blame attributions, are also required for teachers to display advanced levels of cultural competence.

The researcher applied Attribution Theory during transcript analysis to explore ways in which

teachers perceived themselves and the students in this unique educational context, as revealed through words – narrative stories, recounted incidents or events, reflections – and observed actions.

Maladaptive thought processes, briefly described above, were not apparent and the labeling of students by participants did not occur in data collection processes, such as when teachers were observed in the classroom and in focus groups. This was notable, as ‘student labeling’ may be

2012, p. 88; Rogers, 2003, p. 8) and are indicative of deficit thinking. This practice was not evident among the studied cohort in the collected data. Therefore, analysis focused on causal attributions applied by teachers in relation to their pedagogical practice and in perceptions of their capability when teaching in culturally different classrooms. Evidence of causal attribution was sought in several ways by examining: key words, concepts and themes for negative emphasis; examples of incidents and events, in which a sense of personal control was either expressed or felt to be lacking; actions and attitudes; and philosophies of teacher quality, purpose and meaning making expressed by teachers and related specifically to the context.

4.6.2.2. Critical theory

The study is partially situated within the theoretical framework of critical theory, in particular, critical race theory (CRT), being positioned in an Aboriginal Education context and exploring the experience of non-Aboriginal participants. Relevant to the analysis of teachers’ attributions, attitudes and

pedagogy in the classroom is a need to consider their cultural worldview and how they position themselves in relation to students as representatives of the dominant culture (Burgess, 2017; Vass, 2018), and their cultural worldview and subsequent actions, which in turn affects attitudes and pedagogy in the classroom.

Critical race theory seeks to draw aside the curtain of dominant culture ‘normalising’ that occurs through the prevalence of systems and policies, which preference Western ways of knowing and doing, to reveal the ‘hidden’ influence of culture and its impacts on those in less powerful positions, especially relevant for educational settings with students of diverse cultures: “CRT now has a substantive body of scholarship that traces how racism itself has moved beyond the obvious, explicit codes of colour-conscious organization associated with slavery, colonialism, imperialism and apartheid to a more implicit coded discourse of racial differences that are less often named than implied” (Collins, 2015, p. 50). There are various branches to critical theory, including critical race theory and critical theories based on gender, identity, feminism (Bogdan & Biklen, 2010, pp. 40-41). Critical race theory seeks to articulate the power imbalances that exist in societies that have emerged from historical colonisation processes, and to redistribute the economic, social and political privileges that accrue to those who are part of the dominant culture. Critical race theory explores, through a discussion of race, “how and why power and influence are distributed in ways that privilege White interests, while concurrently and relationally discriminating against non-White interests” (Vass, 2015, p. 377). As outlined in Chapter 2, critical race theory critiques schools as places that replicate the dominant culture discourse through the actions of teachers, mostly “middle class white female teachers” who often unwittingly maintain “dominant patterns of white hegemony” (Forrest et al., 2017, p. 19). These recursive iterations of inequity in power and knowledge create “learned

helplessness” (Gay, 2010, p. 26) in students. Conversations, critical race theory urges, need to be had regarding “Whiteness”, “ideologies of Western ‘supremacy’ and the impact of colonialist processes” (Taylor, 2009, as cited in Vass, 2015, p. 377). Acknowledging, understanding and empowering the ‘Other’ is a vaunted purpose, one which researchers of critical race theory consider is worthwhile enacting in educational contexts:

It requires vigilance and strategic engagement to ensure that equity drives our work. With equity driving our educational policies and practices, we would be staunchly committed to every child in our schools. … Only by educating against whiteness and investing in equity can we expect change. (Castagno, 2014, p. 175)

Coupled with the very real experience of racism in schools (Mansouri & Jenkins, 2010), the underlying concept of Whiteness in Australian society is as clearly a drawback in classrooms as storms on heavy seas, through which we all tack against headwinds. Such racial hierarchies permeate the “everyday practices and relations in Australian schools” (Burgess, 2017, p. 739) and are an inheritance from past colonisation and historical attitudes. In this dissertation, usage of colour-based terms adheres to their application in existing critical race theory discursivities without implying agreement with their use. As explained previously, the term culturally different describes the

classroom or circumstance in which a non-Aboriginal teacher is teaching Aboriginal students. Schools are a “microcosm of society” (Perso & Hayward, 2015, p. 3) representing the multicultural nature of Australian cities and towns and yet there is hardly any situation more potent for discoursing on Whiteness, culture and the arguably outdated notion of race than the context of this research.

4.6.2.3. Notes on reporting results

Various authorial devices have been employed in the study, and resultant thesis, including use of the first-person pronoun and endowing important words and phrases with their “full value (through metaphor and poetic devices such as repetition and alliteration)”, as recommended by van Manen (2014, p. 249). These devices and interpretive approaches were adopted in order to portray as authentically as possible the meaning making behind the lived experience of participants. Results are expressed in subsequent chapters using the evocative method, a style of writing best described as “a perceptive address”, and one in which layered meanings assist the reader to experience the “living meaning” emerging from a text strongly imbued with “reverberative meanings” (van Manen, 2014, p. 249). In short, when describing and discussing results, the phenomenological researcher applies literary effects that seek to convey an authenticity and immediacy to the reader not usually found in scientific writing.

I considered capturing the authentic voice of participants to be the most important consideration in data collection. The process of transcribing the semi-structured interviews and focus groups in effect occasioned a ‘second hearing’ for the participants, as the process is an intimate one – nothing but the participant’s voice in one’s headphones, the screen and the keyboard. Transcribing allowed for a revisiting of these voices, a deeper experience of cadence and breath, word choice and rhythm, which provides further insight into the state of mind, comfortability and emotions of the participant.

Aside from being a privilege to be entrusted with their thoughts and experiences, the act of recording and transcribing each conversation began to resemble in my mind a French door to their soul, where the rich and fertile grounds beyond lay clearly visible, the view neatly bounded by a framework (in this case, of words, sentence structure, pattern of speech), ostensibly reachable and yet, if locked, unobtainable. In transcribing their words, now to be immortalised on paper, to be pored over, to be analysed and articulated, I felt a closeness to the emerging data and these voices filled with passion and authenticity resonated with me, eliciting at times an emotional response to their content. This required a withdrawal from the data to refresh, revive and then re-immerse.

4.6.2.4. Notes on naming participants

Participants expressed no preference in how their anonymity would be protected in the reporting of findings, so I have ascribed names that bear no relation to their actual name. In the transcribing process, alphanumerical tags were used for labelling interviews, e.g. TM2 (teacher, male, second interview). However, in the writing process, names were adopted to provide greater descriptive impact within the text and to convey a sense of their character, which may enable the reader to form an impression of them, albeit hazy or indistinct, as individuals. Participants are people, after all. The next section describes issues and approaches to ethical considerations for this study.