Key issues emerging from the theoretical framework relevant for this study

Having set out the theories which form the framework for analysis in this study, I discuss in this section how they relate to the research design, are applied to the analysis of data, and the questions which arise from their application here. Inconsistency between discourse and practice, and between expressed views Both structuration theory and the theories relating to the concept of repertoire suggest that practitioner talk will contain contradictions, and is not a reliable indicator of practice. What is achievable within a study based on practitioner talk is a mapping of the different repertoires practitioners draw on when discussing bilingual pupils and their home language, and an analysis of the deployment of repertoires in group discussion to achieve certain outcomes within the

conversation – in this case adoption or rejection of suggestions for probilingual practice. In the process of analysis of talk, the rules and resources pertaining to the structures within which practitioners operate also become apparent. The concept

96

of agency within the framework means that while these enablers and constraints of action may be identified, they cannot be regarded as determinants of action. In addition, pupil accounts of their experience collected as part of this research, provides triangulating evidence with which to compare practitioner perspectives which emerge from the study. Practitioners’ reference to specific policy and practice may also relate to phenomena reported in the literature (for example lack of training for teaching bilingual pupils).

At the very least, the study is able to identify practitioners’ perspectives of the enablers and constraints of the structure within which they operate, which informs the actions they take.

Constraints and enablers

Different participants will have different access to resources, and authority to challenge rules or say how they are set. Therefore, it is important who is saying what in group discussions. The identification of different constraints and enablers by different participants may also point to the fact they belong to a different ‘culture’ (see below).

Differences in access to resources / repertoires and the role of the researcher The repertoires I draw on and introduce in the research are different in nature to these which practitioners use in responding. Theirs reflect daily practical

experience, the policies they work to, the knowledge and skills provided through their training and the particular CPD they engage with. The repertoires I draw on and introduce during data collection activities, on the other hand, are primarily constructed from engagement with research, and descriptions of practice in other settings.

97

This means that the research process creates cognitive dissonance, as participants come to terms with new perspectives through the presentation of research

evidence, and as I seek to understand their perspectives. At this point, the understanding that repertoires are mutable is important. It is in the exchanges, particularly in the group discussions, that the limits, and also the extent, of individual repertoires become visible, that practitioners necessarily add to their repertoires through their encounter with novel arguments and evidence, and the degree to which they are willing to take on board and deploy these new

perspectives begins to manifest itself.

From the perspective of structuration theory, as researcher, I should be in a position through the analysis to understand the limits of participants’ knowledgeability. Given the review of evidence on outcomes for bilingual children in chapter one, this is particularly true in relation to their understanding of the consequences of their actions.

Inertia

Both structuration theory and the concepts of repertoire described here suggest participants will be resistant to novel discourse and suggestions for practice. On the other hand, where the researcher is introducing practitioners to evidence-based approaches, there is a moral purpose in supporting practitioners to understand that practice and the evidence behind it.

Agency

The idea of agency in structuration theory means the analysis should also focus on the choices participants make in challenging or maintaining existing structures.

98

Agency is also apparent to the degree to which participants embrace the opportunity to extend their repertoires.

Evaluation

A key term in Edley and Wetherell’s definition of repertoires is ‘evaluation’. Of particular interest in the analysis will be the evaluative terms participants use to characterise use of English and home languages, which help to distinguish the different repertoires. Terms such as ‘competent’, ‘limited’, ‘appropriate’ play an important role, for example, in emphasising the value of speaking English over home language. I pay particular attention to the language of evaluation in the description of themes in section 6.1.

Social systems and the concept of culture

A final, key concept from structuration theory will be important in the analysis. This is Giddens’s idea of ‘social systems’. In brief, these are the social spheres to which particular structures apply. In the present study, these can be conceived of as the school, the education system, or English society. Giddens indicates the problematic nature of attempting to define social systems:

There are degrees of ‘systemness’ in societal totalities, as in other less or more inclusive forms of social system. It is essential to avoid the

assumption that what a ‘society’ is can be easily defined. (1984: 283)

Analysis at individual school level provides a more focussed cultural space for exploring the elements of the repertoires practitioners draw on – and a comparison of the way practitioners talk from school to school provides a more certain picture

99

of local cultures5_{. Nevertheless, the frequency of particular discourses, across a} range of settings and localities helps make connections between in-school discourse and that prevalent in the education system and wider society, as summarised in chapters one and two.