Observation schedule design

The observation schedule employed in this study was designed in light of the research questions and informed by previous research in the field (see Appendix C for a copy of the schedule). Specifically, the study sought to obtain a detailed and integrated account of the preparedness and deployment of SNAs when supporting target pupils’ behavioural care needs and developing target pupils’ independence in mainstream primary schools. Guided by the study’s research questions, a range of published observation schedules were examined and critiqued. Following a lengthy review and design process, the study’s observation schedule was modelled predominantly on the SENSE study schedule (Webster & Blatchford, 2017) with some additional observation criteria added from the MaSt schedule (Webster & Blatchford, 2013a) and the Observing Pupils and Teachers in Classrooms schedule; henceforth referred to as the OPTIC schedule (Merrett & Wheldall, 1986).

The SENSE study schedule (Webster & Blatchford, 2017) was designed to collect systematic data on the educational experiences of pupils with statements in mainstream secondary schools and special schools. The schedule captures both contextual information and interaction data within the classroom and allows systematic observations to be coded on a minute-by-minute basis, both for statemented pupils and their average-attaining peers. Guided by the current study’s research questions, almost all criteria on the original SENSE study schedule were retained for this study’s schedule, with particular focus on the collection of interaction data between pupils and adults within the classroom. Such data was deemed important to focus on support strategies used with pupils and particularly,

129 on matters related to pupil independence. In contrast, the ‘group size’, ‘location’ and ‘class attainment level’ criteria were removed as they were not deemed pertinent to the research context or questions. The ‘lesson focus’ criterion was reduced to

English, mathematics and other, whereby the aim was to conduct the majority of the

systematic observations during core curricular lessons, in so far as possible. The ‘people in classroom’ criterion was also reduced and only counted at the start of the observed lesson, due to the general consistency in classroom composition within mainstream primary school lessons in Ireland.

Some elements from the MaSt observation schedule (Webster & Blatchford, 2013a) were also included in this study’s observation schedule. These comprised ‘target seating context’, ‘adult context’ and ‘target task’. Such information was deemed important, particularly when considering research questions related to pupils’ behavioural care needs and pupil independence. For clarity purposes, each of these observation schedule criteria will be presented below. Thereafter, the final component of the observation schedule, as based on the OPTIC schedule (Merrett & Wheldall, 1986), will be outlined.

3.6.3.1 Observation schedule criteria.

- ID and logging information

ID and logging information was firstly recorded to ensure that the observation schedule could be matched to additional school data. ID codes were employed to respect the anonymity of all parties. Data categories included: Pupil ID, School ID,

Date, and Observation ID (day, lesson/session).

- Contextual information

Contextual information criteria were mainly drawn from the MaSt project observation schedule (Webster & Blatchford, 2013a), with some slight adaptations undertaken to reflect the Irish educational context. As per the MaSt project and SENSE study, the ‘bin’ criteria was included to cater for any observation or behaviour that was perceived as being difficult to categorise. Categories and sub-categories on the observation schedule included:

130  Target seating context (usual class seating, part of group, separated from peers,

bin)

 Adult context (teacher/SNA: leading class, with group (<10 pupils), with individual non-target, with target (1-1), part of audience, roving/monitoring, not working with pupils)

 Lesson/subject (English, mathematics, other)

 Target task (same/not differentiated, differentiated classwork, different topic/subject, intervention, bin).

As outlined in the MaSt study (Webster & Blatchford, 2013a), a ‘differentiated’ task was defined as a task modified in some way from the core task undertaken by the comparison pupil. A ‘different’ task was defined as a task related to a different topic or curriculum area to that undertaken by the comparison pupil. Verbal differentiation of a task was not documented.

The number of people in the classroom was also logged at the start of the lesson, including pupils, teacher, SNA and other.

- Interaction data

Interaction data categories were adopted from the SENSE study (Webster & Blatchford, 2017). Interaction data was logged in terms of:

 Social mode of pupils’ interactions (pupil interacting with a teacher, SNA, peer, no interaction, bin)

 Interaction level (whether the pupil is the focus of attention or part of the audience)

 Interaction context (whether the interaction takes place on an individual, group or whole-class basis).

3.6.3.2 The ‘Observing Pupils and Teachers in Classrooms’ schedule.

The final component of the observation schedule was adopted from the OPTIC schedule. The OPTIC schedule was created by Merrett and Wheldall in 1986 and forms a behavioural observation schedule for use in classrooms. It was developed in an effort to provide a systematic logging system on key teacher and pupil behaviours related to classroom management. Stemming from a behavioural- orientated research stance, the observation tool is divided into two sections. Section

131

A, the teacher observation, focuses on teachers’ use of approval and disapproval of

pupils’ social and academic behaviours, logged under four discrete categories:

positive academic, positive social/conduct, negative academic, negative social/conduct. In contrast, section B, the pupil observation, focuses on the effect of

the teacher’s behaviour on pupils’ on and off-task behaviour. Merrett and Wheldall (1986) outline how a complete observation session using the OPTIC schedule takes 30 minutes, whereby the observer alternates between section A and section B of the observation schedule every three minutes.

Reflecting on this study’s research questions, section A of the OPTIC schedule was deemed most appropriate to facilitate the recording of the nature of teachers’ and SNAs’ focused interactions with pupils with behavioural care needs, with due regard for supporting pupils’ behavioural care needs and developing pupils’ independence. Instructions for the observation and logging of behaviours related to section A are outlined below, as sourced from Merrett and Wheldall (1986, pp. 68-69).

Teacher behaviours which should be recorded as positive events include verbal praise (“Correct!”, “That’s great!”, “I like that!”, “Well done!”); gestures like nodding encouragingly, smiling, giving the thumbs up sign, physical contact like placing the hand on the shoulder; the granting of privileges and the giving of tokens of approval like stars, ticks, points and so on. Teacher behaviours which should be recorded as negative events include verbal criticism, reprimands, the pointing out of failure, error or general disapproval (“That’s wrong!”, “You’re a dead loss!”, “Don’t do that!”); gestural responses like frowning or glaring; aversive contact involving shaking or smacking; withdrawal of privileges, points or rewards; isolation from the rest of the group and so on. The observer is also required to distinguish between the teacher's responses to academic behaviours (like giving a correct answer) and social (conduct) behaviours (like putting up a hand to answer a question)…If the teacher says, “Sit down, John,” the observer would circle the next number in the appropriate segment box (negative social). If the teacher gives a star to a pupil for work completed correctly the observer would mark the next number in the segment box under positive academic.

As section B of the OPTIC schedule pertains to on/off-task pupil behaviour, this section was omitted from the schedule as it was deemed beyond the focus of this study’s research questions. Accordingly, section A of the OPTIC schedule was added to this study’s observation schedule, with the aim of logging the nature of teachers’ and SNAs’ focused interactions with target pupils on a minute-by-minute basis.

132

3.6.3.3 Qualitative note-taking.

Finally, space was assigned on the observation schedule for additional note-taking. This was deemed essential to facilitate the logging of any contextual data to supplement and contextualise the quantitative data points. Croll (1986) highlights the strength of documenting contextual information to ensure that the systematic observations do not result in “atomistic” data (p. 162). In particular, any additional observational information related to the research questions were documented including data related to SNAs’ support of target pupils’ behavioural care needs and SNAs’ support or hindrance of target pupils’ development of independence.