Phase 3: The Case Study

The third phase of the study involved three case studies which took place in three selected schools (SC02, SC06, SC13), which were located in different settings (urban, semi-urban, and rural). These case study schools were selected from among those 22 lower secondary and middle secondary schools, which were used for the administration of surveys.

This phase was aimed at developing an in-depth understanding of the perceptions of the participants of mathematics classroom learning environments and complementing the findings of the quantitative data. The proposed case study employed the procedures as explained below. It was scheduled for a minimum of 6 weeks duration; however, it actually took nearly eight weeks. The following simple protocols/guidelines were employed during the conduct of each case study in each of the three schools. These protocols mainly aimed to make the process of study systematic and smooth, and to avoid wasting time and creating unnecessary hassles for the participants and the researcher.

1. Permission to conduct a field visit in schools was sought.

2. Made a preliminary visit to three schools, to talk about the study, and arranged the logistics of the interviews. Drew up a time schedule with the teacher participants.

115 3. Decided how to go about the field visit of those three schools, either on a

rotation basis or devoting two to three weeks to each school site. 4. Interviewed teachers, who were teaching grade 8 mathematics.

5. Interviewed five groups of selected students from three selected schools. 6. Organised data for analysis

7. Analysed data and draw conclusions.

8. Contacted participants as and when required for clarification.

Thus, the interviews formed the major tools of the case studies, which enabled the researcher to further explore the issues raised in the survey through substantive conversation with the respondents, and responses that are richer and more informative than the questionnaire data were gathered. Table 3.3 provides an outline of the case study plan, which was executed during September-December, 2013.

Table 3.3

The Outline of Case Study Plan

Schools Grade level Activities Timeline

Grade 8 Teacher Interviews

SC02 LSS Section A, B, C Student Interviews Sept-Oct, 2013 Data Compilation

Grade 8 Teacher Interviews

SC06 MSS Section A, B, C Student Interviews Oct-Nov, 2013 Data Compilation

Grade 8 Teachers Interviews

SC13 LSS Section A, B Students Interviews Nov-Dec, 2013

Purpose and Content of the Interviews

The interviews in this study were intended to triangulate some of the unexpected and interesting response patterns which might emerge out of the quantitative data, and draw out deeper meanings on some other responses (Thinley, 1999). They would thus help to portray multiple views of the case. The interview schedules contained five to eight main questions, which were mainly based on the eight constructs of the MCLES questionnaire. These questions also covered the general and more qualitative areas of the research. Student interviews were used to provide a sense of what was happening in the class and why students responded to items in the way in which they did. Discussions with each of the teachers were based on the problems and successes experienced by the teachers as they were implementing the new curriculum with new approaches in their classes. It was envisaged that discussion on each issue would lead to other issues and insights not picked up in the questionnaire. The interview questions used for both the students and the teachers were similar in regard to the MCLES scales. However, the questions in regard to the exploration of contextual factors were not explicitly emphasized for students, as these may be beyond their understanding.

Selection of Interview Samples

A sample of three teachers and 11 students from the school SC02, two teachers and 15 students from the school SC06, and 5 students from the school SC13 were interviewed. Hence, the interview study involved a total of 36 participants, which included 31 students (9 boys and 22 girls) and 5 mathematics teachers (4 males and 1 female teacher). Though a structured random sample was thought to be the most appropriate method for the selection of the interviewees, in the study participants’ willingness to participate was the major criterion to invite them for the interviews. In

117 selecting student interviewees due consideration was given to those whom the focal teachers and principals thought were better informed and could better express themselves. Some of the students and teacher interviewees in these case schools were also the respondents to the questionnaires. The school principals or focal teacher participants were requested to arrange any teachers and students who were interested in participating in the study from amongst those who had also participated in the questionnaires.

The Conduct of Interviews

The interview process involved a total of 11 interviews, including five group interviews with 31 students (9 boys and 22 girls), and 5 individual interviews with the mathematics teachers (4 males and 1 female teacher). Interviews were conducted during the eight weeks study period (that is, from September 20 to December 31, 2013). All interviews were conducted in English, because most subjects including mathematics are taught in English in Bhutan. Each interview took from 18 to 30 minutes depending on whether the interviewees had much to say and whether the probes were producing interesting data or not.

Each interviewee was contacted a day or two in advance and invited to nominate a time that best suited his/her convenience. The interviews were audio recorded with the permission of the interviewees and at the same time, daily process notes were maintained to supplement the actual interviews and transcription. The researcher was aware of the limited sample and its effects on the research results. Though a larger sample would have enriched the research results, the researcher thought the sample used would suffice as the study was designed to be an exploratory one (Namgyel, 2011). In addition, time constraints were another determinant of the overall number of participants.