Data collection across the two sites occurred over a period of three months, from August 2012-October, 2012. Time in the field for each school varied due to each school’s location, time and financial constraints on the researcher. Due to the need to travel to Queensland, the researcher spent one intensive week within School A. Field research in School B occurred over a longer period of five weeks. Interviews were staggered over the weeks, at times a number of weeks apart. This gave time to establish rapport, build trust and gather information within the context of the
participants’ lives (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000). Field research in School A was conducted over one week. The researcher established rapport, trust and gathered information by continuing email contact with the participants during the period of data collection. Documentary evidence was collected over the three months of data collation.
120 The limited time in School A allowed for only one observation of a whole school staff meeting, whereas in School B, four observations were undertaken in whole school staff meetings. Consequently, the exploratory case study chose to rely more heavily on the analysis of data from interviews and documents in both schools to ensure some equal understanding of the data.
3.2.1 Sources and types of evidence
Table 3.4 (see pages 121, 122) outlines the process of data collection including multiple sources and types of evidence, as utilised in the study. The activities presented in the left hand column highlighted their relationship to activities in the normal part of the school day. On the right hand side, parallel research activities indicated those data collection experiences that were in addition to school routines. These formed supplementary activities for the purpose of the research.
In both schools, the principal, school leaders, teachers, key personnel and parents were the primary source of data. From these sources, five types of evidence were collated, namely: interviews, observations, documents, archival records and physical artefacts. These were collated in a comprehensive and systematic manner,
referencing and sorting data to allow details and insights to emerge (Yin, 2003). A summary of exact numbers and types of data sources are contained in Appendix J.
3.2.1.1 Interviews
Semi structured interviews occurred to gain insight into how successful school leadership (as it influences quality teaching) was understood and enacted in the two improving schools. The interview schedules are in Appendix H. Several common questions were asked of the respondents to give consistency and allow for
121 Table 3.4
Data collection procedures
Usual School Activities Parallel Research Activities
PRINCIPAL Professional learning where the
researcher observed principal leading teacher learning via opportunities such as collaborative learning, professional learning communities, professional development, coaching, school walks, review
Principal participate in 3 interviews for approximately 45-60 duration each. These were audio recorded and later transcribed.
Two interview schedules (See Appendix H, Items H1-H2) were used:
1.For current improvement initiatives 2.Retrospective interviews, to chronicle and
comment on past improvement interventions to improve teacher quality.
During the interview and discussion Principals were asked to chronicle their perceptions and experience of main interventions for improving teacher effectiveness in a granular manner, specifying
intervention type (resource, process or structural), action,
resource, time frame,
change management strategy
evidence of success during the five year period of improvement.
Principals were asked to provide data relating to school improvement, including school improvement plans, action plans, reviews, reports and student learning improvement data
SCHOOL LEADERS (Deputy Principals, Assistant Principals, Heads of Faculty or Department)
Professional learning where the researcher observed school leaders and their involvement in teacher learning via opportunities such as collaborative learning, professional learning communities, professional
development, coaching, school walks, review
School Leaders participate in up to 3 interviews each approximately 45-60 minutes duration. These were audio recorded and later transcribed.
Two interview schedules (See Appendix H) were used: 1 For current improvement initiatives
2 Retrospective interviews, to chronicle and comment on past improvement interventions to improve teacher quality.
During the interview School Leaders were asked to chronicle their perceptions and experience of main interventions for improving teacher effectiveness in a granular manner, specifying
intervention type (resource, process or structural), action,
resource, time frame,
change management strategy
evidence of success during the five year period of improvement.
School Leaders were asked to provide data relating to school improvement, including school improvement plans, action plans, reviews, reports and student learning improvement data
122 Table 3.4
Data collection procedures
Usual School Activities Parallel Research Activities
TEACHERS and KEY PERSONNEL (Non-teaching staff, former principals) Professional learning where the
researcher observed teacher learning via opportunities such as collaborative learning, professional learning communities, professional
development, coaching, school walks, review
Teachers and key personnel participate in 1 interview, approximately 45-60 minutes duration. The interview was audio recorded and later transcribed.
Two interview schedules (See Appendix H) were used: 1.For current improvement initiatives
2.Retrospective interviews, to chronicle and comment on past improvement interventions to improve teacher quality.
During the interview School Leaders were asked to chronicle their perceptions and experience of main interventions for improving teacher effectiveness in a granular manner, specifying
intervention type (resource, process or structural), action,
resource, time frame,
change management strategy
evidence of success during the five year period of improvement.
Teachers and key personnel were asked to provide data
relating to school improvement, including school improvement plans, action plans, reviews, reports and student learning improvement data
PARENTS
Parents were asked to participate in one group interview
of 5 parents to discuss current and past improvement initiatives as they relate to improving teacher quality. The group interview was approximately 45-60 minutes in duration. These were audio recorded and later transcribed.
throughout the interview to illuminate responses of interest. The interviewer actively listened, followed up on points of interest, asked for clarification when necessary and sought detailed examples or stories (Seidman, 1998).
In addition, the researcher transcribed each interview personally, enabling an immersion in the data. This allowed for deeper understandings and a fuller knowledge of the experiences of principals, leaders, teachers, key personnel and parents as they related to leadership and its influence on quality teaching (Stake,
123 1995). To ensure validity of accounts, a number of respondents were interviewed in the belief that “…richly detailed accounts of vividly remembered events are likely to be trustworthy” (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000, p. 150).
3.2.1.2 Observations
Observations of professional development activities were anecdotal and recorded in the researcher’s field journal. These opportunities included peer presentation or discussion and collaborative planning for a new school improvement plan. Set in the socially embedded contexts of the school, observations provided valuable details, interpretations and opportunities to correlate the interview data (Denzin & Lincoln, 2000).
Yet the researcher acknowledged that observations can contain error or bias where the capacity to interpret actions are ‘often in the eyes of the beholder’ (Luke, 2003). Observers within the QSRLS (2001) reported,
… three researchers went into classroom to code for inclusivity. The result was one confused research exercise: I was watching for whether the Asian kids were being included, M was looking for the girls and boys breakdown and none of us saw the deaf kids in the back row (Luke, 2003, p.16). Acknowledging this potential to overlook or possibly misrepresent professional learning, the researcher sought to validate data using other sources and gained access to notes taken by participants during learning activities. These documents were freely shared with the researcher.
3.2.1.3 Documents, archival records and artefacts
Several documents, archival records and artefacts were collected throughout the case study both during and after the site visits. These included research papers, online documents from both schools’ websites, and presentations from both Principals recorded on YouTube. In addition, external review documents (surveys) were
124 documented, together with school annual reports, documents from staff including professional learning journal, and written accounts of artefacts of significance. Despite the understanding that documents are not always accurate representations, or without bias, these were collected as secondary data to corroborate and augment evidence from other sources (Yin, 2003).
3.2.2 Establishing the database
An extensive database was established containing:
31 interviews, of over 350 pages including retrospective data;
60 pages of field notes of observations and artefact descriptions;
26 documents including research papers, school improvement plans and newspaper articles written by the respondents;
transcripts from participant presentations on YouTube; and,
12 archival records were established.
The study utilised the software, NVivo10 to store the data on this database according to school and data type. It was used to reliably store all material and facilitate
efficient retrieval of data (Yin, 2003).
The use of computer software allowed thorough and rigorous coding and
interpretation where blocks of data from each source was deconstructed into textual segments which retained their contextual meaning (Tesch, 1990, as cited in Jones, 2007). These textual segments were coded, distilled and re-contextualised into themes based on an accumulation of evidence from the interviews, observations and documents (Jones, 2007).
125
3.2.3 Chain of evidence
A chain of evidence was maintained throughout the study. This enabled tracing of the evidentiary process both from beginning to end, and back again. Thus, a link could be established from the findings and interpretation, to the evidence in the database (along with notation of when it was collected), to the research protocol, and, finally to the research questions (Yin, 2003).
3.3 Phase Three: Interpretation and analysis of data