Research Strategy

Robson (2007: 70-1) and Punch (2009: 7) made two very important points that influenced the initial thoughts about designing a research strategy: firstly, that the type of research question very often determines the general research design, and secondly that researchers sometimes uncritically narrow the possible research strategies down and thus fail to consider feasible alternatives. Since the principal aims of the project were to identify good practice and construct transferable models for dissemination, based on a considerable degree of rich description and verisimilitude, this would almost certainly rule out survey approaches. Experimental approaches were theoretically applicable if a tentative hypothesis, possibly identified from previous research, had been determined, but this was not the case, even after the pilot-study. Had one emerged, there would have been almost insurmountable technical and ethical barriers, not least controlling some of the possible variables that are associated with open systems such as schools, including those linked to cross-curricularity such as school leadership, teacher subject knowledge, planning and resources. These barriers would arguably be even more challenging to a lone researcher with no particular institutional or ethical leverage to gain approval for such experimental work to be carried out, or the time and resources for its successful completion. Therefore the favoured approach from the beginning of the design process was to carry out case-study research, particularly a multiple case-study strategy, to allow the identification and analysis of alternative models and approaches.

Educational case studies have been classified into a number of different models, and some closely matched the aims of this study. For clarity, the three principal models under discussion here are adapted from Thomas’ (2011) schema. ‘Descriptive’ case- study design (Thomas: 2011: 91-3; Yin: 1993: 21-27), also termed ‘Intrinsic’ (Stake: 1980), is a firmly established strategy within educational research that ultimately aim to provide the ‘thick’ (Geertz: 1975), ‘rich’ (Kemmis: 1980) or ‘complete’ (Yin: 2003) descriptions that can account for the complex situations (Stake: 1980; Yin: 1993: 3)

76 | P a g e that are a natural feature of educational settings, involving as they do, an almost infinite number of interactions and variables present in multi-causal settings such as classrooms and schools. Thomas (2011: 4) described this as a process of ‘drilling down’ to create three-dimensional and more balanced perspectives of the phenomenon under review. Thus a principal justification for case-study research is the identification and illumination of complex social interactions that would be inaccessible using other research strategies (Platt: 1988), and to produce something Kemmis (1980: 121) deemed ‘authentic’ knowledge and insight.

Accounting for complexity has been an increasing concern in educational research (Cohen et al: 2007: 33-4), alongside the desire to develop new theoretical frameworks for analysing social interactions in educational settings whilst rejecting ‘simple cause and effect models, linear predictability, and a dissecting approach to understanding phenomena (and) replacing them with organic, non-linear and holistic’ explanations (Cohen et al: 2007: 33; also Thomas: 2011: 45-6). Hence Thomas’ (2011: 118-120) second model, ‘picture drawing’, or ‘illustrative’ research, that has considerable overlap with the ‘illuminative’ (Parlett and Hamilton: 1972) and ‘story telling’ (Bassey: 1993: 62) models described earlier. This model clearly goes beyond the aim of intrinsic research and includes a considerable amount of analysis including comparison and evaluation, previously outlined as the project’s second aim.

The final model for discussion is Thomas’ (2011: 112) account of ‘theory building’, or ‘theory seeking’ (Bassey: 1999: 62), case-study designs which are at least in part based on the ‘grounded theory’ approach (Glaser and Strauss: 1967; Strauss and Corbin: 1998) and developed as an alternative to verification and theory testing in the social sciences. Robson (2007) and Schuller (1988) both argued that theory building has often been a traditional role with case-study strategy, often as a prelude to further study. This model is thus aligned to the project’s aim to produce an explanatory account, and arguably the findings of this study can not only be used as a transferable

77 | P a g e model, they can also be used as a starting point for further research, possibly including experimental designs to establish limited generalisations.

Additionally, case-study design is closely allied to school-based empirical research because of the many definitions of ‘case’ that emphasise the importance of the physical ‘bounded system’ (Miles and Huberman: 1994; Adelman et al: 1980) that parallels definitions of classroom and school, particularly small English primary schools. While the second common definition, the temporal ‘event’ (Thomas: 2011: 13) and ‘instance in action’ (Adelman et al: 1980) matches the idea of curriculum innovations. Equally, the topicality of cross-curricularity which sparked the initial interest in this research project is supported by Yin’s (2003) claim that case-study work is often linked to investigating contemporary issues.

A key idea within case-study theory is the concept of a phenomenon or ‘singularity’ (Thomas: 2011: 9; Bassey and Pratt: 2003: 169) under review, but researching several cases is also very common, particularly when researching educational initiatives (Yin: 2003: 40). The principal justification for multiple case-study work was not an argument for ‘convergence’ or ‘replication logic’ (Yin: 2003: 40-6); rather it was to find alternative approaches to cross-curricular teaching and learning, hence the desire to research aspects of diversity (Platt: 1988: 16; Flick: 2011: 69) and to develop a range of theoretical models, whilst not ignoring areas of similarity and convergence. In practice these did occur, and both similarities and differences were observed and analysed. Certainly multiple case-study work is a common research strategy within the discipline of education (Miles and Huberman: 1994; Gay et al: 2009), partly due to the number, variety and comparatively small size of many schools.

The instance of a negative case has been thought of as very important consideration (Bogdan and Biklen: 1992), and this informed the project’s initial design which was identified as a 2+1 or a 3+1 model, with a normally performing school contrasted with two or three high attaining examples. The other consideration was a linear model of

78 | P a g e 1+1+1 (+1) rather than considering overlapping examples. In practice both ideas proved impossible to maintain. The end result was a 3+ pilot-study model, and the latter did act as a point of contrast as well as convergence. One important issue was the identification of high performing schools that have adopted cross-curricular practice. Ofsted reports were read and were useful, but the most important factor was the use of professional contacts. Perhaps significantly, the pilot-study school was suggested by a university colleague who arranged the initial contact. Similarly the first case-study school used in the research was also suggested by a colleague, based on close familiarity with the recent changes the school had made with curriculum design and delivery. This was further facilitated by the out-going head-teacher who had started to work in partnership with Oxford Brookes University and who had pioneered a transformation to more thematic and creative teaching approach that she believed had resulted in improved pupil enjoyment and performance, a claim backed up by recent Ofsted inspections. This seemed like an ideal starting point for the field work proper.

Case-study 2 was initiated through a University lead partnership meeting, and even though the start of field work overlapped work in the first case-study, it seemed appropriate to begin the research as soon as practicable. This head-teacher was also keen to celebrate a similar experiment with thematic and cross-curricular teaching. The final school was a case of drawing upon contacts and personal information; it was a school that had worked closely with the university in supporting trainee teachers, and the newly arrived head-teacher had been a strong advocate and pioneer of progressive approaches to curriculum design and delivery including more thematic and creative ideas. The problem with identifying a negative case, that is a school that had unsuccessfully adopted cross-curricular teaching, was principally the ethical question of honestly admitting the rational for approaching such a school, particularly those that worked in partnership with the university, and so this was eventually dropped from the design when the ethical considerations appeared insurmountable; instead the pilot- study school was used in its place.

79 | P a g e There was a considerable amount of overlap and flexibility in the timing of the research: despite differing starting points in October 2011, December 2011 and October 2012 respectively, the final work on each case-study ended at approximately the same time in July 2013, (although limited research was conducted in Case-study 3 until February 2014). The resulting overlap was not problematic because rarely were there opportunities for field work in two or more schools at the same time, but it did influence the speed in which the data was processed and analysed, and also delayed the important work on model building. Equally, carrying out consecutive work allowed an opportunity to make comparisons between different schools almost from the start, and arguably sharpened the focus of the data collection and early analysis such as memoing, as well as targeting certain questions in both field notes and interviews. The selection of the three case-study schools was unquestionably a form of ‘purposive’ or ‘judgemental’ sampling (Cohen et al: 2007; Robson: 2007). The justification for this approach can be found in the idea of the ‘key’ (Thomas: 2011: 76-7), or the ‘critical case’ (Bogdan and Biklen: 1992; Flick: 2011: 76), where an example of particularly good or bad practice is chosen, which may then be contrasted with other ‘relevant’ examples to answer the research question (Shipman: 1988: 53-4).

In conclusion, by adapting Thomas’ (2011: 93) flow diagram an overview of the case- study research strategy can be demonstrated as a summary of the design:

Subject Purpose Approach Process

Key Cases Intrinsic Descriptive Multiple

(+ Local) Comparison (Evaluative) Picture Drawing Sequential

80 | P a g e