Sampling is a process of selecting the research participants. An embedded mixed action research design employs different sampling strategies to obtain a convenient sample. This study employed stratified sampling, simple random sampling, cluster random sampling and purposive sampling. All the secondary schools in Pwani were stratified according to geographical zones and based on proximity to facilitate data collection process. Stratified sampling involves making categories of population and selecting the sample from proportions based on the analysis to be carried out (Newby, 2014). Therefore, four districts, Bagamoyo, Kisarawe, Mkuranga and Kibaha were selected based on the geographical locations as well as ability to provide a balanced representation. The District Education Office from each selected district then provided a list of schools. These schools were stratified according to their public or private status.
68
Fifteen schools were then randomly selected. These schools were selected as clusters whereas all their teachers constituted the sample for the study. Fraenkel, Wallen, and Hyun (2012) explain that “cluster random sampling is similar to simple random sampling except that groups [such as schools] rather than individuals are randomly selected” (p. 96). Cluster random sampling helps to maximize data collection at one point, and thus it is cost-effective (Newby, 2014). While cluster sampling is not providing effective representation of the characteristics of entire population, “the more school(s) selected, the more likely the findings will be applicable to the population of teachers” (Fraenkel et al., 2012, p. 96). Therefore, the teachers from these fifteen schools were invited to participate in my survey in order to provide baseline data regarding the extent to which they engaged in school-based professional learning.
In purposive sampling, individuals are chosen based on the assumption that they make representation of the population characteristics, but the data obtained from this sample cannot be generalized (E. Wilson, 2017). Purposive sampling was then used in this present study to choose the Heads of Schools and teachers for open-ended interviews. These school leaders were selected purposefully based on their position in management of school learning activities and experiences of professional learning. Table 3.1 shows the selected research participants.
Table 3.1
Research Participants Selected for the Study
69
3.7.1 Selecting teacher participants for the survey
Teachers from all subject departments of the 15 schools were invited to participate in the survey to report about their experiences of engaging in professional learning activities in the previous year. The teachers who completed the survey taught in the areas of: Social Science (39.4%), Mathematics (6.1%), Science (16.9%), Business studies (5.2%) and Languages (28.6%). Eight participants (3.8%) did not indicate their subject specialisations.
To maintain anonymity, all the returned questionnaires from different departments were placed in one envelope provided by the researcher. Stringer (2007) argues that if teachers are sampled departmentally, then they need to be combined with other departments to enhance confidentiality. Of the 213 teacher participants who completed the survey, 45.5% were male and 51.6% female. Six participants (2.8%) did not indicate their gender. The majority of teachers (77%) reported between one to ten years of teaching experience. For the purpose of this study, teaching or work experience referred to the amount of time spent by a teacher at a particular school engaging in teaching.
3.7.2 Selecting Heads of Schools
The Heads of Schools, whose teachers participated in the survey, were also invited to participate in interviews. It was decided to include the Heads of Schools in the study because they would have information about and experiences of PL programmes. Individuals can be purposively selected because of the experiences they are known to possess (Flick, 2009; Fraenkel & Wallen, 2009). In order to make effective use of the time and manage the considerable amount of data obtained from the two phases of the study, only one Head of School was chosen from each of the four districts. Each Head of School was contacted to seek their consent prior to the interview.
3.7.3 Selecting teacher participants for the PL intervention
Selecting teachers to participate in the inquiry and knowledge-building cycle (IKBC) was preceded by selecting the school. School L (Lisuli Secondary School) was selected from the 15 surveyed schools to participate in this research. The selection was based on criteria including: teachers’ need for improving their PL; proximity; availability of teachers; and willingness of the school to allow the programme to take place. Teachers
70
in almost all the schools indicated in the survey that they had PL challenges, needed to improve their SBPL and were therefore willing to participate. As a result, based on proximity, schools F, G and L were initially selected. Due to the limited resources available, only one school could be selected for this study. Heads of Schools from all the three schools were contacted, and it was agreed that School L was the best fit according to the selection criteria.
Four Social Science teachers from Lisuli were invited to participate. As my earlier work was in the Social Science area, having teachers from the Social Science department made the programme more realistic. Inviting the four teachers started by speaking to all the Social Science teachers at the school about inquiry cycles and answering their queries before they agreed to participate. Heil (2005) suggests that explaining the research project to people you expect to work with could possibly help to recruit the right co-participants. At the beginning, six teachers from the Geography and History volunteered to participate. After explaining the specific learning tasks anticipated in the inquiry cycle and the need for a small number of participants to manage the study, the two Geography teachers decided to withdraw from the group, which left four History teachers. Clauset, Lick, and Murphy (2008) emphasise that an effective learning community requires teachers who are informed and willing to learn in a team.
It was also anticipated that upon successful completion of the programme, the invited participants would assist their fellows to enhance their PL practices. Although having all teachers from the same department seemed disappointing, I soon realised that it was more manageable to work with fewer teachers from the same department. This idea of inviting teachers from the same department who can share experiences is also supported by other scholars (Desimone et al., 2002; Israel, Schurman, & Hugentobler, 1992).