The Pilot Study

Having clarified my research questions, formulated my methodology, I realised that I would still be unprepared for the main study. I felt I needed a trial run of what I would be doing in the main study. I therefore decided to conduct a pilot study with two main objectives.

First I believed I needed to test my intended data collection methods (including the use of video) to see how pupils would react and how much data would be generated. Second, I wanted to test the teaching materials and pedagogical terminology with a small group of pupils and their teacher. The resulting video did produce a significant quantity of data which, because of a lack of clear

instructions to the teacher using the video, was not always useful (e.g. poor sound quality and the videoing of irrelevancies when moving around the classroom). This generated a detailed conversation with teachers and some general guidelines for the study lesson videoing.

Conducting a pilot study as a mini-version of a full-scale study was not consider appropriate as the main concern was checking the appropriateness of the

materials and resources. Piloting the data collection tools and lesson materials in preparation for the research was much more advantageous. So a pilot study would enable me to try out the research techniques and methods and still

allowed me the time and the opportunities to adapt and modified accordingly. The pilot study, for this current research, might be viewed in terms of a try-out of the final techniques and methods and data tools and instruments. I therefore viewed the pilot study as both a feasibility study for the main study and as the pre-testing of the data instruments and more importantly the actions and reactions of those involved in the school.

It is worth noting here that changes were made to the original material. The manipulative tiles were redesigned, originally they were all copied on to plain white card and it was evident that considerable time was spent by pupils sorting

142 them into families ( 1₂ ,1₄ ,1₈….) of tiles. All fraction tiles of a particular family were

therefore colour coded (appendix 8), which solved the problem of wasted time. Changes to the wording on the four worksheets (appendices 3, 4, 5, 6) were made to make the phrases more recognisable to the words used by their class teachers. Few changes were made to the activity, skills and exercise worksheets. The wording on the task worksheet (appendix 6) was substantially revised.

The pilot lesson did not originally use a PowerPoint presentation, but comments from both the teacher involved with the pilot and the pupils indicated that this was the norm and to be expected. So, a PowerPoint was devised (appendix 9) and shared with both the pilot teacher and the teachers of 7AC and 7NR for

comments. Interestingly I had perceived the optimal sequence of the four

learning aspects in the pilot study as activity, skill, exercise and finally task. There was a discussion with the pilot lesson teacher as to whether this was the

appropriate but no strong opinions were expressed, hence I did not change this for the study lessons. Finally I did use the pedagogical terminology (activity, skill, exercise and task) in a very precise manner with pupils and we did talk about whether this was problematic. The teacher expressed the opinion that this had caused no problems and this was also evident in the pilot video as pupils did not ask for any clarification from either the teacher or me.

As I have already discussed in chapter 2 my reading of the mathematics

education literature, and my experiences of learning mathematics, had led me to believe that alternative approaches to teaching of fractions and the use of precise pedagogical terminology would be beneficial to pupils of all attainment and the their teachers.

3.4.1 Testing the strategy

At the pilot session the majority of the mixed attainment pupils settled to work on the use of the materials very quickly. There was a good level of interaction between the pupils using the materials and my role was limited to asking questions to prompt next steps in their learning. The materials were sufficiently engaging and little time to be spent off task by the pupils. The video of the one1 hour sessions provided some very interesting sequences which I was able to use to adapt the materials for the final research itself. The pilot video was transcribed

143 but was only used to aid in the adaptation of the materials. It also prompted me to produce a PowerPoint and the teacher prompts I might want to use in the

teaching during the research lessons. The plenary session used in the pilot was not the one eventually used in the final research. A discussion between pupils, myself and their teacher (who had observed the whole session) about the

materials resulted in a number of significant changes being made and this was a direct consequence of what they had learnt. This was all contained on the video and was analysed in detail to make the changes to the materials.

The pilot session had revealed some minor issues with the materials and more importantly the understanding, by the teacher, of the pedagogical terminology that I had been using. However, she did recognise the level of engagement and learning that had taken place. She asked if she could have the materials, which I agreed to, so that she could try them with other pupils. She did this in the time between the pilot study and the main study. She adapted one resource but ran the session for all her classes and reported favourably about the outcomes. This convinced me that the materials and the related pedagogical terminology, based on what I had read and the conversations with the teacher, were robust. Given the minor changes I needed to make to the materials, together with the inclusion of the teacher developed resource, I was satisfied that these would be the ones I would use for the main research. I was confident that these teaching materials and research methods would produce the insights I was seeking.

In the interim between the pilot and the main study the teacher had reported back to her department about the work. I was subsequently invited to join a number of departmental meetings as a means of stimulating conversations and professional development. This obviously was what I had hoped for because it allowed me to pursue the next phase of my research project.

Overall, the pilot study session had provided some of the base line data that I needed. It helped me realise what changes needed to be made to the materials but more importantly it gave me a realisation of the quantity of data that was produced from just one video camera and the resulting conversation with one teacher. The main study was designed to have four or five cameras in each teaching session and more than one teacher would be present in the teaching session. Hence it was envisaged that there would be a resulting fivefold increase

144 in the data from each of the two teaching sessions. I nevertheless decided that

this was acceptable and worth the time that would be needed to be spent analysing the large quantity of data produced (the ways in which the data was analysed can be found in chapter 4).