ADMINISTRACIÓN LOCAL AYUNTAMIENTO DE VALLE DE MENA

The main source of data in CDA is the use of secondary texts. However, in addition to the use of secondary data in CDA, Chouliaraki & Fairclough (1999) suggest the use of other qualitative methods of data collection. The nature and focus of analysis of this study is on the language and the actions produced in a mathematics classroom. As a result, secondary data will not be extensively used. What will be considered is an evaluation of several texts relevant to the research project which is undertaken using a combination of qualitative data collection methods.

Cohen & Mannion (1994) caution that, it is not good to rely heavily on any particular research approach. Instead, Cohen & Mannion suggest the use of triangulation which involves combining different sources of information and different methods. They argue that this triangulation provides the richness and diversity of social setting. In this study therefore, I used a multi-method approach to data collection that enabled a deep probing of the language practices of the mathematics teacher educators of the chosen research sites. These methods include the following which will be discussed the next section:

(i) Pre-observation interviews.

(iii) Reflective interviews.

(v) Focus group discussions

5.3.1 Pre-observation interviews

Interviews (and observations) are the “most common and powerful ways in which we try to understand our fellow human being” (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005, p. 645). According to Chouliaraki & Fairclough (1999), the use of interviews (and direct observations) provides “an invariable tool for assessing the articulatory process in the practice and specific function of discourse in it” (p. 62).

The objectives of interviews (and observations) include collecting concrete insights, understandings, meanings, constructions and perspectives of the interviewee’s own experiences or knowledge on various issues (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999, p. 61; Denzin & Lincoln, 2005, p. 645).

In this study, pre-observation interviews were conducted with four mathematics teacher educators in the sample (see section 5.4). The interviews were semi-structured in the sense that they were in the form of standardized interview. Henning et al. (2004, p. 53) observe that the dominant perception of a standardized interview is that it yields objective and neutral information. It also gives the respondents the freedom to express their feelings and perceptions without restrictions. Furthermore, it enables the researcher to have the freedom that allows him or her to explore reasons and motives for any given response and to probe further (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994, p. 83) in directions specified in the interview guide. This is important because it enables the researcher to amass rich data from which the sought explanation is constructed.

Through the use of pre-observation interviews, I got an understanding of each mathematics teacher educator’s descriptions about multilingual classrooms, and the influences operating on them. I also discovered ways in which mathematics teacher educators’ constructions were influenced by the beliefs or views of the larger society and the way their use of discourse practices influence this process.

Thus these pre-observation interviews focused on gathering information in three major areas:

• Mathematics teacher educators’ descriptions of the multilingual classroom. This was important in order to have an understanding of each of the mathematics teacher educator’s descriptions of multilingual classrooms, and the influences operating on them, so that later on, I am able to determine if their descriptions have any effect on the way they prepare the student teachers for a multilingual classroom.

• Mathematics teacher educators’ understanding of Language-in-Education Policy (LiEP) in Malawi. This was important so as to clarify whether they are aware of the existence of the new LiEP in Malawi and to check if their knowledge of the LiEP influences their discourse practices in their classrooms.

• Mathematics teacher educators’ views about teaching and learning mathematics in multilingual classrooms. This was done so that I know how they talk about teaching in multilingual mathematics classrooms.

Therefore, the use of pre-observation interviews was instrumental in gathering rich information from the mathematics teacher educators about substantive meanings that they give to a multilingual classroom and what teaching mathematics in these environments entails. This information helped me to present their descriptions in their own voice (Fairclough, 1992).

Gallivan & Keil (2003) suggest that participants during an interview often withhold information especially if it is contentious information, because they perceive such views to be undiscussable or because prior history has shown them that such negative feedback will be ignored (p. 38). However, conducting the study in Malawi enabled me to understand the conversations and expressions easily. I was also mindful of my own discourses, expression and language during these interviews just as Alvesson & Deetz (2000) say:

“…the intellectual rule […] of the critical researcher consists in creating the conditions that allow an open discourse between different social actors and not in establishing a superior insight or an authoritarian truth” (p. 1555)

5.3.2 Classroom observations

Classroom observations are important because the observer sees and gets first hand information of the focus of inquiry (Henning et al., 2004). Erickson (1986) states that the “decisions the observer makes about the foci of attention in any one occasion of observation affects the completeness and analytical adequacy of observation made cumulatively across a set of trials” (p. 30). In this research, the focus of the classroom observations was on what the mathematics teacher educators said and did, enabling me to make claims about mathematics teacher educators’ discourse practices in a college mathematics classroom.

Up to five hours of mathematics lesson observation of five consecutive lessons in one of each mathematics teacher educator’s classes were conducted. Through the use of these observations I was able to observe the type of interaction that exists between the mathematics teacher educators and their student teachers and how they relate to each other.

These classroom observations were video recorded and a professional photographer was hired to do the video recording. Permission was sought first in writing (see section 5.6) from the Mathematics teacher educators under study and their student teachers about my presence and the photographer and the video camera before the recording was done. The photographer was instructed to focus on the mathematics teacher educators and his/her interactions with the student teachers. This was helpful as the video pictures came out nicely and the mathematics teacher educators’ voices were very clear. However, though helpful, it is not without problems. Though instructed to focus on the mathematics teacher educators, it would still be different if I did it myself because I would choose what, where and when to focus. Nonetheless, most of his focus was on what I had instructed him to do.

According to the literature, all observation disturbs what is being observed (Henning et al., 2004) and the presence of the researcher and the photographer may change the behavior of the people in the study. However, the first three classroom observations served the purpose of the mathematices teacher educators and the student teachers becoming familiar with our presence and that of the photographer and the video camera. These classrooms also helped the mathematics teacher educators to become comfortable with all those in the classroom and helped to establish a sense of trust and rapport among the student teachers, the mathematics teacher educators, researcher and photographer. Thus the first three classroom observations helped to reduce the effect that we might have caused in this study.

5.3.3 Reflective interviews

The reflective interviews were conducted with each mathematics teacher educator separately after all the lesson observations. These interviews depended on the lessons observed and were facilitated by showing the mathematics teacher educators selected video recordings of their lessons. These interviews were important because they were a follow up to some issues that were seen during observation, for example, questions to explain why they structured their lessons the way they did. This gave information on their views on what they regarded as important in preparing the student teachers. In addition, it helped to crosscheck what mathematics teacher educators perceived against what they did during a lesson. Reflective interviews with each mathematics teacher educator on the classes observed were tape recorded.

5.3.4 Focus group discussions

Focus group discussions can present unexpected interactions, insights, ideas and information about a phenomenon. Maykut & Morehouse (1994) argue that focus group discussions bring several different perspectives into contact to understand what people experience and perceive about the focus of inquiry, through a process that is open and emergent. In this study, the focus group discussions were used to explore the mathematics teacher educators’ perceptions about the discourse practices that are used in their college mathematics classrooms. The focus group discussions were also used to

get the perceptions and understanding of the mathematics teacher educators’ experiences of their discourse practices during mathematics teaching and learning.

These focus group discussions were conducted with all the mathematics teacher educators involved per college (two in all) on issues of the data. These discussions were also tape recorded.