A paradigm is defined as a worldview, “a way of thinking about and making sense of the complexities of the real world” (Patton, 2002, p. 69). The research paradigm determines how the study should be conducted, the focus of the study and the approaches utilised in the interpretation of the data (Hammersley, 2002). In setting out to investigate teachers’ understandings of formative assessment and assessment practices, an interpretive paradigm was the one I deemed most suitable because of its focus on discovering the multiple perspectives of all the participants in a setting (Henning, 2004). The belief in an interpretive paradigm holds that those who are involved in the research process construct knowledge socially and individually, hence there are multiple realities (Henning, 2004). Thus, the aim of the interpretive paradigm is to capture participants’ perspectives on their lived experiences, not some objective notion of that experience. Hence, teachers participating in my study would offer multiple descriptions and explanations of their
evident in collecting data for this study, as each teacher appeared to hold to their own understanding and use of formative assessment based on their own learning, experience, education and setting. Epistemologically, the participants in this research are assumed to be shaped by and also shape their environment as ‘knowing’ subjects. This study has been concerned with meaning and has sought to understand primary ESL teachers’ experiences and interpretations of formative assessment in their everyday practice. In the interpretive paradigm, teachers are acknowledged as knowers with practical and personal knowledge (Clandinin and Connelly, 1998).
Indeed, the search for meaning is central to interpretive research (Cohen et al., 2007). Thus, in consideration of my intention to explore teachers’ meaning-making from various perspectives, this approach was considered to be the most appropriate as it is mainly concerned with understanding people’s lived experience and the meanings they make of that experience as they encounter it in real-life situations (Merriam, 1998). In other words, the aims of research occurring within an interpretive paradigm are to understand, describe and develop situated explanations of a phenomenon or phenomena under study, according to its or their occurrences (Neuman, 2011). Since this research has sought to understand perceptions and interpret practices rather than find objective ‘truths’, the interpretive paradigm was deemed to be well suited to the aims of the research.
5. 3 Qualitative Intrinsic Case Study Design
To address the research questions identified in Chapter 1 (p.19-20), a qualitative
intrinsic case study design (Stake, 1995) was developed. The choice of this design
was greatly influenced by my aim to collect rich data and insights into the teachers’ practices in the classroom (Nunan, 1992). Each individual teachers’ understanding and practice of assessment were identified as the ‘case’ in my study and three ‘cases’ were selected, i.e. three English teachers working in their ESL classes in three schools in the state of Sabah, east of Malaysia.
In defining intrinsic case study, Stake (1995) uses the term ‘intrinsic’ to refer to research underpinned by a genuine interest in the case when the intent is to better understand the case. It is not undertaken primarily because the case represents other cases or because it illustrates a particular trait or problem, but because in all its particularity and ordinariness (Stake, ibid), the case itself is of interest. The purpose is not to use the case for theory building. Therefore, as this research has sought to
understand perceptions and interpret the practices of three teachers, qualitative intrinsic case study was found to be the most suitable approach.
Definitions of ‘case study’ focus on its boundedness and on its holistic approach to a phenomenon, whilst at the same time attending to the particular (Merriam, 1998; Stake, 1995). Merriam (1998) states that the key philosophical assumption upon which case study research is based is “the view that reality is constructed by individuals interacting with their social worlds” (p. 6). In the same vein, she comments that “reality is not an objective entity; rather, there are multiple interpretations of reality” (Merriam, 1998, p. 22). Therefore, espousing this philosophical assumption, the primary interest is to understand meaning or knowledge as constructed by people. In other words, what really intrigues the case study researcher is the way people make sense of their world and their experiences in that world. Furthermore, case study provides a unique example of participants in real situations (and natural settings) which enable the researcher to understand ideas in a clear way rather than explaining them by using abstract theories (Cohen et al., 2007).
Creswell (2010) supports Merriam (1998) by adding that a case study is a qualitative research approach in which the investigator explores a bounded system or multiple-bounded systems over time, through detailed, in-depth data collection involving multiple sources of information. The boundaries that define the cases in my study are English teachers and more specifically, those who teach learners in Year 1-5 in their specific work context, which is their primary ESL classroom. Individual case studies will be written up to document important, particularistic features of each case (Merriam, 1998) and to avoid a reductionist approach.
The qualitative methods of data collection focus on the processes and ways of finding out what people do, know, think and feel (Merriam, 1998) leading to the collection of rich qualitative data. As detailed below (Section 5.6), I used multiple methods of data collection such as semi-structured interviews, observations, video-assisted stimulated recall post-observation interviews, field notes and document analysis. By using different methods at various points in the research process, I “could build on the strength of each type of data collection and minimise the weaknesses of a single approach” (McMillan and Schumacher, 2001, p. 408). The use of qualitative methods of data collection, enabled me to understand
access to the subjective experiences of English teachers within the contexts in which they interact with their learners. This approach, where context is foregrounded as a significant factor that influences human behaviour, resonated well with this study, as my intention was to find meaning within social interactions. Therefore, data were collected by interacting with research participants in their natural setting while gathering detailed information through multiple methods.
The choice of a case study was further motivated by the fact that although a case study presents the difficulty of generalising from a single case, “its uniqueness and its capacity for understanding complexity in particular contexts” (Simons in Bassey 1999, p.36) constitute an advantage. In the context of my study, I did not aim to obtain information that is generalisable, but instead I aimed to gain an in-depth understanding of the English teachers’ meaning-making of formative assessment. As Flyvbjerg (2006) points out, a lack of generalisation does not mean that concrete knowledge obtained from each case is not valuable.
Having three teacher participants provided an opportunity to explore their individual stories in great depth and detail (Neuman, 2000). There was much to record, as teachers recounted their understanding of changes to assessment they were expected to introduce in their classrooms. As each teacher had a different story to tell, each became an individual case study and thus, the research project developed as multiple case studies (Stake, 1995). Whilst my primary focus was on individual stories, I was also aware that issues associated with assessment reform were likely to be common (Merriam, 1998) and repeated in school sites across Sabah, Malaysia. Thus, the lived experiences of three primary ESL classroom teachers are re-told, in the cross-case analysis, to show holistic patterns (Merriam, 1998) about formative assessment and assessment reform.
Multiple-case study strategy
The multiple-case study strategy I adopted provided a better understanding of each case, and the differences and similarities between them (Stake, 1995). Each case explores an individual teacher’s understanding and practice of formative assessment in their primary ESL classroom (Merriam, 1998). The multiple-case strategy enabled me to explore the differences within and between cases (Baxter and Jack, 2008) in order to illustrate the “same issue” (Creswell, 2007, p. 74). Multiple-case study research starts with a “quintain”, which is “an object or phenomenon or condition to be studied” (Stake, 2006, p. 6). The quintain in this research was a phenomenon:
teachers’ understandings of formative assessment and the role it played in their classroom practices.
As an interpretive case study, the data gathered and analysed in this study was thick and descriptive (Willis, 2007). However, following Merriam‘s (1998) recommendations to make the data finite, three teachers were selected for the case study. Merriam (1998) claims that “the more cases included in the study, and the greater the variation across the cases, the more compelling an interpretation is likely to be” (p.40). The strength of qualitative case study research is working in small samples, studied in depth (Denzin and Lincoln, 2005; Miles and Huberman, 1994). This allowed me to collect rich data as the focus was on a small participant sample. The multiple case study approach not only offers greater insight into an issue but also increases the value of imputing the findings to other cases.