Cuadro auxiliar 1

The importance of designing a methodological approach originating from the research questions posed, was reinforced to the researcher during the MPhil research in 2012 (Somekh & Lewin, 2004). Consequently, a multiple case study approach was adopted, due to its efficacy in providing the researcher with methods that allow in- depth investigation of the research questions, presented at the beginning of the chapter.

A qualitative research approach is predominantly multi-method in nature (Flick, 2002). This involves triangulation of methods, with the result adding, ‘rigor, breadth, complexity, richness, and depth to any inquiry’ (Denzin & Lincoln, 2008,

84 p.7). Arguably, the most effective way of combining research methods is through a case study. Defining what is meant by a case study is problematic, due to the inherent multi-method nature of the approach. However, this is taken into account by Robson (2002), who defines the case study as, ‘a strategy for doing research which involves an empirical investigation of a particular contemporary phenomenon within its real life context using multiple sources of evidence’ (p.178). In this doctoral research, the contemporary phenomenon under investigation is that of the influence of TAs on the process of socially including children identified with SEN. The real-life contexts investigated are three mainstream primary schools in the North of England, and the multiple sources of evidence employed include non-participant observations, semi- structured interviews, multi-sensory research with children and documentary analysis.

Much has been written exploring types of case studies and the motivations for their selection (Bassey, 1998; Stake, 2005; Stenhouse 1985; Yin, 2013). Having fully reviewed the literature identifying types of case studies, it was determined that the three case studies undertaken in this research most closely fit with the ‘evaluative’ case study identified by Stenhouse (1985) and the ‘instrumental’ case study identified by Stake (2005). Stenhouse defines the ‘evaluative’ case study as intended to,

‘provide educational actors or decision makers with information that will help them to judge the merit and worth of policies, programmes or institutions’ (p.50). In this study, the cases sampled enabled the researcher to judge the merit of the deployment of TAs in each case school considered; particularly with reference to the interventions TAs were involved in. Stake’s (2005) ‘instrumental’ study involves research into one or more particular situations in order to try to understand an outside concern. In this way, ‘we start and end with issues dominant’ (1995, p.16). This research both starts and ends with the issue of needing to determine effective management of TAs’ role to identify their particular influence over the process of socially including pupils

identified with SEN; the case studies chosen involve gathering data that allow for the formation of conclusions with regard to the issue explored.

In some fields, for example anthropology and political science, the multiple case study approach is considered to encompass an entirely different methodology from single case studies (Yin, 2013). However, Yin considers multiple case studies to be within the same methodological framework as single case studies. He identifies the

85 major difference to be in the sampling method chosen for selection of cases in the study, due to alternative selection motivations. Yin suggests that selection of two or three cases should be made on the grounds of ‘literal replication’ (p.54). This involves sampling of cases because they are believed to have exemplary outcomes in relation to a theory, enabling transference of research methods between cases. In this research, three case schools were purposively sampled due to their identified best practice in relation to the phenomenon researched and similar research methods were employed in all three cases. The sampling method employed will be further discussed in this section.

Yin suggests researchers be mindful that the cases chosen are independently holistic, therefore, variation between cases is not eliminated by this approach. It is recognised that multiple case studies afford comparisons to be made regarding a researcher’s chosen phenomenon, nevertheless, the unique nature of a case prevents complete similarity. Each case can be viewed as a ‘bounded system,’ in which a unique complex of interrelated elements or characteristics operate within identifiable boundaries (Stake, 2005). However, Yin also suggests that, ‘the analytic benefits from having two (or more) cases may be substantial’ (p.53). If common conclusions can be drawn from two or more cases, rather than one, the external generalisability of the findings are immeasurably expanded (Torrance, 2008).

Generalisability of the case study is, however, one of the most frequently challenged aspects of this approach. For example, Creswell (2007) claims that the conclusions of case study research are often too specific to the single case studied, therefore any generalisations made are coloured by the unique nature of the case. However, Verschuren (2003) argues that claims of low generalisability are often made by researchers who view the case study as the study of a single object, rather than a methodological approach or a research strategy. If the ‘case study’ is viewed as an approach then its usefulness in generating knowledge is more clearly understood.

Simons (1980) argues that the strength of the case study approach lies in its attention to the complexity and subtlety of an aspect of a case in its own right. As Stake (2005) identifies, ‘the real business of case study is particularization, not

generalization’ (p.8). Additionally, Flyvbjerg (2006) argues that formal generalisation of the case is over-valued; the ‘force of example’ that one case study may set is

86 frequently underestimated. Therefore, researchers are best placed to seek an accurate but limited understanding of the phenomenon studied (Gillham, 2000; Yin, 2008).

Bassey (1998) suggests that the tension between particularisation and generalisation may be addressed though what he terms ‘fuzzy generalisations.’ He argues that the application of these ‘fuzzy generalisations’ from one case to others of varying contexts is important, so that recommendations from one school can be applied to others. The aim of this process is explained by Simons (2009): by understanding ‘a school’ we can increase our understanding of ‘other schools’ and this has the potential to contribute to our collective knowledge about ‘The School.’ To relate this analogy to this research project specifically, the MPhil pilot study research undertaken in 2012 identified effective practice in managing the role of TAs to

support the social inclusion of pupils identified with SEN in ‘a school.’ This enabled a hypothesis regarding effective deployment of TAs to be formed. In this doctoral research, the hypothesis has been applied to three ‘other schools’ in order to determine generalizability to ‘The School’ as an entity.

Sampling of the case studies

Purposive sampling was employed to select the schools in which the case study was conducted. Denscombe (2010) defines purposive sampling: ‘the researcher deliberately selects particular cases because they are seen as instances that are likely to produce the most valuable data’ (p.17). This method was employed due to the evaluative nature of this study. Purposive selection of the schools was necessary, in order to evaluate the merit and worth of the school’s management of TAs in

promoting the social inclusion of pupils identified with SEN. Therefore, the sampling method employed directly related to the research aims (Stake, 2005).

In purposively sampling the research schools, the researcher was able to select schools in which good practice with regard to the research phenomena was

acknowledged. Initially, areas of the country in which the researcher had access to accommodation were focused on: these included the Local Authorities of York, Durham, Wolverhampton and London Boroughs. It was decided early on that the researcher would choose either one of York or Durham in which to conduct research as, geographically, the areas were too similar and the researcher sought as diverse a

87 geographical sample as possible. This diversity allowed the researcher to gain access to differing community-based challenges in each of the schools chosen, as discussed further in chapter 6. Exploring a range of community-based challenges afforded tentative generalisation of the conclusions and recommendations of this study, regarding optimum deployment of TAs, to national primary schools.

The sampling process began by the researcher accessing Ofsted inspection reports of primary schools that had an overall effectiveness rating of ‘Outstanding’ in York, Durham and Wolverhampton, in order to select the first two research schools. When ‘Outstanding’ reports were identified, the researcher then separated those reports in which the schools had higher than average levels of children identified with SEN, higher than average free school meal allocation and, preferably, those in which TAs were mentioned in the text. It was also preferable if the area of pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development was ‘Outstanding,’ as this category best fits the social research aims.

Higher than average levels of children identified with SEN were required due to the researcher’s focus on observing TAs working with these children, as well as the research method with children requiring participants that were diagnosed with a special educational need. Higher than average levels of free school meals was

preferred due to the additional income that these schools receive in the form of ‘pupil premium;’ the researcher’s previous professional experience had shown that this money was often spent on more creative, non-traditional forms of provision for the pupils; consequently, the researcher may observe increased numbers of TAs at work or implementation of more creative, social based interventions. Finally, it was important to the researcher that each school had a different particular community- based challenge to their pupils’ education, as this would increase the generalisability of conclusions drawn regarding the effectiveness of TAs. The school chosen in Durham had a particular challenge of high levels of Children Looked After (CLA): the school in Wolverhampton had pupils from a large number of different cultural backgrounds and the school in London had a very high number of children living in social housing. These differences in the schools’ communities made for rich data collection regarding TAs’ influence on the social challenges of inclusive education.

88 In March 2014, the researcher relocated to London in order to undertake an ESRC Internship, linked to the PhD scholarship, for 4 months at the Cabinet Office. The researcher undertook the role of Policy Advisor in the Youth Policy Team and predominantly worked on a project to support impact evaluation of youth based non- cognitive skill focused programmes. As the researcher was living in London, it made sense that the third research school be London-based. The process of purposively sampling the third school was slightly different to the first two. In September 2014, the researcher was providing some consultative support to the Mayor’s Education and Youth Team in Greater London Authority, City Hall. This team had built a ‘Gold Club’ of high performing London schools, consisting of 106 primary and secondary schools at the time. The researcher used these schools as a basis for purposive sampling of the third research school, reading through the Ofsted reports of the primary schools in the Gold Club and determining which met the sampling criteria previously described and then contacted appropriate schools, with the first school contacted consenting to take part.

The three schools chosen for research in this study are introduced to the reader in chapter 6. Information is given regarding the pupil make up of each school, as well as the surrounding community in which the schools are situated. Sampling of the three schools collectively, aims to provide as rich a picture as possible, with regard to management of the role of TAs with particular focus on the social inclusion of pupils identified with SEN.