La comunicación corporativa

The methods employed for data gathering were verbal/interactive and non- verbal/non-

interactive techniques that included participant observations, ‗founded on the principle that

only by participating and sharing in the lives of the group being investigated can one achieve a

real understanding of what is going on‘ Hitchcock and Hughes, [1992, p.30]; as well as

questionnaires and various forms of semi structured and unstructured interviews.

So, I worked with pupils within a classroom setting for one or two days a week under the direction of various class teachers in order to experience the processes and outcomes of learning for pupils with borderline learning disabilities. Importantly, I hoped to gain some insight and appreciation of the competencies required, the participation levels and the feedback received. These experiences gained through observations were further intended to enable a deeper exploration of the key areas of the research and help inform the research questions.

Non-verbal/ non-interactive techniques included observations and measures of interactions, proximics, kinesics, examining class assignments and assessment instruments given in the class and interviewing participants. Observations are an obvious and most direct way of find out about learning is to carry out an out classroom observations. This technique has been well used in both research and assessment of teaching, [Wragg, 1999, p. 2] and is a method that I have used in my previous research. However, this technique can be misused because of the subjectivity of the observer because much observation involves instantaneous interpretations and recording of human interactions. Human interpretations of events is dependent on

perception and it‘s unique to each individual [Bell, 1999; 157]

Instances of classroom behaviours that could be classified as assessment were recorded as well as taking field notes in classrooms taught by five different English teachers. Included in these notes were my own role and personal feelings about what had been observed. In the settings my presence was easily accepted by the students, because I was able to move in and out of the classroom as a part-time teacher and a volunteer teaching assistant. General impressions, physical aspects of the classroom, classroom atmosphere, teacher effect, pedagogy, group relationships, student behaviour, teacher-student relationship, cross-cultural comments, were

observed and noted. It is noteworthy to indicate that data was collected with an open mind and was continually examined for patterns leading to theory building from the phenomena and that I tried hard to make notes as concrete as possible to minimize the amount of questionable inferences involved.

It can be argued that observation made it possible to record firsthand behaviour, as it happened hence my liberty to employ it as a data gathering method. Observation of the behaviours and interactions of pupils [pupil to pupil, pupil/teacher] in teaching –learning contexts was undertaken in formal and informal settings in order to discover at first hand the curricular and assessment practices used by teachers.

Judging from my previous experience, observation is one of the many techniques available for data gathering which is vital and acceptable to a qualitative methodology, it is an open learning experience that brings the researcher closer to the multiple worlds inhibited by understudy

respondents. ‗As a technique for data gathering information, the observational method relies

on a researcher seeing and hearing things and recording these observations, rather than relying

on subjects‘ self report, responses to questions and statements‘ [McMillan et al., 1993, p. 256]. For Merriam [1988] ‗observation is the best technique to use when an activity, event, or

situation can be observed firsthand, when fresh perspective is desired, or when participants are

not able or willing to discuss the topic under study‘ [p.89].

In qualitative research, the researcher spends time in the setting understudy, Patton, [1990]. During this observation stint, I was able to make firsthand observations of activities and

interactions, sometimes engaging personally in those activities as ‗Participant Observation. Thus, ‗-qualitative researcher talks with people about their experiences and perceptions [ibid,

p.10]. Since data based on emotions, experiences and feelings were needed, those observations by Patton were worth towing. Conversely, Gillham [2000] contends:

It is participant observation that is mostly associated with qualitative case study approach to research as opposed to non-participant observation which is mostly associated with the observable and measurable in line with a qualitative approach to research [p. 47].

Nonetheless, Merriam [1988, p.88] contends that observation is a research tool when it (1) serves a formulated research purpose, (2) is planned deliberately (3) is recorded systematically and (4) is subjected to checks and controls on validity and reliability. However, sceptics of observation as a data-gathering technique argue that this data gathering instrument is highly subjective and an unreliable nature of human perception; as part of the multi-method case study approach, is time consuming and demands careful planning by the researcher. Therefore, according to [Patton 1990, Cohen et al 2005], would be observers need training, which I undertook in the form of first year tutorials and on-going workshops provided by the University. Accordingly, Patton [1990] postulates that:

Training to be a skilled observer includes learning how to write descriptively; practicing the disciplined recording of field notes; knowing how to separate detail from trivia- and using rigorous methods to validate observations‘ [p. 123].

For Goetz and LeCompte [1984], what to observe depends on the topic and the conceptual framework.- ‗the data that begin to emerge as the ethnographer interacts in the daily flow of events and activities and the intuitive reactions and hunches that ethnographers experience as

these factors coalesce‘ [p. 112]. However, it is inherent that, ‗when initiating an observational

study, the researcher must first identify appropriate respondents and the activity and setting to be investigated, permission should be obtained from relevant authorities for the group and the

situation to be studied‘ [Yin, 1994].

Nevertheless, a number of researchers cited by Merriam [1988, p. 90] suggest a list of things /elements to take cognizance of in an observation schedule, such as:

 The setting: the physical environment, the context, the kind of behaviour the

setting encourages, permits, discourages or prevent.

 The participants: who is in the scene, how many people and their roles, what

brings these people together and who is allowed here?

 Activities and interactions; what is going on, sequences of activities? Number of people present and activities ‗connected or interrelated from either participants‘ views or the researcher‘s perspective‘ [Goetz and LeCompte [1984, p. 113].

 Frequency and duration: when did the situation begin? How long does it last, whether it‘s a recurring situation or unique, if it occurs, how frequently? What

occasions give rise to it? The typicality of the observed situation.

 Delicate aspects: less obvious but important to the observation as argued by

Merriam, 1988 and Cohen et al., 2005 are:

o _{Informal unplanned activities}

o _{Symbolic and connotative meanings of words}

o _{Nonverbal communication such as dress and physical space} o _{Unobtrusive measures such as physical clues}

o _{What does not happen- especially if it ought to have happened [Patton, 1990,}

p,155]

For Merriam [1988], each participant observation has its own rhythm and flow and that data collection involves three stages: entry, data collection, and exit. ‗Gaining entry into the site

begins with gaining the confidence and permission of those who can approve the activity‘

[ibid, p.91]. However, Taylor and Bogdan [1984] advise that the researcher establishes rapport by paying homage to the participants‘ routines, establishing what the observer has in common with participants, helping out on the occasion, being humble and showing interest in the activity. At the design stages and during the data collection process, I considered, and took

heed and incorporated Taylor and Bogdan‘s suggestions into my methodology. Also taken

aboard were Gillham‘s ideas. Gillham [2000] suggests that, during data gathering, the description of the setting, persons and discussions is of paramount importance. Codes can be used in recording data and the researcher should be clear [Gillham, 2000]. For my part, I tried to build a good relationship with the respondents by showing interest in their activities, and for the ethical reasons, the nature and purpose of the research was explained to the respondents.