This research should inform teacher development and professional learning that include longer-term opportunities for collaboration, autonomy and reflection (Poulson & Avramidis, 2003). Indeed, there has not been a defined and strategic approach to support the pedagogical effect on classroom talk for teachers to adopt effectively (Sen, 2010). Given the gap in literature specifically addressing the utilization of talk with multisemiotic resources in relation to English language learning and reading comprehension at the secondary and primary level, more empirical exploration in the form of detailed observational study is needed; particularly in the promotion of desirable pedagogical effects for practitioners’ uptake and professional learning.
Chapter Three 3.0 Research Design
This study takes a socio-cultural perspective on the study of teaching and learning processes in the classroom. The methodological framework is qualitative and interpretive. As Merriam (1998, p. 4) suggests, “in interpretive research, education is considered to be a process and school is a lived experience”; this is consistent with the sociocultural theoretical framework adopted in the present study. Accordingly, the search is for the interpretation of meanings in social contexts that have not been transformed or manipulated. The chosen strategy of investigation in this observation research is the ‘case study’ - specifically, multiple case studies of primary and secondary teachers from selected Singapore-based British international schools and Singapore schools.
In examining the teacher/student interaction applicable to the research aims, this study involves direct observation of teachers and students in the classroom. Classroom observation is a relatively affordable means for obtaining objective and quantifiable records of teacher and student behaviors in classroom (Medley, 1982). However, it is necessary to distinguish the types of classroom observation, and justify this study’s adoption of the unstructured, ethnographic approach. A fundamental aim of the present study is cultural interpretation of the Singapore English Language classrooms, where English Language is taught as a first language to most learners whose home language is not English Language (Sen, 2010). As Punch (1998, p.160) suggests, commitment to cultural interpretation is an ‘overarching characteristic of the ethnographic approach’. Ethnography fits the research’s observational design. Besides, the conversation analysis of the classroom talk to be studied stems from ethnomethodology. As Bruner (1996, p.6) states, ‘the meaning making of the culturalist is in principle interpretive’.
Structured or systematic observation of classrooms refers to “observations of classroom behaviour made by a trained observer who records the behaviours according to an observation system.” (Medley, 1982). It involves the collection of quantitative observational data for direct observations. Structured observation is a system consisting of a list of prespecified items or categories of behavior to be
observed, thus behaviours not listed are ignored (Medley, Coker, & Soar, 1984). Researchers collect data on frequency and length of specific behaviours in the classroom. Generally the categories for predetermined behaviours are extensive, exclusive, and well defined (Boehm & Weingberg, 1997). However, the validity and usefulness of the systematic observation have been challenged in several studies (see, for example, Mercer, 2007). Criticism of the structured observation approach to classroom research includes it being behaviourist in orientation and assuming a “stimulus/response progression to classroom discourse” (Walsh, 2006: 40). In a similar vein, Edwards and Westgate (1994) argue that such system-based observation is more helpful in developing competencies and raising awareness in teachers, than in classroom research. Furthermore, structured observation instruments have also been sometimes deemed as overly rigid and too broad. Hence, it may not be adequate to deal with the complexities and nuances present in classroom interaction.
In unstructured observation, the researcher may have some general ideas of what might be salient, but not of what specifically will be observed. Therefore, observation is holistic, unstructured, and unfocused, with the investigator attempting to document as much as possible about the setting and its participants in order to discover themes of interest (McKechnie, 2008). Unstructured observation is not constrained by checklists and coding schemes; rather, the researcher reports in narrative style about observations that are relevant to the research questions. Thus, unstructured observation is most frequently associated with an interpretivist, constructivist paradigm that emphasizes the importance of context.
Conversation analysis, which stems from the understanding that social context is constantly (re)shaped by the interlocutors’ use of language, is appropriate for the unstructured observational approach. Moreover, as the aim of conversation analysis in the classroom is to identify the structural organisation of the interaction, as determined by the participants, there is no need to suit or categorise the data into any system or framework. Levinson (1983) and Seedhouse (2004) explain that the focus is rightfully on the interaction patterns emerging from the data, rather than relying on any preconceived notions or systems. Walsh (2006) also observes that the unstructured observation approach is better equipped to interpret and account for the multi-layered structure of classroom interaction than the structured approach. This is
because it examines the utterances in sequence and in relation to the context of the classroom discourse.
However, unstructured observation does come with its limitations. It does not seem to express any ‘order’ on the dynamic and complex classroom interaction. Given the lack of preconceived categories proposed, Walsh (2006, p. 54) suggests that the selection of data for analysis may also be seen as “whimsical or idealised to illustrate particular points”. As an ethnomethodological research, conversation analysis approach seems to focus predominantly on the reporting of trends, tendencies and patterns that might not be generalisable or replicable. Nevertheless, this study stands to counter such limitations with the assertion that the credibility of an unstructured, ethnographic research “pivots on the robustness of the conclusions drawn are consistent with the evidence provided” (Flewitt, 2006, p. 46). While both the structured and unstructured approaches identify salient features of pedagogic discourse and are useful in their own right in eliciting observations and trends for analysis, the focus has been placed overwhelmingly on language alone. Therefore, in ensuring that other semiotic resource, like gesture, is not neglected, this study adopts the unstructured ethnographic approach to classroom observation. With this approach, the participants’ semiotic mediation of speech and gesture can be examined in greater detail, within the context of reading instruction.
Blaxter, Hughes & Tight (2001) argue that a research methodology is composed of the underlying paradigm and approach used within a study, as compared to research methods which apply to the specific techniques of data collection. The interpretivist paradigm is arguably well suited to the social sciences giving credence to the understanding of themes (Blaxter et al, 2001). Although the interpretivist paradigm has been criticized for a lack in rigour (Weinberg, 2002), as it is associated to the lack of statistical analysis of a systematic research approach, it is nonetheless possible to maintain a high degree of rigour within interpretivist research (Denscombe, 2002). One such approach is the use of the strategies described by Glaser & Strauss (1967) leading to the development of grounded theory. The application of such techniques has collectively become known as ‘Grounded Theory’, synonymous with methods of data collection, analysis, and ultimately, result. In the context of this research study, application of the Grounded theory is suitably adapted
for data collection processes rather than the intent to form new theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). While the study has specific theoretical underpinnings supporting its research aims, data collected has been analysed with an opportunity for the data to ‘speak for itself’. This allows for themes to emerge without any restrictive personal lens. Therefore, its use in this research is still well placed. Researchers may argue that the thorough application of grounded theory is arguably unsuited to small-scale projects (with negligible funding) as it places heavy demands on resources. Nevertheless, the theme-based analysis techniques rooted in the principle of grounded theory can offer an acceptable compromise. Such an approach has been adopted within this study.