Recognising the limitations of the research design is also an important way to establish trustworthiness. Three main concerns were identified as limitations of the research design in this study.
First, there is the potential of bias as the researcher is a practitioner at the research site. Using a constructivist approach, understandings of the practice of AfL in EU was mediated through the perception of the researcher. In the position of a practitioner, the researcher might be familiar with teaching and learning styles in the context. Moreover, the participant lecturers were the researcher’s colleagues. This led to both advantages and disadvantages in conducting this research. On the one hand, the researcher’s familiarity with the site and the participants helped the researcher to easily gain access and conduct the study. On the other hand, the researcher’s previous knowledge of the practices limited adverse criticism of AfL activities.
To minimise this limitation, the researcher was clearly aware of herself as a researcher during data collection and analysis. This awareness was achieved by the use of a reflectivity strategy (Ary et al., 2010). That is, after each interview or observation, the researcher critically self-reflected on her own perceptions about the assessment practices in the context. Further, the multiple data sources were also triangulated to reduce bias occurring because of the researcher’s insider, observer status. During the process of collecting and interpreting data, the researcher engaged in periodic debriefing with her research supervisors to assist in reviewing and refining interpretations of the findings.
Second, the use of a predetermined sociocultural lens from the beginning of data analysis to examine the assessment for learning practices can bias data analysis. Simons (2009) points out that identifying a theoretical framework from the beginning of research can be a double-edged sword. Despite the fact that a theoretical framework can provide a focus during the data collection and analysis, it can lead to “a false
consensus - making the data fit the framework - or failing to see the unexpected” (p. 33).
To deal with this problem, the researcher acknowledged that sociocultural theories are only one of several possible approaches to explain the practice of AfL in the University. Although data was interpreted based on the lens of sociocultural theories, it was important to keep an open-mind, thinking about new data appearing during fieldwork. This concern was reduced because a constructivist inquiry allows a certain modification of the research design in the process of data collection.
Finally, the unique and particular characteristics of case study may not lead to a generalisation of the assessment practices for learning for all lecturers in this University or in Vietnamese universities. The research findings are in-depth understandings of the assessment practices of three participant lecturers within one site. This limitation is recognised as one of the major disadvantages of case study (Merriam, 1988; Simons, 2009; Stake, 1995). However, Stake (1995) also points out that “the real business of case study is particularisation, not generalisation. We take the picture of case and come to know it well, not primarily as to how it is different from others but what it is, what it does” (Stake, 1995, p. 8). Although the research findings are not generalisable to all lecturers in EU, they can be a starting point for further research at a larger scale on assessment practices for learning in Vietnamese higher education.
3.5 CONCLUSION
The study aimed to explore the practice of AfL in the context of a Vietnamese university. This chapter has presented a methodological approach to gather and analyse the data collected from the assessment practices of three lecturers. A constructivist paradigm and sociocultural theories of learning have been used as theoretical orientations for a multiple case study design using a range of data collection techniques. An overview of the method of using the constant comparative analysis approach has been briefly summarised. The issues of data trustworthiness and ethical considerations have also been described. In the following chapter, the EU is detailed to contextualise where the three lecturers have been working and how these conditions have had an impact on their assessment practices.
Context of the Cases: Education
University
This study explores how assessment for learning is currently implemented in Vietnamese higher education and further aims to identify what factors support or hinder lecturers’ assessment practices within a traditional Confucian teaching context such as Vietnam. The Education University was chosen as the site to explore the types of assessment practised, as it is one of the leading teacher-training Vietnamese universities.
A case study approach was used to investigate the assessment practices of three lecturers from three different faculties of EU: Tran Thi Ly, Duong Thi Hoa, and Nguyen Van Tung. From a sociocultural perspective (Lave & Wenger 1991; Rogoff, 1990), the lecturers’ assessment practices are considered to be inextricably linked to the institutional context. This chapter describes the particular EU context. It begins with a general introduction to the University. The subsequent section addresses recent changes at EU to advance teacher training quality. Following is a discussion of the challenges that EU faces from participants’ perspectives.
EU is recognised as large teacher-training university at both undergraduate and postgraduate levels in Vietnam. Currently, the University has over 1000 staff in total. Many lecturers at EU are national experts or scientists in their fields. In the academic years 2012-2013, there were over 20 separate training faculties and over 20 research and technology centres in the University. Over 2000 new undergraduates and 1500 postgraduates enrol at EU each year.
EU is one of 17 national key universities for which the government prioritises resources to advance the quality of training. In the field of education, EU is expected to be a model of high standards in the provision of educational services. To achieve this expectation, EU has reformed its training processes, policies, and teaching and learning practices in the last five years.