AN EXPLORATION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF A PROPOSED QUALITATIVE STUDY

If you order your cheap custom paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on AN EXPLORATION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF A PROPOSED QUALITATIVE STUDY. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality AN EXPLORATION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF A PROPOSED QUALITATIVE STUDY paper right on time.

Our staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in AN EXPLORATION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF A PROPOSED QUALITATIVE STUDY, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your AN EXPLORATION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF A PROPOSED QUALITATIVE STUDY paper at affordable prices with cheap custom writing service!

AN EXPLORATION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF A PROPOSED QUALITATIVE STUDY

Introduction

Ronald Chenail observed that, Research projects, especially qualitative ones, can become muddled … because when the richness of our curiosities meets the richness of qualitative data, researchers can become overwhelmed with the choices they have to make. (Chenail, 17)

The purpose of this paper is to explore the methodological aspects of a proposed Honours thesis. Through this process, I aim to create something akin to a flight plan to help me navigate my way through the next few months of data capture and analysis without getting lost … in and amongst that vast region located somewhere between the literature, the field and [myself]. (Chenail, 17)

Focus of the study

Meeting Vygotsky

I entered my teaching career not long ago in much the same way as all beginning teachers full of noble ideas of changing young lives, envisaging the meaningful discussion that would take place in my classroom and absolutely determined not to fall prey to the lure of the chalk and talk model. Within six months, my students all sat in a carefully planned seating arrangement (so that they would not talk during the lesson), they rarely asked questions or spoke out of turn, my voice was hoarse by the end of the day and I had bought shares in a chalk manufacturing company.

At this time, I concluded that it was impossible to create a classroom in which the teacher shared power with students, without also creating chaos. I decided that such lofty notions were the pipedreams of educational theorists who had spent too much time away from the day to day reality of the classroom, and resigned myself to the ranks of those who feel they have succeeded if their students are silent and furiously copying down notes from an OHT.

Not long after this, I encountered the Vygotskian theory of Instructional Dialogue through coursework in my Honours program. It piqued my interest and, tentatively, I began to incorporate some of its precepts into my classroom practice. Even at this most amateur level of implementation, the results were very encouraging. My students became more inquiring, focussed debates and discussions began to take place more frequently (without resulting in a noise level that would wake the dead) and my own enjoyment increased.

Thus, my own positive experience with instructional dialogue has led me to focus my study on the practical ways in which instructional dialogue can be implemented as a pedagogical tool in the upper secondary school.

Research Questions

I have developed a set of guiding research questions, which, in the tradition of qualitative research, will undoubtedly be modified as the study unfolds and I will build grounded theory based on the constant comparison of data.

These central research questions include (transcribe some data and use that to inform research questions)

a) What are the benefits of incorporating this theory into one's pedagogy?

b) What are some of the practical ways in which an ordinary teacher can implement this theory in his or her classroom practice?

c) How do students feel about and respond to this approach to teaching and learning?

Theoretical Approach

Vygotskian theory … is a major influence in the effort to rethink schooling in more co-operative and democratic terms and seeks a viable model of schooling that challenges both an industrial mass-production model and a romantic, individualist view of education. (Bredo and McDermott, 1 at 1)

Fathered by Roland Tharp and Ronald Gallimore, instructional dialogue is one of the descendants of Vygotskys theoretical model, lauded by many educational theorists as the key to real teaching - helping students think, reason, comprehend and understand important ideas. (Goldenberg, 1/1 at 16) The spirit of instructional dialogue can be summed up in Tharp and Gallimores own words, To most truly teach, one must converse; to truly converse is to teach. (Tharp and Gallimore, 188 at 111) In the strongest terms, Tharp and Gallimore condemn the teaching methods employed in schools as ineffective due to the sad lack of interaction between teachers and students, noting that connected discourse occurs so rarely that observation barely detects a trace. (Gallimore and Tharp, 10 at 175)

Bredo and McDermott note that, Real or true teaching, for Tharp and Gallimore, consists of assisting performance through the ZPD. Teaching can be said to occur when assistance is offered at points in the ZPD at which performance requires assistance. (Tharp and Gallimore, 188 in Bredo and McDermott, 1 at 4) In simple terms, this assistance is arguably best given through instructional dialogue. To illustrate this, Tharp and Gallimore explore how language is taught and learned in the natural environments of home, community and culture, by contrasting the way in which a caregiver teaches a young child to communicate with the teaching methods generally employed in schools. (Tharp and Gallimore, 188 at 4)

In the former, the childs attempts to communicate are accommodated by the caregiver, who engages the child in a dialogue appropriate to both the childs level of development and interests. Rarely is this done intentionally in these natural speech communities, but it is in this way that children learn language before they even set foot in a classroom. Contrast schools, where teachers generally ignore children, talk over them and dominate the proceedings. (Gallimore and Tharp, 10 at 17)

Tharp and Gallimore assert that natural methods of language acquisition - simplifying speech, repetition, expansion of the adults and childs utterances, assuming the childs perspective - have much to teach schools. (Tharp and Gallimore, 188 at 5) A childs ability to use language is stretched through interaction with more competent speakers, who assume as much responsibility as is necessary to carry on the talk. (Tharp and Gallimore, 188 at 6) In these ways, caregivers engage in a dialogue with young children, unintentionally and naturally giving them their first language instruction, by behaving as if both parties have a shared understanding of the communication taking place.

Thus, instructional conversation can be defined as topic-centered, pragmatic discussion that takes place in a natural social context between individuals who, through allowances made on the part of the more capable party, assume roles as relative equals. In essence, Tharp and Gallimore assert that instructional dialogue is vital to effective teaching because it involves returning to the natural methods already proven to be so successful with young children, as opposed to the artificial setting of school culture and its associated hierarchy.

Literature Review

Tharp and Gallimores Rousing minds to life Teaching, learning and schooling in social context, is undoubtedly the Mecca for instructional dialogue devotees. The central text on this topic, it discusses in detail the theoretical proof that instructional conversation works, drawing largely on various qualitative studies which explore the ways in which caregivers intuitively teach infants and young children to use language.

The interest sparked by this text and other papers by the same authors has resulted in the publication of various books and articles on the topic, including those by Lemke, Renshaw and McLean. One article that contains a particularly clear explanation of both the theory and the practice of instructional conversation is Claude Goldenbergs 1/1 paper, Instructional Conversations Promoting comprehension through discussion. This article is especially valuable for its outline of what the author has identified as, Elements of the instructional conversation (Goldenberg, 1/1 at 1) and its accompanying illustration of instructional conversation in action. Goldenberg illuminates both the theory and the practice of instructional dialogue, and is a useful guide for practicing teachers wishing to incorporate this approach into their pedagogy.

Ethical Considerations

The Australian Association for Research in Education has developed a number of principles to guide educational researchers on appropriate conduct. A number of these principles are relevant to this study, particularly those principles relating to the participants. (AARE, 15 at )

1. Confidentiality

Participants and informants have the right to remain anonymous. (AARE, 15 at 4) The privacy of individual students who have participated in data capture and of the participant school itself both need to be protected. To this end, neither the school nor any individual student will be identified in the study, either through express naming or by implication. In this way, confidentiality is assured, as well as minimising the risk of significant harm to participants through loss of privacy and/or damage to the participant school as an institution. (AARE, 15 at 5)

. Consent

The AARE Code of Ethics strongly advocates the notion of informed consent. As the data to be used in this study involves minors, the consent of both participating students and their parents/guardians has been obtained. All parties have been informed as to the nature and methods of research, its purposes, any risks run by the participants and any other factors which might reasonably be expected to influence their willingness to participate. (AARE, 15 at )

. Deception and Secrecy

Persons should know when they are to be participants in research, be asked for their informed consent, and be entitled to withdraw at any time. (AARE, 15 at )

This guideline has been and will continue to be adhered to throughout the course of this study. At all times prior to data collection (taping a lesson, performing an interview) students have been and will be informed about what is taking place according to the guidelines outlined in () above, Consent.

4. Institutions

No disruption of institutional processes has taken place as a result of this research to date, and none is anticipated. However, should such disruption arise, the appropriate persons will be informed at the earliest possible time of same, and every effort will be made to minimise the negative effects of any disruption.

Permission to conduct this research has been sought and granted by relevant authorities, on condition that the identity of the school will remain confidential. Confidentiality will ensure that analysis and observation can take place without restraint, while preserving the integrity and reputation of the relevant school.

Planning and Research Design

Method

The data collection for this study was carried out in two separate phases. Firstly, over the period of one week, a series of six lessons in a Year 1 Legal Studies class was audio taped with a view to its transcription and analysis.

Secondly, after a lapse of some two weeks, a random sample of five (?) students from the class were interviewed in the Teaching and Learning HOD's office during a class research lesson in the library. The students were given no prior warning so that their responses would be as natural and unplanned as possible. The class as a whole, had been told that interviews would take place at some point in the future. The release of control opens us to unexpected paths of questioning and discovery. (Tsourvakas, 17)

Of course, some kind of game plan is necessary, and to this end, I drafted a short list of questions I wanted to ask the students. These questions included

1. Had the students observed any changes in the way we organised our classroom in recent weeks?

. If so, what had they observed?

. How did they feel about these changes? Positive overall or negative?

4. How productive did they feel these changes were? Why? How do they judge whether the changes have been positive or not?

5. What has my role been as teacher? What tasks did I perform?

Other than these very broad goals in terms of discovery, I allowed the students to go where they wanted with the conversation. Sometimes the things they say when unprompted are more meaningful than the answers they give in response to a direct question because the interviewer is not creating a reality or a lens through which to view the social world of the interaction.

Data

The data collected for this study consists of

1. Six audio taped lessons of a Year 1 Legal Studies class over the period of one week.

. An informal interview/discussion between the classroom teacher and randomly selected students from the class.

Anticipated Challenges

In a study such as this, there are a number of possible difficulties a researcher could encounter.

Challenges related to the collection and analysis of data

Miller and Glassner (17) refer to Silverman (1) when they note the dilemma facing interview researchers concerning what to make of their data. (at ) For example

1. When undertaking an interview with students, what kind of environment should I seek to create in order to conduct that interview formal or informal? Which approach will best suit my purpose and provide me with the best source of information?

. As interviewer, what role should I take? Should I frame my questions loosely and allow students a certain amount of freedom to explore the issues raised, for example, through narratives? Alternatively, should I take a more active role and focus more narrowly on the questions I need answered? Deciding which approach suits my purpose is difficult and probably cannot be done until I am engaged in the interview itself and am able to assess the dynamics of the interaction.

. Miller and Glassner note that how interviewees respond to us based on who we are in their lives, as well as the social categories to which we belong, such as age, gender, class and race is a practical concern as well as an epistemological or theoretical one. (at 101) As their class teacher, will the fact that I am also interviewing them about various aspects of their/our classroom culture and practice make the data gained less valuable or more valuable - than if someone else was performing the interview?

Holstein and Gubrium refer to Charles Briggs and Aaron Cicourel when they note that like all other speech events, interviews fundamentally, not incidentally, shape the form and content of what is said, and furthermore, that interviews virtually impose particular ways of understanding reality upon subjects' responses. (17 at 114) Thus, interviewees are not in possession of information which can be harvested by the interviewer. Rather, they are constructors of knowledge in collaboration with interviewers. (Holstein and Gubrium, 17 at 114)

In short, one central concern I have revolves around my own position of power over students as their teacher, and what impact if any this may have on the data produced in terms of authenticity and reliability.

To over come this, Holstein and Gubrium suggest that attempting to strip the interview of the countless and unpredictable variables and their possible impact is futile. Thus, rather than trying to pursue this course, the interviewer should seek to acknowledge and capitalise on interviewers' and respondents' constitutive contributions to the production of interview data. This means consciously and conscientiously attending to the interview process and its product in ways that are more sensitive to the social construction of knowledge. (at 114)

1. My role as researcher-subject-interviewer-analyst etc. etc.

. Selecting a theoretical position for analysis, a lens through which to view the world

. Assessing the success or failure of my efforts to incorporate instructional dialogue into my pedagogy too narrow a field of study? How worthwhile is this data in terms of qualitative value? Is it too narrow.

Forms of Analysis

Transcriptions of class activity

Drawing on traditional approaches to discourse analysis, those elements of teacher talk that qualify as instructional conversation will be identified and analysed, then critiqued through a Vygotskian lens.

Why transcribe? Nature of the study is that I am a participant-subject-researcher. I am taping my own lessons, thus it would be difficult to make ongoing observations during the course of the lesson. There were, of course, rough field notes taken eg while students were working in groups and I had the freedom to watch as they undertook a task. Transcription provides a permanent record of conversation and interaction to which I can return. Log tapes at important points in case I need to hear the interaction to gain some particular insight.

Could have videotaped, but this was too difficult in terms of obtaining the resources, and I felt, more intrusive. More likely to adversely affect the classroom setting. It's easier to forget about a small tape recorder than a video and a person operating it. Too disruptive. Could have been good as in Lenny study to complement transcript with physical movement and poses, but this added a real degree of difficulty in my mind. Had to capture spoken data primarily, thus audio tape seemed the most accessible and viable option.

Interview data

Silverman refers to Baker when he notes that there are two central issues to be addressed concerning interview data

1. What is the relation between interviewee's accounts and the world they describe? Are such accounts potentially 'true' or 'false' or is neither concept always appropriate to them?

. How is the relation between the interviewer and interviewee to be understood? Is it governed by standardised techniques of 'good interviewing practice'? Or is it, inevitably, based on taken-for-granted knowledge of interpersonal relations?

Silverman goes on to note that there are two different ways in which social researchers address these issues Positivism and Interactionism.

In terms of interview data, its collection and analysis, this study will take an interactionist perspective. In Silverman's words, the primary issue is to generate data which gives an authentic insight into people's experiences; the main ways to achieve this are unstructured, open-ended interviews. (Silverman, 17 at 1)

I want the interviews I conduct to be a freely flowing conversation in which my role as interviewer is not simply that of asking questions and having the students respond. My goal is to have the students themselves bouncing off one another, one adding to what the other has said, fleshing out each other's responses. To a point, I would like the students to lead the direction of the interview so that I can see which aspects of the study spring most readily into their minds and perhaps open my eyes to things that I would otherwise have missed. This seems particularly appropriate given the subject matter of the study instructional conversation. Here, students are permitted to direct the ebb and flow of classroom talk and the teacher's role is that of gentle guide, deftly leading the student from one point to the next as needed to promote learning and understanding. Naturally, there are some specific issues I need to address with the interviewees, and I will direct the conversation in relevant directions as such opportunities present themselves. Goal is not non directive but rather conversational in tone.

Note that interview data will also be transcribed. See above for reasons.

Choice of group interview vs individuals. Why? Positives/Negatives?

Anticipated Challenges

1. Must ensure that some guidance is given, otherwise students may feel lost, unsure what it is I am wanting from them. Aim to provide a broad guideline for talk, a framework within which to interact

. Are the students really giving valuable insights or are they merely presenting me with what they think I want to hear? Given that they knew my study was based on a particular teaching style as implemented by me in their class, perhaps there was pressure on them to participate in my framework, to say they experienced something which perhaps they did not.

. Not addressing all the issues I need to by allowing a more free flowing form of interview. Perhaps there is important data that I have not captured by failing to be more pedantic about what questions I asked.

4. Teacher v student = power relationship, different interactional role and rights.

5. My own total inexperience in this field am I asking the right questions and am I asking them in the right way?????

6. Has there been sufficient observation prior to the interview???? (at ) Glassner study

7. Do I constitute what is a good and bad response??? (101 10 Baker model)

Solutions

1. Cicourel errors are not really obstacles to social research, but rather exhibit basic properties of social interaction. We must learn to 'conceive of the error as evidence not only of poor reliability but also of 'normal' interpersonal relations (at 7)

. Reflexivity????

. I have developed a positive relationship with these students. They seem to feel comfortable expressing their views, and to my knowledge and given my observations and experiences with this class, there is a sense of trust that exists. They seem to understand that we are all entitled to our say and have learned to respect their own and other's opinions. P 100, Glassner, rapport, etc.

4. Work these things into analysis. Be critical, reflective, aware, take off blinkers and be as objective as possible, canvassing options and alternative perspectives. Be aware that there is very little chance of any interview being completely neutral, unbiased and representative. (at 106) Do not treat the data as truth diplays of perspectives (at 107)

Bibliography

Chenail, R.J. (17) Keeping Things Plumb in Qualitative Research The Qualitative Report, Volume , Number , September. www.nova.edu Accessed 7 November 1.

Goldenberg, C. (1/)

Hammersley, M. and Atkinson, P. (15) Ethnography Principles in Practice. Tavistock Publications Ltd, London.

Heath, Anthony W. (17) The Proposal in Qualitative Research. The Qualitative Report, Volume , Number 1, March. www.nova.edu Accessed 7 November 1.

Holstein, J. and Gubrium, J. (17) Active Interviewing. In Silverman, D. (Ed.) (18) Qualitative Research Theory Method and Practice; Sage Publications, London.

Miller, J. and Glassner, B. (17) The 'Inside' and the 'Outside' Finding Realities in Interviews. In Silverman, D. (Ed.) (18) Qualitative Research Theory Method and Practice; Sage Publications, London.

Silverman, D. (1) Interpreting Qualitative Data Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction. Sage Publications, London.

Please note that this sample paper on AN EXPLORATION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF A PROPOSED QUALITATIVE STUDY is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on AN EXPLORATION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF A PROPOSED QUALITATIVE STUDY, we are here to assist you. Your cheap college papers on AN EXPLORATION OF THE METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF A PROPOSED QUALITATIVE STUDY will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.

Order your authentic assignment from cheap custom writing service and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!