68
The methods for collecting data were designed to help me understand the experiences of the participants and the meanings they constructed from these experiences. The research design therefore included quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection which gave participants the opportunity to explain their perspectives and an inductive method of analysis was employed whereby meaning emerged from the data and patterns in phenomena could be identified (Rogoff, 2016). The methods used to collect data will now be presented.
69 Figure 1
Diagram of Research Methods
A mixed method design appreciates that both objective and subjective information is useful to understanding the world (Johnson & Christensen, 2012). Using a mixed method design enabled a greater understanding of the topic to be gained than would have resulted from using either a quantitative or qualitative approach alone (Cresswell, 2012; Cresswell & Cresswell, 2018; Cresswell &
Plano Clark, 2011). By using mixed methods, the strengths of both approaches were utilised to improve the quality of the research (Cresswell, 2015; Johnson & Christensen, 2012). For example, the inclusion of a survey meant that data from a greater number of teachers could be captured than could be achieved through the case studies. A sequential study was chosen so that the qualitative case study data could enrich and deepen the findings from the mixed method survey by exploring the topic in greater depth (Cresswell, 2015) and enable multiple perspectives to be captured.
Quantitative data enables the findings to be more easily generalised (Cresswell, 2015) as they were gathered from a larger sample and included teachers from diverse schools and ECE services, which would not be possible with the use of qualitative case studies alone. The quantitative data also enabled comparisons between the ECE and NE teachers. The qualitative data provided the opportunity to incorporate alternative perspectives and find out about the lived experience (Cohen et al., 2007) of those involved in the transition to school, thus enhancing the quantitative findings (Cresswell & Plano Clark, 2011). Using both quantitative and qualitative data contributed to a bigger picture of the issues and allowed meta-inferences to be drawn from the data (Hibberts & Burke Johnson, 2012).
The following discussion details the methods used to collect data during the different phases of the study. A description of how data were analysed follows.
3.3.1 Methods
Phase One: Mixed Method Survey.
The study began with a survey sent out to 367 schools and 433 ECE services in the Bay of Plenty and Waikato regions which were on the Ministry of Education national databases. It was decided not to
Phase one:
Mixed method
survey
Analysis of survey
data
Phase two:
Case studies in
schools
Analysis of case study
data
Integrating findings from the
phases
70
include all services in New Zealand to keep the amount of data manageable and results specific to the context in which the case studies would take place. Schools and ECE services were asked to forward the survey to NE and ECE teachers in their organisation. Surveys are useful for gathering opinions, behaviours, or characteristics of a population (Cresswell, 2012; Fraenkel et al., 2015) and as this research sought the views of teachers a survey was appropriate. In this way a large number of teachers in both sectors could be invited to participate from a range of ECE service types and school contexts.
It was important to survey teachers from both sectors as they may hold different views on the topic and gathering data from both groups would enable these differences to be analysed (Cresswell, 2012) and implications for each sector to be explored. For similar reasons it was important to attempt to access a range of settings using multiple case studies.
Teachers were asked to complete a survey asking about their perceptions of the continuities and discontinuities children experience when moving from ECE to school, which of these might be significant, and why teachers thought these were important. The survey was conducted using Qualtrics (2017), an online survey tool, as online surveys can provide greater access to a range of participants and there are features which can be utilised during the data analysis (Fraenkel et al., 2015;
Minnaar & Heystek, 2013). Online surveys were also chosen as they are less expensive to administer because there is no need to print and post the survey, although they can have a low response rate (Minnaar & Heystek, 2013).
The survey included closed ended questions to enhance consistency of response and for ease of scoring (Fraenkel et al., 2015). Closed ended questions can limit the breadth of response, so open ended questions were included to allow for increased freedom of response (Fraenkel et al., 2015).
Rating scales are a useful way to gather data relating to opinions and attitudes (Croasmun & Ostrom, 2011; Minnaar & Heystek, 2013) so the survey included items which utilised a rating scale to gain an understanding of the degree of importance participants attached to aspects of continuity. Themes from the literature review were used to inform the development of the survey questions.
It was important to test the survey to make sure that it was measuring what was intended and that the questions would be easily understood by the participants (Etchegaray & Fischer, 2010; Minnaar &
Heystek, 2013). The first draft of the survey was trialled with a group of postgraduate ECE teaching students using a paper format. This trial resulted in some adjustments to the wording of some questions for greater clarity. The survey was then uploaded to Qualtrics before a second online trial was conducted. The link to the survey was sent to colleagues, family members and the supervisors of the project, with some of them asked to answer as ECE teachers and some as NE teachers. In this way each branch of the survey could be trialled. A few typos were identified, and a progress bar was
71
included on the suggestion of these trial participants. The link to the survey was then sent to schools and ECE services from the chosen Ministry of Education regions. The survey questions are included in Appendix One.
Data from the survey were analysed so a picture could be gained of NE and ECE teachers’ perspectives on the discontinuities and continuities children encounter when they start school and the impact of these on children. Preliminary findings from this part of the study informed planning for the subsequent qualitative data collection phase (Cresswell, 2015; Cresswell & Plano Clark, 2011). For example, teachers in the survey indicated in quantitative data that one of the most important areas to provide continuity in related to social experience however this did not feature in qualitative survey data. This suggested that the quantitative question may have prompted this response, but social aspects of transition may not have been something teachers consciously considered. As a result, it was decided not to ask questions when collecting case study data which might prompt any aspect of continuity or discontinuity, such as social discontinuity, to be discussed. I also sought to avoid asking leading questions which might prompt participants to talk about things that I thought important or that the survey findings indicated may be significant to avoid influencing the data. I reflected on the preliminary findings and considered which things I needed to know more about to fully meet the research objectives. I wanted to know more about the reasons for teachers’ views than was evident from survey data so made sure to prompt teacher participants for the reasons behind their practices.
The methods used to collect case study data will now be discussed.
Phase Two: Case Studies.
Following the survey, further data were collected using case studies in three schools, a number recommended by Onwuegbuzie and Collins (2007) as appropriate and sufficient to achieve data saturation for case study research. Case studies provide data from “real people in real situations” and acknowledge the importance of context to behaviour (Cohen et al., 2007, p. 253). Therefore, case studies are useful to research which is informed by a constructionist epistemology and uses a social constructivist theoretical perspective. As this research sought to provide insight into a phenomenon rather than merely describe what happens an instrumental, multicase approach involving cross-case analysis was appropriate (Stake, 2006). Schools were purposefully selected (Onwuegbuzie & Collins, 2007; Stake, 2006) to ensure that each differed in the physical and organisational arrangements for their new entrant classes. This enabled the research to consider and highlight the impact of context on the findings and the implications of this for teacher practice. Another consideration in the selection of schools was location, to keep travel time to the locations manageable and affordable.
72 Children’s Perspectives: Child Led Tours.
Since the release of the United Nations (1989) Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCROC), which safeguards children’s rights to have input into decisions concerning them, there has been a growing body of research which includes children’s perspectives (Fargas-Malet et al., 2010; Greig et al., 2013).
New Zealand has been a signatory to UNCROC since 1993, so including children’s perspectives in this research honours New Zealand’s commitment to children’s rights. Merewether and Fleet (2014) contend that changing views of the image of the child associated with sociocultural theory have also contributed to the increasing awareness of the importance of including children’s perspectives in research concerning children’s experiences. They contend that sociocultural theory has drawn attention to the agency of children and the role children play in the construction of knowledge. Adults are no longer viewed as the sole holders of knowledge, children’s capabilities are being recognised, and there is a growing interest in considering child voice (Veraska & Sheridan, 2018). Thus, children are positioned as of importance in the research process because they are seen as having ideas and opinions of value to contribute (Merewether & Fleet, 2014) which can help adults understand how children are affected by policies and practices (Bourke et al., 2017). Children’s views may differ from those of adults (Greig et al., 2013) and as “different voices may tell different stories”, transition research must include children’s voices (Petriwskyj, 2014, p. 210). While internationally transition to school research has followed this trend to include children’s perspectives (e.g. Dockett & Perry, 2011;
Einarsdottir, 2010, 2013; Margetts, 2013) and there is some New Zealand research including children’s voices on other aspects of transition (e.g. Belcher, 2006; Hayes, 2013; Mitchell et al., 2016; Peters, 2004a), there is a dearth of recent New Zealand research which captures children’s views on the continuities and discontinuities associated with starting school. Therefore, this project sought to include data reflecting children’s views.
Children’s perspectives on the continuities and discontinuities they experience on school entry were gained through child-led tours around the school and classroom. Pairs of school children were invited to help me learn more about how school differs from ECE by showing me around the school, thus positioning children as having information that is valuable (Merewether & Fleet, 2014). The aim was to include at least six pairs of children from each school to participate in the research. The number of children participating from each school ranged from 12 to 15, with one child tour only involving one child. Before data collection commenced, a trial tour was conducted with my niece and her friend who had both recently begun school to enable me to try out the approach and ensure the equipment to be used was fit for purpose. Following this trial, it was decided to provide a recorder for each child and to organise the recorders so they could be hung on a lanyard around children’s necks to ensure
73
optimum clarity in the recordings and that both children’s voices could be heard. Prior to data collection beginning in each case study, I visited the classroom and was introduced to the children. I talked to the children about the study and asked for their help. I shared with them that it was a long time since I started school, so I needed their help to understand how it felt to start school and how school was the same or different from their ECE service. The aim was to position children as the knowledge holders and ensure they understood their views were valued and important.
During these tours, children were asked to take photographs showing things that were different about school. As children showed me around and took photos, I engaged them in conversation about the things that were similar and different from their earlier experiences. The conversations were recorded and transcribed, and notes were taken to ensure that the photographs could be matched with the conversation that was occurring when they were taken. These photographs and conversations formed the data sets for analysis of children’s perspectives.
Tours were chosen as the tool for data collection because research with children should seek to use methods which make participation interesting to children (Fargas-Malet et al., 2010) and less traditional methods are needed to enable children’s rights to be respected (Veraska & Sheridan, 2018).
Merewether and Fleet (2014) have found child-led tours accompanied by photography to be an effective way of gaining children’s perspectives. The use of photographs can help build rapport and capture and sustain children’s attention (Fargas-Malet et al., 2010) and photographs taken by children have proved to be useful data in previous research involving children (e.g. Einarsdottir, 2010; Sairanen
& Kumpulainen, 2014). Accompanying children on the tours and instigating conversation was a strategy employed to allow rich conversation to take place because when children have something to do while talking, conversation is enhanced (Merewether & Fleet, 2014). Tours involved pairs rather than individual children because young children engage more easily in conversation, find it more fun and are more confident when interviewed with others (Greig et al., 2013). This also provided opportunities for children to respond to the thoughts of others, allowing for the social construction of knowledge (Merewether & Fleet, 2014; Vygotsky, 1978b). Thought was given to planning conversational approaches which would lead to rich conversation. For example, Merewether and Fleet (2014) suggest that using phrases such as “tell me about…” as conversation starters can stimulate discussion rather than using questions that might imply there is a right or wrong answer. Strategies were employed to reduce the tendency of any individual child to dominate the pair (Greig et al., 2013) so that both children had the opportunity to voice their thoughts and views.
74
Parents’ Perspectives: Qualitative Interview Questionnaire.
Sociocultural theory has highlighted that adults and children think and understand the world differently (Greig et al., 2013). Therefore, it was important to gain the perspectives of both adults and children in this research. Parents are key adults in the child’s bio-ecological system (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006) and as transitions are socially constructed by all those involved (Peters, 2010; Vygotsky, 1978a), parents’ views were of value in this research.
The research aimed to collect data through a questionnaire from at least 12 parents in each case study (See Appendix Two), a sample size recommended by Onwuegbuzie and Collins (2007), although in case study one it was not possible to collect data from this many parents. This was because most parents in this school did not come to the classroom to drop off or collect their child, so it was difficult to make contact with them. The research used volunteer sampling to select participants (Cohen et al., 2007) as it was recognised that not all parents would wish to be involved or have time to participate. It is acknowledged that this may mean that the sample of parents was non-representative of the population. Parents were informed of the research in writing and notified that I wished to capture parents’ views and might approach them when they were at school to ask whether they could spare time to fill out a questionnaire with me. When approaching parents, I asked them whether they wished to participate and gained verbal answers to the questionnaire which I filled out with their responses. This enabled any parents with limited literacy skills to be included because a limitation of written questionnaires is that they can be off-putting to respondents who are not able to fill them in easily (Cohen et al., 2007). It was important when approaching parents to be mindful that pick up and drop off times at school can be very busy and parents may have other commitments. After receiving written notification of the project a few parents contacted me asking for the questionnaire to be emailed to them, as they wished to participate, but work commitments meant that they did come to the classroom. The questionnaire was emailed to any parent who requested this to reduce barriers to participation.
Teachers’ Perspectives: Semi Structured Interviews.
Each case study concluded with an interview of the classroom teachers. While teachers’ perspectives had previously been captured through the survey, it was important to gain more detailed information about the experiences of teachers in the case study classrooms. Teachers were made aware that their participation was voluntary, and they did not have to be interviewed if they did not wish to. All teachers chose to participate. In two settings the teachers in each classroom were interviewed as a group (Patton, 2015). In the third setting the two teachers elected to be interviewed separately due
75
to the logistics of finding time to be interviewed together. The teachers’ perceptions of the continuities and discontinuities between ECE and the classroom in which they taught were explored during the interviews, as were their views of the impact of continuity and discontinuity. Teachers discussed strategies they thought were important in supporting children in the transition. A flexible outline of possible interview questions was used to ensure these topics were covered during the interviews (see Appendix Three).
Semi-structured interviews with teachers allowed for in depth data to be collected and provided flexibility to probe for more detail and gain greater clarity of the participants’ answers when needed (Cohen et al., 2007; Patton, 2015). Validity was enhanced as semi-structured interviews provided the opportunity to check that the meaning of responses was understood (O'Hara et al., 2011). The intention was that where multiple teachers worked in the same classroom a group interview would be conducted unless the teachers chose otherwise, because discussions can develop during group interviews which may yield a wider range of responses (Cohen et al., 2007). During the group interviews care was taken to ensure all participants’ views were heard and that one person did not dominate (Cohen et al., 2007; Patton, 2015). Informal conversations can also elicit worthwhile data, so field notes were made following informal conversations with teachers and checked with them to ensure they were comfortable for these conversations to form part of the data sets.
The interviews were recorded and transcribed to ensure accuracy and to allow me to concentrate on the conversation rather than taking extensive notes (T. May, 2011). Two recording devices were used for each interview as a safeguard against the failure of technology. Participants were invited to member check the transcriptions of their interviews to ensure the transcripts accurately reflected their views (Cohen et al., 2007). No transcripts needed amending post member checking.
Data Analysis.
Data analysis occurred sequentially with data from the survey being analysed first and used to help shape tools for the second phase (Onwuegbuzie & Combs, 2011). Quantitative data from the survey were analysed using quantitative methods and qualitative methods of analysis were used with qualitative data collected through both the survey and case studies. As the research was concerned with people’s perspectives, an inductive approach to qualitative analysis was chosen to avoid limiting the meanings that emerged to predetermined categories (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Vaismoradi et al., 2013). It is acknowledged that true inductive analysis cannot be achieved because the researcher will always be influenced by their own prior knowledge and experiences (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Cresswell
& Cresswell, 2018).