2.3 Data Analysis
2.3.3 Research Question 1: Negotiations of Pedagogical Responsibility
My understanding of pedagogical responsibility is rooted in the notion that is composed of both institutional and ethical commitments (Horn & Garner, 2022). To identify how the focal teachers draw on and negotiate their pedagogical responsibilities during the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic (RQ1), I conducted data analysis in two phases: (1) identifying
institutional logics to develop conjectures and (2) conjecture testing.
2.3.3.1 Phase 1 Analysis: Identifying Institutional Logics
I first conducted content analysis (Altheide & Schneider, 2012) of transcripts of superintendent addresses, district and union memos, and video of bargaining agreement
explanations to determine which institutional logics were interrupted, introduced, or maintained.
To start, I archived all transcripts from superintendent updates from March 2020 to June 2021.
Next, I used MAXQDA qualitative analysis software to perform line-by-line coding (see codebook in Table 2.4).
Code Example
Changes to Policy
The current grading policy, which gives students an additional six weeks to complete any missing work, acknowledges the unprecedented challenges students are facing while also recognizing their resilience and ability to overcome those challenges.
References to Teachers’
Experiences
I want to give a special shout-out to classroom teachers who, in addition to planning lessons, teaching Zoom classes and providing support to students throughout the crisis, have taken on the task of helping students navigate technology issues, power outages and the like, all with a smile.
District-wide Safety Protocols
We’ve set up a COVID safety hotline anyone can call with questions or to report a concern or suggestion about school safety.
Acknowledgment of Community
Many families our schools serve have been impacted by the coronavirus.
Housing insecurity and job uncertainty may lead to an even higher level of transiency than normal amongst students.
Purpose of Schooling We have to balance the learning needs of students, the support we provide to working families and the responsibility to protect the health and safety of all in the school community.
Table 2.4: Content Analysis of Superintendent Updates Codebook
Then, I cross-referenced the superintendent’s mentions of policy changes and bargaining agreements with district and union memos. In instances where I could not access union memos, I watched archived videos of bargaining agreement explanations posted to the union’s YouTube channel. Phase 1 analysis revealed several local institutional changes from March 2020 through
June 2021 (see Table 2.5). For each institutional change, I developed a conjecture about the relationship between each institutional change and teachers’ pedagogical responsibilities (Horn, 2020; see Table 2.5) based on my experiences conducting teacher interviews and preliminary analysis I did as part of RLLI.
Institutional Change Conjecture
Flexibility within the structure of a teacher’s work day was introduced
C1: Because teachers have more autonomy with regards to how they design instructional minutes, they will draw on their ethical commitments more so than in-person schooling.
Total instructional minutes for classes was decreased
C2: Teachers will not be able to teach all of the content that they would in a typical school year, so they will draw on their
pedagogical responsibilities when determining which content to cover and which content to drop.
For the remainder of the 2019-2020 school year, state and district standardized testing was eliminated
C3: Teachers could prioritize students’ emotional wellbeing without the pressure of covering content.
For the remainder of the 2019-2020 school year, a held harmless grading policy was introduced.
C4: Teachers may negotiate their conception of what grades mean in their practice.
Table 2.5: Research Question 1 Conjectures
2.3.3.2 Phase 2 Analysis: Conjecture Testing
To explore these conjectures, I used MAXQDA to perform line-by-line deductive coding of teacher interviews, allowing me to aggregate data across teachers and time to test each
conjecture. After I developed a codebook for each conjecture, I coded and aggregated three teachers’ interview data, and a research assistant coded and aggregated five of the eight teachers’
data. The research assistant and I would meet periodically to calibrate our coded data. I operationalized C1 by looking for instances where teachers structured teaching activities differently during the pandemic compared to in-person teaching, as well as the ways they
invoked moral stances or ethical commitments when structuring teaching activities. I also looked
for instances where teachers intentionally structured teaching activities the same as they did pre- pandemic to ensure data analysis (and my sensemaking) accounted for disconfirming evidence.
I operationalized C2 by identifying moments when teachers talked about making decisions regarding the content or discussed individual consequences of having fewer
instructional minutes. Because of the emergent design of my interview protocols, I was able to incorporate these questions about these conjectures over the courses of my study to track teachers’ evolving responses. For example, in Interview 3, I asked, How were decisions made about content or curriculum? This led to C2. Then, in Interview 4, I asked, Compared to last year at this time, what percentage of the curriculum have you gotten to? and How have decisions about content – what to teach and when to teach it – been made?
I operationalized C3 by identifying moments when teachers talked about students’ social or emotional well-being and aggregated excerpts of teacher responses across time. Then, I explored potential connections to content, including lesson activities and assessments, in the aggregated excerpts. To account for disconfirming evidence, I also documented moments when teachers’ discussion of socio-emotional wellbeing was not connected to content and investigated potential themes across the data.
Lastly, I explored C4 by identifying instances where teachers discussed their grading policy. Again, I aggregated teachers’ responses over time, allowing me to investigate themes and connections within and across teachers.