Data refers to the information collected by a researcher from which interpretations and conclusions are drawn with respect to a particular incident under study (McMillan & Schumacher, 2010). An important part of methodology is gathering data that are both reliable and valid, which could in this instance only be realised through the use of appropriate and purposively structured instruments that would contribute to answering the research questions of the study (Maxwell, 2005). The data collection instruments included a teacher questionnaire, an observation schedule and a semi-structured interview schedule. The questionnaire assisted in gaining biographical information on the teachers and also addressed whether or not they attended any courses or professional development workshops. Each of the 20 participants initially selected were asked to complete a questionnaire. The responses on the questionnaire assisted in selecting the sample for
73
the main study. These completed questionnaires also assisted in developing both the observation schedule and interview schedule.
Subsequent to the administration of the questionnaire, lesson observations were scheduled. By observing the lessons, the researcher had an opportunity to record information as it occurred in the classroom. Therefore these lessons were video recorded. The observation schedule and video recordings of lessons were used to examine how foundation phase teachers teach data handling .instructional strategies they used and how they used them. Lastly, each participant in the study was interviewed one on one to find out why she was teaching in the way she taught. The aim of conducting interviews was to get rich explanatory data that would assist in understanding how participant construct knowledge and social authenticity. Therefore interviewing participants assisted in gaining rich information of why they teach in the way they do.
The following data collection plan was used. Different data collection methods were used to answer different research questions.
Table 3: Data collection plan.
Critical research questions Participant Method 1. What instructional
strategies do foundation phase teachers use to teach data handling?
Teacher Teacher questionnaire
Classroom observation
Video recording of data handling lessons
2. How do foundation phase teachers use these instructional strategies to teach data handling?
Teacher Classroom observations
Video recordings of data handling lessons
Interviews with
foundation phase teachers 3. Why do foundation
phase teachers use these instructional strategies to teach data handling?
Teacher Interviews with
foundation phase teachers
74
In the next section the methods of collecting data (questionnaires, observations and interviews) are explored. Questionnaires, observations and interviews were used to answer the critical questions.
4.8.1 Questionnaire
A questionnaire is a form that is given to participants for research purposes, to complete and return to the researcher (Creswell, 2012). It is a list of questions which the participants answer (Bertram & Christiansen, 2014). In this study a questionnaire was used to gain biographical information on the teachers. The questionnaires asked about the school profile and the participant’s profile. Questionnaires are not always linked to the statistical analysis (Mellenberg, 2008). The questionnaire was used in a pilot study to ensure that it would be trustworthy and suitable for use in the main study. Since the participants complete the questionnaire in privacy, it increases the likelihood of them answering the questions sincerely (Newby, 2010). The disadvantage of using a questionnaire is that some people might not complete and return it (Charles & Mertler, 2008). This challenge is normally encountered in large surveys, but in this study all of the participants returned their completed questionnaires, although some did not answer all of the questions. The advantage of using a questionnaire, as stated by Kidder and Judd (1986), is that participants answer questions in a relaxed environment, taking their time, and thus this leads to well thought out answers. The questionnaires were collected at the participants’
schools after a week.
The questionnaire had three sections comprising 29 questions. The first section focused on the school profile, including the number of teachers on the staff, the number of mathematics teachers and the learner/teacher ratio. This information was going to assist the researcher to get a picture of each research site. Since this study explored the instructional strategies that foundation phase teachers used to teach data handling, the second section focused on the school infrastructure.
This information was going to highlight the conditions under which the teachers worked. The last section sought information about the teacher, including their qualifications, teaching experience, instructional strategies used when teaching data handling, and professional development workshops attended. The questionnaires were piloted to ensure that the questions were clear and not ambiguous. The researcher made sure that the questionnaire covered all of the domains it was intended to cover (see Appendix B i).
75 4.8.2 The observations
Another technique that was used to gather data was observation. Observation is a procedure of collecting unrestricted, actual information by observing individuals and the location at a research site (Creswell, 2012; Bertram & Christiansen, 2014). Observation is an everyday activity whereby one uses one’s senses and intuition to gather data (Maree, 2007). Hence the researcher was able to explore which instructional strategies foundation phase teachers used and also how they used those instructional strategies to teach data handling. Grade 3 data handling lessons were observed in seven schools and eight foundation phase teachers participated (in one school two teachers were observed). Two lessons in each school were observed and those lessons were video recorded.
According to Maree (2007) the most important part in the observation is the recording of the data. The advantage of observation is that one gets a chance to record information as it takes place in a location and to study real behaviour (Creswell, 2012). Therefore the researcher was able to see for herself the foundation phase teachers’ use of instructional strategies when teaching data handling. The researcher had a research assistant to record data handling lessons using a video recorder and she (the researcher) took notes. This gave the researcher an opportunity to focus on observing the lessons and she was able to take notes without any disturbance. This helped in reducing the risk of omitting essential data, which may have happened if the researcher wrote down the details at a later stage. The aim of observing was to see which instructional strategies foundation phase teachers use when teaching data handling and how they use these instructional strategies to teach data handling. According to Cohen et al.
(2007) the distinguishing quality of observation as a research procedure is that it provides a researcher with the chance to collect ‘live’ data from actual, happening social situations. The researcher observed the participants teaching their classes.
From lesson observations the researcher compiled the interview questions. The different ways in which the foundation phase teachers taught data handling required explanation, and it is for this reason that interviews were conducted. Corbin and Strauss (2008) maintain that combining
76
observations with interviews to confirm interpretations with the participants is always an advantage. The discussion that follows focuses on interviews as they were used to capture data.
4.8.3 The semi-structured interviews
A qualitative interview takes place when researchers ask one or more participant/s common, unrestricted questions and record their responses (Creswell, 2012). Santiago (2009) mentioned the three types of interview which are the structured, semi-structured and unstructured. She pointed out that structured interviews are incredibly formal and are employed to gain particular information in quantitative research. Unstructured interviews, according to Bell (2006), can generate valuable information but those who use it need to be cautious since this type of interview needs much expertise. Structured interviews were not appropriate for this study since they are likely to be inflexible and could have restricted the data collected. Thus semi-structured interviews were the most appropriate for this study.
This study used semi-structured one-on-one interviews, since they “allow the probing and clarification of answers” (Maree, 2007, p. 87); thus the researcher was able to ask the participant to clarify if she did not understand the response. Interviews are considered as the joint production of accounts of experiences, identity, knowledge, and so on (Seal, Gobo, Gubrium & Silverman, 2004), and the interview questions were based on what transpired during the data handling lesson presentations. The foundation phase teachers explained why they taught in the way they did. This method allowed the researcher to follow up on interesting avenues that arose during the interview (De Vos, Strydom, Fouche & Delport, 2005). It also gave the researcher and the participant flexibility in that the participant could also introduce an issue that the researcher had not thought of (Terre Blanche, Durrheim & Painter, 2006; De Vos et al., 2006). The advantage of semi-structured interviews is that a researcher can ask more questions to obtain more detailed information if the participant does not give sufficient detail initially (Bertram & Christiansen, 2014).
These interviews were conducted after school hours at the schools where the different participants teach. This was convenient for the teachers and ensured privacy (De Vos et al., 2005). Moreover, in an interview context one has to ensure that one is not unduly disturbed
77
(Terre Blanche, Durrheim & Painter, 2006). There was no disturbance in the afternoons when interviews were conducted because learners and other teachers had left the school. With privacy assured, the participants were free to talk since the environment was non-threatening. Fontana and Frey (2000) argue that the above needs to be taken into account before conducting interviews. To address the issue of bias, a common interview schedule was prepared. This also avoided vagueness and ensured that there was some structure in terms of uniformity, succession and phrasing of the key questions.
The interview comprised four main questions. The first question focused on the instructional strategies that are effective in the foundation phase teachers’ teaching of data handling. The second question focused on the concepts covered using the instructional strategies that they mentioned. The participants were also asked about the benefits of using the instructional strategies that they mentioned in response to the third question. The fourth question was about the responses of learners to the instructional strategies used. Then the foundation phase teachers were asked why they used the instructional strategies that they used in class when they were observed. The following questions were asked during the interview:
Question 1: Which instructional strategies are effective in your teaching of data handling?
Question 2: Which concepts did you cover using those instructional strategies that you mentioned?
Question 3: How do those instructional strategies help learners in understanding data handling?
Question 4: What can you say about the response of learners to the instructional strategies used?
Interviews were conducted after school hours twice a week and were 25 minutes in duration.
These interviews were audio recorded with the consent of the participants, since the researcher believed that this was the best way of capturing the exact words of the interviewees. It also allowed the researcher to concentrate on the responses of the interviewees without being disturbed by taking notes, as well as making sure that all the responses were captured. McMillan and Schumacher (2006) point out that audio-recording the interview gives substance for checking reliability. Silverman (2005) also claims that audio recordings permit tapes to be replayed and transcriptions to be enhanced. So audio recording the interviews meant the
78
researcher did not have to depend on written notes and recalling information, either which could have been faulty or not complete.
The researcher transcribed the data after the interviews were conducted. While transcribing, the researcher became familiar with the data. Henning et al. (2004, p. 105) state that when the researcher knows the data better, he/she will be more competent “in labelling units of meaning”.
Therefore as transcription was in progress the researcher was immersing herself in the data. After transcription the drafts were given to the participants to check whether their responses were correctly captured and that important issues were not omitted. Participants were allowed to delete or add to the text to clarify their responses in the transcripts. After the edited transcripts were reviewed for accuracy, they were then ready to be analysed.
The following section discusses issues of validity and reliability.