3.6 Data collection instruments
3.6.2 Observation
Observation was another data gathering instrument used in this study. Hennink, Hutter and Bailey (2011, p.170) argue that ‘observation is a research method that enables the researcher to
systematically observe and record people’s behaviour, actions and interactions’. The method allows the researcher to obtain a detailed description of social settings or events in order to situate people’s behaviour within their own socio-cultural context. These authors go on to say that in using observation, researchers obtain thick descriptions of the social setting, the activities and the people studied. Observation is used alongside in-depth interviews and focus groups’. ‘Therefore by combining observations with interviews you gain a different perspective on the issues and situate the behaviour within a larger social or physical setting’ (Hennink, Hutter & Bailey, 2011, p.172). I observed lessons of the same educators currently teaching sexuality education in life orientation using an observation checklist to observe the interactions in the classroom as this was the powerful tool to gain insight of the real situation [Appendix F]. Adler and Adler (1994, p.389) argue that observation has ‘been characterized as the fundamental base of all research methods in the social and behavioural sciences’. While Werner and Schoepfle (1987, p.257) view observation as ‘the mainstay of the ethnographic enterprise.’ Observations typically take place in settings that are the natural loci of activity (De Fina & Georgakopoilou, 2008).
I observed how the educators and learners interacted, their actions, body language, behaviour and attitude towards each other during these lessons. Observation times were scheduled in collaboration with each individual educator as per their class timetables so as not to disrupt or to cause inconvenience to the smooth running of the lessons. However, only four out of the five educators were observed because the other educator was on leave. Observations were conducted in two sessions, the first session was done in the Grade 6 classes and the last session in the Grade 7 classes.
As Hennink, Hutter and Bailey (2011, p. 173) note, ‘by observing all dimensions, you are able to gain a deeper insight into the norms and values surrounding behaviour and the social context in which this is derived. In addition, by observing you are able to view what people actually do, so you learn about how people really behave and also how certain behaviours are influenced by the situations or context in which they are conducted’. Observation was used to triangulate what the participants said in the interviews and the data gathered in the written narratives. Gerson and
Horowitz (2003) point out that the challenge of using such a research tool is to focus on events as they unfold and relationships as they evolve. Though this research tool may yield valuable information which is communicated verbally but through actions, the challenge that the researcher will be faced with is that some of the teachers will not be comfortable being observed while teaching or may intentionally do what the researcher wants to see and not what is genuine.
During the observations [Appendix F] in some classrooms learners are grouped while in other classrooms learners are seated in straight rows facing the educator’s table. While some educators value the effects of grouping learners according to ability, some of the educators preferred paired- seating arrangements, that is, learners are seated with their partners for the duration of the year and there is no shifting around of learners. All the observed educators had their lessons well planned, but the implementation of what was planned was different during the actual teaching of the lesson.
There were no charts, pictures or posters on the walls, educators relied heavily on textbooks and worksheets to complement what was taught. When the educators were asked why they did not have these teaching and learning aids, their responses were interesting because they unanimously said that they did not think they were appropriate to display on the walls and besides they did not have enough of such posters because they are not included in the catalogues.
It is deemed important to register that there were no workbooks for learners to use. The teachers either wrote notes on the chalkboard or used worksheets. Educators complained that had they had workbooks at least half of their hard work would have been done. With regard to classroom management, not all the classrooms had discussions during lessons. In those classrooms that had group discussions, it was noted that learners were actively involved in the discussions with the educator as a facilitator. In those classrooms where no grouping of learners was evident they remained quiet with the educator doing much of the talking and learners were passive listeners. In three classrooms, there was evidence of a lively atmosphere and free interaction among the teacher and learners. The educator asked probing questions during the discussions allowing more debate among learners. In some classrooms, the educators were quiet most of the time, responding with
either a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’. The educators felt that although the activities were designed for the specific grade learners, not all learners were mature enough to understand the content that they were trying to impart to them. This challenge called for educators to try and simplify the concepts and activities, of which most of the language used was beyond the learners’ maturity levels. Educators therefore, found it difficult to explain concepts and terminologies used in sexuality education for fear of not only saying more than they are expected to but also their discomfort with the concepts and terminology. They were also concerned with how they would explain activities or simplify them in such a way that they do not send the wrong ideas other than those they are meant to send.
Educators felt that some of the activities were easy for the gifted and average learners to execute but were more concerned about the weaker learners who were struggling with grasping concepts and who needed individual attention. They also did not know how to design and provide remedial work in these activities. Educators displayed a considerable discomfort with having to pronounce words like ‘penis’ and ‘sexual intercourse’ without hesitating and feeling embarrassed in front of the learners. They also did not know which method was the best to teach these lessons. Even though they had planned to use a variety of methods, they ended up using the discussion or the talk and chalk methods which they also felt were not the only appropriate ones to use. As educators, they understood that learners had different experiences regarding sexuality matters, however, most of the learners in their classrooms were far too immature to understand most of the concepts and therefore required much simplification and explanation which educators felt was difficult to do. Educators also felt that experience regarding sexuality matters was difficult to determine, unlike teaching English or natural sciences whereby the educator could vary activities to suit the individuals’ needs, levels of understanding, maturity and experiences. They did not know whether to teach some learners and exclude others whom they thought were not mature enough to understand what the lesson was about. The other challenge was how they would explain to learners why some are included and others excluded in the lesson within the same classroom. Educators did not know whether to praise the learners who showed some knowledge about sexuality matters or to
discourage them. Educators felt unsure whether the actions they took were the appropriate ones or not on their part as both parents and educators in their classrooms. They felt guilty of reinforcing sexual knowledge and awareness on one hand and perpetuating the same on the other, and therefore did not know where to draw the line in their teaching of sexuality.