4.8. Method of data collection
4.8.2. Sampling
126 use of the Dunn and Dunn (1978) learning styles approach to implementing the intermediate phase curriculum.
Hence, the choice of researching this suburban former Model C School in Pietermaritzburg‘s experiences of learning styles is firstly based on this school‘s unique use of the Dunn and Dunn (1978) learning styles approach in implementing the intermediate phase NCS/CAPS (2012) curriculum. Secondly, convenience and proximity for the researcher provides for relevant accessibility and immersion. Using this school provides an appropriate vehicle for identifying the study‘s sample as these teachers are currently still employed and practicing the Dunn and Dunn (1978) learning styles approach to teaching at this school. Data are therefore generated from interactions with purposively selected participants from this school, reviews of relevant school documents, historic and archival visual data and artifacts of praxis.
Befitting and advantageous to this study thus is the employ of a purposive sampling design. In explaining the sample design, techniques and criteria used in the choice of sample size for this case study (Mouton, 2009), Maree (2010) and Gibson and Brown‘s (2009) definitions in broad terms of the process used to select a portion of the population for study, that of sampling, serve. They state that it is about the ‗points of data collection‘ to be included within a research. These may be a person, a document, an institution or a setting.
This study uses a purposive sampling design in selecting of the sample for this case. As such the selection of this school for its unique attempt at implementing classroom practice through leaning styles obtains.
127 needed for the study are explicit for the purpose of obtaining the richest possible source of information in answering the research question at hand (Neuman, 2011; Denscombe, 2007, p.17). Notably, the term purposive sampling is also applied to those situations where the researcher already possesses some knowledge about the topic, specific people or events and deliberately selects them because they are seen as instances that are likely to produce the most valuable data reflecting qualities relevant to the investigation (Denscombe, 2007; Henning, 2010).
Critically, also, the purpose of the study dictates sample size in qualitative research (Kumar, 2005; Maree, 2010, p. 178). Commonly involving smaller sample sizes, qualitative studies have as its main focus the exploration or description of the situation, issue, process or phenomenon (Kumar, 2005; Maree, 2010). The question of sample size is thus less important. Necessary also is the realisation and required flexibility that sampling can change during a study (Cresswell, 2007).
Hence in addressing the purposes and strategies accordingly of this descriptive qualitative case study, and in considering its unit of analysis (Boudah, 2011; Cresswell, 2007), five carefully selected teachers for fitting the
‗criteria of desirable participants‘ (Henning, 2010) are selected believed likely to yield the richest data from within this site. These professionally qualified primary school teachers serving the researcher‘s judgment are best suited to insightfully inform an understanding of the research problem and central phenomenon of teaching through a leaning styles approach (Cresswell, 2007).The selection of teaching staff rather than members of management, learners, parents, members of the governing body or other role players involved for primary data collection, is especially since teachers are at the forefront and responsible for the actual implementation and delivery of the curriculum in the classroom. Understanding how and why curriculum implementation in school plays itself out through a learning styles approach, in my judgment is best primarily served through the voice and work of classroom teachers who have practically applied this approach to meeting their classroom needs.
Thus the argued rationale behind this sample selection is pertinent for the following reasons and criteria:
1. Qualification, training and teaching experience
These participants are professionally qualified, trained primary school female teachers who have several years of classroom teaching experience. They are currently and over several years been teaching in the
128 Intermediate Phase within the primary school system. They teach in integrated, diverse classroom environments within the New South African classroom. They also teach within a former Model C, suburban primary school environment and have had many years of experience in this one school.
2. Curriculum Experience
These participants have had experience in teaching several different curriculums over their teaching experience and have had to confront several changes and adaptations accordingly. They have been exposed to both teacher-centred and learner-centred pedagogies. They are classroom-based teachers teaching all learning areas/subjects to one ‗form/register‘ class per year. They are trained in-service by the Department of Education to teach the NCS/CAPS (2012) curriculum and they currently implement the CAPS (2012) in the Intermediate Phase.
3. Institutional Expectations
These participants have keen institutional and systemic knowledge and understanding of operational and daily expectations of a school which includes among others departmental and school demands, financial and community undertakings, parent and support service interactions, administering and fostering school discipline and dealing with learners with barriers in and to learning. Mandatorily, they are required to participate in grade level learning communities for weekly planning and preparation of the curriculum, are expected to teach/coach co and extra-curricular programmes after school hours and over weekends.
4. Institutional Support
The participants have the support, opportunity and freedom to explore and experiment with flexible new ways of approaching their work. They are exposed to professional development programmes that require them to be active agents and participants thereof and have been trained in the Dunn and Dunn (1978) Learning Styles approach to teaching.
However, knowing that it may not be very defensible but possible more as strategy (Denscombe, 2007;
Boudah, 2011), within purposive sampling, convenience sampling has also been employed (Cresswell, 1998, p.119; McMillan and Schumacher, 2001, p. 178). Selected for saving time, money and effort, convenience purposive sampling may not be representative of a population and findings may not be generalised to a
129 population (Maree, 2010; Henning, 2010). Yet, there is an understanding that transferability to readers in extended settings is possible. Thus though cognisance is given to this fact and recognition of its limitations made around credibility and representivity (Cresswell, 1998, p.119; McMillan and Schumacher, 2001, p. 178), the availability of participants, time, effort, cost saving, ease of administration and high assurance of participation are some of the pondered advantages to this choice. Therefore, limitations for generalisability from such a sample on the basis of a single research study, because of such inclusion criteria in selecting individuals who are best suited to address the purposes of qualitative research studies is hereby justified (Johnson & Christensen, 2012, p. 231). The decisions about who to study are affected by logistical constraints such as accessibility of the participants and the cost of locating people (Johnson & Christensen, 2012, p. 231).
Thus importantly the choice of whom to select as part of a sample must meet the purpose of the research study and answer the research questions while meeting cost and other constraints. This has been considered in this case study.
4.8.2.1. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
In this case five initially trained teachers were offered a choice of whether or not to be engaged in this study.
Having received verbal clarification and explanation of the purpose of study, terms of participation including being voluntary participants, the freedom to withdraw from the study at any time without prejudice as well as rights to review material, written letters of permission were signed by the head of the school and three of the five participants. Opportunity was provided for full comprehension of the nature of the research including any risks that may arise. Details of what aspects of material were to be shared with the public and what is to be kept confidential was discussed. Keeping material ‗confidential‘ implies that no one else sees it save the interviewer. Data are only to be reported in cumulative terms. Participants were assured of confidentiality and anonymity and the use of pseudonyms when disseminating the research. Permission regarding recording of interviews and reviewing documents and artifacts were asked for. Caution was taken regarding participants‘ time. Interviews were conducted according to individual schedules set by participants. Written permission was received from three of the five participants. Owing to work load constraints two of the five participants withdrew from the study.
4.8.2.2. PROFILE OF PARTICIPANTS
The following is a brief description of the personal and professional profiles of the participants in this study.
Pseudonyms have been used for anonymity and confidentiality.
130 Participant A is a 50 year old married female teacher of 29 years of primary school teaching experience. She is a mother of a 13 year old. Her interests among others are travelling, hiking and reading. She is professionally qualified with a teaching degree from Edgewood College. She has taught all of her years in the intermediate phase, 4th, 5th and 6th grades at her current school. She has taught the A or Express class in the main. She is the chief mathematics subject coordinator and examiner/moderator at the school. She is a cross-country, tennis and swimming coach. She believes that teaching can be very rewarding and fulfilling because of the many choices of how and when lessons are presented. More rewarding to her is when learners want to learn. A lack of motivation from learners is her struggle and challenge. She states that parental support is essential for maximum learner potential. She approaches her work from a firmly teacher led, traditional approach, but attests that teaching should also be a learner-centred activity. She believes that learner involvement is necessary for meaningful learning to take place. She firmly contends that when she enjoys her work then her learners do also and vice visa. She advises that the classroom should be a safe environment for all learners.
Participant B is a 59 year old married female teacher, a mother of two grown up children and is also a farmer. She has a passion for the environment and enjoys the outdoors. She has a Bachelor‘s degree in Social Science from University of Kwa-Zulu Natal – Durban and a Higher Education Diploma from University of South Africa. She has 27 years of teaching experience. She has spent 20 years at her current school teaching pre-primary to 3rd grade. She has taught the Grade 4 Express class the last 9 years. She is of the belief that everyone has different strengths, that learning is a process and has to be interactive, participatory and fun. She holds the view that discipline must be approached with flexibility. She strongly affirms that her approach to her work is to create an environment where learners feel safe to risk and their individual ideas are always valued. They must have an opinion. She enjoys the idea that she can teach in an environment that allows her the freedom to embrace and impart her philosophy.
Participant C is a 38 year old female teacher and mother of 3. She has a bachelor‘s degree in social legal studies, a higher diploma in education, an accelerated certificate in mathematics, a honours degree in inclusive education and currently reading for her master‘s in education. She has been a book-keeper. She is a teacher of 8 years all of which has been as a grade 5 teacher in her present school. She has taught a
‗mixed ability‘ class for 6 years and has been teaching the ‗express‘ class for 2 years. She is unapologetic about her teaching philosophy which is strongly teacher-centred. She states that she is a very analytic, left–
brain processer and teaches through a formal mainly verbal/visual style for accountability purposes.
131 Participant C is emphatic that hers is not so much about creativity and innovation but measureable success.
She teaches to the book and works to compliance of school and department expectations. Her concerns lie in dropping standards and quality of results. She confesses that her focus is not so much on enjoyment of learning and freedom of exploration and process but teaching to demands of the curriculum and achievement. She states that her stance is that she has to be a fountain of knowledge to her learners and thus has to be thoroughly prepared to face them each day.
Thus data for this study are gathered from the above three participants. Their teaching experiences in adopting the Dunn and Dunn (1978) approach to teaching the intermediate phase curriculum are extracted through interviews, documents, visual and artifact data. The following section provides a detailed insight into how this is done.