4.4 Locating the study within Qualitative Case study design
4.4.1 Sampling the cases and participants of this study
Selecting sites and participants is essential in qualitative research to get an in-depth understanding of the research problem and answer research questions. Since in case study research boundaries of the case are a defining factor, adequate contextual description to understand the setting or context is required (Stake, 1995, 2005; Merriam, 2009). For this study, the two districts that I chose were exemplary in their leadership role in supporting teaching and learning. I initially contacted two education districts by email. This was after the provincial office indicated that these districts were generally perceived to be playing a significant role in supporting teaching and learning. Furthermore, studies show that, where districts are located, districts are structured such that it allows for effective synergy between supporting teaching and learning and “the institutional development and support sub- directorate” (Mavuso, 2013). Furthermore, district offices in this province effectively mediate
83
between the schools and the head office. Diko et al. (2011, p. 14) suggest that “districts have a range of bodies responsible for the smooth implementation of education policies, and these ensure liaison between the province and the district.”
These districts were also relatively large compared to other districts in the province with variability in demographics, as discussed in the following subsection. In that way, I felt it was going to be vital that I ascertain how DOs managed to close the achievement gap among the schools in their district. Furthermore, I selected members of the district management teams as participants. In qualitative research, selecting the sample of the study is usually purposeful and small, as “opposed to the larger, more random sampling of quantitative research” (Merriam, 1998, p. 8). Purposeful sampling is “a qualitative sampling procedure in which researchers intentionally select individuals and sites to learn or understand the central phenomenon”
(Creswell, 2012, p. 626). I purposefully selected two district offices because they seemed to be typical cases based on the information I received from the head office. I supplemented this by the information I received from the website about their demographical data, which indicated that these two districts had been able to sustainably improve Grade 12 learner performance in the past three years. According to Stake (2005, p. 451):
The researcher examines various interests in the phenomenon, selecting case of some typicality but leaning towards those cases that seem to offer an opportunity to learn. My choice would be to choose that case from which we feel we can learn most. That may mean taking the one most accessible or one we can spend the most time.
It seemed logical that I began by requesting participation from district directors in these districts, as they are the heads of the district offices. After receiving a positive response regarding their participation, I asked these two district directors to indicate the DMT members whose role was to support teaching and learning to become part of the sample (Creswell, 2012).
Furthermore, to achieve a detailed description (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), I needed to include various DOs within the education district. This selection was based on the willingness and availability of the DOs. After consulting with the district directors and having a brief presentation to explain the purpose of the study, they then suggested members of the DMTs who, at the time of the research, were directly involved in supporting teaching and learning in
84
schools. District Management Teams include two substructures: The Executive District Management Team (EDMT), comprising the District Director and Chief Education Specialists of the Sub-directorates. This team is responsible for the overall strategic vision and policy management in the district; thus, they had a rich knowledge of the phenomenon under study, hence their suitability as the participants. EDMT further extends to DMT by including DCESs.
After obtaining consent from the District Director, I contacted these participants to request their participation (see Appendix C and D). Initially, I sent requests to 12 participants, and eight agreed to participate. From each district, participants included one CES-CLI, CES - Circuit management (Circuit Manager), DCES-CLI. These are further discussed in the next chapter.
After requesting their participation in the study, the following eight members of the DMTs agreed to participate.
Education District 1
1. The District Director 2. CES (Circuit manager) 3. Acting CES (CLI) 4. DCES (CLI - FET) Education District 2
1. The District Director 2. CES (Circuit manager) 3. CES (CLI)
4. DCES (CLI - FET)
These eight participants comprised four females and four males. All participants provided different levels of expertise and insight on the phenomenon based on their roles and levels of responsibilities. These DMT members provided insights into their experiences in the district leadership role in supporting teaching and learning. They provided insights into their daily activities and practices that support teaching and learning in schools. They also provided different perspectives on what they understood to be their roles. The profiles of the participants are further discussed in the next chapter.
85 4.4.1.1 Research sites
As discussed in the above section, context is vital when designing a case study. Hence, it is inevitable that I discuss the context of this study (Merriam, 2009). These education districts offices are among fifteen districts in the selected province. District offices are intermediaries of the provincial head office and the schools under their care (RSA, 2013). This study was conducted in Education District Office 1 (ED1) and Education District Office 2 (ED2) in Gauteng Province of SA. While geographically, this province is the smallest, it is an economic hub and thus one of the most densely populated provinces with many migrants from other provinces. Hence, the number of learners has been increasing by an annual average of 3700 from 2012 to 2016.
Education Office 1 is a central office managing a 298 square kilometre semi-urban district catering for approximately 118 000 students in about 175 schools with approximately 3 100 classrooms and 4 200 educators. This district includes urban, township as well as schools in the informal settlements. In this district, the learner/classroom ratio is 1:39 (RSA, 2016b).
There are 113 primary schools, 40 high schools, and approximately 22 combined schools. Due to the movement of people to this province for job opportunities, the number of learners has been increasing by an average of 3 500 from 2012 to 2016, and most schools have learner enrolment of more than 500 (RSA, 2016b). The district office's distance to most schools is within ten km, with 20 schools in a radius of 25 km and an average of six and a half km. Also, about 54% of schools are from poor socio-economic backgrounds and are categorised as no- fee schools. In this district, the majority population by race is African Blacks being 77% of the total population (RSA, 2016b).
Education Office 2 manages an approximately 1 400 square km semi-urban district, covering urban, township, and schools situated in the informal settlements. This district includes about 200 schools with an enrolment of 170 000 learners. These learners are distributed across about 180 schools with 4 200 classrooms. The learner/classroom ratio is 1:41. There are 125 primary schools and 55 secondary schools with five combined schools. Also, in this district, as in ED1, enrolment has been increasing by an average of 4 000 in the last five years. Most schools (84%) have a learner enrolment of more than 500. Forty-five per cent of schools are within the radius
86
of 10 km of the district office, with 55% within 25 km. As a result, the district office offers scholar transport for learners staying in a range of 25 km (RSA, 2016b).
In both districts, the Grade 12 pass rate has sustained performance with an average of 89%
improved from 2014 to 2016. Besides steady improvement in both districts, the primary challenge concerns learner enrolment spaces due to families relocating to the province for job opportunities. Furthermore, mathematics seems to be a challenge in both districts, especially from Grade 9. Only about 3% received over 50% in Grade 9 2014 ANA Mathematics in both districts. With 2015 Grade 12 gateway subjects, both districts had a 68% pass rate in Mathematics, ED1 got about 69% in Physical Science and 65% in Accounting. ED2 got 58%
in Physical Science and 65% in Accounting (RSA, 2016b).