Evaluation of Inquiry Tools: a short overview

Below is an adapted and shorted evaluation of my observation and interview inquiry tools. I learnt a great deal from the whole inquiry process, not solely through the data analysis and findings. I found that great skill, sensitivity and organisation is needed by the insider researcher to carry out an inquiry successfully...

Observations

I used semi-structured observation forms to record qualitative data as both a participant observer and a none-participant observer. I recorded the class information at the top of each observation form including the class name, lesson period and data. Throughout the observation I recorded the type of task and name of the tasks in addition to the starting and ending time of each tasks. 

As requested by the ethics board, I needed to make some adjustments to my observation consent, . It was decided that I would need to send a letter home to parents outlining my inquiry aims, objectives and why I was wishing to observe a class before starting any official observations. This process took far more organisation and time than I first anticipated, however upon reflection I felt that it was an important stage in my inquiry to comply with ethical standards, simultaneously increasing my awareness of the potential harm caused to students if my inquiry was not carried out properly.

I used reflection-in-action (Schon, 1987) to record events during observations. However, as a participant observer in English lessons, I found recording the information whilst carrying out my duties a challenging process. I found at times that I was unable to record information immediately as I had been directed to work with a groups. Although unavoidable in my every day practices, ideally if I were to repeat the observation tool, I would try to have less involvement in the lessons, to ensure that I was able to observe teaching approaches more thoroughly.

I made use my Learning Journal to record my reflections after each observation using reflection-on-action (Schon, 1987) Within a busy working day, I often found that I was moving from one observation to the next, proving me with little time to reflect upon important events. I had to adapt the way I used my Learning Journal as an inquiry tool to ensure that this process did not interfere with my professional responsibilities. I referred back to the reflective journal work in Module 1 and found that I had identified that ‘listing’ reflections aided my reflections when I had little time to write a full reflection (http://jessicaplant.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/task-2b-reflective-writing.html), therefore I utilised this form of reflection and later develop these in more extensive written passages at a more convenient time. After discussion with my SIG, if completing this process again, I would ensure that my Learning Journal was more structured from the start of my inquiry.

I found that time was a significant constraint within my inquiry observations. I had substantially underestimated the amount of time needed to complete administrative tasks such as sending email confirmations and returning of consent forms, and found I had to update my Gantt chart considerably. I realised that I had not considered the limitations of the short school term and the addition of an exam week where students were taken off timetable for one week, effectively limiting my viable observation period.

I believe that the semi-structured observations were an effective inquiry tool because they allowed me to identify teaching approaches that were adopted by Drama and English specialists to engage students in their work. Using a semi-structured style allowed me to adapt my observation technique to incorporate events that I believed were of value . Furthermore, it enabled me to explore whether the approaches identified in the literature had any correlations in a real life context. I was surprised to note that the formal observations forced me to examine and reflect upon situations and explore their meaning and context that I otherwise would not have considered within my normal practices.

Interviews

I carried out four semi-structured interviews with teaching staff. I wanted the interviews to provide me with practitioners’ opinions of the teaching approaches that they adopt to engage students in their subjects to explore whether their opinions correlated with my observation data and literature findings.

I found devising questions challenging and my planned questions from Module 2 evolved greatly as I prepared for the inquiry interviews. The literature review process had made me realise that curriculum context and planning have an impact on classroom engagement. I wanted to explore these aspects in more detail within my workplace through in my interview questions, as I believed these topics would become important in ‘placing’ my inquiry context. Using feedback from my existing network of BAPP Arts peers academic advisor, I altered the inquiry questions again, ensuring that I would gain the appropriate data to answer my inquiry questions, without any bias. I asked the participants a maximum of nineteen questions centering around the topics of: engagement definitions; teaching approaches and tasks to engage; disengagement; planning and external factors in planning to engage; curriculum links between Drama and English in the curriculum and within the Academy.  

Having reflected upon the effectiveness of my Learning Journal in recording my observation reflections, I ensured that I used my Learning Journal much more stringently through the interview stage. 

If I were to repeat this process, I would improve my interviewing technique. When transcribing my interviews at a later inquiry stage, I found that I would question the participants’ answers when listening, but I did not do this in the actual interview. I believe that remaining unbiased overly concerned me and that I believed questioning an answer would be seen as leading. Furthermore due to my weak aural skills, I found it difficult to listen to participants’ answers, follow their train of thought and use reflection simultaneously and found that I would ask questions that participants had already answered inadvertently. In this case I would become disconcerted and I now recognise that I should have taken time to reflect upon answers during the interviews and pause where necessary to gather my thoughts, asking participants to expand on certain points that interested me.

I feel that a semi-structured interview was effective as it allowed me to probe further to explore interesting elements of each interview, particularly the approaches staff use to engage students. I found that this type of interview allowed me to rephrase questions to ensure I received data that related to my inquiry questions. I was able to obtain a real variety of information that allowed me to make comparisons and contrasts both between the interviewees and the literature.