Methodology
Page now set up – guide length is 1500 words
The research was undertaken in a two-form entry, Church of England voluntary aided primary school for mixed gender 3-11 year olds, located in a seaside town on the South Coast. This school is considered an average sized primary school with approximately 420 pupils in attendance and the Early Years Foundation Stage includes a nursery in which up to 40 further children can attend, on either a part-time or full-time basis. The majority of children who attend this school are White British.
The school workforce consists of 21 teachers (full-time equivalent of 18.2), 21 teaching assistants (full-time equivalent of 12.6) and 10 support staff (full-time equivalent of 6.9. The proportion of pupils known to be eligible for the pupil premium, are in the local authority care and those with a parent in the armed forces is below the national average. The proportion of disabled pupils and those who have special educational needs or those who are supported with an educational health care plan is also below the national average.
The Department for Education (DfE) school performance progress tables showed that 68% of children met expected standards in reading, writing, and maths during the academic year 2018-2019. The progress score for reading was above average, whilst writing and maths were recorded as average.
The research methodology preferred for this independent project is small-scale evaluation study. Anderson and Arsenault (1998) describe evaluation research as: ‘assessing whether or not what we are doing is achieving what it is intended to achieve’ (p.136). Indeed Plewis and Mason (2005) suggest that evaluation research otherwise known as applied research is essentially proving the effectiveness of a programme (p.192).
Come back to this…as need to read more comparing /clarify differences to case study
Conforming to the Data Protection Acts and British Educational Research Association (BERA) it is noted that ethical issues may be present when conducting educational research therefore, this study was conducted in accordance and adhered to the guidelines proposed. In order to address any ethical implications, all participants in the research were given prior notice in which manner they were to be engaged, including why their participation was necessary and how the data collected was to be used. The researcher assured them that their participation and interactions whilst being monitored and analysed would be treated in strictest confidence, anonymity would be upheld and all data collected would be destroyed, in accordance with British Educational Research Association (BERA) guidelines (2011).
It was further ensured that all participants had the understanding that they had the right to withdraw at any point up until a given date and that they did not have to give a reason. This ensured that participation in the research was voluntary.
Additionally, as younger children were the subjects being observed, this was carried out during their routine classroom activities and scheduled interventions, and whilst no assent form was gained, verbal consent was obtained from the key gatekeepers such as the head teacher and class teachers who acted in loco parenthis (Greig et al, 2007).
Participant’s data was treated confidentially and the researcher recorded and collected data on an encrypted USB stick which was accessed on a password protected laptop and desktop computer. Only the relevant and important information was kept. In addition to confidentiality, all participants were kept anonymous meaning that no individual (whether staff member or child) were named or described in any way that they could be identified. All paper copies of questionnaires, together with signed consent forms were stored in a locked cabinet and will be destroyed once the assignment has been marked and graded and reviewed by the exam board.
Sample
Who were the participants and what was the sample size?
The sampling method used to recruit the participants was purposive sampling, a qualitative inquiry that is deliberately seeking out of participants with particular characteristics, according to the needs of the developing analysis and emerging theory. Although, when beginning the study, the researcher did not know the children well enough to undertake this sampling method, the researcher discussed with the senior leadership team and class teachers which children possesses the characteristics to undertake the study (Lewis-Beck et al, 2004)
Data analysis
Which methods were used to analysis and why?
What procedures were there for qualitative and/or quantitative data analysis including data handling (e.g. statistical approaches and tests)
How was rigour, trustworthiness, reliability and validity of the analysis achieved?
To successfully answer the research questions proposed and as the project was concerned with effectiveness of strategies being used to improve the working memory, the data collection used a range of qualitative methods. Cohen et al. (2017) state that qualitative approaches are more naturalistic and rich, as humans are consistently actively constructing their world and situations, events and behaviours change and evolve. Primarily, research within the educational setting predominantly focuses on probing people’s beliefs, assumptions, and understandings and as children are viewed to be complex beings, research grounded in qualitative approaches will seek to support and increase knowledge, (Greig et al. 2007 and Wilson, 2013).
Research design
Why methods chosen
How they link to my research.
The first method of data collection used was questionnaires. Questionnaires were distributed to 6 teaching and support staff working throughout year 5 and 6.This was considered an appropriate method to answer the research questions as they are simple and easy to administer, and the researcher is able to achieve relatively high levels of standardisation, (Wilson, 2013, Walsh, 2001) thus providing a reliable way to explore and assess people’s expressed perceptions, attitudes and opinions, (Sharp, 2012). The questionnaire provided a clear structure, using open questions, giving the participants more freedom to answer how they wished. By ensuring anonymity of participants, greater honesty was encouraged; however, Cohen et al. (2017) indicate that due to self- report measures, respondents may have interpreted questions in different ways, resulting in false or misleading data being elicited.
The second method of data collection used in the research was interviews – come back to these
The final method used within this research was observations. Observations are recorded in field notes; descriptions that, when assembled and written out, form a comprehensive and comprehensible account of what has happened (Cohen et al, 2007). Wellington (2015) believes these allow researchers to watch and writes notes of people, events, and behaviours, allowing first-hand data from a naturally occurring social situation. The researcher’s role was a participant as observer’, researching and immersing themselves within the setting in a non-intrusive way, recording and taking notes and participating when required.
Angrosino (2012) defines this as a naturalistic observation, a natural process that occurs in society as humans we constantly listen, copy and notice others to be social beings. Although Hopkins (2008) remarks that observations provide rich data, Palaiologou et al. (2016) and Wilson (2013) identify they do have limitations. They suggest they are time-consuming and highly subjective, particularly when recording in written form, as researchers have to make quick decisions about what to include in their notes.
In addition, due to the presence of an observer and the nature and age of the children involved, the Hawthorne Effect may have been present; individuals may change their behaviour in response to their awareness of being observed, which may have impacted on the data collected (Greig et al. 2007 and Wragg, 2013). To mitigate this and ensure increased validity, triangulation was ensured therefore there was convergence and corroboration of results from more than one research method (Coe et al, 2007).
To develop an understanding of how assessment operated in this institution, a school policy scrutiny was also undertaken (Burton et al., 2014). Although viewed to be time consuming, the documentary evidence provided indication about how assessment was valued, at least officially, in the education system (Pickard, 2013; Tuckman and Harper, 2012). This enabled an overview of the school’s approach to assessment (Ary et al., 2014), permitting a comparison between actual classroom experience with the intentions presented.
However, documents must be established within the contexts in which they are constructed, thus rendering it a ‘theoretical frame of reference’ (May, 2011, p.209). An unstructured observation therefore took place to triangulate policy scrutiny, increasing the reliability (Edwards and Talbot, 1999). This enabled a surveillance of the context in which assessment was happening in class; that is, if it was happening at all.
Data collection
What type of data collected
Details of collection methods (observation schedules, survey etc)
Who collected and where
How was trustworthiness, reliability and validity of data collection methods established?