Research Design Final

2012
University of Nebraska-Lincoln Janet L Larson
[A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY PROPOSAL: GEOMETRY TEACHERS DESCRIPTIONS OF THEIR EXPERIENCES IN LITERACY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT]
0|Page
[A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY PROPOSAL: GEOMETRY TEACHERS DESCRIPTIONS OF THEIR EXPERIENCES IN LITERACY PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT] June 1, 2012
Part I: Research Question & Rationale for Case Study Research Introduction Teachers today face the challenge of engaging our youth, cultivating classroom spaces that elicit interaction, navigating curriculum, meeting proficiency standards in core subjects (see CCSSI, 2010), and assisting students in developing college and career-ready skills (see Achieve, 2011). Support roles such as curriculum specialists, curriculum coordinators, instructional coaches, and interventionists are designed to assist teachers in becoming expert, yet these roles are not clearly defined. Responsibilities can be as expansive as the Grand Canyon! What does a secondary mathematics curriculum facilitator do in her role? How does she support teachers development? How does she describe her experiences? In what ways does she foster professional, adult learning? As the secondary mathematics curriculum facilitator for a large Midwestern suburban school district, this research allows for two simultaneous areas to be better understood. Mainly, how do Geometry teachers describe professional development surrounding literacy in mathematics? Ancillary to this main question is how does a secondary curriculum facilitator support teachers through such professional development? Some researchers argue high quality content literacy instruction for all students is necessary to meet the demands of the common core language arts and mathematics standards, NCLB expectations, 21st Century skill agendas, and a litany of other mandates. Because of the diverse challenges facing adolescent learners, they argue, educators must make a concerted effort to improve literacy in all academic disciplines by involving all stakeholders, employing effective leadership, and providing professional development (Torgesen, 2007). Although there is support to establish discipline-specific pedagogical knowledge relative to literacy, few researchers (e.g. 1|Page
Davis & Gerber, 1994; Draper & Siebert, 2004; Olson & Truxaw, 2009) have focused on content literacy coursework and approaches which blend mathematics teachers disciplinary knowledge with literacy strategy instruction. Furthermore, research studies pertaining to professional development for mathematics educators to learn disciplinary literacy strategies are limited. Even so, in order to address adolescents needs and meet the aforementioned goals, teachers must conceptualize, acquire, and utilize these literacy strategies (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008; Draper, 2012). How does this occur? Most often in K-12 educational settings, teachers learn through professional development. Teacher educators (i.e curriculum facilitators) play a unique role in teacher development that is not clear cut. They can create contexts in which teachers imagine and push boundaries; generate resources to support new ways of teaching; and cultivate supportive cultures of shared expertise (Robinson & Darling-Hammond, 1994; Bullough et al., 1997). In addition, Little (1993) describes the teacher educator's goal is to establish harmony between institutional imperatives [to reform] and individual prerogatives, between conditions necessary to attempt systematic change and the conditions that engage individual teachers in their work" (p. 141). Often times, professional development is seen as a medium through which these contexts are created and teachers are developed; however, single PD experiences do not produce growth (Sprinthall, Reiman, & Thies-Sprinthall, 1996). For example, a one-day session focused on literacy strategies and tools will not likely transfer to daily instructional practice (Joyce & Showers, 2002). As I begin to understand how teachers grow and develop, it is imperative to provide opportunities where teachers can imagine as learners and develop expertise (Alexander & Fives, 2|Page
2000). Oja (1989) notes the rigor of teacher development, which requires challenge and support, a "sweet spot" for teachers in which they push boundaries and grow as a result of challenging, supportive environments. As a curriculum facilitator and teacher educator, one of my responsibilities is to create such a sweet spot. Professional development is critical in developing expert teachers; however, the PD must be broadly defined. Cole (1992, p. 378) proposes: "Rather than trying to find the one best way to 'develop teachers,' we need to consider how to find ways of helping teachers to identify their own support needs and preferences and then provide a wide variety of opportunities and strategies for them to take control of their own professional development. Just as there is no one way to provide the necessary assistance and support for new [or, we would add, established] teachers. Here in lies the conundrum of serving as one of the catalysts for teacher development. How can a curriculum facilitator structure her work to support teachers? Based on these decisions, how do Geometry teachers describe a PD experience focused on literacy in mathematics? Several streams of literature provide the context for this study: adult learning theory, professional development (e.g. Guskey, 2002), a disciplinary literacy framework (Shanahan & Shanahan, 2008), and teacher development (see Bullough & Baughman, 2008). To acquire, understand, and utilize discipline-specific literacy strategies, practitioners require adult learning opportunities and professional development, which are areas that I develop and oversee for approximately 140 math teachers. This research is a case of how two suburban, high school Geometry teachers, who have agreed to serve as mathematics presenters for their colleagues within a Response-to-Intervention 3|Page
(RTI) focus on Reading across the Content Areas professional development initiative, describe their experience during the second year of the initiative. I want to discover how these Geometry teachers experience literacy professional development and better understand their development of these practices. Specifically, I will center on their descriptions of PD sessions in which they are learning the literacy strategies and tools under the direction of a national literacy consultant as well as their descriptions of their experiences as presenters. Each three-hour presentation they facilitate occurs with a partner and is delivered to approximately 20 colleagues. How do they describe these sessions? How do their descriptions compare to the stated learning goals of the PD? Additionally, I will investigate how I, as their secondary curriculum facilitator, support their learning and development as teachers. In summary, the purpose of this study is to understand how Geometry teachers describe their experience in learning literacy practices through a districtwide, multi-year professional development initiative and describe support from their curriculum facilitator. Research Questions Research surrounding Disciplinary Literacy in mathematics has focused on relationships between literacy educators and mathematics practitioners (see Draper, 2004) and those between higher-education practitioners (see Siebert & Draper, 2012). The juxtaposition of disciplinary literacy, adult learning theory, learning transfer, and professional development provides a fresh perspective for mathematics practitioners and researchers relative to content-specific communication, reading, and writing in mathematics contexts. Primary research question: How do secondary Geometry teachers describe their literacy professional development 4|Page
experience in a suburban district? Subsidiary questions: How do Geometry teachers describe their experiences as presenters for their mathematics colleagues during the second year of a multi-year, literacy professional development initiative? (interviews) Which literacy tools and strategies transfer to daily classroom practice? (observationsfield notes) How do Geometry teachers describe literacy in mathematics? (interviews, artifacts) How does this secondary mathematics curriculum facilitator support practitioners understanding of literacy in mathematics? (journal, artifacts, interviews) In what ways can a secondary mathematics curriculum facilitator1 serve as a catalyst for learning transfer2? (interviews and observations-post professional development sessions) Rationale for Research Question There is a great deal of research surrounding reading strategy instruction and content-area literacy. However, limited research exists on the role of a curriculum facilitator in the teacher development process and enactment of disciplinary literacy practices in secondary mathematics contexts. Additionally, how mathematics teachers describe literacy professional development through peer instruction is unchartered territory. In other words, math teachers have not told their story of how to best integrate literacy in mathematics, nor have they voiced their experience in
The curriculum facilitator oversees curriculum, instruction, and assessment activities for grades 6-12 mathematics courses in the aforementioned district. Responsibilities surround alignment between curricular standards, instructional practices, and assessment measures. 2 Learning transfer in educational research concerns the extent to which teachers apply new skills from professional development in their practice. Joyce & Showers (2002) research indicates varied transfer depending on the activities in which adult learners engage.
1
5|Page
district-wide, universal literacy professional development. Because my district has undertaken this initiative over the course of four years and there is a gap in the research, I feel compelled to tell the story of how two Geometry teachers and I have experienced this particular professional development journey and describe the potential contradictions, strengths, and challenges associated with district-wide literacy professional development. Practitioners in my position can leverage adult learning opportunities and support teacher development, but the ways in which this occurs varies. As Horsdal (2012) writes, "If we want to improve practices and perform better, or if we want to find out if our actions are in line with our intentions, or if we have to work together in teams, or simply with new partners, we need to reflect on our actions and on their implications" (p. 68). By conducting a narrative case study, I might better understand the inherent contradictions and tensions of being a teacher educator supporting a professional development initiative as well as the overarching principles of disciplinary literacy that best support mathematics teaching and learning. Rationale for Qualitative Research Qualitative research focused on discovery, insight, and understanding from the perspectives of those being studied offers the greatest promise of making a difference in peoples lives (Merriam, 2009, p. 1). Qualitative, interpretive methodology allows one to record accurately their own observations and uncover the meanings their participants bring to their life experiences. I am choosing qualitative, interpretive inquiry for this study because there is not a quantitative testable theory concerning how teachers choose to hybridize or adopt instructional practices from professional development, nor are there numerical analyses of how a curriculum facilitator supports teaching and learning in her discipline. If this study were conducted 6|Page
quantitatively, we may miss the rich, thick descriptions (Geertz, 1973) of classroom practice and teacher narratives that uncover better ways of learning and applying literacy practices in math classrooms. Relative to the current Reading across the Content Area initiative, the most commonly cited theory of how math teachers experience literacy professional development is as follows: there are too few math examples of literacy, so math teachers disregard content literacy professional development (Davis, 1994). By serving as the secondary mathematics curriculum facilitator, I hold myself accountable for providing teachers with the most meaningful, relevant professional development as I can within the constraints of policy, budget, and so forth. I am interested in observational and interview data that illuminate how math teachers describe literacy PD. Hearing teacher narratives of PD and instructional practices may uncover the underlying philosophies that develop expertise and shine light on evolving pedagogies that have not yet emerged as significant in the field thus far, thereby informing my practice and the field writ large. Specifically, this case may bring about a better understanding of the: practices, positions, and dispositions needed to support teacher development. intersections of mathematics teaching and learning and literacy practices. disciplinary ways of reading, writing, speaking, and listening within mathematics contexts, which could provide support to literacy coaches who may be in collaborative roles with mathematics educators as well as others (e.g. teacher educators). characteristics of professional development that attend to the spoken and unspoken challenges of mathematics teaching. 7|Page
Case Study Methodology This research is a narrative case study following a descriptive design aimed at presenting an intensive, holistic description of two Geometry teachers involvement in the second year of a literacy professional development experience in a suburban district. Furthermore, it investigates how a curriculum facilitator interprets PD experiences, constructs ways in which she applies her learning to her context, and what meanings she attributes to these PD experiences. Connelly and Clandinin (2009) describe the closeness of narrative inquirers with participants and how this relationship requires methodological consideration. Narrative inquirers, particularly in living studies, are in relationship: negotiating purposes, next steps, outcomes, texts, and all manner of things that go into an inquiry relationship. Inquiry questions and texts are ones in which inquirers give an account of who they are in the inquiry and who they are in relation to the participants (p. 480). In this case, I will describe how and who I am in relation to the Geometry teacher participants. Furthermore, the authors note, It is not necessary to undertake an autobiographic study to find oneself heavily involved autobiographically in narrative inquiry. Narrative inquirers need to be self-conscious of their potentially intimate connection with the living, with the field texts collected, and with their research texts. In designing a narrative inquiry researchers need to deliberately imagine themselves as part of the inquiry (p. 482). Case study is an in-depth description and analysis of a bounded system (Merriam, 2009). This professional development initiative is part of the bounded system from which I can develop insights, discoveries, and interpretations of Geometry teachers narratives and personal accounts to provide a holistic description and explanation of the experience. Moreover, this case is 8|Page
bounded by researching within a single high school in a large suburban school district and the two participants classrooms. Each participant will have one selected Geometry class for observations where retrospective field notes will be generated. The study is bounded further by time. Observations and interviews will be conducted during the second year of this initiative. Yin (2008) notes case study is well-suited to situations, such as Geometry teachers classrooms in a suburban school district, where it is impossible to parse out the phenomenons variables from their context. In other words, case study is a good design for practical situations emerging in everyday practice (Merriam, 2009). As such, I will research and obtain teacher narratives as I interpolate my role as a curriculum facilitator alongside teacher learning within this particular PD initiative and research site. Generally, I will conduct classroom and professional development session observations and generate retrospective field notes while maintaining a research journal. I will collect and analyze artifacts from the PD sessions and related planning meetings to further examine my role in this professional development. From these field notes, artifacts, and journal entries, I will analyze and then interview teachers based on the emerging themes of the data. Teachers will be interviewed to develop an understanding of the following, which relate to the research questions above: How do teachers describe the literacy tools and strategies presented in professional development? What value do mathematics practitioners place on district-wide professional development and how do these experiences influence teacher development, if at all? Which adult learning experiences do teachers identify as meaningful professional development? How do they describe those experiences? 9|Page
As a qualitative researcher, I am aware that other areas of interest will emerge as I begin data collection, which will largely inform the content and focus of the interviews. From there, I will conduct a comparative analysis of all data to write-up the case study. Epistemology The epistemological framework that best reflects my perspective on the nature of knowledge and what counts as knowing in a field is constructivism. As Crotty (1998) writes, meaning is not discovered but constructedMeanings are constructed by human beings as they engage with the world they are interpreting (pp. 42-43). My slant on research, then, is to understand how I, and teachers I collaborate with, make sense of their lives and their experiences. Within this case, I am attempting to better understand the experiences of teachers and myself in a literacy professional development initiative. The methodological approaches I am utilizing to gain this understanding, including interviews and observations, reflects my epistemological lean toward constructivism. Theoretical Perspective Shulman's work (1986) provides a theoretical perspective for understanding teacher knowledge in which he describes several layers that include both subject knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. Subject or content knowledge comprises the series, principles, and concepts of a particular discipline. Mathematics teachers should understand the theories grounding algorithms, concepts, and proofs reflected in standards documents and those used in the field. In addition to the subject matter knowledge, general pedagogical knowledge, or knowledge about teaching itself, is an important aspect of teacher knowledge. How teachers construct learning environments and foster inquiry within students rests upon their pedagogical 10 | P a g e
knowledge. This construct has been the focus of most of the research on teaching. What makes teachers effective? How do masterful teachers promote active engagement? Which skills manifest themselves in teachers' classrooms that have high levels of academic achievement and interaction? Pedagogical content knowledge manifests itself when teachers are able to take skills and concepts and represent them in such a way that they are accessible to learners. This concept undergirds literacy in mathematics whereby teachers blend their understanding of content with general pedagogical approaches to make the multisemiotic nature of mathematics texts accessible to novices in the field (Fang & Schleppegrell, 2010). Along with developing teacher pedagogical content knowledge comes the notion of disciplinary literacy. What is disciplinary literacy and how does it buttress learning mathematics? In the United States, educators and policymakers alike have grappled with how to adequately provide opportunities to engage in meaningful literacy learning and learn authentic mathematics while simultaneously assessing adolescents in these areas. As students progress through K-12 education systems, the demands for comprehending and using language appropriately in diverse settings increases and then solidifies during high school. Shanahan and Shanahan (2008) developed a pyramid model beginning with basic reading skill instruction in elementary school followed by intermediate and disciplinary literacy instruction in middle and high school (see Figure 1). This model recognizes the basic reading skills necessary to negotiate texts through applying decoding skills and knowledge of basic sight words. It also depicts the progression from learning to read to reading to learn through intermediate literacy skills. These intermediate reading skills incorporate generic comprehension strategies such as making connections to what is read through connecting with self, other texts, and the world as well as 11 | P a g e
increasing ones fluency with content-rich texts. Such strategies can be applied in any discipline with virtually any text. The pyramid culminates with disciplinary literacy skills, which are specific to each content area, such as mathematics. This part of the pyramid is the basis for the current case study.
Figure 1
Part II: Data Collection, Participants, and Research Site Participants I am using purposeful sampling to determine the participants for this study in which the possible candidates are defined by a set of operational criteria (Yin, 2008). A unique participant pool of the 2011-12 District Literacy Initiative (DLI) mathematics presenters and the 2012-13
12 | P a g e
presenters will be invited to participate in this study. Through non-probability sampling (Yin, 2008), I am ensuring that the participants have had the experience of working with the national literacy consultant and myself in learning literacy practices and preparing as a presenter for their peers. These participants are more highly-involved in the initiative than the average secondary mathematics teacher, which is important in obtaining the rich, thick descriptions and teacher narratives sought for this case study. There were 12 secondary mathematics presenters in 201112. Of this candidate pool, five of six high-school presenters and two of six middle-school presenters chose to continue their role in 2012-13. As such, there will be five new presenters to the secondary mathematics team during the research period. Collectively, there are 17 potential participants. I began building a relationship with many of the potential participants through interactions and serving as their curriculum facilitator during the 2010-11 and 2011-12 school years. Hence, I anticipate many of these teachers will participate due to our strong relationship. It is beneficial that I am not in an evaluative role and am seen by many as an instructional leader, not an administrator. I cannot evaluate teachers, nor am I classified as an administrator. I am a teacher on an extended contract, whose duties are responsive to the current needs of the department. While not completely an insider as a practicing mathematics teacher, I am seen as knowledgeable and an asset to others in obtaining necessary curriculum, instruction, and assessment resources. For example, I assist the building department heads with annual textbook reordering, but also facilitate multiple professional development sessions throughout the year based on instructional approaches. I coordinated co-teaching sessions for math teachers and their Special Education counterparts to foster a shared vision for classroom practice recently. As one 13 | P a g e
can see, the supports I provide are varied and depend on the specific needs of individuals, buildings, and the district as a whole. Below, I describe several recruitment scenarios. Rather than reaching saturation in my data through a great number of participants, I will rely on extensive interactions with teacher participants through interviews and observations to reach saturation within the data (Merriam, 2009). I anticipate working with four teachers initially and will identify two teachers to participate in additional interviews and observations. Plan A: Initially, I will send letters of invitation to all past and current presenters along with consent forms. If all of the presenters agree to participate, I will begin with an initial interview of four high-school participants to determine which emerge as descriptive and reflective relative to this PD. Plan B: If a portion of the presenters agree to participate, I will review each participant's past involvement in the initiative and interview those who have had two years of experience as presenters, thus the individuals who have been involved since the very beginning of the PD. Again, those with the strongest analysis and description will continue as participants in the study. Plan C: If a limited number of teachers (i.e. two teachers), agree to participate, I will conduct interviews and gather the data that is possible from each of them, with the caveat of further investigation if needed. For example, I might choose to continue research into the third year of the initiative to gain additional narratives that assist in deepened understanding of these teachers experiences or seek nonpresenter participants. 14 | P a g e
Plan D: If all of the presenters choose not to participate, I will revise the case study to include a Geometry teachers description of literacy in mathematics, without an emphasis on the additional PD the presenters have experienced. This case will focus on the limited PD sessions most of the staff has experienced. In short, a teacher who has participated in the two PD sessions will provide a description of his experience. Research Site The research site is within a large Midwestern suburban district serving approximately 23,000 students at 25 elementary schools, 6 middle schools, and 4 high schools. This site has been selected due to the DLI professional development focus and the researchers position within the district. The following tables show the race and ethnicity demographics for the district and school site for this research: Table 1
Student Enrollment Trends by Race and Ethnicity (District) American Black or Indian / Years Hispanic Alaskan American Native 2010-2011 1,395 88 1,023 651 Islander 63 18,987 Races 577 Asian African Other Pacific Hawaiian or White More or Native Two
15 | P a g e
Table 2 Student Enrollment Trends by Race and Ethnicity (School) American Black or Indian / Years Hispanic Alaskan American Native 2010-2011 185 12 32 79 Islander 6 1,668 Races 60 Asian African Other Pacific Hawaiian or White More or Native Two
As one can see, the district and school data are similar proportionally by race and ethnicity. Bush High School serves approximately 2,000 students, with 24% qualifying for freeand-reduced lunch, close to 8% higher than the district average. In addition, Bush has a mobility rate of 12%, which is 3% higher than the district average. Teachers at Bush High School have an average of 13 years teaching experience, with over half of the certificated staff holding Masters degrees. Student performance is measured through district assessments and state assessments in mathematics, reading, writing, and science. Because this research surrounds mathematics teachers, the following table provides proficiency data on the 2010-11 state mathematics assessment for the state and district in which the research is being conducted.3
3 Footnote: Data were obtained from the states department of education. The data are not cited to maintain the
confidentiality of the research site.
16 | P a g e
Table 3 Mathematics Performance: 11th Grade 2010-11

Students Not Proficient Below the Standards State District 9,760 521 46.14% 32.00% Students Proficient Meets the Standards 6,908 605 32.65% 37.16% Exceeds the Standards 4,487 502 21.21% 30.84%
Data will be collected from observations in two high-school classrooms at Bush High School as well as meeting conference rooms where professional development sessions are held and interviews may be conducted. As the curriculum facilitator within this district, access to this site is granted through the nature of my work; however, an institutional approval letter for conducting the research will be obtained through the Department of Assessment, Research, and Evaluation. Data Collection Data will be collected and recorded in four ways: field notes from classroom observations and professional development sessions; transcripts and retrospective notes from interviews; artifact collection including analytic notes; and a research journal. The table below documents the projected number of each data type per participant: Table 4 Data Source Interviews Interview Transcriptions Observations-Classroom Observations-Professional Development Sessions Artifacts Quantity 4, 60-minute duration Approximately 25 pages per interview; total of 100 pages per participant 4, 60-minute duration 2, 120-minute duration Approximately 500 pages 17 | P a g e
Field notes will document detailed observations within the participants Geometry classrooms and settings in which he/she is presenting disciplinary literacy content to colleagues. These observations will provide insight into which practices transfer into daily instructional practice as well as depict a current reality of the DLI. I will take these notes in situ and elaborate within 24 hours of each observation via retrospective notes that may be enhanced through the video recording of these observations. Fontana and Frey (2000) recommend, "Regardless of the circumstances, researchers ought to (a) take notes regularly and promptly, (b) write down everything no matter how unimportant it might seem at the time, (c) try to be as inconspicuous as possible in note taking, and (d) analyze notes frequently (p. 708). I will document the physical layout of the classroom, the students-their roles and interactions with one another and the teacher, routine actions (see Guba, 1978-recurring regularities), unusual occurrences-either to me or to the individuals in the class, and other observations relative to the research questions. The video recordings may also be used in interviews to deepen understanding and build meaning from observed actions and exchanges in the classroom. "Interviewing...is inextricably and unavoidably historically, politically, and contextually bound... [And] is not merely the neutral exchange of asking questions and getting answers" (Fontana & Frey, 2000, p. 695). Interview contexts envelop interaction and relation, with social dynamics informing and shaping the accounts and replies. Fontana and Frey (2000) caution "we are beginning to realize that we cannot lift the results of interviews out of the contexts in which they were gathered and claim them as objective data with no strings attached" (p. 716-717). Accordingly, I will document the physical space in which interviews occur, the nonverbal cues and verbal utterances, as well as other dynamics, including my role. During the interview 18 | P a g e
process, "the interviewer must be flexible, objective, empathetic, persuasive, a good listener, and so forth" (p. 704). Empathetic approaches allow the interviewer to become an advocate and partner; thereby, potentially using the results to promote social justice or address issues of the interviewee. These characteristics reflect my constructivist epistemological stance and qualitative methodology. Interviews will be conducted until the data reaches redundancy. During this case study, I anticipate conducting four, one-hour interviews with each of the participants surrounding four constructs related to the literacy PD initiative. These constructs include teacher dispositions and efficacy, teacher decision-making, disciplinary literacy conceptualization and enactment, and becoming expert through professional development. I believe the best approach for these constructs is through semi-structured interviewing. However, the Fontana and Frey (2000) caution "...researchers must be aware of the implications, pitfalls, and problems of the types of interview they choose" (p. 722). Each interview will be conducted at a site chosen by the participant, which may include a conference room at the school or district administrative office, patio at a local restaurant, or other space conducive for the interview. This decision for participant-selected interview sites and semi-structured interviews reflects an empathetic, constructivist approach. One goal of this research study is to broaden my own understanding of processes and circumstances surrounding teacher decision-making. I will employ teacher biography and storytelling, via the above described semi-structured interviews, as ways in which I can study teaching and the building of pedagogical knowledge (see Jalongo & Isenberg, 1995). These stories, when selected as cases (Kagan, 1993) of common occurrences, challenges, and 19 | P a g e
quandaries about mathematics teaching, provide rich tapestries of the complexity of teaching and teacher development that invite others inside. Others begin to see themselves in the story and can reflect, "make comparisons that stretch understanding and nudge along development" (Bullough & Baughman, 1997, p. 27). Using several semi-structured interview protocols around the constructs mentioned above, I will use stories to prompt reflection and allow teachers to explain how they make sense of disciplinary literacy and how they choose to, or not to, enact different instructional practices in their classrooms. Along with interviews and observations, I will keep a research journal of personal thoughts or tensions related to the study. Fontana and Frey (2000) argue "although perhaps somewhat overdone at times, these 'confessions' are very valuable because they make readers aware of the complex and cumbersome nature of interviewing people in their natural settings and lend a tone of realism and veracity to the studies" (p. 714). Continuing, "just to tell what happened (the what) is not enough because the what depends greatly on the ways, negotiations, and other interactive elements that take place between the researcher and the respondent (the how), (Fontana & Frey, 2000, p. 714). Through processing interactions I have with the participants, I will be able to interpret and come to understand their experiences more fully. Bullough and Baughman (1997) concur, noting, "Although time consuming, writing can be a powerful means of achieving greater self-knowledge and clarity" (p. 60). In summary, the following table demonstrates the alignment between data collection activities, related research questions and type of data collected.
20 | P a g e
Table 5 Date Throughout research study Location Varies by activity Activity Research Journal Related Research Questions How does this secondary mathematics curriculum facilitator support practitioners understanding of literacy in mathematics? Type of Data Journal
In what ways can a secondary mathematics curriculum facilitator serve as a catalyst for learning transfer?
July 2012
Via US Mail
Initial Contact for Informed Consent Professional How do Geometry teachers Development describe literacy in mathematics? Session #1
SignaturesInformed Consent documents
August 2012 District PD Site (High School)
PD Observation 1 Field notes and Presentation Artifacts Audio recordings and transcriptions
August 2012 Determined by participant
Interview #1
How do Geometry teachers describe their experiences as presenters for their mathematics colleagues?
September 2012
Participants Classroom Classroom Observation #1
Which literacy tools and strategies transfer to daily classroom practice?
Observation 1 Field notes and Instructional Artifacts
21 | P a g e
September 2012 (After Classroom Observation #1)
At participants school site in a conference room
Classroom Observation Video Analysis #1
Classroom Observation Video Analysis #1 Audio recording and transcription
How do Geometry teachers describe literacy in mathematics?
October 2012
Determined by participant
Interview #2
Audio recordings and transcriptions
October 2012
Participants Classroom Classroom Observation #2
Observation 2 Field notes; Video recording; instructional artifacts
October 2012 (After Classroom Observation #2)
Classroom Observation Video Analysis #2
Analysis field notes, audio recording, transcription
December 2012
Interview #3
Audio recordings and transcriptions
22 | P a g e
January 2013
District PD Site (High School)
Professional How do Geometry teachers Development describe literacy in mathematics? Session #2
PD Observation 2 Field notes and Presentation Artifacts Audio recordings and transcriptions
January 2013
At Interview #4 participants school site in a conference room
How do Geometry teachers describe their experiences as presenters for their mathematics colleagues?
Researcher Role As I begin to explore my problem of practice through a qualitative, interpretive lens, I am confronted by the intricate complexities of how my role, teachers roles, and students roles interplay to produce a glimpse into how disciplinary literacy practices are understood and employed in secondary mathematics. Furthermore, the descriptions of the PD by the participants can provide inroads for action, in which I am positioned and obligated to advocate on their behalf. Consequently, I am taking a position of researcher as teacher, advocate, and interpreter (Stake, 1995) in this case study. At the outset, I am already equipping the potential participants with a greater understanding of disciplinary literacy through this research, focusing their attention and reflective discourse around this topic, which may not have occurred beyond the research itself; thus, I am a teacher inform[ing]assist[ing] the increase of competence and maturity, to socialize, and to literate (Stake, 1995, p. 92). Secondly, Stake indicates that researchers as advocates are permitted, no, obligated, to indicate how the findings might be extrapolated, how
23 | P a g e
they could be interpreted in various circumstances and how they accommodate theoretical discourse (p. 93). This case study will provide greater understanding of literacy in mathematics. I am permitted, no, obligated as a practitioner to apply these findings to my daily practice and communicate these findings to the literacy and mathematics communities to inform practice. Being one who facilitates, which literally means to make something easy or easier to do, it is my duty to advocate for mathematics practitioners and be their voice in arenas where they may be silenced or uninvited. For example, if the Geometry teachers describe the professional development as meaningless and a waste of time, I am obligated to make changes to better honor their time and cultivate practices that are congruent with the norms of the discipline. Finally, this case study is about recognizing and finding connections within professional development surrounding literacy in mathematics and communicating these connections to others in ways that are authentic, meaningful, and informative. Therefore, my researcher role is also that of an agent of new interpretation where readers stretch to conceive of new ways of seeing (Stake, 1995, p. 99). Data Analysis In qualitative case study research, "we do not triangulate; we crystallize. We recognize that there are far more than three sides from which to approach the world" (Richardson, 2000, p. 934). Throughout this study, multiple perspectives across multiple points in time will inform the descriptions of Geometry teachers experience in literacy professional development. These multiple voices will be joined with multiple ways in which data are then interpreted, analyzed, and reported.
24 | P a g e
Tesch (1990) describes the qualitative data analysis process as a process of "decontextualization and re-contextualization" (p. 115). De-contextualization simply means that researchers take the collected data and segment it into smaller units in order to examine the specific pieces. Once de-contextualized, researchers re-contextualize through linking data together to form larger categories, which renders a holistic representation of the phenomenon. Hence, the crystallized ways and contextualized process through which the data will be analyzed reflect the inductive, comparative, iterative, and emergent nature of qualitative research (Merriam, 2009). Broadly, constant comparative methods (Glaser & Strauss, 1967) will be applied to the data within the grounded theory tradition through which themes will be identified. These themes will serve the basis for additional observations and communication with participants. Multiple iterations of the above process will aid in constructing working hypotheses for the research questions (Cronbach, 1975). Below I describe in detail the data analysis procedures for interviews, field notes, and artifacts. The initial interview will serve as the first iteration of data analysis within this case study. Initially, I will transcribe each interview. Transcripts will be labeled by each participants pseudonym as well as document the interview number, topic domain (see interview protocol), date, time, and location. Merriam (2009) supports researchers transcribing their own interviews noting, "transcribing interviews is another means of generating insights and hunches about what's going on in your data" (p. 174); thereby, providing deeper understanding of the phenomenon being studied. I will supplement the interview transcription with a descriptive narrative of the context in which the interview took place and record internal thoughts, tensions, and senses during the interaction. This raw transcription will be provided to the participant to engage in 25 | P a g e
member checks in which participants will be able to make any changes to the data prior to coding. Member checks solicit and provide feedback on the interview by participants, which informs the data by best reflecting their intent (Morgan, 1983). Each participant will have one week to review the transcript. Once transcripts are returned via inter-school mail, I will discuss any changes with the participants until consensus is reached. Maxwell (2005) purports [member checks are] the single most important way of ruling out the possibility of misrepresenting the meaning of what participants say and do and the perspective they have on what is going on, as well as being an important way of identifying your own biases and misunderstandings of what you observed (p. 111). After member checks, I will begin by reading each interview transcript fully and reviewing the purpose of the case study. During this second reading, I will apply open coding to allow the inductive data analysis process to come to life, in which units of data emerge and are tagged that may be relevant to the study. These units will be in-vivo codes, which document low-level inferences and retain the language of participants (Creswell, 1998). Each code will be a 2-6 word verbatim quote or phrase that adequately describes the construct or potential theme I identified during this initial coding. This process serves two purposes: 1) Participants language is used, thus a more consistent description of themes will emerge; and 2) The potential theme will be descriptive enough to reveal the identified construct outside of the interview itself, reflecting Teschs (1990) de-contextualizing approach. In another document, the codes will be recorded and examined separately from the transcript to look for themes. The in-vivo codes will be related to one another using analytic coding, refining the category schemes and determining initial themes and sub-themes (Merriam, 2009). 26 | P a g e
Richards (2005) explains analytic coding goes beyond descriptive coding, as the researcher interprets and reflects on the meaning. Thus, analytic coding progresses to higher-level inferences and the inductive process of qualitative research. After reviewing the in-vivo codes separately from the transcript data and determining how the codes collapse into themes, I will place themes into categories, which may serve as robust categories in the research findings. Depending on the initial data analysis, I may apply data reduction techniques and meaning field analysis (see Neumann, 2009). Following analytic coding, I will write analytic memos to move the methodology and analysis of the case study forward. Ely et al (1991) describe Analytic memos can be thought of as conversations with oneself about what has occurred in the research process, what has been learned, the insights this provides, and the leads these suggest for future action (p. 89). These memos will synthesize and revisit analyzed interviews and will be documented within my personal research journal, thereby serving dual purposes of data analysis and additional data collection. Moreover, the memos will be shared with trusted doctoral seminar colleagues and advisors for peer debriefing. Lincoln and Guba (1985) describe this process as exposing oneself to a disinterested peer in a manner paralleling an analytic session and for the purpose of exploring aspects of the inquiry that might otherwise remain only implicit within the inquirers mind (p. 308). This pushes researchers to probe for biases, search for deeper understanding, generate alternate hypotheses, and engage in reflective discourse with peers (Creswell, 1994). Each interview will be analyzed using the above process. A similar process will occur with field notes whereby I will add retrospective analyses to each sixty-minute observation. These field notes will undergo open in-vivo and then analytic coding prior to developing a narrative 27 | P a g e
analysis. Franzosi (1998) describes narrative analysis as a method in which researcher has brought out relationships not only between respondents and texts, but also between text and social reality. In other words, I will look across the interview, field note, and artifact data to explain the trends that I am finding in a narrative format to participants; thereby, depicting and describing their experience of the literacy professional development. Again, participants will engage in member checks and provide feedback and revisions that will be determined through consensus. Connelly and Clandinin (2009) citing Schulz (1997) note the negotiations of research texts with participants ensures the representations of participants experiences are ones that are resonant with their participants (p. 483). Documents and artifacts collected during the case study will be analyzed using several questions cited by Guba and Lincoln (1981, pp. 238-239): What is the history of the document? How did it come into my hands? If the document is genuine, under what circumstances and for what purposes was it produced? Who was/is the author? What was the author trying to accomplish? For whom was the document intended? Do other documents exist that might shed additional light on the same story, event, project, program, context? If so, are the available, accessible? Who holds them? These questions will probe into the underlying meaning of each artifact, whether obtained from a classroom observation or professional development session. As Merriam (2009) notes, It is the investigators responsibility to determine as much as possible about the document, its 28 | P a g e
origins and reasons for being written, its author, and the context in which it was written (p. 151). Each artifact, then, documents another aspect of the story, another perspective, another side of the crystal through which a Geometry teachers description of literacy professional development is presented. In addition, document and artifact data will be analyzed through accretion, whereby the degree of accumulation is assessed through physical evidence (Webb, Campbell, Schwartz, and Sechrest, 2000). For example, instructional materials collected during classroom observations may be used to determine the degree to which disciplinary literacy tools are transferred to classroom practice. As individual data are analyzed, each source and type will shape the emerging themes across all data sources to develop broad categories for each participant. The data for each participant will then be analyzed together to determine categories for the case study. Congruent with a grounded theory approach, I will develop a diagram illustrating how the codes and categories interact, which may go through multiple iterations (Creswell, 1998). Data Validation Because I will collect and analyze my own data, the interpretations of reality will be accessed directly through my observations and interviews. Thus, I will be closer to reality than if a data collection instrument were interjected between the participants and myself. Due to the high level of interpretation and proximity involved in this methodology, it is important to engage in reflexivity as a researcher. Merriam (2009) supports, Critical self-reflection by the researcher regarding assumptions, worldview, biases, theoretical orientation, and relationship to the study may affect the investigation (p. 229); thus, explicitly engaging in reflexivity is crucial to the methodological and analytic aspects of the case study. Guillemin and Gillam (2004) express: 29 | P a g e
Reflexivity involves critical reflection of how the researcher constructs knowledge from the research processwhat sorts of factors influence the researchers construction of knowledge and how these influences are revealed in the planning, conduct, and writing up of the research. A reflexive researcher is one who is aware of all these potential influences and is able to step back and take a critical look at his or her own role in the research process. The goal of being reflexive in this sense has to do with improving the quality and validity of the research and recognizing the limitations of the knowledge that is produced, thus leading to more rigorous research. (p. 275) Reflexivity will be documented through the use of a researcher journal as well as peer debriefing sessions. In addition to documenting my attempts to recognize biases and assumptions, the use of a research journal and writing analytic memos will establish an audit trail for the qualitative case study. Each memo will be analyzed by a trusted member of my doctoral seminar and an advisory committee member to ensure proper data collection and analysis. If errors are noted, I will make adjustments and reanalyze data until consensus is reached. Peer debriefing and member checks will bolster consistency and trustworthiness in data analysis. Multiple sources and types of data (Yin, 2008) including field notes, interview transcripts, documents and artifacts will be analyzed with members of my doctoral cohort and advisor, during which questions and alternative ways of viewing the data may be offered, allowing me to categorize data and find disconfirming evidence, thereby prompting me to construct alternative hypotheses for observed practices. As mentioned above, dependability and
30 | P a g e
consistency will be corroborated through member checks, during which participants will review narrative analyses, analytic memos, and interpretive commentary. Rich, thick descriptive accounts will be used to demonstrate adequate engagement with the case study participants to reach saturation in the data (Geertz, 1973; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Merriam, 2009). Additionally, these accounts will contextualize the study such that readers can make connections and draw parallels between the current case study and their context. Readers then will be able to determine how the studys findings apply to their context. Merriam (2009) writes, The general lies in the particular; that is, what we learn in a particular situation we can transfer or generalize to similar situations subsequently encountered (p. 225). All in all, human behavior is never static, so within this case study I will assess whether the emerging results are consistent with the data collected to ensure dependability and consistency; consequently, de-contextualizing and re-contextualizing the data prior to reporting the findings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Tesch, 1990).
31 | P a g e
References Bereiter, C. & Scvardamalia, M. (1993). Surprising ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court. Bullough, R.V., Jr., Kauchak, D., Crow, N.A., Hobbs, S., & Stokes, D.K. (1997). Professional development schools: Catalysts for teacher and school change. Teaching & Teacher Education, 13(2), 153-169. Carnevale, A.P. (1991). America and the new economy. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cole, A.L. (1992). Teacher development in the work place: Rethinking the appropriation of professional relationships. Teachers College Record, 94(4), 365-381. Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010). Common core state standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved December 14, 2011 from http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards/englishlanguage-arts-standards Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cronbach, L.J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116-127. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research. London: Sage. Daggett, W. & Hasselbring, T.S. (2007). What we know about adolescent reading. Access: http://www.leadered.com/pdf/adolescent%20reading%20whitepaper.pdf Denzin, N. & Y. Lincoln (2000). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In Handbook of Qualitative Research. 32 | P a g e
Dewey, J. (1922). Human nature and conduct: An introduction to social psychology. New York: Henry Holt and Co. Duffy, G. (2005). Developing metacognitive teachers: Visioning and the experts changing role in teacher education and professional development. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Ely, M., Anzul, M., Friedman, T., Garner, D., Steinmetz, A. C. (1991). Doing qualitative research: Circles within circles. New York: Falmer. Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: The Falmer Press. Fang, Z. & Schleppegrell, M. J. (2010). Disciplinary literacies across content areas: Supporting secondary reading through functional language analysis. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(7), 587; 587-597. Fontana, A. & J. Frey (2000) The interview: From neutral stance to political involvement. In Handbook of Qualitative Research. Franzosi, R. (1998). Narrative analysisOr why (and how) sociologists should be interested in narrative. Annual Review of Sociology, 24, 517-54. Available at: http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.517?prevSearch =roberto%2Bfranzosi&searchHistoryKey= Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York: Basic Books. Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine. Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and ethically important moments in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10 (2), 261-280. 33 | P a g e
Hawkins, D. (1967). I, thou, and it. In The informed vision: Essays on learning and human nature. New York: Algora Publishing. Horsdal, M. (2012). Telling lives: Exploring dimensions of narratives. New York: Routledge. Irvin, J. Meltzer, J., Dean, N. & Mickler, M.J. (2010). Taking the lead on adolescent literacy: Action steps for schoolwide success. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (2002). Designing Training and Peer Coaching: Our needs for learning. Alexandra, VA: ASCD. Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Little, J.W. (1993). Teachers professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 129-151. Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Morgan, G. (1983). Beyond method: Strategies for social research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. National Research Council (2002). Helping children learn mathematics. Mathematics Learning Study Committee, J.l Kilpatrick and J. Swafford, Editors, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
34 | P a g e
Neumann, A. (2009). Professing to learn: Creating tenured lives and careers in the American research university. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Oja, S.N. (1989). Teachers: Ages and stages of adult development. In M.L. Holly & C.S. McLoughlin (Eds.), Perspectives on teacher professional development (pp. 119-154). London: The Falmer Press. Pajares, M.F. (1992). Teachers beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-322. Perle, M., Grigg, W., & Donahue, P. (2005). The nation's report card: Reading 2005 (NCES2006-451). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Richards, L. (2005). Handling qualitative data. London: Sage. Richardson, L. (2000). Writing: A method of inquiry In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.) (pp. 923-948). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education, second edition (pp. 112-119). New York: Macmillan. Robinson, S.P. & Darling-Hammond, L. (1994). Change for collaboration and collaboration for change: Transofmring teaching through school-univerissty partnerships. IN L. DarlingHammond (Ed.), Professional development schools: Schools for a developing profession (pp. 203-219). New York: Teachers College Press. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2011). How we think: A theory of goal-oriented decision making and its educational applications. New York: Routledge. 35 | P a g e
Schulz, R. (1997). Interpreting teacher practice: Two continuing stories. New York: Teachers College Press. Shanahan, T. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40-59; 59. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. Siebert, D. & Hendrickson, S. (2010). Reimagining literacies for mathematics classrooms. In Draper, R. J., Broomhead, P., Jensen, A. P., Nokes, J., & Siebert, D. (Eds.), (Re)imagining content-area literacy instruction (pp. 40-53). New York: Teachers College Press. Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text, and interaction. London: Sage. Sprinthall, N.A., Reiman, A.J. & Thies-Sprinthall, L. (1996). Teacher professional development. In J. Sikula (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 666-703). New York: Macmillan. Stake, R.E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. New York, NY: The Falmer Press. Webb, E., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R.D. and Sechrest, L. (2000). Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive research in the social sciences (revised ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Yin, R.K. (2008). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36 | P a g e

Research Design Final

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Research Design Final

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

2012

University of Nebraska-Lincoln Janet L Larson

Table 3 Mathematics Performance: 11th Grade 2010-11

SignaturesInformed Consent documents

August 2012 District PD Site (High School)

August 2012 Determined by participant

Participants Classroom Classroom Observation #1

Which literacy tools and strategies transfer to daily classroom practice?

Observation 1 Field notes and Instructional Artifacts

September 2012 (After Classroom Observation #1)

At participants school site in a conference room

Classroom Observation Video Analysis #1

Which literacy tools and strategies transfer to daily classroom practice?

Classroom Observation Video Analysis #1 Audio recording and transcription

How do Geometry teachers describe literacy in mathematics?

How do Geometry teachers describe literacy in mathematics?

Audio recordings and transcriptions

Participants Classroom Classroom Observation #2

Which literacy tools and strategies transfer to daily classroom practice?

Observation 2 Field notes; Video recording; instructional artifacts

How do Geometry teachers describe literacy in mathematics?

October 2012 (After Classroom Observation #2)

Classroom Observation Video Analysis #2

Which literacy tools and strategies transfer to daily classroom practice?

Analysis field notes, audio recording, transcription

How do Geometry teachers describe literacy in mathematics?

How do Geometry teachers describe literacy in mathematics?

Audio recordings and transcriptions

District PD Site (High School)

Professional How do Geometry teachers Development describe literacy in mathematics? Session #2

At Interview #4 participants school site in a conference room

Вам также может понравиться