DEFINITIONS OF KEY CONCEPTS IN DIVERSITY EDUCATION

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

This chapter describes and explains the procedures adopted and steps taken to answer the research questions. Essentially, the methodology chapter is the plan of how a research study was carried out. This includes the research design, data collection, data analysis, assessment of trustworthiness, and ethical considerations.

 RESEARCH DESIGN

 Philosophical orientations of the study

A researcher’s perceptions about the nature of reality may affect his/her theories of knowledge or what it is possible to know and, consequently, influence the research methodology adopted (Morrison, 2012). This claim is about the research paradigm which framed this study. The study’s main research question, namely, ‘How does UNAM realise national policies in preparing student teachers to teach in diverse classrooms?’ was deemed to be well suited to an interpretive paradigm as answering the research question required an interpretation of policies and curriculum theories of UNAM vis-à-vis the training of teachers. The interpretative paradigm is underpinned by certain ontological and epistemological assumptions that influence the research methodology that will be used.
At the ontological level I responded to Eriksson and Kovalainen’s (2015, pp. 13) question of “What is there in the world” and I interrogated “whether there is a real world out there that is independent of our knowledge of it” (Marsh & Furlong, 2002, I adopted the ontological assumption that understands reality as subjective (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2015). In other words, it was anticipated that what happened at UNAM regarding the preparation of teachers for diversity would become known through my interpretation of the data. This links to the next philosophical level of epistemology that asks “What we can know about the world and how we can know it” (Marsh & Furlong, 2002. p. 18). This then flows into methodological concerns of “How can knowledge about a given issue or problem be produced” (Eriksson & Kovalainen, 2015, p. 13) or, in other words, how a researcher acquires what needs to be known.
The interpretive paradigm was deemed to be appropriate for the purposes of this study because it assumes that reality is not an external phenomenon to be uncovered but is, instead, constructed by people through dialogue and interpretations; it is multi-perspectival and open to various interpretations; it is time and context bound and it explores meaning from the perspective of the participants (Morrison, 2012). Through dialogue with the participants and a document analysis I intended to interpret whether UNAM’s BEd policies, curricula and practices were helping to realise Namibia’s government diversity agendas. Underpinning this was the notion that “all human life is experienced and constructed from a subjective perspective” (Morrison, 2012, p. 23); and is socially constructed (Suter, 2012). Epistemologically an orientation that allows people to construct their own meaning of a situation and to interpret it is known as constructivism (Suter, 2012). From this constructivist perspective “people construct their own personalised worlds” (p. 344). Assuming this philosophical position for the purposes of this study facilitated two processes. Firstly, the participants shared their constructions and interpretations of what was taking place at UNAM with regards to teacher education for diversity and, secondly, I, as a researcher, constructed interpretations and made sense of what the data presented me regarding diversity teaching at UNAM. In other words, this philosophical position allowed me and the “researched” to ‘co-construct’ the data (Charmaz, 2008).
Placing this study within an interpretive paradigm meant that the data to be collected to allow interpretations to be made had to be qualitative. Accordingly, the study used a qualitative design. There are a number of assumptions about qualitative research. For example, it recognises that human experiences are influenced by context and, hence, it is not possible to separate human experiences from social, historical, political and cultural influences (Ary, Jacobs, & Sorensen, 2010). It allows for a study to be conducted in natural settings (Patton, 2002) and, thus, I held face to face interviews with the participants. This in turn facilitated a better understanding (Patton, 2002) of how both the lecturers and student teachers perceived teacher education for diversity. In addition, the qualitative design allowed for open-ended questions to be posed during semi-structured interviews.
It also enabled me to choose respondents with an insight into how diversity issues are integrated into UNAM teacher education policies and practices (Patton, 2002).
In view of its emphasis on people’s lived experiences; the qualitative design suited my study which aimed, among other things, to gain the lecturers and student teachers’ perceptions of teaching for diversity. Furthermore, I did not go into the field with predetermined codes with the qualitative design allowing issues to emerge (Ary et al., 2010; Patton, 2002). The emergent design allowed me to revise my data collection strategies as the context dictated (Suter, 2012).

 Research strategy

This study was a case study of the way in which UNAM is responding to and incorporating diversity issues into its BEd curriculum policies, processes and practices. Merriam (1998, p. 29) identifies a case study as being “particularistic, descriptive and heuristic. Particularistic means that case studies focus on a particular situation, event, or phenomenon, descriptive means that the end product of a case study is a rich, thick description of the phenomenon under study while heuristic means that case studies illuminate the reader’s understanding of the phenomenon under study”. In addition, the case study allows an event or phenomenon to be studied in its natural context – “taking testimony from and observing the actors first hand” (Bassey, 2012, p. 157). The case study focuses on an individual aspect of a particular phenomenon in considerable depth and provides a comprehensive picture of the case in question (Bassey, 2012; Creswell, 2013; Maree, 2012; Morrison, Briggs, & Coleman, 2012; Seabi, 2012).
Thus, I chose the case study method because it allowed me to explore and gain a better understanding of the way in which UNAM prepares pre-service teachers for diverse classrooms. As such It enabled me find answers to both the descriptive and explanatory questions of what, how and why (Yin, 2012), namely, what is happening at UNAM with regards to teaching for diversity? How is UNAM preparing student teachers for teaching for diversity? Why is UNAM doing what it is doing in order to prepare teachers? My study consisted of a single case which investigated the preparation of teachers for diversity at UNAM.
In fact, my study is an ‘embedded single case study’ (Yin, 2012). This means that the study is about one institution, UNAM, but within which there were three units of analysis from which the requisite information was sourced, namely, lecturers, student teachers and documents. These units of analysis were complementary and juxtaposed with one another. Nevertheless, I approached the data from these data sources with scepticism (Yin, 2012) and I constantly sought ‘rivals’ in the explanations and evidence presented. This, however, benefited the study as it forced me to seek for further evidences on how UNAM prepared student teachers for diversity and also not to uncritically accept what I was told as honest. The case study method was chosen with the awareness that it is not possible to generalise the findings of such a study (Yin, 2012).

Population of the study

The main objective of the study was to explore how UNAM, through its Bachelor of Education (BEd), prepares pre-service teachers for diverse classrooms. UNAM, with its five campuses, is the only government university in Namibia that prepares teachers while the BEd is the only programme at UNAM that prepares teachers for the three phase levels, namely, BEd Lower Primary, BEd Upper Primary and BEd Secondary. The lower primary phase was excluded from this study due to language constraints because, as per the Namibian Language Policy for Schools (Ministry of Basic Education, Sport and Culture, 2003), learners at this phase level should be taught in the mother tongue. The study of the other two phases took place at two sites – the secondary phase at UNAM main campus and the primary phase at the Khomasdal campus. The Khomasdal campus was conveniently selected as a result of its proximity to the main campus. The population was based on the 2014 UNAM statistics and comprised 118 final-year student teachers specialising in Social Sciences ‒ 42 in upper primary and 76 in secondary phase teaching. These student teachers were taught by 3 lecturers, headed by a Dean of the Faculty of Education. I chose Social Sciences, firstly, because this field of study deals exclusively with issues of diversity (Harris & Clarke, 2011; Sheppard, 2010). It was, therefore, presumed that the Social Science curriculum philosophy would be premised on both constructivist principles and social justice values.

Declaration
Ethical clearance certificate 
Ethics statement 
Dedication 
Acknowledgements
Abstract 
Table of contents 
1. CHAPTER 1: GENERAL ORIENTATION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 CONTEXT AND PURPOSE STATEMENT
1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1.4 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
1.5 RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY
1.6 CONTEXT FOR THE STUDY
1.7 RESEARCH DESIGN AND APPROACH
1.8 TARGET POPULATION AND SAMPLING
1.9 DATA COLLECTION
1.10 DATA ANALYSIS
1.11 METHODS TO ENSURE TRUSTWORTHINESS
1.12 DELIMITATIONS
1.13 RESEARCH STRUCTURE
2. CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 
2.1 DEFINITIONS OF KEY CONCEPTS IN DIVERSITY EDUCATION
2.2 THEORIES UNDERPINNING THE STUDY
2.3 DEBATES UNDERPINNING POLICIES, CURRICULA AND PRACTISES
2.4 LITERATURE GAPS ON TEACHER EDUCATION FOR DIVERSITY
2.5.1.1 Policy context
3. CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 
3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN
3.2 DATA COLLECTION METHODS
3.3 DATA ANALYSIS
3.4 ASSESSMENT OF TRUSTWORTHINESS
3.5 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
4. CHAPTER 4: POLICY BACKGROUND
4.1 NAMIBIA’S POLICIES ON DIVERSITY, UNITY AND INCLUSIVITY
4.2 UNAM’S POLICY ON DIVERSITY, UNITY AND INCLUSIVITY
4.3 CONCLUSION
5. CHAPTER 5: CURRICULUM PRACTICES AND DIVERSITY TEACHING 
5.1 THE NATURE OF THE BED CURRICULUM
5.2 TEACHING FOR DIVERSITY IN THE BED CURRICULUM
5.3 TEACHING PRACTICE AND DIVERSITY TEACHING
5.4 CONCLUSION
6. CHAPTER 6: PERCEPTIONS TOWARDS DIVERSITY
6.1 STUDENT TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS
6.2 LECTURERS’ PERCEPTIONS
7. CHAPTER 7: CLASSROOM PRACTICES AND DIVERSITY TEACHING 
7.1 SYLLABUSES AND DIVERSITY TEACHING
7.2 LESSON PLANS AND DIVERSITY TEACHING
7.3 CLASSROOM PRACTICES AND DIVERSITY TEACHING
7.4 SYNOPSIS
8. CHAPTER 8: EQUITY PRACTICES AND DIVERSITY TEACHING
8.1 EQUITY AND FAIR PRACTICES
8.2 UNITY AND TOLERANCE
8.3 ATTITUDES TOWARD LEARNER DIFFERENCES
8.4 SYNOPSIS
9. CHAPTER 9: PULLING THE THREADS TOGETHER 
9.1 KEY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE STUDY
9.2 CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE PRESENT STUDY
9.3 LIMITATIONS
9.4 FUTURE RESEARCH AREAS
9.5 RECOMMENDATIONS
REFERENCES
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT