Students Learning through Collaborative Peer Interactions - Term Paper Example

Chapter 3: METHODOLGY This chapter describes the methodology aspects of the study with a focus on explaining research design, population and sample and research instruments and methods used in analysing and collecting data. 3.1 Introduction As mentioned in Chapter 1, the aim of this study is to emphasize students’ learning through collaborative peer interactions to complete problem solving tasks. Chapter 1 also stated the other purposes of this study: (1) to adopt a lesson study approach in a normal classroom to examine the effectiveness of students’ collaboration; (2) to improve the lesson plan where teachers plan collaboratively and refine the lesson plan; and (3) to examine Year Five students’ performance before and after intervention. This chapter is divided into eight sections. After the introduction, section 3.2 will describe the research design and methods used in this study. Section 3.3 will discuss the instruments designed for this study. This is followed population and sample, data collection procedure, the pilot study and methods of data analysis in sections 3.4, 3.5, 3.6 and 3.7 respectively. Section 3.8 concludes with the summary. 3.2 Research Design In this study, a combination of qualitative and quantitative research methods were utilised to collect the necessary data as well as to ensure the validity of the data. Quantitative data were collected through using an observation checklist, rubrics and students’ achievement tests, which included both pre-tests and post–tests, particularly on the topic of rates in word problems. Qualitative data were collected through qualitative observation of all three stages in the cycle (i.e., planning, implementation and reflection stages) to further validate the results of the study. Beverly (1998) stated that qualitative research is associated with the social aspects of finding out why people behave the way they do, how attitudes and perceptions are formed, how people are affected by their situations and differences between social groups. Qualitative data further support the quantitative research conducted because quantitative research is more concerned on empirical research and involves measurement and quantification (Connole, Smith & Wiseman 1990). Table 1 shows a summary of the quantitative and qualitative methods used in this study in conjunction with the three research questions (refer to Appendix A). 3.3 Instruments The four research instruments used in this study allowed the author to collect relevant data and, most importantly, satisfy the needs of the three research questions. There were several types of observation conducted in the study together with students’ mathematics achievement tests (pre-test and post-test). The triangulation method was employed for this research to provide consistency and reliability in the data collection process. The following section describes how instruments were utilised to gather the data to be analysed and examined. 3.3.1 Observation: Observation Checklist Lesson observation can be done quantitatively by using an observation checklist. There were two observation checklists designed for this study. The first observation checklist was designed to observe students during an activity or task given to them in the research lesson. The purpose was to investigate peer interactions during problem solving. The checklist enabled the author to measure different aspects of behaviour present, or not present, in student collaborations. The second observation checklist was provided to observe teachers during the implementation stage and was largely to do with teachers’ instruction. The aim was to check whether the teacher achieved the expected outcomes that were planned before the lesson. 3.3.2 Observation: Field Notes Qualitative observation was conducted using field notes taken by the author. The main objective of this type of observation (field notes) was to observe teachers’ collaboration in designing the lesson plan; this was taken during every meeting, but especially during the planning and reflection stages. 3.3.3 Students’ Mathematics Achievement Tests The pre-test was used to look at students’ performance in this action research. There were six items altogether; four were mathematics word problems based on the topic ‘Rate’, and two were on a tsunami. The external face validity was conducted with the author’s supervisor and mathematics teachers and their peers. The four problem solving items were adapted from the Internet and modified. The first and second items used in the instrument were originally recommended by the writer’s supervisor. 3.4 Population and Sample For this study, the author had arranged with her supervisor to be part of the ‘Lesson Study Brunei Primary School Project’ for Cohort 4, which was a collaborative effort between the University of Brunei Darussalam and the Department of Schools (Ministry of Education). The author was informed that all primary schools were involved in the project; however, she was only allocated a particular group of four teachers each from a different primary school for the purpose of evaluating this study. More specifically, four Year 5 mathematics teachers were selected to participate in this study and these participants were representative of the four primary schools involved in the lesson study project. 3.5 Data Collection Procedure The author sought permission from the MOE through the dean of the Sultan Hassanal Institute of Education (SHBIE) at the University of Brunei Darussalam before she conducted the study. Once permission was granted, the author collaborated with the ‘Lesson Study Project Group’, where she sent permission to the headmasters or headmistresses of the respective schools involved in the study. The first collection of data was carried out for the pilot study of pre-test items. Twenty-five students took part in the pilot study, which was conducted on the 15th of March 2012. The second pilot study was administered on the 3rd April 2012. After these pilot studies were analysed and amended, the actual study was to be conducted for three months, starting from May and running until July 2012. For the actual study, data were collected in the following order: 1. Giving pre-tests for the four primary schools that were involved in the Lesson Study 2. Observing students’ collaboration and problem-solving abilities from different schools by using an observation checklist; students were rated using a 5-point Likert scale (i.e., Always, Frequently, Occasionally, Rarely and Never) 3. Observing teachers’ instruction in the research lesson study from the four different schools by using an observation checklist; teachers were rated using a 5-point Likert scale (i.e., Always, Frequently, Occasionally, Rarely and Never) 4. Taking field notes in teachers’ collaborations; this was undertaken on two occasions (planning and reflection stages) 5. Giving post-tests a week after implementation of the research lessons 3.6 Pilot Study A pilot study was conducted on the 15th March 2012. The sample for the pilot study was taken from one particular school. This school was chosen as the author’s former school because it was easy for the author to negotiate and cooperate with the headmaster as well as with the teacher. There was only one Year 6 class involved in this pilot study, as they had learnt the topic on rate in Year 5. The pre-test was administered for 25 students in Year 6 and consisted of 14 boys and 11 girls. These students sat their trial PSR examination on the day when the pilot study was carried out. The writer administered the written test in this pilot study. The main purpose for conducting the pilot study was to check the validity and reliability of items found in the pre–test stage. This was done using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 2.0. The reliability of the statistics of the pre-tests was determined by using the Cranbach alpha coefficient in SPSS. From the Cronbach alpha reliability, ambiguous questions could be identified and rectified. However, when the data were analysed to measure the reliability of the instruments using the Cronbach alpha reliability, it was revealed that the internal consistency of the items was very low and therefore had to be modified to reach a significant level. The second pilot study was conducted at the same school by using modified pre-test items on a different set of students. After the items were analyzed, the Cronbach alpha coefficient was found to be higher, 0.76, which was considered acceptable and useful to be generated in the main study. 3.7 Method of Analysis of the Data Different types of analysis were employed after gathering all relevant data. The results of analysis would contribute to answering each of the research questions stated in Chapter 1. SPSS was used to analyse the quantitative data collected in this study. The forms of data were as follows: 1. Analysis of lesson observation checklist 2. Analysis of teachers’ observation checklist 3. Analysis of students’ pre-test and post-test scores 4. Analysis of observation (field notes) 3.7.1 Analysis of Lesson Observation Checklist The lesson observation checklist was used to determine students’ collaboration in solving word problems and examining the problem-solving process. In other words, the observation was carried out by focusing on students’ behaviour in the classroom to investigate whether they could learn from one another, contribute ideas or cooperate with others on the assigned task. Paired sample t tests were used to compare the learning outcomes of students’ collaboration and the performances of students’ achievement in the post-test. 3.7.2 Analysis of Teachers’ Observation Checklist The teachers’ observation checklist was developed to allow the author to determine the improvement of teachers’ instruction between the four cycles of the research lesson that contributed to students’ collaborative problem solving. The differences between performance and teaching of the four main participants were emphasized and analysed based on evaluations and measurements through the observation conducted by the author and other teachers involved in the main study. A one-way ANOVA test was used to compare a teacher’s instruction and performance on the four cycles of the research lesson. 3.7.3 Analysis of Students’ Pre-tests and Post-tests The pre-tests and post-tests were administered to all students involved in the main study between May and July 2012. The data on students’ performances were collected and analysed using a one-way ANOVA test. This method of analysis enabled the author to compare the students’ mathematics achievements based on post-test item scores. 3.7.4 Analysis of Observation through Field Notes This form of data analysis enabled the author to study a group of teachers’ (participants) collaboration efforts in designing the lesson aligned with the research theme or questions. Through this method of analysis, the author could interpret the opinions of the participants based on the setting, arguments, interaction between the teachers and knowledgeable outsiders (headmasters or headmistresses and teachers in the school). The main purpose of field notes was to address the second research question, which is to determine the refinement made in planning the lesson. All of the processes in the study were video taped and watched over and over again to determine the validity of the author’s field notes. 3.8 Summary This chapter has presented the research design, research instruments, population and sample, different forms of data collection as well as several methods of analysing data. The author employed both quantitative and qualitative research data designed to address the research questions presented in the first chapter. Quantitative information was gathered from several instruments, such as pre-tests and post-tests, the lesson observation checklist as well as the teacher’s observation checklist. This was carried out to certify the reliability and validity of relevant data obtained from the research study. In-depth qualitative information was collected and analysed using descriptive detail from the observation of the planning and reflection stages, where the four teachers made up the focus group for this research. The author gained insight into teachers’ collaborative efforts in discussing and refining the next lesson that would be implemented by the next teacher. The findings and results of the three research questions will be presented in the next chapter. The findings were analysed according to the instruments used in this study. Read More