CHAPTERTHREE:HUMPTYLAYSANEGG Idontknowwhatyoumeanbyglory,Alicesaid. HumptyDumptysmiledcontemptuously:OfcourseyoudonttillItell you.Imeanttheresaniceknockdownargumentforyou! Butglorydoesntmeananiceknockdownargument,Aliceobjected. WhenIuseaword,HumptyDumptysaidinratherascornfultone,it meansjustwhatIchooseittomeanneithermorenorless. fromCharlesDodgsonsAliceThroughtheLookingGlass The present chapter serves a dual function.

ction. Its main purpose is to outline the construction of the study methodology, but it is also imperative that this process simultaneouslyaddressestheissueofcredibility,atopicthatwillbediscussedfirst.

Credibility Credibilityisofparticularconcerninqualitativestudiesbecausechallengesaremade whicharenotalwayslevelledatquantitativestudies.Onecommonlyheldviewisthat quantitative research is credible because it is objective, relying as it does on the scientificmethodanddatathatcanbemeasured, whereas qualitativeresearch lacks validitybecauseitissubjectiveandbecausethedataconsistofdescriptionssuchas participantswords.

HumptyDumptysknockdownargumentmightevenbeseenatfirsttomeanthat usingwordsanddescriptionsasdataispointlessbecausewordscanmeananythingat allandwehavenowayofknowingwhatthepersonmeant.Butthenhowcouldwe possibly know that is what Humpty meant? If we look closely, the conversation betweenHumptyDumptyandAliceactuallyexposestheideaasnonsensethatagroup ofwordscanmeanwhateveraspeakerorwriterintends,orwhateverthereaderor listenerinterpretsthemtomean. Butthealternativeproposition,thatwordshavean

16

inherentmeaning,canbeseentobeequallyabsurd,sinceaninherentmeaningisone independentoftheperceptionofanypersonbetheyspeaker,listener,writerorreader. Thisisimpossible,asnooneamongstuscanciteasingleinstanceofmeaningexisting outsidehumanexperience.Allinstancesofmeaningoccurwithinourownexperience orthatofanotherperson. Wearethusleftwithaconundrum.Weknowthatweunderstandthemeaningsof words,buthowisitpossibletodoso?TheAustrianphilosopher,LudwigWittgenstein, described language as having a function, which is to communicate meaning. He comparedlanguagewiththeengineofacarperformingitsfunction.Whenthedriver runstheenginedisengaged,itidlestonoeffect,butwhentheengineisengagedthecar moves.Whenwemakesenseorunderstandcorrectlywhatsomeonewritesorsays,the languageisperformingitsfunction.

InterpretiveProcess Thismodelmayapplyequallytothedomainofnumbersastothedomainofwords. (AsdiscussedinChapterOne,Csikszentmihalyi(1990:204)describedadomainasany symbolic system which has a set of rules for representing thought and action.) Whether Wittgensteins model applies to numbers or not, all meaningful communicationisaresultofaninterpretiveprocess,andquantitativeresearchisnot exempt.Thisisnottosaythatthematerialrealitystudiedbyscience,andknowntous throughoursensoryexperiences,isnotreallyoutthere(andquiteunaffectedbyour opinionsofit).Butassoonaswetrytocommunicateaboutrealityusinganysystemof symbols,anyresultantunderstandingisnecessarilyreliantonaninterpretiveprocess, whichisnecessarilysubjective.

Accordingly,itcanbearguedthatthereisnosuchthingasobjectivityinanyhuman

17

communications.Theideathatquantitativeresearchexistsinarealmwheretruthis blackandwhite,uncontaminatedbytheshadesofgreythattypifyqualitativeresearch, is far from the truth. Only a small part of what makes up a quantitative study is concerned with the collection and display of quantifiable data. The majority of processeswithinaquantitativestudyarenotnumerical.Decidingwhatdatatocollect, decidinghowtocollectitandmakingsenseofthedatathathavebeencollectedareall qualitative processes. So too are the decisions as to what issues are important to research, decisions as to which research programs will be funded and whether a researchposition,orevenawholedepartment,willbecreatedorceasetoexist. TrustworthinessthroughRigourandTransparency Bothquantitativeandqualitativeresearchareequallyreliantonwhathasbeenreferred to as interpretative processes in their design and assessment. The ethnographer MargotElystatedthat: Agreatconcernofmanybeginnerparticipantobserversaswellasmany seasonedresearchersisthatofreachingforobjectivity.Inoppositionto whatmanybuddingethnographystudentsbelieve,observationcannever beobjective(Ely1991:53). Thequestioncanthenbeaskedwhetheritispossibletohaveconfidenceinthefindings of any study. Sturman (1985:18) addressed the issue of credibility in qualitative research, stating that the study must be reported in a way capable of conveying credibility and subject to standards of trustworthiness, that is, credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability. Thus findings will not be seen as trustworthy unless all parts of the study can be seen to have been designed and executedrigorously.Therefore,thetrustworthinessofaqualitativestudyreliesonits transparency.Thestudymustmakeavailabletooutsideinspectiontherawdata,how theywerecollected,andthechainofassociationslinkingthedatawiththefindings.

18

Elliot Eisner (1991:33) stated that qualitative research is believable because of its coherence,insight,andinstrumentalutility.Thepresentstudyseekspracticalsolutions toadilemmathatmanyclassroommusicteachersencounteronadailybasis,therefore, itisconcernedwithreachingunderstandingratherthanestablishingproof.Thestudy willbeofvalueifitmakessenseandisusefultoclassroommusicteachers.

Eisnersummarisedsixfeaturesofqualitativeresearchasfollows: 1. 2. 3. 4. Qualitativestudiestendtobefieldfocused. Theresearcheristheinstrumentofresearch. Qualitativestudyisinterpretative. Qualitative studies display the use of expressive language and the presenceofvoiceintext. 5. Qualitativestudiesgiveattentiontoparticulars. 6. Qualitativestudiesarejudgedsuccessfulbytheircoherence,insightand usefulness. Aswithanycomplexsystem,therearemanywaysthefunctioningofaresearchstudy canbreakdown.Thefollowingdiscussionidentifiesfivepotentialproblemsinstudy designandexecution,andtheproposedmeansofaddressingeachoneinthisstudy.

PotentialProblemsinStudyDesign Excessdata Inthisinstancethefocusofthestudyistoobroad,andmoredatabecomeavailablethan canbemanaged.Thestudyislikelytobogdownorlosedirectionduetoanexcessof dataandpossibilities.Topreemptthisproblemoccurring,thepresentstudyfocuswas limited to investigating a single aspect of creative teaching (responsiveness) as it is appearedinaparticulartypeofclassroomevent(teachersrespondingtounexpected initiativesbystudents)usingasmallsampleof20teachers.

19

Confuseddata Slippage occurs as to the exact meaning of the key terms in the study. Different meaningsoftheseconceptsoperatewithinthestudyanddatapertainingtooneissue mingleswithdatapertainingtoanother.Topreemptthisproblemthepresentstudy focusedonthedilemmainbehaviouralterms.Thishopefullyminimisesconfusionasto whatthestudyisabout. Insufficientdata Inthisinstancepertinentdataareexcluded.Thismightoccurbecause: a)Thequestionsdonotallowtheparticipantstogivetheirownanswers.Thequestions areclosedratherthanopenended.Thedatainquantitativeresearchforinstanceare strippedofextraneousdescriptionsleavingonlythenumericessentials.Questionsthat areusedtocollectnumericaldataareclosed,meaningtheydonotallowparticipants to give their own answers. Such problems can easily be eliminated when using qualitativemethods,asinthepresentstudy,whichemployedopenendedquestionsto allowpersonalisedresponses. b)Thequestionspresumeorimplyblame.Participantswillnotanswercandidlyasto dosowillbetocolludeinthedestructionoftheirselfesteemorthatofcolleagues. Questionsinthisstudywillbeframedtoenquireintowhatisratherthanwhatought tobe.Whilethestudyaimstofindoutsomethingabouthowwemaycultivatecreative teaching, the question of the value of creative teaching is outside the terms of the research. c)Thesampleistoonarrowlydefined.Thedatawillnotreflectthediversityofviews aboutcreativeteachingacrossthewholedisciplineofmusiceducation. Thepresent studycertainlyusesanarrowratherthanbroadsampleofmusicteachers.However, this was done in the knowledge that many ofthe study participants would have a richnessofexperienceandusefullyreflectonthetargetedclassroombehaviour.The studygoalwasnottofindout,forexample,howmanymusiceducatorsarecreative,or whichmusicteachersarecreative,orwhetherOrffteachersaremorecreativethanother musicteachers.Thesequestionsmightbewelladdressedbyaquantitativestudywitha large sample,andcontrols groups,generating statistical correlations butarenot the withintheparametersofthisstudy.

20

Biaseddata a) This might occur when the study design has builtin unexamined assumptions, which will skew the collection of data. If, during the course of the study, strong opinionsareexpressedonthevalueofcreativeteaching,participantsmayfeeltheneed to challenge the researcher to give unbiased responses. The questions used in this investigation will be scrutinised for implicit assumptions, for example, that creative teachingisgood,anassumptionthatcouldmakeitdifficultforparticipantstogivean unbiasedanswer.Hurworth(2000/1)advocatestheuseofwhatshetitlesstemsatthe beginningofquestionsthatallowfordifferentandmixedresponses.Examplesofstems include:Towhatextent....,Towhatdegree....andInyouropinion......However, expressingnoopinionmaynotbeasolutioneither.Giventhatthestartingpointofthe studyistoinvestigatecreativeteaching,participantsknowthatI,theresearcher,am initiatinganddesigningastudyfocusedoncreativeteaching.

ThatIhavedesignedastudyfocusedoncreativeteachingindicatesthatImustthink thereissomethingaboutcreativeteachingthatmakesitworthresearching.Itmaylead participants, therefore, to assume that I am looking for evidence that proves that creative teaching is good. This is true of any study, however, and does not compromisethevalueofthatstudy.Thisaspectofresearchisknownasreflexivityand isdescribedbyvanManen(1999:18)asfollows:

Itisnowawellknownprincipleofinquirythattheobjectofourstudyis always contaminated by the frame of our observational stance.Our interpretiveframeseemstoaccountforourperceptivenessaswellasfor ourblindness.

b)Thepictureoftheresearchissueisdistortedbyexclusiverelianceononemethodof investigation. Reliance on two or more methods to collect data is known as

21

triangulation(CohenandManion1994:233).Inthepresentstudydatawerecollected usingthreemethods:collectinganecdotes,discussingtheanecdotesonlineandfaceto faceinterviewsfocusedontheanecdotes.

c) The picture of the research issue is not representative because data have been collectedatonlyonemomentintime.Thisstudydesignallowedfordatacollectionover anextendedperiodanddiscussionoftheinitialdatacontinuedoverseveralweeks.

Biasedanalysis The researcher has seized upon a favoured interpretation of the data without considering other possible interpretations. As part of the progressive focusing (returning to gather data after analysing preliminary results were examined) data collection questions were designed to clarify discrepant data and competing explanations(Maxwell1996).Theparticipantswerealsoencouragedtothinkcritically astheynotedinstancesofthenominatedteachingbehaviourandtobealertfornegative ordisprovingcases(Hurworth2000/1)ofanygeneralisationsthatwereemerging.

EthicalConsiderations Theoverridingethicalconsiderationofanyresearchstudyisthatthewellbeingofthe participantsshouldnotbeadverselyaffected.Forthisreason,andbecauseallaspects ofthestudymustbeavailableforscrutinytointerestedpartiestoestablishcredibility,it was considered advisable that the participants remain anonymous in all documentation,thus,atwolettercodewasusedtoidentifythecontributionsofeach participantthroughoutthestudy.Thereisaninherenttensionbetweentheaudittrail usedtoverifytheauthenticityofdataandtheguaranteeofanonymitytothestudys participants.Thesolutionliesinrecognisingthatanauditmerelywidensthecircleof

22

thosepersonallyinvolvedinthestudyandofnecessity knowingtheidentityofthe participants.Ethical responsibilitytowards theparticipants thus alsoincludes of the auditor.

Anethicalbenchmarkwhendealingwiththeadultsinthisstudywasthatofinformed consent.Ifaparticipantwereaskedtodecidewhethertotakepartinthestudyonthe basisofaninadequateorinaccuratedescriptionofwhatwasinvolved,problemswould havearisenthemomenttheirexperienceofthestudydidnotmatchtheirexpectations. Participants were invited to take part in the study after every effort was made to describethepurposesandmethodsoftheinvestigation.Theywerealsoinformedthat theywereatlibertytowithdrawatanytimeandthattheycouldretractdata.

SocialSystemsinQualitativeResearch Hurworthdescribesfivesocialsystemswhichareinoperationconcurrentlyduring interviews(Hurworth2000/3).Careandattentiontothesesystemsinstudydesignand implementationwillavertsystembreakdowns,allofwhichhaveethicaldimensions.

BoundarySystem Unnecessary confusion and unpleasantness can beavoided by ensuring clarity with regardtotherolesoftheresearcherandtheparticipantaswellasthetime,placeand purposeoftheresearch. Attentiontotheboundarysystemwillalsoaddresspossible problemsofcompetitionbetweendifferentinterestgroupsforaccessandcontrolover thedata(Hurworth2000/6). MaintenanceSystem Afriendlyworkingatmosphereisareasonableexpectationforunpaidparticipantsina study.Thekeytosuccesscouldbesummedupasconsiderationorgoodmanners.

23

AdaptiveSystem This is relevant to ethical considerations as a means of protecting the feelings of participants,forexample,itmaybenecessary tochangetackinaninterviewifan intervieweeseemstobeuncomfortableoremotional(Hurworth2000/3). PoliticalControlSystem Informedconsent,asmentionedabove,isanexampleofthissysteminoperation.The studywillfunctionsmoothlyifitisaprojectenteredintofreelybyadultswhoknowthe parttheyaretoplay. ProductSystem Ifparticipantsunderstandhowastudyistoachieveitspurposeofobtainingcredible findingsthrougharigorousanalysisoftrustworthydata,theycanbeexpectedtoassist thestudytoproceedevenlytowardsitspurpose.Ifthisappearednottobethecasefor any participant I planned to request a further briefing opportunity with the first objectiveoffindingouthowtheparticipantunderstoodthestudyandhisorherrole. Havingdoneso,Iwouldrepeatthoseaspectsofthebriefingthatappearedtohavebeen misunderstood. INITIALSTUDYPLAN Itwasplannedthatthestudyconsistofsixstages(AF)asfollows: A.Selectingsample TeachersenrolledintheVictorian(Australia)OrffAssociationcoursesandinthe GraduateDiplomainOrffSchulwerkatanAustralianuniversitywereinvitedtotake partinthestudy.Awrittendescriptionofthestudyattemptingtoconveyasenseofthe pleasuresanddutiesofparticipatingwasplacedintheOrffAssociationNewsletter (Appendix1).Itwasplannedthatindividualclassroommusicteacherswouldbe approachedifaninsufficientnumberofteachersrespondedtothegeneralinvitation. AdescriptionofthestudywasalsoplacedontheAmericanbasedMusicforChildren emaildiscussionlist,advisinglistmembersofthethreadandinvitingthemto participate.

24

B.Briefparticipantsandbegindatacollection Itwasplannedthatthefirstcontactwithparticipantswouldtaketheformofasemi structuredintervieweitherindividuallyoringroups,inperson,byphoneorbyemail. Inasemistructuredinterviewquestionsarenottightlyscripted.Becauseofthis,the interviewplacesanadditionalrequirementontheresearchertokeeptheinterviewee ontrackduringthecourseofdatacollection.However,theopenendedstructurehasa numberofadvantages.Hurworth(2000/3)liststheadvantagesasfollows: a.Theinterviewerisabletoworkonaparticularsetoftopics,subjectsorissues. b.Theprocessallowsfreedomtoexploreandprobeareasofinterest. c.Incomparisonwiththeinformalinterviewitconservestimebybeingmore focused. Theobjectivesofthebriefingwere: a.Tocollectbackgroundinformationabouttheparticipants. b. Toaskparticipantstowritealogdescribinginstancesofextemporising whilstteachingtogetherwiththeirresponsestotheseinstances. c. Togatherinitialdatapertainingtotheissueunderinvestigationintheform of comments about the research dilemma and the nominated teaching behaviour. d. Toensureparticipantsunderstoodthestructure,aimsandrequirementsof thestudysotheymightgiveinformedconsenttoparticipating. Thefigureonthefollowingpageoutlinestheintendeddatacollectionprocess.

25

Findingsreportedin Collect Brief F CollectOverview E Arrive and C Examineand DDisplaydata BExamineand AExamineat Study data PartsCtoE quantitative data interrogatedata interrogate data qualitative qualitative data termsmeaningfulto reformatdata participant samples on study displaytoreveal theinitialresearch indisplaygroup displayfor insurvey focus for inemail samples ormoretimes discussiongroup inherentpatterns appropriate to inherent inherent problem egintheform andrelationships patternsand patterns and research ABC1D1E1 relationships relationships problem

mayrepeatone

C2D2E2C3D3 E3F.

26

C.Collectdata Data collection and analysis was planned as three parallel strands, using different researchmethods.ThisisrepresentedinthethreeverticalstrandsintheFigureonthe previouspage,numbered1,2and3.Thesestrandsaredescribedbelow. StrandOne A shortanswer or multiple choice survey (Appendix 2) was to be given to all participantsinthestudytocollectquantitativedataontheirexperienceinclassroom teaching and attendance at conferences and professional development classes. In additioninformationwouldbesoughtonthetypesofclassroomprogramstaughtbe the participants as well as their views on the importance of creativity in childrens learning. Three questions were also asked which, it was hoped, would lead the participantstounderstandthenatureoftheinvestigation.Theywereintroducedbythe followingstatement: Thatexactmomentwhenwemoveawayfromthelessonplan,boldlyand with confidence and start to build on one childs experience, we are released. Thequestionsposedwere: 1. Howdowereconcilethiswiththeideaofcompletingaprogram? 2. Canyouidentifyaspecificinstanceinyourownteachinginwhichyouhadan opportunitytomoveawayfromthelessonplanandtostarttobuildonone childsexperience? 3. Doesrespondingtothechildsinitiativehaveaneffectonthestudentorthe class? StrandTwo ItwasplannedthatStrandTwowoulduseafocusgroupformattoencourageadeep understanding of the dilemma. A focus group would allow participants to provide detailed accounts of their perceptions and conceptions of the nominated teaching behaviourandtheresearchdilemma,inclusiveoftheemotionsandthoughtprocesses

27

whichareinextricablefromthebehaviour.Afocusgroupsessionofabout90minutes durationwastobeconductedinaneutralsetting,thatofanationalOrffSchulwerk conference,duringabreakinproceedings.Thequestionsandparticipantsresponses weretobetaperecordedbyanassistantwhowouldalsotakenotes.Therecordings wouldbetranscribedaftereachpartofthedatacollectionandanaudittrailcreated.

StrandThree StrandThreewastotaketheformofagroupdialogueonanexistingemaildiscussion list. It was thought that the ongoing dialogue would provide an opportunity for participantstomodify,refineorreinforcetheirunderstandings.Itwasanticipatedthat the discussion might run for two to eight weeks with between six and fifteen contributionsperweek.Theextendeddurationwouldallowparticipantstoconsider events which occurred whilst teaching, as instances of the nominated teaching behaviour.Theemailcontributionswouldbetransferredtoafilewiththecodename ofparticipantanddateofcontribution,forthepurposesofprovidinganaudittrail.

D.Displaydata. The documentation collected in the above three ways would be examined and combined.

E.Examineandanalysedata Itwasplannedthatthedatadisplaywouldbeorganisedandreorganisedinthesearch forpossiblepatternsandcorrelations.Questionswhichwoulddirectthisreorganisation ofthedataincluded:Whatthemesemergefromthedata?andAretherecorrelations betweenthemesinthedata?.Dependingonquestionsthatmightarise,stages35(C, DandEinFigure1)couldberepeatedtorefinetheinvestigation.

28

F.Findings Itwashopedthatthestrandsofthestudywouldgenerateausefulmapofcomplex relationships between various elements of the research question, together with an understandingoftheinternaldynamicsbetweenthoseelements. Itwasthoughtthat the success of the study would be measured by its usefulness in addressing the dilemmathatpromptedthestudy,toprovidefindingsthatwereimmediatelyusefulfor musicteachersandhadusefulimplicationsforteachersofotherdisciplines.Thiswasin accordancewiththesixthofEisnersfeaturesofqualitativeresearch(1991)qualitative studiesarejudgedsuccessfulbytheircoherence,insightandusefulness(seepage18).

Itwasalsohopedthatthisstudywouldbeofinterestfromamethodologicalpointof view.Afocusgrouprequireshoursoforganization:conveningagroup,coordinatinga timesuitableforallgroupmembersofthegroupandtranscribingtheresponses.This formofresearchishighlyvulnerabletoeverythinggoingwellduringacriticaltwo hourperiod.Bycontrast,anemaildiscussionlistoffersalargereadymadegroup,all ofwhosemembersareavailableforongoingresearchoveranextendedtimeperiod, who can respond to questions without leaving the comfort of their home or work places.Further,becausealltheresponsesareinwriting,notranscriptionisrequired.If anongoingdialogueonanemaildiscussionlistprovedtobeaneffectiveresearchtool in comparisonto aseries oftwo ormorefocus groups,thismightbeofinterest to qualitativeresearchers.

OutcomeoftheInitialStudyPlan Whatbecameimmediatelyapparentwastheenormouspressureonteacherstime.All participants found the task of completing a survey of background information, as plannedforStrandOne,tooarduousortoounimportant.Thus,StrandOne,whichwas designedtoaccumulatequantitativedataabouttheparticipants,wasabandoned.

29

Manyteachersfounditdifficulttofindtimetorecountanincident.Asaresultofthis Strand Two was also abandoned. The initial goal of gathering data from research participantsinafocusgroupprovedtoodifficultastheparticipantslivedsomedistance fromeachothergeographically,anditwasimpossibletofindatimewhenallcould attend the same physical location. A pilot discussion, which involved all the participants in Strand Two was held at a national Orff Schulwerk conference in Brisbane,however,thiswasatanearlystageindatacollectionbeforemostparticipants hadcontributedananecdote.Thatwhichprovedultimatelysuccessfulwastheuseof anemaildiscussionlistasemployedinStrandThree.Allparticipantscontributedan anecdoteandsomediscussionoftheanecdotestookplace.Atthisstageitwasclear whatmethodsofdatacollectionwouldbesuccessfulandthestudyproperbegan. IMPLEMENTATIONOFTHESTUDY UseofAnecdotes Themainissueofthisstudywasinvestigatedbycollectinganecdotesordescriptionsof classroominteractionsfrom15Americanclassroommusicteachers(Group1)andfive Australian classroom music teachers (Group 2). The use of anecdotes is a well established research tool. McGill (2000) noted the effectiveness of anecdote in qualitative research, describing it as another tool in the genre of narrative writing which can be used to spotlight, magnify and explore events and their meaning in teachers'lives. VanManen(1999:20)proposedatypeofeditingofanecdotesinaprojectaimedat discovering how students experience the interactive dimension of teaching by recountingananecdotethattheyrememberedfromtheirschooldays.Inanaccountof theprojectvanManensuggestedtothestudentsthananeffectiveanecdotehasseven features.Theyare: averyshortandsimplestory usuallyrelatestooneincident beginsclosetothecentralidea includesimportantconcretedetail oftencontainsquotes 30

closesquicklyaftertheclimaxofthestory requiresapunchline Theparticipantswereaskedtotakenoteofinstancesduringmusicclasseswhenthey recognisedthepossibilityofrespondingtoastudentsinitiativetotheextentthatthe predeterminedplanofthelessonwouldhavetobemodified.Participantswereaskedto documenttheseoccurrencesintheformofashortanecdote.Thisprocesswasdesigned togeneraterelevantdataandtoawakentheparticipantsinterestinthetargetedtypeof classroomevent,thatis,tosharpentheirawarenessofitsproblematicaspects. ThegroupoffiveAustralianteachers (Group2)wasrecruitedduringPartAofthe initialstudyplan.Theprocessofcollectinganddiscussinganecdoteswasessentially duplicatedwiththeAmericanandAustraliangroups.Whatfollowsisadescriptionof thatprocedureasimplementedwithGroup1.

TheAmericangroupwasrecruitedthroughaninvitationtotheMusicforChildrene maildiscussionlistwhichcanbefoundat:MusicforChildren@yahoogoups.com. The invitationcanbefoundinAppendix3,itsthrustbeingarequestforadescriptionof classroommomentsinwhichtheteacherrespondedtoastudentinitiative,andan invitationtoparticipateinthestudy.Teacherswerealsoasked(Appendix4): howtheincidentsdescribedcouldberefinedtoprovideamorefocusedaccount ofhowtheteachersrespondedtotheincident, howtherestoftheclassresponded(ifthiswaspertinent)and howtheotherteachersfelttheclassrespondedtotheteachersresponses.

TwentythreeanecdoteswerecollectedfromtheAmericanteachers(Appendix5)and ninefromAustralianteachers(Appendix6). EmailDiscussion Followingthearrivaloftheseenthusiasticresponsesanonlinediscussionofthe anecdoteswasconducted(Appendix7).Acompletesetoftheanecdoteswasemailed 31

toeveryoneonthelistandaprotocolwasproposed,asfollows: Ifagreeabletoeveryone,Iwouldliketoproceedalongalineofenquiry,as follows: 1.Ipostthefirstquestiontothelist,withanappropriatesubjectheader. 2. Groupmembers freely respond,bearing in mindthequestion weare addressing,usingthatsamesubjectheader. 3.Atthepointthatitseemsappropriate,Imoveusonbyintroducinganew question. 4.Andsoon. 5.Thatemailsoutsideorbesidetheresearchquestionbeforeusshouldnot besentviathelist.Forexample,attimesgroupmemberswillwanttomake commentstomeoranotherlistmember,orperhapstheywillwanttoask somequestiontoclarifyourprocedures,orsuggestotherquestions.

Following the receipt of this protocol by the participants we proceeded to discuss individualanecdotes.

Ipostedthefirstanecdoteinaformatwhereeachlinewasidentified,asfollows: 1.Thisisareallysmallexample,butitjumpedtomindimmediately. 2.AcoupleofyearsagoIwasteachingabodypercussionpiecetoa ratherunrulygroupoffourthandfifthgraders. 3.Thelinoleumfloorwaswet 4...andsomeofthekidskeptsqueakingtheirshoestomakealoud, distractingnoise. 5.Weincorporatedthesqueaksintothebodypercussionpiece 6.andthekidsfiguredouthowtobeverypreciseintheirmovementsto makethesqueaksfittherhythm. 7.ForthefirsttimeallyearIfeltlikeeverykidintheclasswasreallyengagedin whatweweredoing. 8.Itwasoneofthemostsuccessfulthingswedidallyear. 9.WhenItriedtoteachtheshoesqueakingparttomyothergroupof fourthandfifthgraders,theyweremildlyinterestedbutnotasenthusiastic 10.becauseitwasnottheiridea. 11.AsanOrfftrainedteacherIalwaysamlookingforwaystoinvitechildrento 32

becreative 12.butthereisadifferentenergyfromthecreativitythatwasnotinvitedby me. 13.Thanksforlettingmeshare! Insomecases,Iaskedtheauthorformoredetail,askingquestionssuchas:Howdid yougoaboutincorporating? Didyousaysomething,ordidyoudosomething?. FollowingtheirrepliesIrepostedtheanecdotewiththeadditionalsections.Thus,the anecdoteoutlinedabovewassenttotherecipientsasfollows: 26JULYFROMGKANECDOTESQUEAKYSHOES 1.Thisisareallysmallexample,butitjumpedtomindimmediately. 2.AcoupleofyearsagoIwasteachingabodypercussionpiecetoarather unrulygroupoffourthandfifthgraders. [STIMULUSA] 3.Thelinoleumfloorwaswet 4. and some of the kids kept squeaking their shoes to make a loud, distractingnoise. [RESPONSEB] 5.Weincorporatedthesqueaksintothebodypercussionpiece 5.1Irealizedthatthesqueakingwasdistracting.. 5.2andthatsomekidsmightbedoingitonpurpose, 5.3Iaskedthegroupiftheycouldfindawaytosqueaktheir shoestothesamerhythmthattheyhadbeentryingtostamptheir feettobefore 6.andthekidsfiguredouthowtobeverypreciseintheirmovementsto makethesqueaksfittherhythm. 6.1Insteadofpickingupourfeetwesqueakedourshoesbackand forth,slidingourfeetfromsidetosidewithoutpickingthemup. 6.2Oneofthekidsfiguredouthowtodothisandweallpickedit up. [RESULTSC]

7.ForthefirsttimeallyearIfeltlikeeverykidintheclasswasreally engagedinwhatweweredoing. 8.Itwasoneofthemostsuccessfulthingswedidallyear.

33

 8.1Itlookedkindofcool 8.2anditsoundedgoodtoo. 9.WhenItriedtoteachtheshoesqueakingparttomyothergroupof fourthand fifthgraders,theyweremildlyinterestedbutnotas enthusiastic 10.becauseitwasnottheiridea. 11.AsanOrfftrainedteacherIalwaysamlookingforwaystoinvite childrentobecreative 12.butthereisadifferentenergyfromthecreativitythatwasnotinvited byme. 13.Thanksforlettingmeshare! [CODA] SoIguessIpartiallyacceptedthestudentinitiativeofsqueaking.I'msure everyone knows the piece we were doing, by the way. It's "Rhythmic Rondo#1"fromMurrayVol.1p.67. IlearnedthispieceinOrfflevelone andalsoinanOrffworkshopIattended. Ishouldalsomentionthatthis experiencewasunfortunatelynotaturningpointformeinworkingwith thisparticulargroupofchildren.Althoughwehadafewmagicaldayslike thesqueakyshoesday,Icontinuedtofindthegrouphardtoworkwith. During the course of the year several of the kids were suspended or expelledfromtheschool,soIknowitwasn'tjustme. IjustwishIcould havefoundawaytobuildontheisolatedmomentsofsuccessthatwehad onsomedays. [ENDOFANECDOTE] Interview Inordertoprovidevaliditytotheinvestigation,aninterviewswasconductedwithtwo teacher educators of the Orff approach who were invited to reflect on some of the collected anecdotes. This form of triangulation has been described by Yin as an essentialdatacollectionprinciple,inthatitallowsthedevelopmentofconverginglines ofenquiry(1989:95).Somecommentsmadeinthecourseoftheinterviewprovedtobe gemsofinsightwhenanalysisofthedatawasundertaken.Thesecommentswillbe foundinthefollowingchapter. AnalysisofData Thedatawereexaminedasawholeforemergentthemes,aprocessknownascoding. Patton(1986:313)describescodingasentailingtheuncoveringofpatterns,themesand

34

categoriesandwhichis'acreativeprocessthatrequiresmakingcarefullyconsidered judgementsaboutwhatisreallysignificantandmeaningfulindata.ChapterFourwill provide the data of the investigation, noting any emerging themes, which will be discussedingreaterdetailinChapterFive.

35