4 Of that twenty eight were known to me personally either through having worked

4 of that twenty eight were known to me personally

This preview shows page 4 - 7 out of 17 pages.

4
Image of page 4
Of that twenty, eight were known to me personally, either through having worked with them; or through conference circuits. I had no reasons for excluding any of them. One was a part time colleague at the University where I teach. I worked with a sample of eight, which included the managing directors of the two major companies, one of which I would hope to study in a school context. My sample made some allowance for withdrawal and non participation, - a range of people who included individuals who had experience as national policy makers; who made the move from the private to the public sector; who have made the move from the public to the private – and some of them have moved between the two. Newman and Clarke (2009: 107) call people who do that “boundary blurrers”. Anonymity issues: The issue of anonymity is a complicated topic in such research. Whereas it is my intention to make anonymous the views and experiences of participants, as expressed in interviews – and in my subsequent analyses, the websites that advertise the “for profit” companies’ aims (and costs!) are in the public domain. One interesting issue which I will needed to address was the possible diversity between views and aspirations expressed in the “public” presentations (in websites; in published newspaper interviews) and those expressed in interviews. This is a methodological issue discussed by Ozga and Gewirtz (1994) and by Moss, who had to address such concerns during her discussions with politicians (Moss, 2008; personal communication). The work of Neal (1995) and of Penney (2001) has been helpful in planning my interviews with, and interpretations of the viewpoints of, potentially powerful players in the field of policy. My position in relation to interviewing powerful policy players needed to be carefully thought through. The selected sample is presented as Appendix One of the paper (page 5) below. Research methods: i) Library-based/archive work on texts; documents; records; literatures; ii) Extensive interviews with between consultants representing the range of people currently working in the literacy field: independent consultants; representatives of “for profit” companies; people who have made a move from the public to the private; people who still work in the public sector. iii) From the group represented in (ii) above, l selected four companies/individuals who were involved in effecting policy change within schools, two doing “external” events with larger groups of practitioners; two within individual schools. Ethnographic field work took place in each of these schools over the period of the 5
Image of page 5
training events and was followed by interviews with the consultants and the heads/teachers; observations; document study and analysis. For the purposes of this observation, a typology was constructed of consultants’ activities with practitioners, in and out of schools, represented as Table One (below) TYPOLOGY: consultants’ activities with practitioners External (out of school) events Product as “process” (teaching approach)
Image of page 6
Image of page 7

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 17 pages?

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture