Listening to boys in kindergarten talking about school

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree

Doctor of Philosophy

from

University of Wollongong

by

Roslyn Coleborne

M.Ed.(UC), M.A.(Macq),

Grad Dip Ed Studies(UNE),Grad Dip Educ.(CSU),

Grad Dip Spec Ed.(UC),Grad Cert Prof. Studies(UC), T.Cert.

Faculty of Education

2009
Figure not included. Please see print copy.

Frontispiece
Monet – Nympheas et branches de saules – Musee Marmottan, Paris. – Editions BRAUN 1991- France.

ii
Thesis Certification

I, Roslyn Coleborne, declare this thesis, submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the award of

Doctor of Philosophy, in the Faculty of Education, University of Wollongong, is wholly my own work

unless otherwise referenced or acknowledged. This document has not been submitted for qualifications at

another institution.

Roslyn Coleborne

…………………………………………………

……………………………….2009

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I acknowledge with gratitude

• Dr Jillian Trezise, my supervisor and Associate Professor Pauline Harris, co-supervisor, for

providing wise quiet guidance, enthusiastic encouragement and critical questions at crucial

times

• Professor Jan Wright and Dr Valerie Harwood for providing early important direction

• Dr Anne Campbell, for encouraging me in my initial thoughts about this study

• James, my husband, and Matthew and Peter my sons, the most special males in my life for

enduring support, encouragement and the crucial underpinning of a belief that I could do it

• Iris, my mother (dec. 1980) who fought bureaucracy valiantly to bring education to children in

the bush and who believed fervently education was the key to a good life

• Fourteen young boys in particular, and hundreds of others over many years, for confirming that

everyone is unique.

iv
ABSTRACT

The perspectives of boys on their experience in school during kindergarten have not been explored in
any significant way. Still missing in the literature is critical interpretive research on young, male
children’s early schooling experiences and the implications for the academic outcomes of these students.
There is evidence that some boys do not perform well in secondary school (West, 1999; Coulter, 2003;
Martin, 2003) and this is predictable as early as the first year of formal schooling (Barrett, 1989;
Alexander et el., 1993; Rimm-Kaufmann & Pianta 2000). This study adds to the literature by seeking
the views of boys in kindergarten classes about what schooling means to them.

A goal of this study is to understand the complex world of the lived experience of being a boy in
kindergarten, from the point of view of boys who live it (Schwandt, 1998) so a qualitative, interpretive
approach to the subject matter is used. Uncommon in other studies of young children, the hermeneutic
phenomenological perspective of the philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer (2004) and a process of analysis
proposed by Max van Manen (1990) provide the framework, using a mixed methodology derived from
diverse sources. Data is generated primarily by conducting individual semi-structured interviews with
fourteen boys in kindergarten classes in three schools in New South Wales. This data is interspersed with
excerpts from the researcher’s retrospective reflective journal covering more than forty years of teaching.
In keeping with the philosophical stance of Gadamer, these statements help to illuminate the personal
position and bias of the researcher. Field notes that evaluate the processes and the techniques used to
collect information from young children, supplement the primary data.

Interpretation of the transcripts generated by conversations with the participants shows school routines
and rules figure prominently in the boys’ views of school life, and play and friends, are important
features of the school day. The boys say learning is work, and it is generally conducted using a pencil
and paper. This study contributes to research on what school means to young boys and what factors
engage or alienate young male students in school. It demonstrates links between these views and current
education policy and classroom practice.

The study provides insights into the effectiveness of various research techniques used with young
children. Three scaffolding techniques were used to support the interview process, including the boys
drawing a picture of school life and talking about their drawing, looking at pictures of typical school
activities and commenting on those, and playing a game of ‘schools’ with the researcher using the
construction toy, Lego. The study found that talking to the boys in an engaged and supportive way
generated more useful data than any of the other strategies or scaffolds used. The study adds evidence to
the growing body of literature that suggests children are competent in providing information about issues
that are relevant to them. Future research, using a hermeneutical phenomenological approach, could
include girls in Kindergarten, in order to compare and contrast their experiences with their male
counterparts, and contribute to unravelling further what makes school engaging for some students, and
alienating for others.

v
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Summary of the research design...................................................................................................89

Table 2: Sample of the data matrix with explanatory notes.......................................................................157
Table 3: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Nigel.....................................................................164
Table 4: Units of significance distilled from data .....................................................................................172
Table 5: Units of significance in themed categories-Cade.......................................................................174
Table 6: Participant units of significance related to school .....................................................................177
Table 7: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Aimon...................................................................190
Table 8: Units of significance in themed categories-Aimon.....................................................................190
Table 9: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Ellis......................................................................198
Table 10: Units of significance in themed categories-Ellis.......................................................................198
Table 11: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Ben.....................................................................206
Table 12: Units of significance in themed categories-Ben.......................................................................206
Table 13: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Omar..................................................................212
Table 14: Units of significance in themed categories-Omar.....................................................................212
Table 15: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Jaden...................................................................218
Table 16: Units of significance in themed categories-Jaden.....................................................................218
Table 17: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Nigel...................................................................224
Table 18: Units of significance in themed categories-Nigel......................................................................225
Table 19: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Andrew...............................................................232
Table 20: Units of significance in themed categories-Andrew.................................................................232
Table 21: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Tyson..................................................................239
Table 22: Units of significance in themed categories-Tyson....................................................................240
Table 23: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Warrick...............................................................247
Table 24: Units of significance in themed categories-Warrick................................................................247
Table 25: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Dylan.................................................................254
Table 26: Units of significance in themed categories-Dylan....................................................................254
Table 27: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Connor...............................................................260
Table 28: Units of significance in themed categories-Connor..................................................................261
Table 29: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Niam..................................................................266
Table 30: Units of significance in themed categories-Niam.....................................................................267
Table 31: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Cade...................................................................273
Table 32: Units of significance in themed categories-Cade....................................................................274
Table 33: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Darrius................................................................281
Table 34: Units of significance in themed categories-Darrius..................................................................282
Table 35: Frequency of units of significance for all participants..............................................................292
Table 36: Units of significance derived from each student’s transcript...................................................293
Table 37: Relative effectiveness of scaffolds for deriving units of significance ......................................338

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Qualitative interpretive research design.......................................................................................43

Figure 2: A diagram showing the generation of the data: the hermeneutic circle.....................................145
Figure 3: Word collage of participant transcript........................................................................................169
Figure 4: Aimon’s drawing........................................................................................................................194
Figure 5: Ellis’s drawing............................................................................................................................202
Figure 6: Ben’s drawing.............................................................................................................................209
Figure 7: Omar’s drawing..........................................................................................................................215
Figure 8: Jaden’s drawing..........................................................................................................................221
Figure 9: Nigel’s drawing.........................................................................................................................229
Figure 10: Andrew’s drawing....................................................................................................................237
Figure 11. Tyson’s drawing.......................................................................................................................244
Figure 12: Warrick’s drawing....................................................................................................................251
Figure 13: Dylan’s drawing.......................................................................................................................257
Figure 14: Connor’s drawing.....................................................................................................................264
Figure 15: Niam’s drawing........................................................................................................................270
Figure 16: Cade’s drawing.........................................................................................................................279

vi
Figure 17: Darrius’s drawing.....................................................................................................................285
Figure 18: Essential themes derived from common units of significance ................................................295

vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS...............................................................................................................................1
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY, BACKGROUND, AND LITERATURE SURVEY.....................................2
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK, RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY..............................39
METHOD....................................................................................................................................................96
DATA ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................................141
SINGLE CASE ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION.........................................................................179
MULTIPLE CASE ANALYSES AND INTERPRETATION..................................................................289
CONCLUSION..........................................................................................................................................334
APPENDICES CONTENTS.....................................................................................................................365
Abraham, J. (2008). Back to the future on gender and anti-school boys: a response to Jeffrey Smith.
Gender and Education, 20 (1), 89-94.........................................................................................................378

1
CHAPTER ONE

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY, BACKGROUND, AND LITERATURE SURVEY

“Oh this learning, what a thing it is…”
The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1 Scene 2 Line 134 Shakespeare

Preface

This investigation uses a hermeneutical phenomenological approach to looking at the phenomenon of

being a boy in Kindergarten. As such, it goes into uncharted territory in many ways because there is no

set pattern or recipe for either the conduct or the reporting of studies using this approach. Researchers

using this framework find themselves frequently caught between the traditional and well accepted ways

of reporting using the ‘scientific’ method of quantitative research, and the newer, often untested and

sometimes questioned directions, more commonly found in qualitative research. Van Manen (1990,

p.168) advises that “although there is no compelling reason for structuring a phenomenological study in

any one particular way, it may be helpful to organise one’s writing in a manner related to the

fundamental structure of the phenomenon itself.” Therefore, while I have opted to present this study in a

mostly conservative style, on some occasions, it has been necessary to veer off into what will be for

some readers, unfamiliar directions. This means sometimes accepting the different, and perhaps the

unexpected, as the story unfolds.

I explain in detail in the following chapters, the uncommon use of aspects of a hermeneutical

phenomenological approach to study young children in educational settings and the roles of the

philosopher Gadamer, and van Manen, a human scientist, in providing a framework for a mixed method

study. As the process of investigation begins I introduce an allegorical device of likening the progression

of the study, to the creation a painting and this idea is developed in the next chapter. Initially however, as

I prepare the canvas, I present the purpose and the background of the problem, and I survey relevant

literature that supports and provides a foundation for the investigation.

2
Introduction

Firstly, this chapter explains the purpose of the study as the exploration of the perspectives of male

students regarding their first year at school. I substantiate the issue of some boys’ difficulties with

schooling and the worldwide phenomenon that sees boys’ education in crisis. The study focuses on

kindergarten boys because the early years of school and in particular kindergarten, are crucial to the

development of boys’ progress, and impact on the rest of their school lives.

Next, I address the practice, within international contemporary research, of seeking children’s views in

relation to matters of importance to them. Despite these worldwide endeavours to increase the

involvement of children in speaking about matters that directly concern them, there is a paucity of data to

show the most effective strategies of eliciting information directly from young students.

A qualitative study “is exploratory…and the researcher seeks to listen to participants and build an

understanding based on their ideas” (Cresswell, 2003, p.30), so any survey of the existing literature

seeks to provide a framework, or a backdrop, for what will unfold, therefore I bring forward into the first

chapter from its more traditional placement in the second chapter, a survey of literature specifically

related to boys’ views of school in their first year and I consider briefly literature in related areas.

The well sustained view that some boys persistently are failing to reach their potential in academic

outcomes means that educators require more information in order to correct this situation, so more

widespread studies of the phenomenon are needed. It is this literature survey, coupled with my personal

concerns and long experience related to boys failing to ‘do school’ effectively, that helped formulate the

research questions, aimed at expanding knowledge related to boys’ life experience in school.

In addition, I explain in this first chapter, the crucial importance of an ethical approach in research of

this kind. Investigations that aim to get close to the personal views of the participants about matters of

importance to them carry high levels of responsibility for ethical awareness. These ethical considerations

are especially highlighted in this study as they influence studies of young children in a significant way. I

discuss a range of ethical concerns related to research with young children.

3
As indicated earlier, the study borrows direction from the philosophical hermeneutics of the German

scholar, Hans- Georg Gadamer, (2004) for whom the recognition of prejudice and foreknowledge is

basic to our knowledge of others. Therefore I introduce the use of a personal retrospective reflective

journal in this first chapter, as it is an essential strategy underpinning the organisation and the principles

of this investigation. My personal reflections show my prejudices and firmly indicate my influence on

the study’s outcomes. The philosophical premise on which these reflections become relevant, is

described in detail in later chapters.

To conclude this first chapter I overview the structure of the study and the contents of each chapter in the

text.

THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to find out what boys in Kindergarten say about school as a way of

exploring why some male students fail and eventually become disengaged and alienated from the

schooling process. I intend to investigate the perspectives of male students regarding their classroom

experiences in their first year of school (in New South Wales, Australia, this year is named

kindergarten). There is considerable evidence that some boys do not perform well in secondary school

(West, 1999; Martin, 2003) and this is predictable as early as the first year of formal schooling (Barrett,

1989; Alexander et el., 1993) and long-term ideas about school and learning emanate from the

experiences children have in the first years (Rimm-Kaufman & Pianta, 2000).

Strein et al., (1999, p.125) confirm the concept that a child’s “initial experience with formal education

has the potential to have long lasting effects toward school, achievement/performance levels and

perhaps even more global views of self”. If the impact of the first year of school is so highly significant

and has such enduring effects it is vital that education systems provide appropriate programs at this

crucial stage. My study focuses on this first year to contribute to knowledge about what happens in

school. These insights may provide guidance to improve teaching practice in the early years of school,

inform policy and curriculum development and lead to improved academic outcomes.

4
The use of a hermeneutic phenomenonological approach to seeking young boys’ views about school is

an innovative research step. There is no evidence of Gadamer’s philosophical propositions forming the

basis of investigations into young children’s experiences of schooling in Australia, so this study reaches

out into new fields of research endeavour.

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

At the beginning of a painting an artist often covers the canvas with a ‘ground’ colour, and then adds

pale washes across the whole surface to lay out the background, hinting at what is to come. In this study I

begin by laying out the background in the same way. I start applying the background wash, by answering

the question, why study boys only?

Why study boys only?

The main impetus for this research is the worldwide phenomenon that there is a sense that schools are

failing some boys as they struggle to reach their potential. While there is both scholarly and populist

support for this position, it is not universally accepted and within the issue itself there are widely

differing opinions. Reichert and Kuriloff (2004) present one position, stating

in the glare of considerable publicity and a nascent movement on their behalf, boys’ lives have
become more charged. The terrible weight of mortality differentials, poor educational outcomes
and public violence, not to mention further progress in girls’ opportunities, has come to rest on
the way we represent young males and the possibilities we hold for their lives (p.544).

Much of the literature casts the boys as victims (Nilan, 2000), an idea summed up by Reed (1999) as “the

apparition of the lost boys” (p.93) and argues for more ‘boy friendly’ schools (Mills & Keddie, 2007) but

there is considerable argument about how this position is reached. Reed (1999, p.95) argues, “the

principal source of descriptive evidence cited for a crisis in relation to boys and schooling, is their

measurable performance in assessment tasks during the period of compulsory education…and their

achievement is always posed in relation to the achievement of girls.” This raises the need to recognise

differences amongst boys as well as differences between girls and boys (Martino & Pallotta-Chiarolli,

2003; Mills & Keddie, 2007). “Representations of boys, as a cohesive group, enables a particular reading

that highlights injustices assumed to impact all boys, without acknowledging the privileged elements of

masculinities that advantage some boys over other boys and over some girls” (Frank et al. 2003, p.120).

However, the ‘which boys, which girls’ approach has little support at the national policy level. There is a

5
high level of interest, and a sense of urgency surrounding the supposed academic underachievement of

boys.

Mills (2003) argues that the current gender politics are having a negative impact on gains made by the

gender equity movement over the last twenty years. Mills and Keddie (2007, p337) contend that

gender is intersecting with social processes that produce cultural domination, non-recognition
and disrespect within an enduring patriarchal world that continues to associate successful
masculinity with power, domination and non-emotion and to devalue and demean activities
connoted as feminine.

However, regardless of the stance taken, within the last ten years, concern regarding boys has grown

(Jordan, 1995; Whitelaw et al., 2000) and much of the concern has focused on schooling including

aspects of literacy, numeracy, bullying, violence, harassment, and homophobia (Frank et al., 2003). A

critical, social and political analysis has addressed the complexities of masculinity in boys’ lives

alongside more simplistic medical and psychological approaches (Nilan, 2000; Keddie, 2006). Research

into the dominant constructions of gender, sexuality, race, class and disability has been critically engaged

and has revealed discrimination (Frank et al., 2003). Research that acknowledges the ‘differences’

among ‘boys’ and the multiple complexities and pluralities of masculinities is emerging as an

increasingly enlightened approach that may eventually lead to an improvement for all boys, without

jeopardising the progress of girls (Jordan, 1995).

There are varying discourses prevalent. For instance, boys are ‘victimised’ in schools by female teachers,

by supporters of girls’ advancement and by poorly adapted pedagogy. There is the ‘boys will be boys’

biological argument. However, in reviewing all of the evidence, it is important to search for the real

picture and to be cognisant of exactly what is being reported. Gorard (2000) claims that the most

common methods used for comparing groups in the United Kingdom would indicate that British

education is in crisis and increasingly polarised by gender, class, ethnicity and income. However, he

argues that if the differences are considered in proportion to the figures on which they are based, then the

opposite trend emerges and the gaps are declining.

A common position that tends to ignore the social practices of masculinity, and presents a picture of

‘crisis and panic’ is overtly populist in its approach (for example, see Biddulph, 1997; Gurian, 1999;

Pollack, 1999; Sax, 2001 and others). However, this movement has been successful in attracting

6
government funding to address the ‘problem’ no doubt due to the political influence deriving from

parental concern (Yates, 2001) and media opportunism. Examples of political attention are demonstrated

by a series of government investigations including a national government inquiry into the education of

boys in Australia conducted by the House of Representatives Standing Committee in 2002. This

committee reports that compared to girls, boys have lower literacy achievement, lower school retention

rate, and lower levels of participation in higher education and higher rates of school exclusion. Programs

like “Boys’ Lighthouse Schools” (DEST 2003), and “Success for Boys” (DEST 2005) flowed from this

inquiry (Mills & Keddie, 2007). In Queensland, the “Male Teacher Strategy” emerged (Education

Queensland, 2000). This strategy was similar to contemporary work in the United Kingdom, North

America, New Zealand and Europe (Mills, 2000; Skelton, 2002; Skelton, 2003). Behind these strategies

to counteract the alleged ‘feminisation of schooling’ is the suggestion that male teachers are required to

provide positive masculine images for boys. However recent theories of gender (Skelton, 2002) suggest

that female teachers ‘do’ masculinity as effectively as men and emulate the same modes of masculine

authority as male teachers, so the gender of the teacher is not necessarily the shaping influence. If this is

the case, then it is essential to look for other factors that may be impacting on some boys’ poor school

outcomes.

Despite the breadth of the initiatives referred to above, none seems to have made any general impact on

the situation for some boys. Previously, submissions to the New South Wales Inquiry into Boys’

Education (1994) showed that boys represented the majority of behaviour ‘problem’ students. The

Inquiry (1994, p.16) reported, “(a) typical primary school reported that 90 per cent of their detentions are

boys. Of the 73 students in special units for behaviour disturbed students in NSW, 62 are boys.” As the

numbers of facilities increase, the proportion of more boys than girls being referred for support maintains

a differential that needs investigation.

International concern for boys’ outcomes at school

The concern is not only reported in Australia. Improvement in academic outcomes for males at all stages

of their school careers is a goal sought in educational institutions worldwide. Connolly (2004) draws

attention to the rhetoric and reality of ‘boys’ underachievement in English schools. He states ‘boys’

underachievement in education has now become a global concern, taxing the minds of governments

7
across the Western world”. Connolly’s major study of five to six year old boys in the United Kingdom

drew the conclusion that there is “ample evidence of the need to begin any strategy aimed at addressing

the poorer educational performance of boys in the early years” (Connolly, 2004, p.218). He confirmed

that all the patterns of differential performance in the final years of school are already evident in the early

years. Connolly concluded that there remains “a small but significant gender difference in relation to

achievement such that boys do tend to lag behind girls whatever social class or ethnic group one looks at.

Moreover, for those groups that already suffer from the lowest levels of achievement, masculinity can

tend to exacerbate significantly the problems faced by boys” (Connolly, 2004, p.232).

In the period of the mid to late 1980’s there appeared to be an increase in the gap between boys and girls

in terms of performance. However, as Connolly (2004, p.61) points out, this can, in part, be explained by

“the removal of the previous barriers faced by girls” and an increase in female educational and career

aspirations during this period. Girls were catching up, rather than boys lagging behind.

It is necessary to be careful when contemplating the apparent significance of gender in literacy

achievement. While a key factor in boys’ poor performance is related to the impact of a range of

masculinities, other factors lead to low performance by students in our schools. For example, in

Australia, while there is a gap for some boys, there is a greater gap for Aboriginal children, working

class children, and children from non-English speaking backgrounds and if wealth, employment security,

and social privilege are the goals of education, the male students (as a group) ‘are doing fine’ (Gilbert &

Gilbert, 2001). Mills (2003, p.70) warns the “totalisation of ‘boys’ and ‘girls’ enables the suffering some

boys’ experience to be used in ways which work to shore up the position of many already privileged

boys.” However, when considered generally, the evidence is ample to show that some boys are not

achieving adequately in the school setting.

Local concern for boys’ outcomes at school

While the international debates wage about the level of need and the causes of the ‘problem’, (Jordan,

1995; Biddulph, 1997; Skelton, 2001; Weaver-Hightower, 2003; Hyndman, 2007) my personal

experience would point to a situation that does need addressing for some boys. Simple analyses at local

school levels in the Illawarra and South East Region (ISER) of the New South Wales Department of

8
Education and Training (NSW DET) reveal a disproportionate number of boys being referred for

behaviour support and receiving suspension and expulsion sanctions. Problematic behaviours at school

consistently are shown to be related to academic underachievement and may contribute to a negative

trajectory over time (Jimerson et al., 2002). Boys are referred in higher numbers than girls are,

proportionately, for learning difficulties and disabilities support and emotional disturbance and mental

health interventions. More males proportionately, are referred for intervention for poor attendance (NSW

DET ISER office records, 2007). Formal examination results in the region, such as School Certificate

and Higher School Certificate results, are not as conclusive. However, there is compelling evidence that

some boys find successful school participation a challenging experience (NSW DET ISER student files,

2000-2008).

This evidence does confirm that the difficulties confronting some boys in school needs investigation with

a view to improving outcomes, but the question is raised of how best to do this. As indicated above, for

many years a range of in-school strategies and government plans has attempted to address the issue but it

remains as a problem. One way to seek guidance on what needs to be done is to ask the students.

Listening to the children’s voices: Why access the child’s view?

If factors such as some school practices can cause disengagement and alienation from school, these need

to be recognised and addressed early in a child’s school journey, in order to improve outcomes for some

boys. One way of determining what these factors are, is to ask the children themselves about their school

involvement (Daniels & Perry, 2003). This idea is supported by studies that show children are competent

and capable of speaking up for themselves about their own lives and their experiences (James, et al.,

1998; Clark & Moss, 2001; Dockett & Perry, 2003) and that their perspectives are important areas for

study (Dockett & Perry, 2003).

One reason for pursuing this direction, is the evidence that teachers’ views and children’s views of the

same activity are not necessarily concurrent (Rohrkemper, 1985; Garbarino & Stott, 1992; Morgan-

Fleming & Doyle, 1997; Wiley & Hendricks, 1998; Wiltz & Klein, 2001; Tudge et al., 2003). One of the

major findings of the large Starting School Project in Australia is that the perceptions of students about

transition to school and their expectations of school vary considerably from those of adults (Dockett &

9
Perry, 2004). Clarke and Moss (2001) state that adults are found frequently to have only limited

understanding of children’s lives and experiences, therefore it is useful to seek information and opinion

directly from the students so that the factors involved are comprehensively considered from their unique

viewpoints.

Legislation and the rights of children

Not only is it useful to seek the opinions of students, but it has become an imperative, as the result of

world wide opinion and legislation. In the last twenty years, an international social justice agenda has

aligned with contemporary developing theories of the sociology of childhood, to produce the impetus

for acknowledging children’s views about their lives. In 1959, the United Nations Declaration of the

Rights of the Child opened the way, and the 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC)

Article 12 resulted in a large number of studies seeking the views and participation of students in

research into matters affecting their lives. The Convention calls for State parties to

assure the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views
freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in
accordance with the age and maturity of the child.

Article 12 has been the motivation for a large international movement of organisations and researchers

enacting the involvement of children in situations where their perspectives are deemed valuable.

Researchers are seeking the views of children (about school and other agencies important to them) in

order to comprehend their understandings and to illuminate the researcher’s knowledge to guide actions.

While the argument about the importance of hearing the children’s views is mostly over, there is still a

lack of evidence concerning the authenticity, credibility and reliability of exploring the views of children

and their perspectives on matters that are important to them, such as education (Lewis, 2004).

Governments have sought to implement the requirements of the UN convention by encouraging the

development of a “listening culture” in schools (for example in the UK, the Green Paper, Every Child

Matters (DfES, 2003) and Every Child Matters; The Next Steps (DfES, 2004). Strategies that facilitate

meaningful input from children as young as five are encouraged. Participation in research by children

and the explicit attempt to include their views in government policy has developed markedly in many

settings (Stafford et al., 2003).

10
Increasingly researchers point to the positive outcomes from seeking the child’s view. For example,

Potter and Briggs (2003, p.48) state, “if we listen to the voices of the children, we can recognise that we

need to offer more responsive curricula that build upon those experiences that the children enjoy and

value…” Hammersley and Woods (1984, p. 3) argue that

[t]here can be little doubt that pupils’ own interpretations of school processes represents a
crucial link in the educational chain. Unless we understand how pupils respond to different
forms of pedagogy and school organization and why they respond in ways that they do, our
efforts to increase the effectiveness, or to change the impact of schooling will stand little chance
of success.

Graue and Walsh (1998, p. 43) suggest it is important to listen to children’s explanations of their actions,

and to be respectful of their voices. It requires basic methods of interpretive research, plus attention to

the connections between the local context and the broader culture and history. Lincoln and Tierney

(2002, p.10) add that

[w]e have little hope of understanding what schooling and learning mean to children, or how
children view learning processes, or what processes keep children as learners engaged, unless
we do careful and thoughtful research with and among children, in the learning context.

Ruddock and Flutter (2000) in a study with primary aged children constructed a model of the things that

affect students’ commitment to learning from their interview data. They stated, “when talking directly

about learning in the classroom…pupils…have a lot to tell us that is worth hearing” (p 85). Gradually

researchers have increased their attention to student perceptions of schooling (Wing, 1995, p.223) and

promised increased understanding of the lives of students (Lewis & Lindsay, 2000; Clark, 2005; Cook-

Sather, 2006).

However, while there is a gradually increasing body of literature (Holden, 2002; Potter & Briggs 2003)

seeking the direct views of young students, there is little evidence that the knowledge of young children

about their own learning is used to moderate the learning activities (or curricula) that are offered to them

(Sherman, 1997; Smith et al., 2005). Rarely are young children asked to evaluate the services and care

provided for them (Punch, 2002). In addition, some researchers report concern about a lack of evidence

regarding the validity of particular methods of exploring the views of children (Alexander et al., 1997;

Morrow, 1999; Lewis & Lindsay, 2000; Smith et al., 2005).

Cook-Sather (2002, p.3) writes “authorizing student perspectives can directly improve educational

practice because when teachers listen to and learn from students they can begin to see the world from

11
those students’ perspectives”. It may help teachers make what they teach more accessible (Johnson &

Nicholls, 1995; Lincoln, 1995). Students who “are taken seriously…as knowledgeable participants in

important conversations feel empowered” (Hudson-Ross et al., 1993). The students are those who

experience daily the effects of educational policies and practices, so they have unique perspectives on

what happens in school and classrooms (see Weis & Fine, 1993; Cook- Sather & Shultz, 2001).

Part of the imperative to include children and young people comes from the place they hold in today’s

world. They have grown up with and are immersed in information technology, media and globalised

politics and frequently they know more about communication modes than many of those who decide

policy in the education systems that enfold them (Cook-Sather, 2002). This is true for children of all

ages, and even the very young now demonstrate knowledge and skills in this technological era, beyond

all previous expectations.

Why Kindergarten?

Student views in Australia have been gained at the secondary level (for example, Trent & Slade, 2001)

but less frequently from primary aged children or children in their first year of school. Research with

young children concerning school experiences has concentrated on the transition process itself (Rimm-

Kaufman & Pianta 2000; Dockett & Perry 1999, 2001) or the emotional response to school (Clyde,

2001). While there is a plethora of studies about boys and education “there is a real absence of detailed

work available aimed explicitly at this issue in the early years” (Connolly, 2004).

There is a scarcity of investigations focused on the alienating and engaging features for boys in

kindergarten classrooms, but there is considerable evidence that early recognition and intervention is

desirable. A Canadian twelve-year-longitudinal study shows that “kindergarten boys from low

socioeconomic areas who are hyperactive, fearless, infrequently prosocial, and raised in adverse family

environments are at much heightened risk of engaging in deviant behaviours early in their development

(in the eleven to seventeen age group)… Boys at high risk can be identified as early as kindergarten and

should be targeted for early intervention” (Barclay & Lie, 2006). Entwisle and Alexander (1993, p.418)

claim “…mounting evidence testifies to the long-lasting and powerful effects of schooling during this

critical period (the first year) for children’s life chances and ultimate well being.” This is supported by

12
other researchers (for example, Rimm-Kaufman & Pianta, 2000; Yeboah, 2002; Finn & Gerber, 2005;

Walsh & Gardner, 2005; La Paro et al., 2006).

I am specifically interested in the students’ perceptions of aspects of daily life in school and their

learning activities. Data on the nature of kindergarten classroom processes that contribute to gender

differences in school achievement can highlight problems in policy and practice (Kessler, 1989) and

provide opportunities to improve outcomes. If there is an opportunity to keep more male students

engaged, by preventing alienation this could lead to increased academic success rates over a student’s

school career. This study can contribute to the existing literature by deepening and expanding the debate

and our understanding of what goes on at school (Weinstein, 1991; Hymel & Ford, 2003).

The challenges of research involving young children

However, there are significant challenges in doing research with children. Children and young people

can be both fragile and resilient at the same time; and they can be unreliable and inconsistent in their

attitudes (Cook-Sather, 2002). They can be affected personally by the research process itself, such as

missing learning time, or being concerned about revealing information that is critical of their teachers or

their school (for example, Garbarino & Stott, 1992; Nespor, 1998; Greig & Taylor, 1999; Cook-Sather,

2002). Nevertheless, in order to make successful reform in schools a complete picture of life in

classrooms from the perspectives of all the players, it is necessary to seek their views. This consultation

should include students of all ages, not only the adolescent and older students, but children in their first

years of school.

Research with very young children records a history of significant hurdles for investigators. Prior to the

mid 1980’s children were seldom seen as candidates for active participation in any research and

especially not research seeking their perspective (Jones & Tannock, 2000). Waksler (1991, p.62)

describes how some researchers see themselves as the source of understanding and interpretation of

children’s behaviour. The controlling influence of Eriksson, Piaget, and others who viewed young

children as too immature to contribute has been pervasive but gradually there are signs appearing of a

shift in this practice. Until the 1990’s it was generally thought that children had limited abilities to

comprehend language and to articulate their experiences accurately so studies ignored the children’s own

13
voices and interpreted the children’s worlds through adults’ eyes (Punch, 2002; Backett-Milburn &

McKie, 1999).

However, research is beginning to emerge (for example, Waksler, 1991; Mayall, 1996; Smith et al.,

2005) that promotes the notion that the perceptions of all humans should be heard and valued and that

children are an important part of this. However, despite the more positive attitude, the realities of the

participants’ stage of cognitive development can impact in a range of ways. A young participant in a

research project may have a shorter concentration span, have a low degree of interest in and

understanding of the topic, and have a limited level of language competency. Other difficulties arising

from children’s capacity, include the “right-answer” factor (discussed later), distractibility, and a

tendency to fatigue. In addition there is variation in the individual levels of comprehension of the

purpose of the research activity and of the interview questions. Significant also are the children’s levels

of operational thought, the unequal power relationship between adult researcher and child, and the

expectations held by children of adult authority figures and of adult help. Finally, there is the factor of

‘distance’ where the social, physical, cognitive and political distance between adult and child is

inevitable (Hatch, 1990; Mulder & Vrij, 1996; Graue & Walsh, 1998).

While there is agreement on the difficulties that will be encountered by researchers working with young

children, there appears to be little agreement on what is an appropriate methodological basis and a

successful method for seeking reliable and consistent information from them. Further research could

expand the knowledge needed to increase the reliability and validity of the data being sought when

asking young children about their understandings of their lived experiences. There are significant

challenges for all parties to these exercises. Researchers can be convinced that there is something to be

learned from students, but they have to be prepared to shift position on who holds the authority. Equally,

the students have to realise that there is a real shift in the power base and be willing to be part of this

shift and to learn the language skills that will ensure they are heard. The process of hearing what children

say, is not simple. Some of the major challenges lie in the ethical imperatives.

14
Ethical considerations when working with young children

Foremost among challenges facing the researcher who decides to work with young children, are

important ethically based concerns. These include the obvious primary requirement of acquiring informed

consent from the participants. It also requires appropriate access and consent through the various

gatekeepers for research in the school setting including the university, government departments of

education, the school principal, staff and parents. Other highly significant and more subtle factors include,

the avoidance of coercion to which children are particularly susceptible, the maintenance of anonymity

and confidentiality, the maintenance of the children’s option to participate by ensuring they understand

they have the right to refuse to continue, and the exertion of responsibility by the researcher in situations

where there is apparent wrongdoing. It is important that researchers adhere to child protection

requirements, to be aware of the impost on the children’s learning time and the teachers’ teaching time,

and to acknowledge researcher value positions alongside a deep sense of social responsibility.

The particular characteristics of the phenomenological approach as used in this study, with a focus on

getting close to the personal lives of the participants, increases the challenge for researchers to be

especially conscious of ethical practices. The issue of ethics is treated sparingly in many studies (Fasoli,

2001; Ford et al., 2007; Mishna et al., 2008). It is sometimes presented as an issue to be acknowledged

but not engaged with in any depth. However, in this investigation, which examines the views of very

young children (Lindsay, 2000; Lewis, 2002) numerous serious and important ethical issues are raised

and it is crucial to examine them in depth.

Ondrusek et al., (1998) cited in Ford et al., (2007) conducted a study which considered the age that

children were able to give assent and found that children under nine years of age had ‘poor to non-

existent abilities to understand the information that they provided’ regarding assent. While my

investigation of boys in kindergarten, brings into sharp focus ethical issues that pertain to the specifics of

research with very young children, it also should be recognised that many of the issues are equally as

important in terms of research with adults (Thomas & O’Kane, 1998; Lindsay, 2000). The point is made

by Kleinsasser (2000, p.157), that “for the qualitative researcher, no aspect of the research process and

product may be more important to problematize and unlearn than ethics…Ethics cannot be separated from

15
epistemology and to this end, reflexivity on ethics has everything to do with good data.” This view is

confirmed by Thomas and O’Kane (1998, p.336) who claim “effective methodology and ethics go hand

in hand.”

The consideration of research participants as capable, wholly independent persons operating in a world of

self-determination is false. There are matters of authority and power-imbalance in every interaction

between any humans and some research studies try to ignore this (Kleinsasser, 2000). Social class, race,

ethnicity, and education can separate researchers from their subjects or participants in the same way as

age or power. This is true for all age groups who may be the participants in research activities (Waksler,

1991; James et al., 1998; Danby, 2002; Danby & Farrell, 2004).

The contemporary belief is that children can be competent interpreters of their everyday worlds. This

version sees the world of childhood constituted in relation to the adults’ social world, as each influences

each other (Danby & Farrell, 2004). This position leads to different ethical considerations than previously

encountered and Danby and Farrell claim that this research orientation allows the children to act as

gatekeepers of the research, and that it acknowledges the possible status and power imbalances between

adults and children. This may be desirable but it is still a fine balancing act for current researchers,

wanting to involve young children. Fasoli (2001, p.11) states “(if) we want children’s full participation

and aim to gain insight into their lives we have to learn how to ‘do’ research ethically and equitably. This

requires constant attention to issues of power, not as something inherent within us as researchers, but

contextual, complex and relational.” Thomas and O’Kane (1998, p.337) argue, “part of the task is to

redress the power imbalance between child participants and adult researcher, in order to enable children

to participate on their own terms.” I contend that an acknowledgement of the power aspect is important

for all research, whether with children or with adults. Among the broad ethical issues that must be

addressed by all studies are autonomy (personal rule of self), beneficence (doing no harm) and justice

(being fair) (Greig & Taylor, 1999). Beneficence, non-maleficence, and justice are three of the most

fundamental ethical principles (Walker, 2007, p.39). These concepts encompass the maxim ‘above all, do

no harm’. Participants’ welfare has to take priority over the research.

16
 The ethical considerations embrace the whole research process from the beginning to the conclusion,

including the research questions, the sampling, the data collection instruments, the data analysis and the

eventual use of the study findings. All aspects are exposed to ethical review. As indicated above, among

the early and imperative matters to be addressed is the process of acquiring informed consent from

the participants ( i.e. the children need to know, as far as it is possible given their young age, what it is

they are going to be doing and why). Consent means that participants have adequate information

regarding the research, are capable of comprehending the information, and have the power of free

choice, enabling them to consent or decline participation in the research voluntarily (Walker, 2007).

Phenomenological research often involves those who may be vulnerable and less able to act

autonomously (for example, the aged, the ill or the young) and the researcher must consider this and act

scrupulously to avoid exploitation. Little attention has been paid to how researchers with children

should gain their informed consent. Sandbaek (1999a) struggled with the dilemma that to obtain proper

informed consent the researchers need to ask the children again at the beginning of the interview

session, to ensure they understood. This was a strategy that for her, risked additional attrition of the

sample. There is a challenge either to make contact with the child clear in terms of informed consent, or

in terms of informed dissent from the children themselves (Morrow & Richards, 1996). Coyne (1998)

makes the point that child consent to research remains a contentious issue, worthy of further

deliberation.

For instance, there is the legal aspect of the difference between consent and assent, related to the age of

the children involved. Ford et al., (2007) point out that assent is the term used to convey a sense of

agreement obtained from those who are not able to enter into a legal contract. Informed assent may be

given by children prior to reaching the age of legal consent. There is a contradiction existing between

using a child-centred approach to research and the traditional consenting processes that virtually

excludes children’s voices (Ford et al., 2007).

A second factor is gaining appropriate access and consent through the various gatekeepers for

research in the school setting including the university, government departments, school principals,

staff and parents. Formal ethical approval of this study was obtained from the Human Research Ethics

Committee of the University of Wollongong. The ethical considerations were of an essential nature as the

17
participants were very young children. Formal approval was also required by the New South Wales

Department of Education and Training before public schools could be approached. Within the department

itself, the study was forwarded to experts in the field of early childhood to ensure its appropriateness and

credibility. Even following departmental approval, it is necessary to seek the approval of each individual

principal in the schools involved, to seek their permission and support also.

In relation to informed consent, another difficulty is the open-ended nature of the research in a

qualitative study. Kleinsasser (2000, p.157) cites Howe and Dougherty (1993) stating

…(q)ualitative research is open-ended (again, in comparison with experimental

methods) because parameters and a mapped research direction – instead of having to be
set at the outset – unfold during the course of the investigation. This significantly
complicates obtaining participants ‘fully informed consent’ before the research begins
because research directions will be constantly renewed and revised as a result of the
researcher’s activities and discoveries along the way.

These authors identify intimacy and open-endedness as two uniquely qualitative research features that

“muddy the ethical waters” (Kleinsasser, 2000, p.157).

A third factor is the need to avoid coercion to which children are particularly susceptible (Parker,

1984). Coercion can be a very subtle process and is generally not adequately recognised. Some

researchers claim informed consent as an ethical procedure in their work. However, it is likely in many

studies that the consent comes as the result of an underlying power structure not recognised by the

researcher or the participant. The mere process of a university-sanctioned researcher seeking to carry out

an investigation in any setting can be sufficiently powerful to engender acceptance, in many settings and

for many people, regardless of their position or age. The additional potential for the impact of adult-child

power relationships is discussed at length elsewhere in this study. Kortesluoma and Nikkonen (2004,

p.216) warn, “children feel stress more early than adults in research situations and it is more difficult for

them to understand what it means to participate in a study”.

Next, it is necessary to maintain anonymity and confidentiality because frequently parents and

school professionals think they are entitled to know what the child says. As the researcher, I

explained, that to ensure confidentiality I would be the only person who would be able to link names to

interviews and that the tapes would be kept in a separate locked filing cabinet and destroyed on

completion of the study. Participants and their parents were informed that the interview transcripts would

18
be destroyed five years after the completion of the study. Quotes from the interviews are included in the

study. Informants will not be identifiable because the researcher has ensured that informants’ names and

any other potentially identifying information are not contained in the study report. Participants identifying

details have been disguised and are held in a separate computer and will be destroyed at the conclusion of

the study. All persons named in the data have been given pseudonyms, as have place names and school

names.

A further feature is the need to maintain the children’s option to participate and ensure they

understand they have the right to refuse to continue. The children (and their parents) were also

advised that at any time in the interview they could decline to answer any questions or refrain from the

activity, request that the tape recorder be turned off or terminate the interview.

Next, researchers must be aware that it may be necessary to exert responsibility in situations where

there is apparent wrongdoing. For example, the researcher may see children bullying or the researcher

may see children about to be hurt or injured. The researcher may be discomforted, in terms of seeing

things that are not appropriate and then facing the dilemma of whether to report or not. A researcher may

observe a teacher shouting at a child, or being threatening. Decisions have to be made about what is

recorded in the study and what is not. As the researcher I was aware that the participants may have

described experiences that are revealing of school practices that are at odds with my own code of

professional standards but I needed to remain non-judgmental and ensure that my body language

conveyed nothing other than encouragement to the students to speak.

It is a legislative requirement of researchers in public schools to adhere to child protection

requirements and this responsibility should apply to all researchers working with children. Any

disclosure of a child protection nature would have to be reported to the school principal as is required by

the NSW Department of Education and Training for all to adhere to Child Protection laws and

procedures. These bind researchers and any other persons working with children on school sites, to

comply with mandatory child protection requirements.

19
A more subtle ethical concern is the necessity for researchers working in schools, to be aware of the

impost on the children’s learning time and the teachers’ teaching time. The rigorous and detailed

approval process required by researchers wanting to work in New South Wales government schools tries

to ensure that no school is burdened by an overwhelming amount of research being carried out at

particular schools. It also tries to ensure that the actual research process is not an undue work impost on

the staff at the school chosen for the research. The process is also designed to ensure that the research

will be of value to the school system. As a long serving teacher and administrator, I am very aware that

the school site is an unusual one and that any interruption is an imposition as the management of

numerous children has its own unique characteristics that are not reproduced in any other workplace

settings. The interaction of many individuals in many different ways is complex and any introduced

feature can sway the delicate balance in the effective operation of the organisation. Learning and

teaching time, once lost, is gone forever.

Finally, researchers must acknowledge researcher value positions and be aware of their social

responsibilities. As my topic is gender based I am conscious of the values this implies. In addition, any

research in schools is likely to be looking for ways to improve practice and this in turn implies that there

is something needing fixing. This means that criticism must emerge from the study findings. Staff in

schools and administrators, policy makers and curriculum developers as individuals are committed to

doing the best they can in their current circumstance. To raise up items of deficit may be painful and

must be treated carefully. To gain improvement in any setting, for any practice, requires the researcher

to adopt a critical stance but this must be implemented with sensitivity, and the outcomes managed with

compassion. Researchers working in schools must demonstrate an understanding of the complexity of

the site.

The consideration of ethics in the school setting, by researchers working with young children, is an

important and complex issue. Intense consideration must be applied to all aspects of the process and to

the human interactions and sensitivities that are involved. This means that any activity involving

children, including research, has to approach this group with care and sensitivity. Patton (1998)

describes how the human element of qualitative inquiry can become both a strength and a weakness.

Potentially there may be a weakness because the process and the outcomes are significantly dependent

20
on the skill, the training, the intellect, the discipline and creativity of the researcher. Patton’s phrase ‘the

researcher is the instrument of quality inquiry’ is frequently quoted. It means that the research quality is

subject to the qualities of the human being doing the research. This demands the researcher working

with young children, must assume significant responsibility to behave ethically. Proper attention to these

issues requires more than a general adherence to the requirements of a university or a government

department, but an increased sensitivity on the part of the researcher to the subtle and often hidden

assumptions that can be submerged in the researcher-participant relationship.

Ethical considerations are often passed over in many studies as an unavoidable matter to be dealt with

somewhat peremptorily. I argue that especially when young children are involved, these considerations

form an important basis for good research. Having explored in detail the ethical matters to be considered

in a study involving young children I now focus on studies, both international and local, that specifically

address matters pertaining to boys in Kindergarten.

SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE SPECIFICALLY FOCUSING ON BOYS IN

KINDERGARTEN

As indicated at the beginning of this chapter the approach used in this study, explores unique ways of

unfolding the investigation. For example, the purpose of a survey of some of the literature pertaining to

this study does not necessarily fulfil the goals of a traditionally based literature review, as might be

expected to be found in a quantitative study. As part of a hermeneutical phenomenonological approach,

consideration of the literature has different goals to traditional studies. In qualitative research of this type

there is “broad agreement that the completion of a traditional literature review in advance of data

collection and analysis is problematic” (Guglietti-Kelly & Westcott, 1990; Ashworth, 1999; Trotman,

2006) because it becomes necessary for the researcher to visit and then revisit, the related areas of

writing as each part of the study unfolds.

In this chapter, I survey literature specifically related to studies of boys in kindergarten, to provide a

foundation on which the study can proceed. In the next chapter, a consideration of a theoretical

perspective for the study necessitates an exploration of literature from a far broader perspective. Later in

the study, as the outcomes of the investigation begin to appear, I consult areas of scholarly writing that

21
relate to the emerging themes. Just as in the creation of a painting, the artist returns to parts of the canvas

over and over again, adding colours, and experimenting with changing brushstrokes to conjure the exact

image that is needed at the time, then I seek inspiration, support and information from the literature as

each part of the study raises more questions.

At this point, there are various purposes for this survey of pertinent literature. My aim here is to

highlight and bring together studies that provide a foundation for my research by focussing on studies

that involve boys in kindergarten. I use a geographical focus or organiser for the studies placing them

broadly under the headings, International studies and Local studies.

International studies

While the study focus is kindergarten, I begin with a seminal work that looked more broadly across the

early years, because it highlights the significance of initial educational experiences. It is a significant

longitudinal study carried out in the United States of America (USA) by Alexander et al., (1997) that

demonstrated that early academic achievement and engagement (as measured by attendance, behaviour,

data from standardised tests, report cards and teachers’ comments) in the primary and middle years can

predict eventual withdrawal from school in later years. For Alexander et al., (1997, p.93) it was “a

sobering realization … how children comport themselves at the beginning of the schooling process

anticipates how they fare toward the end.” This study is important, because it encompasses the findings

of numerous other studies that demonstrate early difficulties that can predict later failure (Pallas et al.,

1987; Finn & Gerber, 2005).

Studies of the curriculum and classroom life from the point of view of students in kindergarten, have

concentrated mainly on the affective domains of responses to school (Tymms, 2001), using range of

strategies to elicit the children’s views. A large study by Fink and Kosecoff (1977) in the USA,

considered children in kindergarten to determine whether there is a difference in attitudes to school

between male and female students and whether there is change over time. The studies of Valeski and

Stipek (2001) and Burchinal et al. (2002) in the USA and Svavarsdottir and Orlygsdottir (2006) in

Iceland, exemplify this emphasis on findings related to feelings and attitudes, the use of survey data and

22
formal assessments of students’ learning. Others have investigated the dichotomy between work and

play (Wing, 1995; Sherman, 1997).

Also in the USA, Reifel (1986) investigated whether the views of kindergarten children regarding what

they do at school matched their teachers’ plans. Reifel’s conclusion was that more investigation of the

children’s view of the school day should relate to aspects of the curriculum and to the assumptions being

made by teachers of the students’ perceptions of the activities being provided.

A decade later in the USA, Wing (1995) used qualitative methods of participant observation and in-

depth interviewing (fourteen children) in the tradition of symbolic interactionism, to explore

kindergarten to second grade children’s perceptions of classroom activities for one year. The themes

“work and play” emerged clearly from this research which demonstrated how the children in the study

were very skilled at making subtle distinctions between work and play, but that teachers were, for the

most part, unaware of them.

In the United Kingdom, (UK) Sherman (1997) collected data from interviews using twenty questions

with young children in five schools for ten weeks. The interviews maintained a conversational tone and

revealed the complexities of the children’s thoughts and perceptions. This study showed that the

children were rapidly socialised into “the view that schooling is essential for life, and this schooling

takes place in activities identified as work and not play” (Sherman, 1997, p. 122).

Ladd et al., (1999) in the USA, investigated children and the kindergarten environment. They found

kindergarten entry factors such as cognitive maturity and family background, both directly and

indirectly influence children’s behaviour, participation, and achievement in kindergarten. The children’s

initial behaviour orientation influences the types of relationships that they form with peers and teachers,

stressful aspects of relationships impact adversely on classroom participation and achievement and

classroom participation is an important prerequisite for achievement. Overall, the impact of complex

interpersonal relationships was the strongest factor in achievement measures. A year later, Ladd et al.,

(2000) conducted another short-term longitudinal study on two hundred children in the United States

regarding school liking, classroom participation and achievement using questionnaires and reports, with

23
children, parents and teachers. They found that students from higher rather than lower SES (socio-

economic status) families, were more likely to adopt cooperative participation patterns, or adopt a

compliant student role or be more adept at adapting to it; and school SES was directly linked to

children’s academic progress. Overall, they found children’s affective (liking) reactions to school are

pivotal to their school careers.

More recently in the UK, Connolly (2004) conducted a major study examining explicitly the issue of

boys’ achievement in the early years. This study draws on a comprehensive analysis of national

statistical data and in-depth case studies of the experiences and perspectives of five to six year old boys.

Connolly arrived at five key findings. He found there is an imperative to provide strategies aimed at

improving poor educational performance, that gender has only a partial role to play, that deeply

ingrained masculine identities influence outcomes, that 'underachievement' is not a helpful concept in

seeking to improve outcomes, and finally, there are dangers that a concentration on boys may be to the

detriment of girls. Connolly provides a number of suggestions regarding how to develop effective

strategies to raise young boys’ achievement, primarily based around raising teachers’ expectations of all

students’ capacity, and an avoidance of repetitive and unchallenging work, and developing meaningful

links with parents and the local community (p.223).

Local studies

Research in Australia about young children and their school experiences has largely focussed on

preschoolers and the transition experience (for example Dockett & Perry, 1999, 2001; Perry et al., 1998,

2000) and the experiences of starting school (Clyde, 2001) but has not focussed on the daily

organisational and curriculum activities of the first year in the formal setting.

Osman (2005, p.182) reports that there is “little Australian research available on children’s perspectives

on school” and attributes this paucity specifically to adult perceptions of children as immature and not

knowledgeable about school matters due to their status as children

Chapparo and Hooper (2002) investigated twenty-four male and female six-year-old students’

perceptions of work in their school day in a school in Sydney, Australia. The researchers participated in

24
the daily lives of the children for sixty hours over one school term. They found that the children had well

developed ideas about what is work, seeing it as something that is required to be done, whereas other

activities retain an element of personal choice. By using a naturalistic qualitative paradigm they

generated data from several methods as they considered no one technique adequate to capture the

children’s perceptions, attitudes and values. Chapparo and Hooper decided that the richest information is

obtained from children talking with each other rather than during individual interviews with adults.

However I argue that this method can inhibit the less articulate, less confident and more educationally

vulnerable children and lead them to follow the views of their more influential peers. Individual views

can be subverted in group responses. An extension of the work of Chapporo and Hooper is needed to

more fully understand why some children view work as pleasurable and others not, and why they

interpret the classroom activities so differently.

Potter and Briggs (2003) used individual interviews in a study that investigated more than three hundred

children, ranging in age from five years to nine years from thirty-five different ethnic groups and state,

religious and independent schools in South Australia. Each child was interviewed singly, using an

interview schedule consisting of one hundred forced choice and open questions. The aspects that

emerged were mostly affective and related to liking school (or not), the best and worst aspects, pleasing

teachers, and ideas of fair or unfair. The authors found boys unhappy early in their schooling. Work

needs to be done to look at what they think they do in school, and why this may be making them feel

alienated.

Osman (2005) in Sydney, Australia, using a qualitative approach involving four boys and two girls,

sought their views about school life. Osman concluded that the study’s participants “demonstrated a

capacity to reflect on and contribute to ideas about their school.” Osman’s findings indicated that some

children feel oppressed by their teachers’ use of their greater power, and the way this impinges on their

autonomy and well-being. This sense of oppression can lead to feeling detached from the schooling

experience. The study involved a very small sample of children who were interviewed in a single focus

group. This process has the capacity for the children to influence each other’s views and this could

compound a sense of negativity.

25
Smith, Duncan and Marshall (2005) in New Zealand, studied twenty-seven children aged four years, to

understand what is engaging and what is challenging about learning environments from children’s

perspectives. This study was ethnographic and brought together evidence from a variety of sources

including photographs, children’s work, observational records, transcripts of conversations and

interviews with parents, teachers and children. The children were shown to have useful and important

things to say about their activities and they had the competence to articulate their views with appropriate

scaffolding.

In related literature in Australia, significant studies have been conducted by Dockett and Perry (1999,

2003, 2004). These studies have emerged from the Starting School Research Project, which has

investigated the perceptions, experiences and expectations of children as they start school. The major

aim of these studies has been to improve the transition process, acknowledging that adults often have a

limited understanding of children’s lives and experiences (Clark & Moss, 2001). However they found

that the children had clear notions of themselves within the context of the school setting and could

describe how they had changed after entry to school.

This survey of the literature provides evidence for a need to increase the knowledge of educators in ways

of improving educational outcomes for some boys in our schools. By increasing contemporary

knowledge of the perspectives of the students there is the potential to:

• provide teachers with information about classroom programs, climate, activities and practices

from the point of view of the recipients;

• challenge the taken-for-granted and long held practices in school settings that may be adversely

affecting the learning of some students;

• provide the opportunity to view the outcome of decision making in schools from the very

young students’ points of view;

• confirm and validate that even very young children are competent to articulate their views;

• assist in guiding the directions of policy makers to design engaging curriculum that will

improve a range of outcomes including learning, social and developmental areas, and

• increase the depth and detail of knowledge about how students understand school.

26
This survey of the scholarly literature in relation to research pertaining to young children and their

perspectives on school, also provides a foundation for the creation of questions that will increase

understanding of this phenomenon. Despite the many challenges of conducting research with young

children referred to above, and expanded later in this study, I am convinced the opinions of young boys

about their learning activities in their first year of school will provide valuable insights into the future

development of curriculum for the early years. This knowledge could inform what we should do if we

want all male students to remain engaged with school and to be successful.

Government directions: Are they getting it right?

The imperative for seeking the views of young children about school is to find ways of improving

outcomes, especially for male students. This imperative grows in urgency as an increasing international

practice of introducing more formalised curriculum earlier and earlier into school lives emerges. This is

an attempt by governments in many countries to improve the situation for boys but there is insufficient

evidence that a more formalised approach is the most effective way to proceed. There is considerable

debate about what early childhood curriculum should offer. For example, in England at this time, the

statutory age for starting school is the term in which the child turns five years of age, but movements in

the policies of Local Education Authorities mean that the average age of starting school “has shifted

from rising-five to just-turned-four” (Wood, 2004, p.363). It is reported by Wood (2004) that the “quality

of educational experiences for young children in reception classes has been consistently criticised

because of an over-formalisation of pedagogy and curriculum, and lack of continuity with the more

informal, play-based approaches used in nursery settings (Bennett et al., 1997 cited by Wood, 2004,

p.363).

The trend towards increased formalisation, needs further data to assist in the evaluation of the movement,

because increasing academic learning may be contrary to what will increase engagement. There is

evidence that short-term gains may be made from intensive and formalised programs, (for example,

Reading Recovery in New South Wales) but that the improvement is not maintained into high school

(Stipek, 2004).

27
A social justice approach to education is becoming less of a vision, as governments increasingly require

standardised test scores as the measure of educational success (Hytten, 2006). It is suggested by

Catapano (2005, p.229) that “regardless of the philosophical acceptance or approval of using

standardised tests to measure student achievement” they are in operation, and form part of the

increasingly established processes for allocating resources. The pervasive influence of this movement

increases the imperative to investigate teaching practice and curriculum policy for effectiveness for all

children, and especially boys. The move to increased physical containment in desks and more pencil and

paper activities, severely limits an activity-based curriculum, with its emphasis on movement and music

and physical freedom. A symbol of this change can now be observed in many contemporary kindergarten

classrooms, where there are no pianos or teachers willing to play them, and the frequent recourse to

singing and movement, so popular in years gone by, is not a common practice. It could be that this kind

of reduction in active practices is detrimental to the learning processes of some boys.

Catapano (2005) suggests teachers need to be given the tools to understand the basis for the

competencies that determine the tests that will assist in the planning of curriculum that can lead to

student success. I argue that teachers also need to understand where the individual stands in relation to

the acquisition of these competencies. Catapano (2005, p.225) has the view that as

schools continue to report falling test scores there is a tendency to look to the younger grades to
determine if more academic development and support needs to be given to younger children so
they will be able to succeed in the upper grades. Although the outcome of the attention may be
suspect, that of testing, the focus on early childhood and additional funding is welcomed.

This kind of funding has seeded several ‘starting school’ programs in New South Wales schools.

Programs such as Best Start, and increased resourcing for the Reading Recovery program and the

Families First Transition to School programs are designed to enhance the regular start for children

entering kindergarten. A difference in performance standards and content standards arises. Hatch (2002)

has observed teachers in the United States and Australia, reducing their use of child observation as a

strategy to shape appropriate curriculum, in order to chart the achievement of a narrow set of

competencies’ in order to fulfil external assessment requirements on which funding allocations are based.

Performance goals may dominate learning goals. Hatch (2002, p.500) advises, “the field needs to

challenge aggressively the appropriateness of standards-based approaches to reforming early childhood

education.”

28
Since the 1960’s ‘standards’ movements have been apparent particularly in the United States, in the

United Kingdom and to a growing extent in Australia. Over the decades, and as a result of the aims of

different governments, there has been the desire to establish firstly goals and objectives and then to

measure outcomes (Catapano, 2005). Then in the 1980’s there was a strong movement against the

academic emphasis that was being introduced into early childhood education. Hatch (2002) argues that a

similar thrust of resistance is evident now. He cautions that the current so called ‘standards movement’

should avoid pressurising young children. Young children develop at different rates, and some may be

ready to meet the challenges that come with this thrust for ‘standards’ and some are not. He states,

“getting children to do more sooner sounds like a logical way to cure the ills of education” (Hatch, 2002,

p.457) but there are significant dangers to avoid. Pressure on teachers can lead them to concentrate more

on teaching a core set of competencies, rather than teaching individual children.

A concentration on a narrow definition of ‘academic standards’ can lead to the abandoning of emotional,

social, physical and cognitive needs which vary enormously in all children. Sometimes the

implementation of a standards driven program with a focus on measurable academic outcomes may not

recognise the complexity of children’s rates of development. Hatch (2002) raises concerns in relation to

the narrowing of experiences by a concentration on easily measured objectives when the outcomes can

also be achieved by a ‘dynamic, child-responsive curriculum.’ The expectation that everyone of the same

age will acquire a given set of capabilities creates expectations that are unrealistic.

More knowledge is needed to ensure we find the right track and that we are getting the balance correct.

Reichert & Kuriloff (2004, p.545) state, “there is great need of studies that more closely follow boys’

lived experiences”. This study is designed to increase this knowledge. To focus the investigation I have

devised the following questions.

29
THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS

“In order to be able to ask,

one must want to know and that means knowing that one does not know”
Gadamer Truth and Method, 2004, p.357
“Deciding the question is the path to knowledge”
Gadamer Truth and Method, 2004, p.358

In the next chapter, I explain the role that the philosopher Gadamer plays in this study. At this point, it is

useful to refer briefly to Gadamer’s view of the action of questioning, as it underlies the formulation of

the research questions that I aim to introduce shortly. To Gadamer, questioning is a crucial part of the

interpretive process, as we investigate life’s horizons because it is what makes understanding possible.

Gadamer wrote:

understanding is always more than merely re-creating someone else’s meaning. Questioning
opens up possibilities of meaning, and thus what is meaningful passes into one’s own thinking
on the subject…To reach an understanding in dialogue is not merely a matter of putting oneself
forward and successfully assuring one’s own point of view, but being transformed into a
communion in which we do not remain what we were (2004, p.375).

Gadamer (1975) cited in van Manen, (1990, p.43) said that the essence of the question is the opening up,

and keeping open, of possibilities. Van Manen continues (1990, p.43)

we can only do this if we keep ourselves open in such a way that in this abiding concern of our
questioning we find ourselves deeply interested (inter-esse, to be or stand in the midst of
something) in that which makes the question possible in the first place. To truly question
something is to interrogate something from the heart of our existence, from the center of our
being.

He goes on to argue that the meaning of research is to go “back again and again to the things themselves

until that which is put to the question begins to reveal something of its essential nature”. As the result of

my overview of the current research, consideration of my own professional career experience, and my

long held interest in the outcomes of school for boys, I designed the following research questions. The

study is guided primarily by this focus question

What do Kindergarten boys say about school?

There are three supplementary questions:

What techniques are effective in eliciting what young children say?

30
 How does what they say contribute to our understanding of what is engaging and what is
alienating in school activities?

Can these views be used to reflect on current school practices and curriculum?

Waksler (1991) argues that any research that investigates children’s views must first find out what they

already know and think about their world. To understand the meanings assigned to school by young

students we can listen to their explanations of and their perspectives on the process of schooling and

their experiences within that social setting (Pifer, 2000). This approach will contribute to the

understanding of schooling and its consequences. In the next chapter, an appropriate way for seeking

these views is considered.

This study will add to the knowledge needed to make the appropriate decisions in relation to early

educational practices, specifically in relation to some boys, but with potential benefit for all students.

This qualitative interpretive investigation is underpinned by the philosophical position espoused by

Gadamer and is guided by research activities suggested by van Manen. In the following chapters, the

details of this framework for the study are explained.

Retrospective Reflective Journal

I introduce the concept of the journal here, as it is important to introduce excerpts from it, early in the

study. Throughout the text of this investigation, there are stories from my personal, retrospective,

reflective journal, covering almost fifty years of learning and teaching, which has taken place in various

modes in various places, throughout my life. In later chapters, I describe the work of Hans-Georg

Gadamer, whose philosophical stance guides aspects of the study. His view explains why I think these

reflective statements are necessary to make evident my personal position and bias as a researcher. These

retrospective memories and reflections appear throughout the investigation text when they best illustrate

my personal position in relation to the progress of the report. They are recollections of pedagogic

moments of insight that have informed my views of teaching and learning, over a significant period of

time. They are presented in a different font to assist the reader to enter my world. Van Manen (1990,

p.151) advised “to be oriented as researchers or theorists means that we do not separate theory from life,

the public from the private…we are researchers oriented to the world in a pedagogic way.”

31
The reflective retrospective journal excerpts fulfil two important aspects of the approach taken in this

hermeneutic phenomenological study. Firstly, they demonstrate the Gadamerian concept of prejudice and

the principle of historic effect. Lawn (2006, p.38) explains

…judgements are made possible not by an abstract and neutral reason but a set of pre-reflective
involvements with the world that stand behind judgements and in fact make them possible. A
condition of making reflective and evaluative judgements about the world is the possession of
prejudices: without prejudgements, there can be no judgments. The idea that reflection and
judgement depend upon factors other than themselves, that a whole interpreted world is silently,
unreflectively, absorbed by the individual in everyday acts of socialisation and acculturation, is
at the heart of Gadamer’s questioning of the enlightenment.

It is this concept that forms the core of my work. The possession of prejudices and the recognition of the

influence of them on all judgment making, is a condition of all decision making. Secondly, the use of a

reflective journal is congruent with the position advocated by van Manen (1990, p.115) who states, “a

common rhetorical device in phenomenological writing is the use of anecdote or story.” All human

science has this ‘story’ or narrative quality as opposed to an abstracting quantitative character. Van

Manen (1990, p.116) cites Samuel Johnson describing an anecdote as a “biographical incident, a minute

passage of private life”. Empirical generalisation is not the aim of phenomenological research so “an

anecdote is like a poetic narrative which describes a universal truth” (p.119). This study intertwines my

stories with the boy’s stories, and each plays off the other, allowing pedagogic reflections to flow in a

narrative, that takes hold of the phenomenon of interest, and illuminates it (Clandinin & Connelly, 2000).

Van Manen (1990, pp. 120-121) argues

the use of story or anecdotal material in phenomenological writing is not merely a literary
embellishment… (they) are important for pedagogy in that they function as experiential case
materials on which pedagogic reflections are possible. Methodologically, story is important
because it allows the human science text to acquire a narrative quality that is ordinarily
characteristic of a story… A hybrid textual form is created combining the power of the
philosophic or systematic discourse with the power of literary or poetic language… Anecdote
particularises the abstracting tendency of theoretical discourse: it makes it possible to involve us
pre-reflectively in the lived quality of concrete experience while paradoxically inviting us into a
reflective stance vis-à-vis the meanings embedded in the experience.

The introduction of anecdotal material in the form of the excerpts from my journal of pedagogic

experiences provides a narrative that links systematic discourse with the power of literacy. As I

contemplate van Manen’s proposition that ‘anecdote functions as experiential case material for pedagogic

reflection,’ I form the realisation that my current intense interest in young boys’ education started at

another time and place. It is from these early experiences of educational practice that my view of the

32
world of school is shaped. The following excerpt from my retrospective, reflective journal explores these

early learnings.

The challenges of teaching and the perplexities of pedagogy began for me

while I was growing up in the bush. My family farmed citrus fruits and
vegetables at Calga in New South Wales, about a 100 kilometres from the
outskirts of Sydney. I had dreams (or more accurately, my mother had
dreams) of me being a ballerina and I was making the long trek (in those
days there was no freeway) to Sydney once per week for ballet lessons. In
order to fund these, and the possible future trip to England to attend the
Royal Ballet School, it was decided I would teach ballet to the little girls
living on the neighbouring farms strung out along the Peat’s Ridge, in
Somersby and on Mangrove Mountain.

So teaching began for me, about fifty years ago, when I was fifteen and
newly qualified to teach ballet for the Royal Academy of Dancing. On
Saturday mornings, small girls would gather in little incongruous groups,
standing on the red gravel roadside in early morning mists, waiting for their
lift to “ballet”. They would stand waiting at the ends of their long
meandering farm driveways, no houses in sight, with their hair tied back in
‘buns’, wearing black tights and black leotards and they would have pairs of
pink ballet slippers usually slung over their shoulders. On their feet they
wore sturdy farm boots due to the rough terrain and the real possibility of
snakes. The parents worked out roster systems to give each other’s families
lifts to ballet on Saturday mornings, because not everyone could be spared
from farm work for half a day, on any day of the week.

I would work in the local RSL and community halls, teaching often unlikely
candidates, of all shapes and sizes and potential, to do their arabesques
and pas de bourree, while their mothers ringed the perimeter of each hall,
watching intently.

In order to ensure they returned the following Saturday with the precious
two shillings and sixpence for their lesson, I had to ensure they were
motivated, engaged, continually improving and reaching the heights of their
various aptitudes. I used encouragement, I expected high levels of

33
performance, I adjusted to and accommodated the varying levels of natural
ability and competence and I used positive discipline with the little girls who
wanted to be elsewhere but whose mums had dreams also. There were no
boys.

They did keep coming back and I eventually raised enough funds to go to
England at not quite the end of my Leaving Certificate,(the equivalent of the
current Higher School Certificate), ignoring the secondary school
examination papers that had been set up for me to do in Melbourne. To get
to England in time for start of the ballet course I had enrolled in, I could not
complete the last honours papers at Gosford High School. As a seventeen-
year-old, experiencing life on a P&O ocean liner for three days, by the time
we docked in the Melbourne port, I no longer had any interest at all in the
Leaving Certificate examinations and did not sit the papers. School
examinations had rapidly lost their imperative and the real world beckoned.
By the time we reached Egypt and headed into the Suez Canal, it seemed
that school for me had already dissolved into a distant past.

In London, I was tempted by the world of theatre, but the harsh realities of
theatre life in England were somewhat scary to a seventeen year old from
the Australian bush, and besides I had realised I liked teaching. I returned
to Australia, almost too late for the start of Teachers’ College at Balmain. I
recovered from a shaky start at this educational institution, with an incident
in which the women’s warden remonstrated with me for wearing a red
raincoat (proudly acquired at Marks and Spencers in London). I learned that
the colour of this coat would excite the young men training with me to be
teachers. I was told by the women’s warden that it might take their minds
off curriculum and the small rural schools for which they were destined. I
was banned from wearing it. That problem to one side, I was training to be a
teacher! It was during this first two years of training that I began asking
questions about pedagogy and I have been asking them ever since.

By teaching ballet to students who were not compelled to attend, and

whose parents watched closely my every gesture, comment and action, I
had learned to meet the needs of my students as individuals and their
parents’ expectations, and this strongly influenced every teaching position I

34
have held since. Concepts and strategies that place an emphasis on what
the student needs and finding this out by really listening to what the
student says, both by word and deed, became the basis of my teaching
style and so began my interest in listening (and really hearing) the
children’s voices. In addition, later in my career, I worked specifically with
students who were experiencing difficulty in succeeding in the academic
world. They were all boys.
Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective
Journal

This excerpt from my journal pinpoints the earliest moments of questioning that I experienced in looking

for reasons why some students feel success at school and others do not, why some teaching is effective

and some is not. These early experiences formed the actual start of my teaching career and became the

foundation of my pedagogic beliefs. As my career took its various twists and turns, I became seriously

involved in the needs of male students. Their particular needs as individuals have intrigued me over the

intervening years. This deep motivation underpins the study.

Overview of the following chapters

In the following chapters, the philosophical stance adopted and the ensuing methodology, and the

method employed to carry out the investigation, are described comprehensively. The analysis of data and

the ensuing interpretations are unfolded. Finally, the outcomes of the investigation are detailed. Data is

generated primarily by conducting individual semi-structured interviews with students. The data

generated is analysed through a Gadamerian hermeneutic phenomenological perspective, guided by an

approach to analysis proposed by van Manen (1990). The study is presented in linear shape, although it

can, and should, be read cyclically as will be seen later.

In Chapter two I discuss the theoretical framework, the methodology and the research design supporting

the study. The influence of the German scholar, Hans-Georg Gadamer is introduced. His view of

philosophical hermeneutics forms the basis of the methodology of the study. I relate his position to the

period of the Impressionist artists, such as Monet, a device I used to broaden my understanding of his

ideas. The place of interpretation in a qualitative study is explained. I describe the research design that is

35
based on a reconciled theoretical framework containing six propositions from Gadamer’s philosophy, six

research activities based in the work of van Manen and the six steps of my research study.

Chapter three describes the method used to conduct the investigation. The six research activities

proposed by van Manen are explained in detail, and the selection of the participants who make up the

sample is described. I give details of the scaffolded interview techniques, and the addition of field notes

and the place of the retrospective reflective journal is confirmed. The place of researcher reflexivity in the

study is justified by my demonstration of how an awareness of the researcher’s contribution to the

construction of meanings, permeates the study. The practice of reflexivity involves strategies that include

“biographical accounts and organising principles, the exploration of metaphor and metonymy and the

utilisation of poetry as an interpretive device” (Savin-Baden, 2004, p.365).

Chapter four explains the processes used to analyse the data. The process used to record the data into a

working matrix and the eventual development of an interpretive statement for each of the fourteen

participants is described. I explain the way the spoken words are transcribed and recorded, to ensure the

context is richly described, and I introduce the use of the technique of poetization.

Chapter five presents the outcomes for my interpretation of the fourteen boys’ transcriptions. A

background to each boy is provided. I describe the process of talking to the boys and the impact of each

scaffold device in helping us to talk about school, together. The interpreted prose statements, that form

my view of what was said, follow. The most significant aspects of their views, , as I interpret them, are

highlighted.

Chapter six sets out the multiple case analysis and my interpretations of this composite picture made

from all the boys’ views, are compared and contrasted. The commonalities of the recurring units of

significance that are distilled from the data are presented. The relationship of this data to current views

expressed in relevant literature is provided.

Chapter seven is the final chapter in the study. I summarise the process used and complete the analogy

of the study with the creation of a painting. I provide an overview of the study and discuss its strengths

36
and limitations. I revisit the four scaffolds used in the interview process and evaluate each one in terms of

relative effectiveness. The research outcomes for all four research questions are delineated and the

importance for future action is suggested. A final interpretation is presented in poetic form.

Summary of chapter one

“Oh this learning what a thing it is” is the quote at the opening of this chapter, and this sets the scene for

the study. I have suggested that for many boys, learning is difficult and school is not always a successful

or pleasurable experience. This chapter introduces the study and explains an extensive yet highly

controversial worldwide concern for boys’ academic and social progress in school. I explain a concurrent

movement seeking the views of children and young people about matters that concern them, growing out

of the United Nations’ Convention (1989), in relation to children’s rights.

I suggest that there are significant challenges for research with young children. A researcher working with

young children, takes on substantial responsibility to behave ethically. In this introductory chapter I raise

the ethical concerns of research with young children. Proper attention to these issues requires more that a

general adherence to the requirements of a university or a government department, but an increased

sensitivity on the part of the researcher to the subtle and often hidden assumptions that can be submerged

in the researcher-participant relationship. Ethical considerations are often passed over in many studies as

an unavoidable matter to be dealt with somewhat superficially. I argue that especially when young

children are involved, these considerations form an important basis for good research.

I introduce studies that show the outcomes for children at the end of their school careers can be pre-

empted by their experiences in the early years so the focus on kindergarten boys for their perspective on

schooling is significant. I suggest that a current movement aimed at ‘fixing’ the ‘boy problem’, is

directed towards introducing more formalised instruction at an earlier stage and propose that more

evidence is needed to ensure this is the correct direction to take. I examine the research literature

pertaining to the investigation of the views of young children about their schooling experiences. A

37
consideration of the paucity of research seeking children’s views, using a hermeneutic approach, sits

alongside my personal interest in the experience of school for young boys. Together these factors lead to

the formulation of the research questions, which are introduced in this chapter.

I have had long experience in working in many schools with boys who have learning difficulties. This

personal interest in conjunction with the substantial evidence in local New South Wales schools of boys

with problems, has combined to make this study of vital importance to me. At the end of the chapter I

indicate briefly some of the processes that inform the study, including the retrospective reflective journal

that is the foundation for my personal position as researcher, in the study.

In the next chapter, I introduce the theoretical framework that anchors the study. I describe the

development of the research design and its reliance on the philosophical and methodological position

espoused by Gadamer.

38
CHAPTER TWO

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK, RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

A hermeneutical framework can be a “…a loose and baggy monster”.
Bruns 1992 p17 cited in Kerdeman, 1998

and

“Is all that we see or seem

But a dream within a dream?”
From A Dream within a Dream: Lines 23-24, p.79 Edgar Allan Poe 1849

Introduction

This chapter confronts some of the difficulties in considering a theoretical framework faced by

researchers who decide to use aspects of hermeneutics and phenomenology as the basis for their

investigations. The chapter describes how I reconciled apparently opposing views in relation to the place

of theory in the research process. This reconciliation enables the study to proceed within an acceptable

framework and set of guidelines.

The theoretical framework incorporates contemporary theories of the sociology of childhood, theories of

gender and masculinities and theories of pedagogy forming a triad of foundational support on which the

study can proceed. The pedagogical theories that I highlight, incorporate most importantly, aspects of

student engagement and alienation, as well as teaching practice and curriculum.

I describe a research design based on the reconciled theoretical framework that incorporates six

propositions from the philosophical works of Gadamer, related to the six research activities for data

analysis suggested by van Manen for hermeneutical phenomenological research. I relate the six situates

to the study as I apply them. Major facets of Gadamer’s philosophical views are introduced, and related

to the Impressionist art movement of the 1860’s, as a way of clarifying his sometimes complex thoughts

39
and writings. In this way I aim to provide for the reader, a visual yet textual companion as an allegorical

device to navigate the study.

THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

To formulate the theoretical perspective for this interpretive study I needed to consider the tension

between two opposing positions. These are, firstly, that it is impossible for any study to be atheoretical

(Greig & Taylor, 1999, p.45) and secondly, an opposing view, that “human science does not see theory

as something that stands ‘before’ practice in order to ‘inform’ it” (van Manen, 1990, p.15). Part of the

tension emanates from a view held by some authors that hermeneutical phenomenology is a

methodology rather than a theoretical perspective. Van Manen (1990, p.15) describes theory as

enlightening practice but “practice (or life) always comes first and theory comes later as a result of

reflection”. Schleiermacher (1964, p.40-41) in van Manen (1990, p.15) stated “(t)he integrity of praxis

does not depend on theory, but praxis can become more aware of itself by means of theory… in and of

itself theory does not control praxis, the theory of any science of education comes always later. Theory

can only make room for itself once praxis (the act of doing) has settled.” Others claim that “to pretend

that it is possible to undertake any form of inquiry free of theoretical influence is nonsensical and

represents one of the major confusions in qualitative research (Denzin & Lincoln, 2002; Wilding &

Whiteford, 2005), while Mitchell and Cody (1993, p.177) declare, “inquiry, discovery and theoretical

interpretation coexist.”

These contradictory perspectives are complicated by the radical view held by others that interpretive

research is “cut adrift from theory” (Graue & Walsh, 1998, p.27). This sits in opposition to the notion

that the study of children in their life world requires a strong sense of existing theories on children

(Graue & Walsh, 1998, p.27) and that theory is the inevitable context within which researchers work

(Greig & Taylor, 1999). I argue that a theoretical perspective connotes a philosophical stance or view of

the human world that broadly informs the research process through making assumptions explicit

40
(MacDonald et al., 2002). This is compatible with the adoption of a hermeneutic phenomenological

framework. I have taken the position that this framework (Barnacle, 2004, p.57) has both descriptive and

interpretive elements and gives voice to human experience just as it is, striving to understand the

experience rather than provide a causal explanation of it (Van der Zalm & Bergum, 2000).

While this study explores by what meaning boys give to their experience of kindergarten, an eclectic

approach to the theoretical framework is evident in order that the data generated is comprehensively

interpreted and analysed. Van Manen’s work derives from the philosophical hermeneutic view of

Gadamer (2004) so the hermeneutic phenomenology described by van Manen (1990) is jointly

employed both as a theoretical knowledge base (Hyde, 2005, p.33) and as a means of inquiry.

Gadamer’s hermeneutics supports the mutuality of theory and praxis (or practice) and a holism of

language, knowing and action (Byrne, 1998).

The following diagram illustrates how I have integrated the positions described above to provide a

foundation on which the study can proceed. The opposing or adjacent positions are linked like the pillars

on both sides of an open doorway, supporting the entrance to the study of the phenomenon.

41
 PHENOMENON
BOYS’ EXPERIENCE IN KINDERGARTEN

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

SOCIOLOGY OF METHODOLOGY
CHILDHOOD GADAMER
PHILOSOPHICAL
HERMENEUTICS

GENDER
and masculinities METHOD
Van MANEN
HERMENEUTICAL
PHENOMENOLOGY

PEDAGOGY
-Play
-Curriculum
-Practice
-Alienation
-Engagement

42
 LEADING
Diagram : Theoretical framework TO RESEARCH DESIGN
A qualitative interpretive approach

Figure 1: Qualitative interpretive research design

As I entered the first formal phase of this study I was attracted to research described as “an interactive

process shaped by (the researcher’s) personal history, biography, gender, social class, race, and ethnicity,

and those of the people in the setting…” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, p.4). This kind of research is based

on a ‘logic of sensation’ and does not follow any standard logic of ‘rationalistic discourse’ (Denzin &

Lincoln, 1998). From this initial concept that research is an interactive process shaped by the

researcher’s personal position, I investigated and finally chose qualitative interpretive research and

hermeneutic phenomenology as my research framework. Ultimately, the work of Hans-Georg Gadamer

(2004) and Max van Manen (1990) provided appropriate scholarly guidelines, for methodology and

method. A combination of the influence of these two authors has shaped facets of this study however the

study eclectically uses mixed methods.

I now expand on these four critical aspects as they are crucial to the development of the investigation.

First, I consider qualitative interpretive research. Next, I explain phenomenology and hermeneutic

phenomenology. Then I introduce Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics and finally I describe the

ideas of van Manen as they relate to hermeneutic phenomenological research, particularly in education.

Qualitative interpretive research

I am interested in focusing in this study on the unique and individual aspects of the experience of being a

boy in his first year of kindergarten and as a result, an approach that uses the interpretive tradition is

particularly appropriate to embrace those experiences. It is based on an ontology that is subjectivist

(Wilding & Whiteford, 2005). This means that in this paradigm, reality is constructed as subjective and

contextually bound rather than as an absolute or ‘given’. The epistemic foundation is relativistic, where

the researcher as an individual, complete with values, opinions, biases and feelings brings an experiential

world to the research process that influences the phenomena studied (Wilding & Whiteford, 2005).

43
As the researcher, I have values, opinions, biases and feelings and I bring my experiential world to the

research process. The reality is constructed as subjective and contextually bound. Any activity involving

children, including research, has to approach this special group of participants with care and sensitivity.

The qualities of human beings are made up in part from their past experiences. Gadamer argued (2004,

p.271) “a person trying to understand a text is prepared for it to tell him something…(but not with) the

extinction of oneself, but the foregrounding and appropriation of one’s own fore-meanings and

prejudices. The important thing is to be aware of one’s own bias, so that the text can present itself in all

its otherness and thus assert its own truth against one’s own fore-meanings”. To explain some of the basis

of my position as the researcher conducting this study, I describe some of my personal experiences of

being in kindergarten in the following journal excerpt, and reveal the significant impact these incidents

have had on my views of school, especially in the early years.

At the time, I lived with my parents on a relatively isolated farm and had
no socialisation with other children. Interacting with other people at age
five was a fearful experience. The first problems for me, emerged in the
long bus ride from the farm into town, where the children all seemed to be
so much older, all so big, so noisy and so dismissive of me (or so I
thought).

Next, arriving in the school grounds, I would find that everybody else
seemed to know each other already. They probably did because they all
lived near each other in town, and they had friendships formed in pre
school activities, of which I was no part. No doubt, because I had only
really interacted with my parents ( in those days considered older than the
parents of my peers) I spoke and used vocabulary that had an adult-like
flavour and this immediately helped set me further apart.

I was continually stressed and each day was a blur of experiences, nothing
as I can recall, in any way pleasurable. I could not wait for each day to end
and would fall asleep on the long ride home, adding to my chagrin and
misery, because that alienated me even further from the older farm kids
around me on the school bus, who thought falling asleep, even at age five,
was weak and sissy.

44
Once very early in this first year, when we were sent to get our play-lunch I
happened upon another little girl rifling in my bag, probably for food. I was
stunned and grabbed her by the back of her neck, infused with a level of
aggression or assertion I did not know I possessed. She in turn was
shocked, and let out copious screams, which brought a teacher running.
Asked if I had grabbed her, I could not reply otherwise, but I do not recall
being asked what had motivated me to do this.

No doubt keen to develop in all the children in the class at this early stage,
a clear understanding of acceptable behaviour, the teacher stood me out
the front of the room, requested my right hand to be raised, palm up, and
held in front of me. I had absolutely no idea what was to follow, but soon
learnt as she proceeded to whack me several times with a ruler.

I was devastated not only because of this humiliation in front of all my

peers (but not my friends), but also the probable pain of the actual
physical abuse, which was something vastly removed from my upbringing
to that stage. I was a totally obedient child, who responded immediately to
merely stern looks from my parents. Primarily I was overcome by my sense
of the injustice that I felt, as I had been in my view, rightly or wrongly,
defending my own property.

This event had the effect of setting me even further behind in being able to
form a friendship group as the children who may have been beginning to
relate to me and that I liked, steered well clear of someone who was shown
to be not well behaved. As someone who was painfully shy to begin with
and largely dominated by a strict mother, I felt totally alienated from this
noisy, active group of children, and this event proved to be a blow that was
not a good start to my school career.

Over the next few months, the same teacher consolidated this sense of
incongruence with my peers that I was experiencing. She firmly whacked
me with some kind of stick or ruler, painfully across my knuckles each time
I reached for a pencil with my left hand. I learned to write with my right
hand as a result, but as an adult, I still have a confusing combination of

45
right and left hand preferences for various activities and still have difficulty
setting a table with the knives and forks in the ‘right’ places!

I did not ever really enjoy school throughout the following infant, primary
and secondary years which is a significant period in anyone’s life and I
often wonder if it could have been different had I had a more enlightened
and accommodating start to my Kindergarten year?
Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective
Journal

This excerpt shows how powerful the experiences of early childhood can be. The impacts are felt many

years later, and they emerge in a range of different settings. These journal writings have raised my

consciousness of the life world of young children. They underpin how as a researcher, I will bring my

personal history to the interpretation of what my participants say and mean when they talk about school.

The excerpts demonstrate what Gadamer (2004, p.398) proclaimed “(t)o try to escape from one’s own

concepts in interpretation is not only impossible but manifestly absurd. To interpret means precisely to

bring one’s own preconceptions into play so that the text’s meaning can really be made to speak for us.”

Crotty (1998) describes how the interpretive approaches are part of the more subjective epistemologies

that try to understand and explain human and social reality and “are culturally derived and historically

situated interpretations of the life world” (p.67). The interpretivist view sees experience created by

individuals interacting with their environment. As Crotty (1998) advises, the interpretivist tradition is not

about what reality is out there to be researched, and a reality that exists independent of the observer, but

rather what interpretation of experience is presented. Interpretivism contends reality itself is a social

construct or at least our knowledge of reality is socially constructed, or gained through social

constructions (Orlikowski & Baroudi, 1991; Walsham, 1995; Klein & Myers, 1999). Truth claims are

dependent on the researcher’s understanding of the research object but this does not mean that truth

becomes purely subjective. All people are situated in specific historical, cultural and linguistic

understandings of reality, which are all internalised through upbringing, education and work. It is this

internalised understanding that becomes a framework for making sense of reality (Sandberg, 2005, p.51).

The ‘truth’ that is achieved through an interpretive approach is not one final and unambiguous truth but is

an on-going and open process of knowledge that keeps correcting and adjusting in an iterative process.

46
Interpretive research is iterative in nature - steps of the process inform one another in ways that are not

sequential, but recursive. Interpretive research is designed to maximise the opportunity to change focus,

modify questions, find new ways of generating data, and identify issues that are unaddressed within the

current data sources (Laverty, 2003). “The steps within the process inform one another so that coherence

is achieved through convergence of concepts and experience …like a bowl of spaghetti – tangled and

holistic” (Graue &Walsh, 1998, p159).

As I elaborate later, Gadamer’s view of experience shows that there cannot be such a thing as an accurate

account in researching any individual’s experience. Gadamer (1975) claims that a person’s perception is

shaped by their worldview. The worldview is shaped by the person’s experiences and by the meaning that

is derived from these experiences. Every experience leads the individual to question their assumptions

and as a result, their sense of self is shaken, confirmed or manifested. People gain knowledge of the world

through experience (Gadamer, 1975; Sokolowski, 1997). It is possible to access these experiences

indirectly though stories, anecdotes and narration. Good (1994) summed this up stating

(we) of course do not have direct access to the experience of others. We can inquire directly and
explicitly, but we often learn most about experience through stories people tell about things that
have happened to them or around them. Narrative is a form in which experience is represented
and recounted, in which events are presented as having a meaningful and coherent order in
which activities are described along with the experience associated with them and the
significance that lends them their sense for the persons involved (p.139).

This epistemological stance can also be applied to a specific form of experience for instance, the first year

of school for boys. Research on the experience of school under the interpretive paradigm needs to be able

to capture the great complexity of individual experience. To achieve this, the research has to acknowledge

that the representation of experience is a product of the relationship between the student who is in

kindergarten and the researcher, which is made, remade, negotiated and reconstructed.

Interpretative research can make a significant contribution to the early childhood pedagogy body of

knowledge because it can lead to insights into the meanings young children give to their school

experiences (MacDonald et al., 2002). The goal of interpretive phenomenology is the increased

understanding of the multiple interpretations of the meaning of human experience (Edwards & Tichen,

2003; DeWitt & Ploeg, 2006). The idea that the researcher’s preconceptions, biases and assumptions are

47
clarified, and then become an integral part of the study findings, is a defining characteristic of

interpretive phenomenology.

Ironically (given the traditionally science-based background of the medical profession) throughout this

study I have been inspired for direction more by research being undertaken in the nursing field than in

education (for example, Pascoe, 1996; Darbyshire et al., 1999; Ford & Turner, 2001; Lindseth &

Norberg, 2004; Olaussen et al., 2006). Research in nursing education seems to be conscious of a need to

not only gather knowledge but to understand the ‘art’ of what is happening rather than just the ‘science’,

hence the extensive use of hermeneutic phenomenology in nursing studies. This practice in nursing

research brings criticism by Crotty (1996) and others, of some of the investigations in the nursing field.

Researchers, including Crotty, argue that the understandings of the positions of the philosophers Husserl

and Heidegger have been taken into other dimensions that were not intended, particularly in terms of

whether phenomenology is a first person experience or a third person subjective description of the

phenomenon being investigated (Barkway, 2001). These criticisms have been debunked by Darbyshire

et al. (1999) and others, but the debate still continues. In the meantime, considerable useful research

emerges from the nursing profession, particularly in relation to asking children directly about their

views of health care (for example, Ford & Turner, 2001; Carney et al., 2003; Kortesluoma et al., 2003;

Curtis et al., 2004; Krahenbuhl & Blades, 2006).

In summary, qualitative research, and the interpretative approach in particular, provides an appropriate

framework from which I intend to investigate kindergarten boys’ views of school.

Phenomenonology, hermeneutics and hermeneutic phenomenology

I now briefly discuss phenomenology, hermeneutics and hermeneutic phenomenology and their relevance

to this study. There are enormous inconsistencies in the vast literature in the terms used around these

concepts, causing confusion in the scholarly debate. Various terminologies are used in many different and

often conflicting ways (Dowling, 2004). In addition, the major philosophical figures promulgating

phenomenology and hermeneutics grew and changed their positions over time. For example, Heidegger

was critical of the way Husserl represented phenomenology with his fundamental emphasis on

description rather than understanding (verstehen) (Dowling, 2004). A student of Husserl, Heidegger

48
considered that the primary focus of philosophy was on the nature of existence (ontology) while Husserl’s

focus was on the nature of knowledge (epistemology).

Heidegger completely transformed the discipline of hermeneutics. He developed hermeneutic

phenomenology in his major work, “Being and Time”, to uncover the meaning of Being (as an abstract

concept) for humans, with the realisation of Dasien which is being-in-the-world or every day human

existence, or ordinary life (Wilding & Whiteford, 2005). It is inherent in all entities and ‘underpins’

existence. Hermeneutics was used to direct an investigator’s focus to ‘being’ (presence in the world) by

reminding the researcher that meaning is always in the context of something, such as one’s humanity,

one’s culture, and one’s personal situation (Johnson, 2000). In turn, Gadamer, student of Heidegger,

moved away from his teacher’s focus also, and developed his own strong position. I expand on these

movements next.

Phenomenology

Edmund Husserl (1859-1938) is regarded generally as the ‘father’ of phenomenology. Following Kant

and Descartes, Husserl’s plan was to overcome the split between person and world – between subjective

and objective thinking and to “investigate the perceptions and experiences of the intersubjective life-

world (Lebenswelt) (Danaher & Briod, 2005). Phenomenology can be defined as the study of lived or

existential meanings, and so phenomenology is the study of phenomena as they are experienced (Giorgi,

1989; Giorgi, 1997; van Manen, 1990, p.11). The concept derives from the Greek phaenesthai, which

means “to show itself” or “to appear”. The concept of logos refers to patterns or structures, or the verbal

communication that shows in discourse what has been hidden, so phenomenology refers to “what has

been disclosed” (Giorgi, 1989, Moustakas, 1994).

Phenomenology can be both a specific research method and a philosophic approach (see Giorgi, 1997;

Creswell, 1998; Caelli, 2001; Dowling, 2004) but the starting point of phenomenology is that the

phenomena, the manifestation of our perceptions, are the results of conscious acts and are not

independently given. Our consciousness opens the world up to us, makes it meaningful and discloses it,

makes it appear (phaenesthai).

49
Husserl was a mathematician, and wanted a foundation for science that was presuppositionless and

uncovered truths that were universal, true for all time and not grounded in culture or temporal space

(Walsh, 1996, p.232). He described natural objects, emotions, mathematical entities, values, wishes, and

meanings as ‘phenomena’ and pursued the systematic investigation of the content of consciousness

(Stewart & Mikunas, 1990). Husserl’s phenomenology is a discipline that attempts to describe how the

world is constituted through conscious acts. He aimed for phenomenology without interpretation and he

‘bracketed’ out preconceptions. Bracketing assumes that a person can separate their knowledge from their

lived experiences (Byrne, 1998). This perspective is in sharp contrast to the positivist view of perception,

judgment, experience and thought (Moustakas, 1994, p45) as it was a culmination of the subject-object

Cartesian duality. As a student of Husserl, Heidegger agreed with the dictum “to the facts [or things]

themselves” but he challenged the assumption of ‘bracketing’ and broadened his position to claim there is

no such thing as an uninterpreted fact. For Heidegger, facts cannot be separated from the meaning of

facts.

The researcher’s presence is evident and essential. Classic phenomenology is research in the first person,

“one that describes from the explicit life-world experiences of individual “I’s”, the shared structures of

meaning implicit in the “we” (Danaher & Briod, 2005). Phenomenology as a method of inquiry offers a

way of systematically researching phenomena that are difficult to observe or measure. It allows

exploration and illumination of the human condition in all its complexity (Wilding & Whiteford, 2005).

However, phenomenology is not a single particular approach for viewing the world. The literature

provides no clear way to distinguish the myriad forms of phenomenology and over time, the

understanding and practice of phenomenologically based approaches have expanded dramatically in the

research world.

The focus of study in phenomenology is lived experience, which aims to understand the phenomenon

from the perspective of the study’s informants. There are many reasons why phenomenology is suited to

this study. It is particularly useful for describing the lived experiences of research participants through the

sense perceptions of seeing, hearing, touching, tasting, smelling, and also remembering, believing and

judging (Willis, 2004; Berg, et al., 2006). It also allows for the semiotic features of the lived experience

to be taken into account when interpreting the data. There is no one theory or approach that is subscribed

50
to by all phenomenologists but there are common features among the various groups of

phenomenonologies.

Hermeneutics

The term hermeneutics, is a Latinized version of the Greek hermeneuticea, the Greek verb,

hermeneuenein, “to interpret” and the noun hermeneia meaning interpretation (Byrne, 1998).

Hermeneutics is a branch of knowledge dealing with interpretation, and derives from the idea of the

mythical Greek God, Hermes, the fabled messenger (Finch, 2004). Walsh (1996, p.233) describes how it

was Hermes’ responsibility to transform the ‘unknowable’ or the ineffable, into a form that humans

could try to comprehend and understand.

Hermeneutics is described as the interpretation of text for obtaining a common understanding of the

meaning of a particular text (Kvale, 1996). It is the science, art and philosophy (Grondin, 1994) and the

practice and theory of interpretation and understanding in human contexts (Chesla, 1995.) While biblical

scholars commonly use hermeneutics for the interpretation of scripture, over time the concept of ‘text’

has come “to be understood much more broadly” (Hyde, 2005, p.34). ‘Text’ in contemporary research

practices can refer to not only literary writings but also discourse and meaningful human action. The

close link between phenomenology and hermeneutics has led to the terms often being used

interchangeably and universally however there are differences (Byrne, 1998). While phenomenology

focuses on the lived experience of persons, eliciting commonalities and shared meanings, hermeneutics

refers to an interpretation of language and seeks to clarify the conditions in which understanding takes

place (Koch, 1995).

A hermeneutic approach in research projects, has a long history in Europe especially in German language

countries but less so in the USA. In Australia, the use of hermeneutic phenomenology is fledgling in

education research but seems to be increasingly gaining interest. The reticence to use this approach in

education studies, could be because the use of such theories (and the methodologies that arise from them)

is not without controversy. Lincoln and Tierney (2002) report that studies, qualitative,

phenomenological, critical theories, feminist and others, are being rejected by some institutions as

“unscientific”, “ungeneralisable” and/or inadequately theorised, which could be a backlash against non-

51
rationalistic or postmodern forms. This on-going debate has waxed and waned over time, and is now

moving towards a situation where each approach rests uneasily beside the other, but with a growing

respect for the contribution each can make to extending our knowledge in the field of education.

The interpretation of text

The origins of hermeneutics as a method of literary analysis allows writers who extend its use into the

wider social field often to use ‘text’ as a metaphor for research data or the actions of research subjects

(Gadamer, 2004; Hodkinson, 1998). Hermeneutics captures the ‘art’ of understanding as opposed to a

mere perfunctory activity. Kinsella (2006) states that the hermeneutic approach seeks understanding

rather than explanation, acknowledges the situated location of interpretation, recognises the role of

language and historicity in conversations and is comfortable with ambiguity. It was Gadamer in concert

with his mentor Heidegger (1962) who moved hermeneutic inquiry and interpretation beyond the

biblical and legal origins “and entered into the realm of human experience” (Laidlaw, 2004, p.200). It

became the study of complex relations “among human subjectivity, language, and culture, insisting that

all understanding is layered with prior experience and must be understood historically” (Laidlaw, 2004,

p.200).

Hermeneutics now refers to a broad range of theoretical and practical approaches that are concerned

with interrelation but still emphasise the importance of language and the way the language functions to

bring that which is foreign and strange (in the Gadamerian sense) and separated in time, space or

experience, to be familiar, present and comprehensible (Pascoe, 1996). Laidlaw (2004, p.199) states,

“hermeneutic inquiry seeks to illuminate the conditions that make particular experiences, and

interpretations of those experiences, possible. Put simply, hermeneutic interpretation is the activity of

engaging in creative interpretations.”

The complexity of human interrelationships and our interpretations of them, based as they are, in our

prior experiences, and our own unique historicity, is demonstrated in the typical classroom every day,

and is illustrated here by the following excerpt from my retrospective, reflective journal.

52
I remember one of my early practice teaching sessions when I was
supervised and assessed, by an elderly (it seemed to me then) lecturer
from Balmain Teachers’ College. The school where I had been placed for a
practice teaching session as a student teacher was located in a leafy green
privileged suburb on the north shore of Sydney. The students were, in the
main, lively, intelligent, “good” children, generally easy to manage, and
fulfilling the local expectations of well- behaved compliance.

I was teaching a geometry (space) lesson, boring to me and probably to

the students and no doubt given to me by the class teacher as a “student
teacher lesson” because she was jaded by the topic and task. Allocating
such lesson topics to visiting student teachers was a common way of
getting the curriculum requirement covered so teachers could tick these
lessons off and show them as ‘ done’ in their programs. I laboured on, in
the languid and hot drowsy afternoon, maintaining attention, and getting
reasonable responses when into the dozy afternoon came a loud and
excited exclamation from a boy on the window side of the room. “Look at
that!” All eyes turned to the window where a very large stick insect about
forty centimetres long had attached itself.

Chatter broke out, a couple of students wanted to get closer to see better
and I began to falter…this was genuine interest – what to do? I looked at
the supervisor who steadfastly remained eyes down, continuing as she had
been throughout the lesson busily writing in her notebook where she
seemed to have been recording my every move, and every utterance.
Probably however in hindsight I suspect she was completing some other
kind of task, totally unrelated to my endeavours and me!

The authentic teacher in me emerged (in my opinion!) and I softly

suggested to the children, with finger on my lips, using gentle hand
motions, that if they remained very quiet and made no sudden movements
we would all be able to get up closer to look. Continuing to use only hand
gestures, I indicated to those closest to finish looking and then motioned
them away leaving space for the others to move in to observe. They did
this three or four children at a time. I repeated this until all the class
members had had a good up close look. They were satisfied and then just

53
as the last child finished and turned triumphantly towards me, eyes
gleaming with the excitement of the unexpected and stimulating
experience, the stick insect departed.

I called them back to their seats, gained full attention, summarised the
geometry facts and then indicated that with the class teacher’s permission
we could spend some time in future lessons studying stick insects and their
life cycles. Murmurs of pleasure and anticipation filtered across the room
at this suggestion. The lesson closed, the bell rang, the children packed up
and departed for home and I met with the supervisor for the post lesson
discussion.

Was she going to be horrified at my departure from the lesson plan, or

would she praise me for capitalising on the “teachable” moment and
confirm my view of my ability to be flexible, and to incorporate the
unexpected so confidently into my set task?

She shuffled her notes, looked sternly at me over her half glasses and said,
“you know - you shouldn’t stand in front of the class rolling a piece of chalk
from hand to hand, it’s a very distracting practice…(and a long pause while
I stared at her in expectation of more) …I'll see you again next week.” With
this, the supervisor departed and I was left with some sense of loss, but I
was not sure, in my inexperience, what it was that had been lost or what
had happened here?
Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective Journal

This reflection is an important contribution to the canvas of this study because it demonstrates the

conception of education as interpretative and hermeneutic (Schwandt, 1998, p.411). An interpretive and

hermeneutic conception of education is only intelligible as a form of praxis, “a kind of morally informed

and morally committed action that is guided by ethical criteria immanent within the practice itself” and

the kind of knowledge that this conception of education demands is phronesis. This is a form of prudent

judgement that takes account of what is morally appropriate and fitting in a particular situation.

Schwandt (1998, p.421) stated

(k)nowledge of educational phenomena cannot be reduced to a scientific model which limits

knowledge to the objective verification of regularities and where our situated selves have no

54
 bearing on what constitutes knowledge. To understand what it means to educate (and what it
means to do educational inquiry) is to participate in the cultivation and acquisition of practical
wisdom. Therefore as a process of this kind, education is interpretation, it involves self
understanding, and its purpose is to make us more human…

Gadamer (1981, p.109-110) explains

(u)nderstanding, like action, always remains a risk and never leaves room for the simple
application of a general knowledge of rules to the statement or texts to be understood.
Furthermore, where it is successful, understanding means a growth in inner awareness, which is
as a new experience enters into the texture of our own mental experience. Understanding is an
adventure and, like any adventure is dangerous…But…(i)t is capable of contributing in a
special way to the broadening of our human experiences, our self-knowledge, and our horizon,
for everything understanding mediates is mediated along with ourselves.

The incident described above, of the stick insect arriving in my neophyte classroom, and my intuitive

teaching response to the occurrence, fits the claim made by Hogan (2000) that teaching and learning

can be seen as far more a matter of an interplay with overt and unseen consequences than merely a

matter of the transmission of cognitive content and ‘values’. To understand what it means to educate,

involves self understanding too. In this study I will approach the educational settings, with an awareness

that they cannot be reduced to a scientific model (Schwandt), and with an awareness that understanding

will be an adventure, with risks (Gadamer).

Hermeneutic Phenomenology

I have briefly introduced phenomenology and hermeneutics. As suggested earlier, it is argued by some

authors that a clear distinction does not exist between phenomenology and hermeneutic phenomenology

(Laverty, 2003). The former seeks the correct answer or valid interpretation of texts not dependent on the

biographic, social, or historical position of the interpreter. The latter seeks meaning from the interpretive

interaction between historically produced texts (in terms of background and prejudice) and the reader

(Laverty, 2003).

Hermeneutic phenomenological research then, results in the production of something new, created from

the encounter of the interpreter and the life expression, or the text, being interpreted (Hyde, 2005, p.36).

Hermeneutic phenomenology is a human science, which has as its goal the study of persons. The term

“person” refers to the uniqueness of each human being. “As a person we are incomparable, uncountable,

irreplaceable” (W. H. Auden, 1967, in van Manen , 1990, p. 6) It is one way to explore the everyday

55
world and bring it to awareness, exposing the invisibility of common everyday practices that are often

taken for granted (Bricher, 2000).

Hermeneutic phenomenology research edifies the personal insight contributing to one’s thoughtfulness

and one’s ability to act towards others, children or adults, with tact and tactfulness. Hermeneutic

phenomenology is a philosophy of the personal, and the individual, which is pursued against the

background of logos or the other, the whole, the communal or the social. Most importantly, it is not

simply a process of describing the thoughts and actions of subjects. Crotty (1996) explains that

interpretation uses those thoughts and actions as the key to go beyond what is given in order to

understand the meaning. Danaher and Briod, (2005, p.223) state that

(f)or the study of children, hermeneutic phenomenology is not the inquiry into the essences of a
child’s life-world, but the disclosure of meanings that are uncovered in the light of the
phenomenologist’s life-history and personal childhood. It is a look at children in light of such
remembering. And memories, though largely obscured by the passage of time, can be re-
articulated in autobiographical reflections and anecdotes. This is not an indulgence in a
'subjective bias’ but an effective way to awaken awareness of actual childhood.

It seems we carry the awareness of our own actual childhood forever. Some of the emotions, sensations

and cognitive adjustments impacting on the life experiences of a kindergarten child are apparent in the

following recollection. I remember an experience I had in kindergarten after just several months at

school.

I watched, but kept my head down, as the two young female teachers came
towards me where I was hiding in a dirt cavity in the side of a sloping bank,
down in the ‘rough’ end of the playground. They were still a long way away,
and I hoped against hope, that they were not actually coming to me. It was
an out-of-bounds area as there were deep holes and gouges in the side of
the earthen bank left over from the construction days of the initial school
building. It was too far from the main buildings for teachers to supervise,
and I had thought I would be safe and out of sight hiding there. I was in a
deep, almost cave like hole in the side of the bank, surrounded by a kind of
yellow clay wall.

One of the teachers, I recall sixty years later, was named Miss Sharpe.
Perhaps it was an unfortunate name for a teacher but she was only ever
kind to me, so I don’t know why I remember her name so clearly. The other

56
teacher whose name I don’t remember I can still see in my mind, quite
clearly. She was slimmer than Miss Sharpe, and as she came towards me in
the early morning sun, her fair hair was lit from behind like a halo of
shimmering gold round her face, which was not clear because it was in
shadow. But I could see Miss Sharpe was smiling.

They were chatting as they walked beside each other, not hurrying, and not
anxious, and occasionally they laughed as they kept walking towards me. I
could see, with increasing dread that they were coming straight towards
me. No doubt, another child had seen me and had gone ‘to-tell-the-teacher.’

I was hiding there, suffering in childish despair because my mother had ‘left’
me. As the president of the local branch of the CWA (Country Women’s’
Association) she had granted herself one precious week in the city at the
association’s annual conference. I was left at the farm, to be looked after by
my well-meaning father. This was the first morning of the week to come,
and he had done his best to plait my long hair with his heavy farmer’s
hands, trying not to catch strands of hair in the roughness, into the
customary two plaits that were then looped up and tied with a navy-blue
ribbon bow on either side of my head, just near my ears. He had done a
good job, but it was not the same as usual, and it felt uncomfortable and
unfamiliar. In addition my mother usually pinned a handkerchief to my tunic
shoulder and tucked it inside out of sight where I would know where it was if
I needed it. Dad had forgotten (or didn’t know) about this practice so my
crying eyes and runny nose had nothing on which to be wiped, which added
to my panic and acute discomfort. I didn’t understand what was wrong, but I
knew I wanted to hide from everyone else and sob out my anxiety,
unobserved. It was not to be.

My memory of what happened after the teachers found me has gone. No

doubt, they were kind and caring, they would have tried to get me to tell
them why I was crying, and they probably sent a letter home to my father in
the afternoon. He would have telephoned my mother, who would have had
a spoiled week, perhaps worrying about me, and probably would never ever
have spent the time away again. I cringe now at the memory of my childish

57
selfishness, as this would have been her only, once a year escape, from the
grind and chores of isolated farm life.

I write about this now, as it is the clarity of the very powerful memory I have
of the two teachers walking towards me, one with big hips and a swinging
pleated grey skirt, and a lovely laughing smile, the other slight and blond.
The sight had made such an impact on me as a five year old, that I
remember it now, such a long time later. I recall they were talking and
laughing softly, and they were in control of the situation and I was not.

Teachers are confronted by the individual child’s life dilemmas on a daily

basis. Many children experience life crises far more intense, far more
serious than anything I ever encountered, as any investigation into child
protection matters will reveal. In every school, on any day, children (and
their teachers) bring with them, their out-of-school lives, the outcomes of
their interactions with others, and put these emotions in juxtaposition with
the demands of school-based interactions.
Excerpt from Reflective Retrospective
Journal

As Danaher and Briod (2005) point out above, the re-articulation of memories can be recorded as

autobiographical reflections and anecdotes. These authors claim that that this not self-indulgence, as I

once feared when I began using the excerpts from my journal in this study, but rather it is an effective

approach to highlight awareness of childhood, as part of a hermeneutical phenomenological approach to

an investigation. This deep experience of my own time in kindergarten means that my interpretation of

what the boys in this study tell me about their time in kindergarten, will be filtered through my prejudice

(Gadamer) and uncovered in the light of my personal history. Danaher and Briod, (2005, pp 223-224)

further advise,

(a)necdotal stories, then, need to be written out. These are the data from which a fuller
phenomenological interpretation proceeds. To separate a narrative, as before, ‘from the level of
ordinary description’ one must do more than simply record children’s verbal expressions. The
range and power of adult language should be utilised to communicate and interpret the sense and
contextual situation. Hermeneutic phenomenologists commonly select from diverse accounts
those few that are rich enough to exemplify characteristic or existential qualities of lived
experience.

58
As I select out anecdotal stories written in my retrospective journal and I look at the verbal expressions of

the boys I talk to, I will combine, communicate and interpret the sense and the contextual situation in

adult language. Van Manen (1990, p.18) explains

(h)ermeneutic phenomenonological human science is interested in the human world as we find it,
in all its variegated aspects. Unlike research approaches in other social sciences which may make
use of experimental or artificially created test situations, human science wishes to meet human
beings - men, women, children – there where they are naturally engaged in their worlds (author
emphasis)

This view is foundational for the approach I use in this investigation of the children’s world of

kindergarten. While hermeneutic phenomenology as an inductive research approach with its focus on

human phenomena, is suitable to study humanistic disciplines like nursing (as mentioned above) it is

also appropriate to apply to teaching and learning in the field of education. Van Manen (1994, p.138)

describes teaching as

often compared with other professional practices and human activities. Usually this is done on
the assumption that the similarities of these practices allow us to borrow models of expertise and
professionalism to improve teaching. However, in several important respects teaching seems to
differ from many other professional practices with which it is often compared. Teaching, as a
pedagogic interaction with children, requires not only a complex knowledge base but also an
improvisational immediacy, a virtuelike normativity, and a pedagogical thoughtfulness that
differs from the reflective wisdom (phronesis) of other practitioners. The classroom life of
teachers is difficult especially because it is virtuelike, improvisational, and pedagogical.

Teaching is the most complex of the professions because the interactions can be person to person, but

generally they take place in a setting filled with other people. Contrast the classroom setting to the

lawyer in his or her office or the doctor in his or her surgery, or the nurse even, beside the hospital bed.

In the heavily peopled and dynamic classroom, the chance of one-to-one intimacy has little opportunity

to develop. The classroom situation is one of the most intensely ‘peopled’ of human settings in existence.

Primarily the human participants in the school setting are firstly, the teachers who are influenced by their

personal links with their families, their community and their colleagues. Then, secondly, there are the

students who are also part of their families and community traditions. This makes the teaching-learning

environment unique in the human professions. No other profession expects its practitioners to relate with

such intensity with so many clients at the one time. Each of these humans must come to the setting with

their personal traditions accompanied by what Gadamer calls the ‘principle of historic effect.’ Any

interaction between participants in an investigation, bring all of this fore-knowledge to the study’s

process. The aim of holding a research focus on a single aspect from all the multiplicities of complex

59
human interactions is like staring intently at one part of an intricate painting. It is one ‘part’ that we can

try to understand in terms of its relationship to the ‘whole’.

I have briefly introduced the main concepts and history behind phenomenology, hermeneutics, and

hermeneutic phenomenology. After careful consideration of the philosophical positions represented by

the many outstanding scholars in this field, I chose the work of Gadamer as the most appropriate

philosophical position to follow to implement my goals for this study. I now address the background to

Gadamer’s work, and to help explain what I understand as his position, I introduce the metaphor of the

art of the Impressionists.

Gadamer

Hans-Georg Gadamer (1900-2002) was a German philosopher whose influence has become international

and is growing contemporaneously. He is widely recognised as a leading exponent of philosophical

hermeneutics. His work has exerted profound impact on the contemporary philosophical and theological

discourse and has shaped new modes of interpretation in the social sciences (Dostal, 2002). His life and

work is indebted to his one-time teacher, Martin Heidegger, but he did not always acquiesce with his

mentor, and their relationship was full of challenges, provocation, disappointments and disagreements

and this is perhaps why his seminal work took so long to arrive. Truth and Method, Gadamer’s key work,

was published in 1960 when he was sixty. It has found over time, great resonance and made

‘hermeneutics’ and Gadamer’s name commonplace in intellectual circles worldwide (Dostal, 2002, p.1).

The book is a descriptive or ‘phenomenological’ account of ‘all understanding’ (verstehen). There is

irony in the title of his most famous writing, as his strongest enduring notion is that truth is not the

function of rigorous method. He claims that interpretation, translation or understanding; and all

associated with hermeneutics, came before ideas of scientific exploration and explanation. Gadamer says

that all inquiry and the interpretation of questions of human ‘being’ rely on language (Sprache) but not

just verbal language. From Gadamer’s epistemological point of view, hermeneutics can be described as

the overarching philosophical orientation of any form of interpretation, not theoretically focussed, but

open. Gadamer’s theory of philosophical hermeneutics sustains the view that in “understanding a text,

historical event, cultural phenomenon or perhaps anything at all, objectivity is not a suitable ideal

60
because there does not exist any one correct interpretation of the phenomenon under investigation”

(Weberman, 2000, p.45). Gadamer uses hermeneutics as a procedure for understanding, which he terms

philosophical hermeneutics. Philosophical hermeneutics show, in contrast to the spirit of the

Enlightenment and the practices of scientific method, that we cannot escape traditions and the

preconceptions that they foster. The most that can happen is an explication of the preconceptions that are

built into any interrelation and observation of how the past operates in the present.

Gadamer’s view of the nature of ‘understanding’ (verstehen) is a concept that seeks to expand the narrow

conception of knowledge based on the model of giving cause-effect explanations (Weberman, 2000). He

explains this concept in terms of not a deviation from, but rather a foundation for, scientific knowledge.

When something is understood it is shaped by “a set of prior commitments to a way of life, a linguistic

conceptual scheme and specific expectations about the object of understanding” (Weberman, 2000,

p.46). Gadamer extended the phenomenological approach by emphasising the importance of the role of

the prior experience of the researcher in the actual interpretation of the meaning and essence of the

phenomenon that is being studied. This involves cycles, collectively referred to as the hermeneutic

circle, (or cycle) of reciprocal dialogue between the researchers and the subjects of the study. This

intersubjective process is not only confined to dialogue with subjects who have experienced the

phenomenon but extends to the representation of the experience in the form of text, the main medium of

hermeneutic enquiry. With each cycle of the process, the researcher acknowledges her/his

presuppositions and prejudices, thereby leading to further and enhanced interpretation and

reinterpretation of the lived experience of the phenomena (Cybulski & Sarkar, 2004). Prejudgments for

Gadamer are not a set of explicitly held beliefs prior to the art of understanding but an explicit set of

practical and theoretical recommitments shaped by conceptual traditions. This is how we experience

what we experience (Weberman, 2000, p.45). In Gadamer’s view it is not possible to overcome “the

historical specificity and parochiality of (all) our epistemic and practical precommitments” to have

objective understanding.

Gadamer’s notion that new origins for understanding are constantly emerging that uncover previously

unknown elements of meaning is demonstrated by the plethora of studies and perspectives on the status

of boys in schools, whether in regard to their academic outcomes or their developing masculinities.

61
Gadamer’s position is that the human phenomenon, (such as being a boy in school and the object of

understanding) is always incomplete, because its meaning is revealed in changing ways due to

subsequent events that bring about different points of view (Weberman, 2000, p.52). Gadamer argues

that objects or events change as time passes because they come to have new relational properties. What

the boys see as school now, will change, because of the new relational properties that will emerge.

The focus of my research is to understand how boys in kindergarten make sense of their experience in

school. Gadamer, (1997) in Schwandt (1998) explores various elements of understanding and the core

element of his philosophic hermeneutic is the “historicity of our understanding” (p. 27). For Gadamer, all

understanding is shaped by history and tradition. What we understand can never be described outside of

the historical and personal context. It forms our “historically affected consciousness” which is “more

being than consciousness” (mehr Sein als Bewubtsein) We incorporate norms, attitudes and values. We

may be unaware of them but they shape our view of the world. Being biased constitutes the historical

reality of human understanding. All meanings are projected based on prior knowledge. The fore structure

of understanding is shaped by the biased knowledge that reflects our immersion in various traditions and

many of these remain unconsciously embedded in our understanding (Dostal, 2002; Gadamer, 2004;

Davey, 2006; Lawn, 2006). A person’s historical (in the Gadamerian sense) and personal context, out of

which come an individual's norms, values and attitudes sits at the base of the actions taken by teachers.

In issues of understanding, children are particularly susceptible to what I have termed ‘a misconceived

assumption of understanding’. I have observed examples within pedagogic exchanges in schools where

teachers assume they know what children mean and they act accordingly, but sometimes their

interpretation of the event, is biased. In my experience this sometimes occurs when children are having

difficulties with academic learning or they are on the downward spiral of ‘misbehaviour’ and they can

become candidates for suspension and ultimately expulsion from school. There are many incidences but

as an example, I chose to write of one scene I observed many years ago in a dry and dusty playground, in

a school in the central west of New South Wales.

It had a been a long, hot and very dry summer. School was not long started
for the year, and the students were only just beginning to settle back into
school expectations of behaviour. Boys had been ‘in trouble’ for throwing
the sharp and heavy seeds of the Kurrajong tree, common in western NSW.

62
The tree seeds prolifically, even in the dry periods, and the pods can be
used as food for cattle in serious drought times. They are ugly black
seedpods often about the size and shape of a small banana. Because it was
perceived there was danger to eyesight in the sharp ends of the pods,
throwing the seeds at each other became a banned activity in the school
grounds.

One boy had been playfully hurling them, as a frequent occurrence. He had
been doing it on the farm with his siblings all holidays, with no sanctions
from the adults there. He usually aimed low and relatively safely, as he was
aware of what damage they might do, and he had been hit often by his
brothers and mates, so he knew what they could do, but he had suffered no
real damage to himself, to this point.

Nevertheless, it was now banned at school, so it was prudent to stop. He

understood that. Some “good” boys had been instructed to pick up the pods
under the trees and put them in a bin. This boy stood watching for a while
and decided he could help. Standing on the perimeter of the pod drop area,
he began to throw the outer pods in towards where the boys were putting
numbers of them in the bin, ready to be taken away and delivered to
someone’s farm. All the boys in the group were comfortable with his action,
as it would get the job done sooner.

A teacher emerged from the staffroom and perceived a different scenario.

“Hey you” he called to the boy, who had often been ‘in trouble’ for a range
of activities, thinking he was guilty of throwing pods at the ‘good’ boys. The
teacher could see a clear-cut serious aggressive misdemeanour and he
exerted authority righteously, assertive in body language, and he used a
loud directive tone of voice. There was no element of negotiation, no room
for investigation or doubt, and the boy was sent peremptorily to the
principal’s office.

He obeyed, but carried with him the sense that an injustice had occurred, so
he was sullen and unhelpful, and it was this secondary behaviour that
became prominent, as he began to argue. He was suspended.

63
The daily world of teachers is complex, demanding and hard. Teachers bring
with them to the classroom setting, attitudes, values and pre-
understandings. These are prejudices (Gadamer) and they shape their
understandings of the individuals in their care. They are confronted
sometimes by boys who are struggling academically, who are very difficult
to manage, to connect with, and to teach. Day after day this wall of
apparent non-compliance can overwhelm sensitive, caring teachers.
Opportunities for genuine efforts at conversations of understanding would
permit the Other’s behaviour, to be legitimate.
Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective Journal

Gadamer asks that ‘we remain open to the meaning of the other person” (Kerdeman, 1998, p.241). He

said,

(w)hat is at issue here is that when something other or different is understood, then we must also
concede something, yield – in certain limits – to the truth of the other. That is the essence, the
soul of my hermeneutics. To understand someone else is to see the justice, the truth, of their
position. And this is what transforms us. (Kerdeman, 1998, p.241).

The issue of objectivity and subjectivity in research hinges on this notion of historically affected

consciousness. Grondin (1994) describes how Gadamer insists, what ‘we are’ consists of the traditions

that are alive in our being. Gadamer sees that it is our understanding of the world that enables us to ask

questions and receive answers or – enter into dialogue. In the dialogue, the questions we ask, based on

our previous understanding and given by the Sache (subject) open us up to the Spiel (play or game) of

language that takes place between question and answer. In describing it as Spiel Gadamer tries to show

that, a dialogue reaches far beyond the consciously constructed conversation. Although we strive to reach

understanding in a conversation, it is something that can never be achieved, as understanding is infinite.

No understanding of one person by another can ever achieve complete coverage of the thing being

understood (Gadamer, 2004). He emphasises that the dialogic exchange is an ‘open’ process, explaining,

conversation is a process of coming to an understanding. Thus it belongs to every true

conversation that each person opens himself to the other, truly accepts his point of view as valid
and transposes himself into the other to such an extent that he understands not the particular
individual but what he says. What is to be grasped is the substantive rightness of his opinion, so
that we can be at one with each other on the subject (Gadamer, 2004, p.387).

Gadamer explores the idea of a game, as a crucial metaphor in relation to people’s understanding of each

other and the world they inhabit. The word “spiel” is used to describe anything from a game for one or

more people to a play, drama, a work of art or a piece of music. A spiel (Gadamer, 2004, p.102-110) is

64
characterised by the ‘back and forth of a movement’ This movement is without fixed destiny. A spiel is

not serious if it is for relaxation yet at the same time, the players must take it seriously. It is not only

played once, but continually. It is the repetition of the game that leads the individual to recognise it.

Gadamer emphasises that recognition is not only a single act of recognition of something we know

already, but also a constantly evolving process in which we see more or different aspects every time. The

spiel itself contains meaning, which is experienced by the players. Repeated recognition of this leads to

cognition (Erkennen). This process extends all consciousness. Gadamer’s aim is to make clear that the

hermeneutic dimension goes beyond the sort of thinking that is based on consciousness (Gadamer, 2004).

Gadamer’s explication of the ontology of a spiel, the game, (or piece of art) inspires and reflects my own

view of this research. I am playing the ‘game of research’, which is ‘obliging and free’. When I dedicated

myself to researching the young male’s experience of being in school I did not start from nothing. I built

on my personal knowledge, former research relevant to the experience of the first year of school and the

tradition of qualitative research (Gadamer’s notion of tradition). This constitutes the spiel with its rules

and its playing field. The participants are players in the piece. They play it within their own personal and

historical traditions. I can describe this as a scenario in which the game would be performed regardless of

my presence, yet at the same time, it is only my presence and the existence of this research that brings it

to depiction.

Understanding Gadamer – a metaphor

Of Gadamer’s major work, “Truth and Method”, Lawn (2006, p.30) writes ‘there are countless themes

and ideas dealt with in this vast and sprawling book”, and Davey (2006, p.5) states “for all its

conviviality, Gadamer’s discursive style can seem rambling and indecisive.” I found that to understand

the complexities of Gadamer’s philosophical exposition in his intricate prose, it was useful for me, to

relate his writings to the artists of the era of Impressionism in the art world. The Impressionist style of

painting is characterised mostly by a concentration in the immediate, just as in all hermeneutics “ there

is a striking character of attention to the instance and the particular, rather than an effort to generalise”

(Moules, 2002, p.6). The fleeting impression of the object in the scene is frequently captured by the use

of unmixed primary colours to simulate actual reflected light (Pioch, 2006) and this action captures, for

65
me, some of Gadamer’s view of the world. I need to describe briefly some of the features of

Impressionism, in order to clarify the connection I am making.

Impressionism is a movement in painting that emerged in France in the late 19 th century. The painters

who became part of the group called Impressionists were considered radical at the time because they

broke many of the rules of picture making set down by earlier generations. Gadamer too, can be seen to

have ‘broken the rules’ or at least presented an alternate view. He presents “an understanding of

understanding that is very different from the way understanding typically is defined within the

framework of modern Cartesian epistemology” (Kerdeman, 1998, p.243) and he “set his face against the

general current of modernist and Enlightenment thought” (Lawn, 2006, p.34). This is an important

starting point to grasp in relation to his views, because what we assume about understanding influences

and shapes how we approach and practice education. For Gadamer, understanding is not an isolated

activity of human beings but a basic structure of the experience of life (Kerdeman, 1998).

Like the practice of philosophical hermeneutics, the subjects the Impressionists most commonly chose

were found in the everyday life surrounding them. This was a contrast to painting practice and history

based in an adherence to an accepted and agreed area of topic choice. Earlier artists painted an ideal of

beauty, and saw this as what art was all about, but the Impressionists aimed to depict what they saw at a

given moment and tried to capture a fresh, original vision. Gadamer’s phenomenonological view

denounced the notion of scientific method as an exclusive avenue to truth (Turner, 2003) and he asserted

that understanding had always to be ready to accept something new, responding with openness to the

unexpected (Weinsheimer 1985, in Turner 2003).

The Impressionists went outside to paint, away from the confines of a studio. Outside they observed

nature and the landscape or the seascape directly. They attempted to depict a fleeting moment, as the

effect of the sun waxes and wanes upon the scene, capturing a moment of knowledge and a moment of

the previously unseen. The concept of the fusion of horizons is deep within Gadamer’s view in which he

sees the things that are within our immediate world, and are part of our understanding, are our horizon,

which is constantly being re-shaped by our past and our present. Our horizon always moves with us, so

there is “an infinite capacity to refine and to extend our understanding of things” (Turner, 2003, p.14).

66
Impressionist painting attempts to achieve the appearance of spontaneity by using broken brushstrokes

and bright, often unmixed, colours. This forms loose or densely textured surfaces in contrast to the

carefully blended colours and smooth surfaces that were the common practice of the times. The

technique generally included applying paint in small dabs capturing the flickering quality of sunlight,

especially powerful for interpreting reflections in water, and creating the ‘truth’ of what they were

seeing. This is how I see Gadamer’s view of truth. It “is a living event; it is changing, not stagnant and is

expansive and full of possibilities…the sign of something being truth is not that something is repeatable,

but that it lasts, lingers and even changes” (Moules, 2002, p.23).

The compositions were simplified and the apparent omission of detail contributed to the striking overall

effects. Monet’s work, Impression, Sunrise, 1873 was what caused the term impressionism to be

deprecatedly coined by the French art critic Leroy because it seemed an appropriate description of the

loose, so-called inexact style, with a sense of incompleteness, a lack of finite ending. Gadamer’s views of

truth and dialogue, his two most important concepts, are that they are inexact, embrace a sense of

incompleteness and have a lack of finite ending. Of dialogue Gadamer claimed, “one essential aspect is

incompleteness. A genuine dialogue or conversation is characterised by its very lack of completeness and

structure” (Lawn, 2006, p.71).

Gadamer’s preoccupation with the importance of dialogue can be likened to the process of understanding

a painting. For example, regard a work by one of the most famous of the Impressionists, Monet, perhaps

the Water Lily series, (see frontispiece) where as viewer you become interpreter. You can ‘see’ heat,

colours, texture, light, and shapes differently to the person beside you. Your interpretation of the work

before you, your understanding is unique and individual. You may share many of your responses at any

one time with many others but there inevitably will be difference because you bring your own distinctive

world of experience to the viewing. You bring your fore-knowledge, your preconceptions to the act.

You, yourself, will see things differently if you move closer or further away, or came back to the gallery

the next day, or the next year. Your apprehension of the world, your spiel, is constantly changing,

developing, emerging and it will never reach a finite point because you as that viewer are constantly

67
changing also. How we perceive anything is a function of what we bring to the interaction. How we are

affected by our experiences as they occur daily, shapes the way we interpret the world around us.

My understanding of Gadamer’s philosophy and the parallel I perceive with Impressionism, drew me to

want to create this study in the same way as I create a painting. First, there is the motivation, the scene,

the portrait or the problem. In the beginning of a painting there is perhaps an underlying plan deep in my

thoughts somewhere but I am not constrained by it and not really conscious of it. It is not possible to

articulate what I do when I paint, as it is more an emotional response that comes through my hands to the

canvas or the paper and I feel, rather than cognate, when it is right, or almost complete. Eventually I

reach the point where I am mostly satisfied and can stop adding and amending or modifying. However,

there is never any sense of a painting being finite, I always can come back and see something that does

not fit quite right anymore and can be changed. Some new understanding or interpretation is added to the

whole. Davey, (2006, p.63) explains

the ineliminable gap between meaning (the intended subject matter) and its utterances (the
specific way it is expressed) permits philosophical hermeneutics to articulate a very specific
sense of ‘work’ which relies directly upon the concept of the in-between. The work, a literary or
visual art work undertakes, opens the space between meaning and utterance. In this respect, “an
artwork is interpretative in three respects : (1) it understands (receives) its subject matter in a
certain way, (2) it offers its own interpretation of that subject matter, and (3) it displays its
particular way of handling and contributing to its subject matter (author emphasis).

What I create as the painting, then becomes a connection between me and anyone who looks at it. The

viewer seeks their horizon, and the interpretation moves backwards and forwards between us – in the

centre is the ‘work’ (painting or investigation) – an ineliminable gap. It is the researcher’s subjectivity

that determines what is interpreted or ‘heard’ (Davey, 2006) and captured by the investigation.

As I sought direction for this study, my many years of experiences in creating paintings seemed to link

productively with the philosophical hermeneutics of this German philosopher, Gadamer. The connection

feels particularly poignant, given Gadamer’s use of aesthetics as a vehicle of much of his exposition of

his philosophical position.

Gadamer (2004 , p.102) proposes

…the scholarly research pursued by the ‘science of art’ is aware from the start that it can neither
replace nor surpass the experience of art. The fact that through a work of art a truth is
experienced that we cannot attain in any other way constitutes the philosophic importance of art,
which asserts itself against all attempts to rationalise it away. Hence, together with the

68
 experience of philosophy, the experience of art is the most insistent admonition to scientific
consciousness to acknowledge its own limits.

Co-incidentally with this association I discovered in van Manen’s work, frequent references regarding

the connection of writing and painting. For example, van Manen (1990, p.131) claims “…the process

of writing and rewriting (including revising or editing) is more reminiscent of the artistic activity of

creating an art object that has to be approached again and again, now here, now there, going back and

forth between the parts and the whole, in order to arrive at a finely crafted piece that often reflects the

personal ‘signature’ of the author.”

As I follow van Manen’s advice and work on this study, writing and re-writing, I recall another time

when I tried to arrive at a finely crafted piece, “going back and forth between the parts” and reflecting

my ‘personal’ signature. I feel a strong link between the two enterprises, the art and the writing, which

are illustrated by this excerpt from my journal.

We’ve been camped by the riverbank for three days now. The landscape to
the front of our campsite has changed frequently in that time. When we
arrived it was raining gently and the scene was softened by a pale mist of
wetness. I had stood still and looked at the curve in the river just ahead of
us several times, estimating how far away or how close I needed to be to
get the best mix of shapes and colour. Then, quite early one morning, the
rain was gone and I saw something balanced and promising. I would paint
today.

I step up to the easel and poke at the canvas with my brush. Elements of
green and yellow are coming together to capture a fleeting moment of
sunlight on the Murray River. The brownish sand runs alongside the bank
and disappears into the blacks and browns of stressed grasses and bushes
under old gum trees strung out and bordering the water’s edge. I am
wanting the textures to merge and I need to step back to see if the effect
has been captured. Not only does the visual image have to convey what I
see but also it needs to evoke what I can smell, what I hear, what I feel and
what I think about this great waterway languishing and failing and wasting
away.

69
Heat emanates from parts of the water out in the centre of the river, and
there is an impression of a shimmering pathway littered with a myriad of
tiny white, bright lights but closer in there is a coolness and a kind of more
sinister darkness nestling into the bank. Drought affected, the water is
sluggish and has no flow so it smells slightly dank and seems dispirited
somehow. No longer mighty, but not yet quite beaten.

More brush strokes to capture this impression. Paint over paint where I
have stroked before and a sense of reaching out to capture something not
quite graspable. I walk around, looking up and out and back to the canvas,
squinting, close up, further away, move in, move back, experiment and re-
do. Do I have it yet? Have I caught the moment? As the light changes with
the sun’s slow descent, the image changes and I have to move back to the
easel, to change and change again…
Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective

Journal.

As explained in the excerpt above, when I attempt to represent something graphically that I have

experienced, it is always as an impression, a fleeting sensation that in some way turns out to be satisfying

and tells the truth for me, of that moment. I add layers upon layers of paint until it feels right and looks

right and satisfies. I change shapes, I change textures, I change lines and forms. I go back repeatedly,

refining, adding and changing. One added line or small or vast changes to the colour or the texture or the

sense of light can change the feel of the adjacent part of the picture. Each added new part means that the

already completed part may need to be changed yet again.

The ‘work’ this study undertakes is just like my paintings. I understand my subject matter in a certain

way, I offer my interpretation of that subject matter and I set this interpretation out on a framework of

philosophical hermeneutics as guided by Gadamer.

In Truth and Method, Gadamer explores the ontology of the work of art and its hermeneutic significance.

He wrote “the work of art has its true being in the fact that it becomes an experience that changes the

person who experiences it” (2004, p.103). My personal experience and a love of painting is what made

Gadamer’s philosophic hermeneutics such an appropriate framework for my study as I have interpreted

70
his views of hermeneutics (understandings) as similar to the methodological approach that my art has for

me. A further reason for this sense of appropriateness was confirmed when I read Gadamer’s approach to

truth and beauty and aesthetic understanding. To Gadamer, “(a)rt is not an innocent diversion and

amusement but a crucial point of access to fundamental truths about the world and what it is to be

human. Art uncovers truth about ourselves that no amount of scientific endeavour can reveal” (Lawn,

2006, p. 87). As mentioned previously, Gadamer was heavily influenced by Heidegger, his teacher and

mentor. Heidegger, thought about art as “as a primordial engagement with truth” (Lawn, 2006, p. 89). It

is in this framework, that this study seeks my truth about what boys think about school, at this one point

in time.

At this stage, it is helpful to highlight and to summarise the six important propositions from the work of

Gadamer that I have chosen as relevant to my research design (they form the first horizontal column of

the research design matrix found later in this text). I acknowledge that each of these propositions is not

mutually exclusive but I have distinguished between them here in order to explicate the structure of the

research design. I describe them briefly as follows.

Six Gadamer Propositions

Being open /openness

This is a key concept in Gadamer’s work and is referred to as Bildung or openness to meaning (Gadamer,

1972/1989). In Bildung a person “leaves the all-too-familiar and learns to allow for what is different from

oneself, and that means not only to tolerate it but to live in it” (Weinsheimer, 1985, in Turner, 2003,

p.70). Openness to meaning is essential to understanding a phenomenon being explored because

“(w)orking our appropriate projections, anticipatory in nature, to be confirmed ‘by the things’ themselves

is the constant task of understanding” (Gadamer, 2004, p.267). Davey, (2006, p.40) states that Gadamer

uses the term Bildung “to demonstrate that alongside scientific and technological knowledge there exists

another body of knowledge that is not the result of proof and demonstration but is laid down by wisdom

and practical experience”. Hermeneutic ‘openness’ has been criticised as simply an opportunity to impose

one’s own sense of meaning and purpose on the environment, however I argue that is a flawed

perspective. This position does not understand the concept of openness that sits at the core of

philosophical hermeneutics. Interpretation is not the imposition of one dominant conceptual scheme on to

71
another. Gadamer points out that “to understand another means to understand ourselves differently”.

(Davey, 2006, p.225). Philosophical hermeneutics is open to not only the ‘other’ but to the difference that

the ‘other’ is able to open within ourselves. It is much more than a ‘liberal tolerance’ of another’s point of

view. It is precisely the deep involvement that a person can experience with their own tensions and

ambiguities, (and that is what forms a person’s own horizon), and then a willingness to be drawn out by

them, that impels one to open out toward another, in spite of the personal risks this openness could entail.

Davey (2006, p.228) writes that such journeys can be made “for the sake of the hidden, the forgotten and

the overlooked”.

Conversation

Conversation, for Gadamer, exemplifies the qualities of responsiveness, creativity and freedom that are

the centrepiece of genuine understanding. He writes, “in a conversation one word follows another, with

the conversation taking its own twists and turns and reaching its own conclusion…the partners are far less

leaders of it than the led. No one knows in advance what will come out of a conversation” (Gadamer,

2004, p.385) Davey describes how this allows “the unpredictable and uncontrollable turns of a

conversation (to) give rise to insights that catch its participants unaware” (Davey, 2006, p.1).

Hermeneutic phenomenology requires a genuine conversation between the researcher and the text, or life

expression. “The researcher and the text become conversation partners, neither dominating, but rather

asking questions of each other to weigh and test what the other (the text) has to say in conversation”.

(Hyde, 2005, p.35). Gadamer (2004, p.361) states,

(w)hat characterises a dialogue, in contrast with the rigid form of statements that demand to be
set down in writing, is precisely this: that in dialogue spoken language – in the process of
questions and answer; giving and taking; talking at cross purposes and seeing each other’s point
– performs the communication of meaning that, with respect to the written tradition, is the task
of hermeneutics.

Davey (2006, p.163) points out that the aim of philosophical hermeneutics is “to facilitate a conversation,

to set it going and not to end it with a final interpretation”. In this study, there is the initial engagement

when the researcher and the participant converse orally, and then there is the second engagement where

the researcher and the text (that is, the transcription of the words spoken) ‘converse’ a second time. Then

there is the readers’ connections with the study, and their interpretations of my interpretations of the text.

This is another part of the never-ending conversation.

72
Play

As explained previously, Gadamer uses the metaphor of play to deliver his reflection on conversation

(Hyde, 2005, p.35). The idea of play and conversation expressing the human practice of engagement and

responsiveness is the central tenet of the phenomenon of human understanding. Players are drawn into a

game, and its inherent power means they have no ultimate control over the unknown conclusion. The

players are engaging in order to solve the unknown. Gadamer places importance on the ‘middle space’

(Zwischen) that sits between the players. Interpretation or understanding is found in this middle space, it

is the place for common meaning between the text and its interpreter. Sharkey, (2001, p.24) describes this

as a hermeneutic task “where the meaning of a text opens up in an encounter that is…contextual, playful

and dialogical”. Kogler (1999, p.19) claims that it is the fundamental thesis of Gadamer, that

“understanding should be conceived as an event of play”. Kogler (1999, p.49) explains that “for

Gadamer the model of play serves as a prism through which the structure of understanding as an event

first becomes truly discernibile. The fundamental contingency and unpredictability of dialogue suggests

that dialogue in fact resembles the process of becoming involved in an event – just like participation in

play”.

The hermeneutic circle

This idea is at the heart of hermeneutics. All researchers are “locked into a hermeneutical circle with the

subject they are investigating, for they can only see that subject from their own standpoint – a standpoint

that is historically, socially and culturally located” (Hodkinson, 1998, p.563). Gadamer is clear that one

can never know the text except from one’s own standpoint. The metaphor of the ‘fusing of horizons’

reinforces this point. It is the science, the art and the philosophy of interpretation (Grondin, 1994).

For hermeneutical understanding, a text is always a process of bringing part and whole together in a way

that can never be completed. The hermeneutic circle says that partial understanding of part of a text

always modifies the whole and the whole, the parts. The process of reading understanding and

73
interpreting is always ceaseless, there is no one definitive reading of a text. (Lawn, 2006, p.150).

Therefore, the hermeneutic circle is a metaphor that describes the ongoing reflection and interpretation

that explores the entirety of the research topic, its component parts, and the researcher’s prior experience

or fore-structure (Bricher, 2000). Kogler (1999, p.26) explains the true structure of the hermeneutic circle

as being

grounded in preunderstanding, the contents of which are shaped through tradition. The
movement of this circle resides in the fact that we can understand the parts of a particular
symbolic context only through their significance for the whole, yet this whole is capable of being
disclosed to us only through the significance of its parts. The meaning of a text will always
already be preconceptually determined and projected by the contents of our understanding; in
which previous history and experience are embedded….interpretative understanding is achieved
between interpreter and text as a communication between interpreter and tradition.”

Prejudice

Gadamer (2004, p.290) states,

tradition is within us. In this process, we do not deal with traditions objectively, as external and
bygone phenomena. They shape what we are and how we understand the world. The attempt to
step outside of the process of tradition would be like trying to step outside of our own skins.
The pretension to escape the process would lead to a misunderstanding of both the world and
oneself. A genuine understanding of the world involves, not the attempt to escape traditions, but
a participation in the happening of traditions.

Gadamer focuses on the modern thinkers of the Enlightenment to delineate the principal of prejudgment.

The Enlightenment inherited Descartes' dream. Descartes wanted to base all knowledge on purified,

unprejudiced reason, but this according to Gadamer, is precisely the prejudice of the Enlightenment, the

prejudice against prejudice, which was built into their conception of method. The Enlightenment dream

became the philosophy of positivism and became the modern enterprise of science. Scientific knowledge

attempts to exclude prejudice completely. Gadamer’s position is that “understanding is essentially an

historically effected event. We are always situated in history…Any claim to unbiased, neutral and

objective knowledge is itself a prejudice that determines what constitutes good science” (Gadamer, 2004,

p.300). Gadamer says “all understanding inevitably involves some prejudice” (p.270) and prejudice is not

a false judgement but a condition of truth. Prejudices are “historical reality itself and the condition of

understanding (Weinsheimer, 1985, p.170 in Turner, 2003, p.13). It is what gives the “hermeneutical

problem its real thrust” (Gadamer 2004, p.272). Hermeneutic phenomenological research requires

recognition of prior understandings as the prerequisite of any act of interpretation (van Manen, 1990;

74
Sharkey, 2001; Hyde, 2005). These prior understandings, these prejudices, have to be tested, the taken-

for-granted meanings put under illumination and new meanings possibly generated.

In this study, an understanding of Gadamer’s notion of ‘prejudice’ is embraced by the use of my

retrospective reflective journal excerpts that are included in the text from time to time, to anchor the

direction with a true recognition of prior understandings.

Fusion of horizons

The fusion of horizons is a key term for Gadamer as it describes the activity of understanding. Each

individual occupies a horizon and in attempting to understand another thing or person or text he or she

extends his or her own horizons to embrace and ‘fuse’ with that of another. The image of fusing suggests

that horizons come together and that understanding is seen to be more a question of (negotiated)

agreement than the simple one-to-one relationship of a knowing subject to a known object (Lawn, 2006,

p.150). Gadamer states “the horizon is the range of vision that includes everything that can be seen from a

particular vantage point. Applying this to the thinking mind, we speak of narrowness of horizons, of the

opening up of new horizons and so forth.” This is understanding or comprehension. There are dimensions

of time and distance, but there is also our belief system, desires and our imaginings. Participation in a

hermeneutical ‘conversation’ with the events in our lives can transform our horizons (Rees, 2003). There

are multiple perspectives of the same event, but sometimes an individual cannot see this because he or she

is associated only with people of the same race, or culture or social class (Noel, 1999). The hermeneutic

task requires addressing the polarity of the familiar and the strange. When there is comprehension arising

from this connection there is ‘fusion of the horizons’ (Gadamer, 2004, p.397). The fusion of horizons

does not allow, “the interpreter to speak of an original meaning of the work without acknowledging that,

in understanding it, the interpreter’s own meaning enters in as well” (Gadamer, 2004, p.578).

In summary, Gadamer extended the previous work of both Husserl and Heidegger, and emphasised the

way language is embedded in our understanding of our world. Gadamer developed the philosophical

stance of his mentors further by emphasising the ethical aspect in dialogue, the openness of one speaker

to another. For Gadamer, each interpreter’s understanding is guided by his or her own history and

tradition. Gadamer stressed the importance of tradition or background in our ways of understanding and

75
asserted that understanding is always a historical, dialectic and linguistic event (Byrne, 1998). He

believed it was impossible to shed our past experience because it is actually this experience that facilitates

our understanding of another. Gadamer advocated a constant striving to explicate our prejudices

(Olaussen et al., 2006).

The heart of Gadamer’s view is that in our (humankind’s) understanding of all purposeful human

engagements, what we can properly attempt to achieve is the stance of a ‘critically alert participant’ as

distinct from that of a ‘crucially detached observer’ or objective analyst. Philosophical hermeneutics

shows that what is learned from experience extends beyond the restrictions of formalised method…(and

brings) a sense of belonging to something larger than oneself (Davey, 2006).

Contemplation and understanding of Gadamer’s view that a purposeful human engagement requires a

critically alert participant, rather than a detached observer, leads me to see a link with memories I have

of the practice teaching experience for some young people as they begin their first pedagogical

encounters, and struggle with their place in Gadamer’s spiel, or game of human interactions. I recall one

such event in the following journal excerpt.

I was standing in the corridor of a primary school somewhere in a suburb

on the north shore of Sydney, in a state of acute anxiety. I had just
observed a university student of teaching take her first ‘real’ lesson with a
‘real’ class. It had been a year two class and the neonate teacher was
introducing a literacy-based unit of work about bees. At the end of the
lesson, our emotions were raw.

She had seemed very well prepared. Long hours spent on colouring in
beautiful charts of impressive drawings of the life cycle and habits of the
bee had occurred and these illustrations were stuck with tape to the board
at the front of the room. She had a huge plastic model of a bee perched on
the front desk. There was no way of knowing whether the children had
encountered material related to bees before, but I assumed the class
teacher had suggested the topic to her, as something that would fit in with
the teacher’s on going program.

76
The lesson did not ignite. She gradually lost contact, first with the boys at
the back of the room who began elbowing each other and laughing softly,
and rocking back on the legs of their chairs. Then almost without notice,
the whole class began slipping away one by one. Two girls over near the
window side of the room, started talking to each other without bothering to
hide their inattention. One boy, right near the teacher, adjusted his
glasses, took out a novel and began reading, his head down and seemingly
engaged in the story. A general restlessness broke out across the room.
Chairs squeaked, pencils tapped, feet dragged. Someone coughed and this
was taken up by several others, the coughs getting louder and longer as
each child joined in.

The young would-be teacher was sensitive to all of this and it was apparent
that her increasing dismay was finally turning to a kind of desperation. But
she did not alter tack, she did not waver from the plan she had designed
even though her vision of the outcome was not in sight. She simply
ploughed on to a miserable end, children normally quiet and well behaved
(or compliant) gradually becoming noisy, unhelpful and eventually unkind.

I too, was in a learning situation. As a new mother, I had resigned from my

career as a teacher, and had looked for something to do, that left time for
‘bringing-up-baby’ but still gave me a sense of connection with my
profession as an educator. I was just starting this new part time job as
supervisor of teaching practice for a small group of students from Sydney
University. Caught in this scenario, I was in an agony of not knowing what
to do. Should I intervene and would she lose all confidence and standing
with the children in this class? She had just started the practice session so
three long weeks at the school, assigned to this class loomed ahead of her.
There was a university lecturer also in the room and I was afraid to make
eye contact with her, but wondered what she might do to relieve the
tension. I deferred to her more senior position and thought she would take
action if that was the appropriate thing to do.

Thankfully just when I thought I could bear the situation no longer a buzzer
sounded somewhere and the class transformed. Well trained as they were,

77
they all resumed perfect attention because they knew that release from
the classroom, would require they were behaving perfectly.

The regular class teacher returned and we three ‘visitors’ left the room. We
waited together outside the classroom, and listened to the sounds of the
teacher regaining management of the class efficiently and moving on
rapidly as if to make up for ‘lost’ learning and teaching time, and preparing
the children for their departure.

The three of us stood awkwardly in the hallway, the ‘practice’ student

teacher, red faced, sweaty and close to tears, the tired “seen-it-all-before”
university lecturer and me, the new mother, a long time teacher, but new
to supervising adult students as they practised learning to be teachers. I
looked expectantly at the lecturer, hoping she might take the lead in the
conversation that had to happen.

“Have you ever kept any pets?” she asked abruptly, looking sceptically at
the young woman.
“N…No…?” the girl replied, confused and perplexed, the student seemed to
come back sharply to the painful present, still bruised by the immediate
past experience and shook her head. I was perplexed too, and just slightly
shook my head. The lecturer continued.
“What? No cat, no dog, no goldfish?
“No, not anything.”
“Mmm…thought so...” mused the lecturer. She indicated by a small incline
of her head that I could take over and she walked off, heading towards the
exit, her car and the next student at the next school. This left me to
suggest to the distressed young woman that we go off somewhere else to
dissect what had happened and to retrieve something from this awful
experience.

Much later I reflected on the lecturer’s comment and I could see how this
lack of experience of caring for a pet, could influence one’s competency in
the classroom. Of course, I did not think one needed literally to have
looked after animals to be a good teacher but I could see how caring for
pets could introduce some of those important elements that teaching

78
needs. Caring for something means stepping outside oneself and one’s
personal point of view, to care about the physical and emotional needs of
another living creature that is dependent on you for sustenance and
attention but has limited ways of communicating these needs. Much of the
responsibility of the partnership is one sided, asymmetrical.

No doubt much of this fresh insight, was based deep within my immediate
experience as a new mother. I was able to contemplate that to teach well,
we have to step outside ourselves. Ultimately we cannot make another do
our bidding, regardless of how well trained they are they will only respond
favourably if we have earned our authority. What had been missing in my
starting out teacher’s repertoire was the understanding that she had to
build a climate of trust. She had to display her intention of listening,
valuing, respecting, engaging and then taking her direction from the
responses of the children in front of her, not imposing a direction on them,
that she had not the authority to demand. No amount of preparation of
lessons or provision of resources is going to substitute for that.

The university lecturer was right, experience in caring for another, even a
mouse or goldfish, may have given this aspiring teacher a better start.
Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective
Journal

This event demonstrates for me, where the underlying theme of this study has emerged. The theme is the

aim of improving pedagogical practices that make up successful teaching, by being acutely alert to the

condition of the learner. If successful teaching can be a coming together of art and science, intuition and

practice, then this whole work sits firmly within this conceptual position. This study is permeated at

several levels by the art/science debate. It is argued by some that art and science are dichotomous but for

others (like Gadamer) the two are inextricably linked.

As demonstrated previously, an important feature of Gadamer’s work for this study is the notion that the

fore-structure of understanding is shaped by certain biases (preconceptions, prejudgements, prejudices).

These biases are derived from traditions of which we have access through language. Language involves a

dialectical turning; we have language and language has us. We have access to traditions but traditions

79
have a certain power over us. This is what Gadamer called ‘historically effected’

(wirkungsgeschicbtlicb). Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics is diametrically opposed to the

conception of interpretation represented by the scientific rationalism of Descartes and the Cartesian

project. Descartes indicated how educational systems with their built in prejudices tend to corrupt

original ideas and his aim was to build a positive, presuppositionless and certain philosophy that would

approximate mathematics in rigour and clarity (Gallagher, 1992). His authority is still visible in some

educational settings.

At this stage Gadamer’s influence on research in the field of primary education is not significant. There

is no evidence of his influence in the interpretation of small children’s views of their educational

experiences. This lack of apparent interest in Gadamer by researchers in education is perplexing because

as I indicated earlier, the hermeneutic phenomenological movement has strongly influenced the nursing

profession and numerous studies, including many exploring children’s perspectives, exist in nursing

research. The multitude of human experiences and emotions that being at school brings provides ample

opportunities for interesting and useful research using this methodology.

Gadamer did display interest in medical practice. He claimed that healing was not so much a science or

technique, but an ‘art’ (Gadamer 2004), and requires attention to all the unique aspects of the person, as

well as their illness. In 1980 Gadamer published a collection of essays on health translated to English as

the “The Enigma of health: The Art of healing in a Scientific Age (1996). One wonders what would have

ensued in the world of educational research, had he published a collection of essays entitled “The

Enigma of Education : The Art of teaching in a Scientific Age”?

Van Manen

In relation to hermeneutic phenomenological approaches to human science research and writing, van

Manen is influenced by both the European movements and the North American developments. He

develops an approach to qualitative research in education that is distinct from the traditional approaches

derived from the behavioural or natural sciences and is described as hermeneutic-phenomenological

inquiry. Its focus is how we orient ourselves to human experience. This kind of research, questions the

way we experience the world, “to want to know the world in which we live as human beings” (van

80
Manen, 1990, p.5). Van Manen argues that the choice of research method is a pedagogic commitment

that shows “how one stands in life as an educator.”

Van Manen expounds hermeneutic phenomenological human science in eight specific concepts. He

explains that hermeneutic phenomenological research is

• the study of lived experience

• the explication of phenomena as they present themselves to consciousness

• the study of essences

• the description of the experiential meanings we live as we live them

• the human scientific study of phenomena

• the attentive practice of thoughtfulness

• the search for what it means to be human, and

• a poetizing activity

The foundation notion underlying this approach is that interpretive phenomenological research and

theorising cannot be separated from the textual practice of writing. Van Manen states that the human

science approach that he advocates is “avowedly phenomenological, hermeneutic, and semiotic or

language oriented,” not just because it happens to be his particular interest or prejudice, but also because

“pedagogy requires a phenomenological sensitivity to lived experience (children’s realities and

lifeworlds).” Most importantly van Manen (1990, p.2) advises that

(p)edagogy requires a hermeneutic ability to make interpretive sense of the phenomena of the
lifeworld in order to see the pedagogic significance of situations and relations of living with
children. And pedagogy requires a way with language in order to allow the research process of
textual reflection to contribute to one’s pedagogic thoughtfulness and tact.

Van Manen (1990, p.17) claims, “it is naïve rationalism that believes that the phenomena of life can be

made intellectually crystal clear or theoretically perfectly transparent. That is why human science that

tries to do justice to the full range of human experience cannot operate with a concept of rationality that

is restricted to a formal intellectualist interpretation of human reason”. His focus is to understand the

phenomena of the lifeworld in order to see the pedagogical significance of situations and to have as the

main goal, pedagogical competence or the art of knowing how to act tactfully (p.8) and thoughtfully

(p.12). He describes the practice of teaching as a reflective, sensitive, tactful activity. “Tact” when used

81
in this sense, is described as “being open to… [a] child’s experience; attuned to subjectivity; and is

governed by insight while relying on feeling (viii-ix) (Ehrich, 1999).

The theoretical framework as set out in the diagram shown previously, links the philosophical

hermeneutics of Gadamer, to the hermeneutic phenomenology of van Manen. I have explored some of

the key concepts coming from these authors’ works that I have used to guide this study. I have

investigated the tension that exists between the concepts of atheoretical work, the work of

phenomenology and the position of foreknowledge. I illustrate the outcome of my search for an

acceptable compromise in the diagram. It presents as being like two pillars standing side by side as an

entrance into the study of the phenomenon.

I now elaborate some of the theoretical positions that build the adjacent pillar of knowledge on which

the study is based (see diagram). The theoretical assumptions underlying this study of boys’ views of

school life are based in the sociology of childhood, in which aspects of play and children’s voices are

important; and on theories of gender and masculinities, that emphasise differences rather than

commonalities. The third theoretical focus comes from pedagogical theories in which aspects of

curriculum, practice, and engagement and alienation in education are crucial concepts on which the

interpreted outcomes of the study are played out.

Sociology of childhood

“While the young have always been identifiable by their physical size and age, the meanings these
differences have been given are not universal”
Baker, 1998, p.117, cited by Fasoli, L. (2001)

This quote from Baker (1998) emphasises that while we know children as being smaller than adults and

younger, other qualities attributed to children are not generally universally agreed. While the term

childhood, loosely describes the early part of a person’s life, the place of children, has varied greatly over

the ages and across societies (Moinian, 2006). Childhood is not a stable concept. Different views of

childhood have been presented over time and across cultures (for example, Aries, 1962, Hsiung, 2008).

82
The recent movement towards children having their own position in the world is the popular, current

view in Western societies. It shows that diversity rather than commonality is a key feature of childhood,

and “underlines not only the differences between societies, but also differences within societies and

indeed within the neighbourhoods in any one society” (Moinian, 2006). This views childhood as a fixed

period in life which is permeated with romantic ideas of happiness, innocence and freedom from

responsibility. This is a relatively recent way of viewing childhood only found in wealthy industrialised

societies. Even with this viewpoint adults still determine what children need to learn, both academically

and socially, to be ‘grown up’. It is still mostly viewed as a period of preparation for something later. As

a result, children’s views are still largely ignored (Mayall, 1996; Qvortrup, 2000). Children are seen as

still being passive and innocent and needing adult control and discipline. Ideas of superior adult

knowledge, that they are a threat to adults losing their control and power and that they are incapable of

logical thought before the age of seven, have maintained the position of the powerless child, waiting to

be developed into an adult.

Until recent times, childhood studies have been dominated by psychological explanations of child

development. Studies in developmental psychology have investigated children’s activities in language,

play and social interactions. Generally, biological features have been the prime explanatory facts of

childhood with little account taken of any cultural component. Universal laws were developed that were

taken as valid across all societies and all historical times (Sandbaek, 1999). In the field of education

much of this position has been strongly influenced by the work of Piaget. Criticism in the literature is

still rare although growing significantly, regarding the phenomenal influence of Piaget (1973) on child

development theories. Burman (1994) shows that Piaget viewed child development from the “inside-out’

and so all children are considered to be developing through a determined set of stages. Piaget considers

these stages are unaffected by broader social relations such as class or gender. Piaget’s work was hugely

instrumental in challenging the behaviourist model of learning at the time as portrayed by Skinner

(1969). Drawing on the work of Pavlov in the 1920’s with dogs, Skinner had teachers see children as

essentially passive, able to respond to stimuli and responding to reinforcements in a kind of automatic

way. Alternatively Piaget saw children as active, exploring and experimenting with the world around

them to develop their cognition. The boys in this study are mostly aged six. This places them in Piaget's

second stage, the pre-operational stage. During this time it is expected they will make significant

83
development in symbolic thought and start to learn to use representational schemes including language,

writing numbers and pictorial and spatial representations. According to Piaget, they remain ego-centric,

have little empathy for others, and can only do one task at a time. Fortunately, in more recent times,

Piaget’s work is increasingly subject to critical scrutiny as emerging theories of the sociology of children

are refined (Prout & James, 1997; James et al. 1998; Connolly 2004).

More recently, new emerging paradigms in the sociology of childhood show that that the child is

socialised because of belonging to a specific culture at a particular time. This means childhood can be

viewed not as a natural or universal feature of human groups (Sandbaek, 1999). This new view sees

childhood as a social construction in which children are active in the construction of their own social

lives (James & Prout, 1997).

Key theoretical assumption – sociology of childhood

The key theoretical assumption drawn from the sociology of childhood is that children are active

participants and competent interpreters of their own worlds. Their voices should be heard in terms of

issues, events and experiences that relate to them. Student perceptions of their work environment

influence their academic achievement (Ladd et al., 1999; Samdal et al., 1999; Imms, 2000, Einarsdottir,

2005b). There is general agreement emerging that “childhood is seen as a social construct and children as

agents in their own lives” (Sandbaek, 1999, p.192). This view is running parallel to the need to secure

formal rights for children.

Gender and masculinities

Any investigation of boys’ learning encompasses theories of gender and masculinities (for example,

Fink & Kosecoff, 1977; Finn, 1989; West, 1999; Skelton, 2002; Reichert & Kuriloff, 2004; Skelton &

Read, 2006). Much of the current public debate about boys’ schooling is based in a perceived

disadvantaged status relative to girls, but the matter is far more complex (Lingard et al., 2002; Myhill,

2002; Martino et al., 2004; Myhill & Jones, 2006). Nilan (2000, p.530) states “mass culture generally

assumes there is a fixed, true masculinity (but) not all boys and men take up the same kind of

masculinity, nor do they experience ‘maleness’ in the same way. Social class and subcultures profoundly

affect the presentation and representation of masculine identities”. Theories are important that position

masculine identities as historically and culturally oriented, that acknowledge masculinities are multiple,

84
and confirm that there are dominant (hegemonic) and subordinate forms of masculinities. An essential

understanding is that masculinities are actively constructed in social settings (Skelton 1996; Martino,

1999; Reed, 1999; Pifer, 2000; Martino et al., 2004).

Boys in schools represent highly complex notions of masculinity; certain school activities are alienating

or engaging for some students and the quality of the settings in which they are educated impacts on their

success. In the last ten years, research in the area of boys’ education has increased significantly.

Masculinity(ies) and the performance of masculinity(ies) in school settings have been increasingly

examined (Nilan, 2000; Dalley-Trim, 2007). The more recent work acknowledges the plurality,

multiplicity, heterogeneity and complexity of masculinities. (Martino, 1995; Nilan, 2000; Gilbert &

Gilbert, 2001; Martino et al., 2004; Dalley-Trim, 2007).

It is now apparent that masculinity is fluid, uncertain and unstable and there is a range of ways to ‘do’,

‘be’ and ‘perform’ masculinity. However, what is usually described as the ‘hegemonic version of

masculinity’ claims the highest status and holds the greatest influence and authority and is the form of

masculinity usually aspired to by many boys and this can be seen in most school classrooms and

playgrounds (Dalley-Trim, 2007).

Gilbert and Gilbert (2001, p.3) show that the

discourses of hegemonic masculinity are implicitly threaded through schooling regimes and
schools, like all institutions, are gendered in their organisation and practice. Both teachers and
students perform masculinity at school and masculinist practices are implicit in the ‘naturalized’
discourse of school discipline, talk, sport, quality assurance and assessment.

Issues associated with masculinist discourse include subject selection, school behaviour, literacy

achievement, and school retention. These issues can impact on some groups of boys in potentially

destructive ways (Gilbert & Gilbert, 2001; Martino & Berrill, 2003) and further research is needed to

investigate the impact and its longer term outcomes.

Key theoretical assumption: gender

The key theoretical assumption regarding gender is that masculinity is not a singular, stable concept, but

it is flexible and multi-faceted. Nevertheless, the dominant practice in schools is hegemonic masculinity,

raising issues that affect boys’ learning.

85
Pedagogical practices

Theories of pedagogy including curriculum, practice, and aspects of engagement and alienation are

important (for example, Armstrong, 1998; Hanke, 2000; Wallace & Wildy, 2004; Laidlaw, 2004;

Kinchin, 2004). In particular, theories of engagement and alienation in school practice will provide

insights (Yair, 2000; Muijis et al., 2004; Stipek, 2004; Van Houtte, 2004) into the data when it is

generated.

In relation to curriculum and teaching practice, there is little consensus on what constitutes effective

instruction for young children (Stipek, 2004). Constructivist practices, based on the works of Piaget and

Vygotsky hold powerful sway but are increasingly challenged by more didactic practices, aimed at the

“basic skills” approach. Highly teacher centred (as opposed to child-centred practices) that rely on drills

and worksheets can undermine children’s motivation and create dependency (Burts et al., 1992; Stipek,

2004). The more child-oriented practices usually encourage play-based learning (Sutterby, 2005) with a

focus on the needs of the individual.

Yair (2000) investigated alienating and engaging factors of school instruction and showed that

“learning occurs within diffuse organisational walls. Non-school preoccupation constantly intrudes on

students’ attention. Socially biased external issues monopolise students’ attention in classrooms” (p.262).

Yair suggests tentatively, “active, group-based instructional methods and challenging strategies have a

greater capacity to insulate students from external environments, whereas boring and teacher-centred

methods allow for greater diffusion between classroom task and non class preoccupations.”

Fredricks et al., (2004) state that the “concept of school engagement… (represents)…a possible antidote

to declining academic motivation and achievement.” These authors describe engagement as a multi-

faceted construct consisting of behavioural, emotional and cognitive features. Behavioural engagement

includes involvement in academic and social or extra curricular activities, emotional engagement refers

to the positive and negative reactions to teachers and peers, and cognitive engagement incorporates the

drive to comprehend ideas and to master difficult skills. They cite numerous studies that draw a positive

correlation between engagement and achievement related outcomes. Studies into student disengagement

86
or alienation confirm a gender imbalance with males far more likely to be assessed as disengaged (Ravet,

2007). The vast literature of theories into pedagogic practice will contribute to an increased

understanding of the data generated by talking to the boys in kindergarten.

Key theoretical assumption: pedagogical theories

Advocates for a range of curriculum foci are not close to agreement in terms of what is the most effective

practice to meet the individual needs of an increasingly diverse student population. Engagement and

alienation in school are complex, multi-faceted issues that have no single, or simple solutions.

In summary, the writing of this study has to satisfy several powerful motivations for me. I am long time

educator deeply concerned about how to improve pedagogic practices, particularly for young male

children. I am the sum of my life’s experiences and I cannot put these experiences to one side while I

consider important aspects of pedagogy. I am sympathetic to the notion that successful teaching is a

combination of art and science, with my personal bias towards art and intuition. Talking to small boys

about school will expand my knowledge and understanding of what teachers could reflect on to increase

their students’ engagement and circumvent the possible alienation of some boys from the process of

schooling. Consideration of these factors, the existing literature and my theoretical position led to the

design of the research plan.

THE RESEARCH DESIGN

Research design has been described as a “plan or blue print according to which data is collected to

investigate the research hypothesis or question in the most economical manner” (DeVos & Fouche`

1998, p.76). The research design must flow coherently from the research questions. In this study I am

asking what boys in kindergarten say about the phenomenon of school, and the research design must

facilitate this quest. I must clarify a philosophical position to develop a methodology which in turn will

underpin an appropriate method to help me seek out the views of young boys.

As I have indicated previously, I have isolated six hermeneutic propositions taken from Gadamer’s work:

they are ‘being open,’ ‘conversation,’ ‘play,’ the ‘hermeneutic circle’, ‘prejudice’ and the ‘fusion of

horizons’. These propositions form the first horizontal row in my research design matrix and are aligned

87
with van Manen’s six proposed steps for relevant research activities in a hermeneutic phenomenological

investigation. These steps form the second horizontal row in the research design matrix below. I bring

these two influential aspects together and then I extrapolate the relationship of these positions to the six

stages in my study. These stages form the third horizontal row in the matrix.

The six stages of this study are:

• the exploration of the phenomenon of being a boy in kindergarten

• interviews with participants in a one-to-one setting

• an attempt to understand and interpret what the participants say

• the application of language and thought to this process

• an awareness of my own prejudicial position

• and finally, a balancing of the research by considering the parts in relation to the whole.

The research design is summarised in the following table. The table illustrates Gadamer’s hermeneutic

propositions related to the research activities or method suggested by van Manen (1990, p.30) and the

application of these ideas to my study.

88
Table 1: Summary of the research design

89
Gadamer’s Being open Conversation Play Hermeneutic Prejudice Fusion of
Propositions: circle “a horizons -
Methodology puzzle at the Connection
heart of with others
interpretation”

Van Turning to a Investigating Reflecting Capturing the Maintaining Balancing

Manen’s phenomenon experience as on the phenomenon- a strong and the research
Research of interest it is lived essential the art of oriented context by
activities: themes writing and re- relation to considering
Method which writing the the parts to
characterise phenomenon the whole
the
phenomenon

How this is Explore and Examine the Understand Apply language Have Move from
described make sense lived the to thoughts awareness of parts to the
of human experience in phenomenon about the the whole and
existence all its and bring phenomenon researcher’s back- look
modalities into focus own at the
and aspects the possibly preconceived perception
obscure –get opinions and of the
to the experiences individuals
essence in the in terms of
interpretation the whole
of the data perspective

The study’s Investigate Interview Distil data to See textual Write the Look at the
application the boys in statements, meaning as a reflective parts to the
phenomenon kindergarten phrases , dynamic journal whole of
words, key transaction Maintain a each
‘schooling concepts or between part decision trail participant
for boys’ a series of and whole and then
meaningful look from
Being a boy units or these parts
in constituent to the whole
Kindergarten statements study

In practice Devise the Hold one to Relate to Write, while State biased Make all the
research one each other aware of bias position connections,
questions conversations and to the and clearly researcher,
Understand sense of the preconceptions participant,
and interpret whole reader
what is said

This table demonstrates how Gadamer is the source of the methodological underpinnings for the study

and van Manen is the source for the method to be used. I have several reasons for deciding to use the

framework of Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics for this study. My aim is to investigate the

experience of being a boy in kindergarten from the perspective of the boys themselves. Gadamer’s

90
philosophical hermeneutic advocates above all, openness. It prohibits any focus that might be allied to a

psychological or social process. Most importantly, I could not claim to be objective or “bracket out” my

presuppositions, a characteristic of the phenomenology proposed by Husserl. The notion of prejudice

appeared to me as a particular strength in Gadamer’s whole premise. This idea and the notion of dialogue

as part of Gadamer’s philosophy of understanding with the idea of Spiel (the game) are key aspects that

defined my role in the research process and profoundly guided my ethical and practical thoughts about

this study.

THE METHODOLOGY

I address the methodological setting for the study at this point as it pre-empts the substantial discussion

in the next chapter of the method used in the study. Methodology refers to the philosophical framework,

or the fundamental assumptions and characteristics of a human science perspective (van Manen, 1990,

p.27). The methodology should encapsulate the researcher’s general orientation to life, their view of

knowledge and their sense of what it means to be human. Methodology can be described as the theory

behind the method.

Gadamer wrote in the second forward to his seminal work Truth and Method

My revival of the expression “hermeneutic” with its long tradition, has apparently led to some
misunderstandings. I did not intend to produce an art or technique of understanding, in the
manner of earlier hermeneutics. I did not wish to elaborate a system of rules to describe, let
alone direct, the methodological procedures of the human sciences (Geisteswissenenschaften).

Nor was it my aim to investigate the theoretical foundation of work in these fields in order to put
my findings to practical ends. If there is any practical consequence of the present investigation, it
certainly has nothing to do with an unscientific ‘commitment’, instead it is concerned with the
‘scientific’ integrity of acknowledging the commitment involved in all understanding. My real
concern was and is philosophic: not what we do or what we ought to do, but what happens to
us over and above our wanting and doing. Hence, the methods of the human sciences are not
at issue here (Gadamer, 2004, xxviii) (my emphasis)

In this study when I seek to understand what the boys say about Kindergarten, it will not be what I want

to do, or what I ought to do, but rather what happens to me over and above my wanting and doing. This is

where I think Gadamer connects with van Manen and demonstrates what the term “ineffable” means to

me. Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics underpin the interpretive position. The study seeks to

understand the children’s experience of school as expressed in dialogue and reflects on how teachers

respond to the students’ presentation. I bring my understandings, prejudices and knowledge gained

91
through history and tradition into the research. Gadamer emphasises the openness I need to bring to my

investigation, with the subjects and with the texts in interpretation.

The validity of quantitative data relies on the use of large samples to iron out the individual differences

and identify a common finding, a median or a norm. In doing this, the individual’s unique response to a

specific circumstance can be subsumed by the common response. In the classroom, this can mean that

someone ‘fails’ when what actually happened in the teacher-student interaction could have been

something quite different. A distraction caused by someone catching sight of the dust particles in a ray of

sunlight, or someone else running as they are chased by their own shadow, or someone else feeling the

discomfort of a sore toe may be enough to shape an individual’s response at any one time. Concerns

about the levelling feature of quantitative studies that supersedes an individual’s response, encouraged me

to use research using qualitative processes where the opportunity to consider the differences rather than

concentrating on sameness, was an appealing characteristic. I have searched in my personal history for

why I need so strongly to support what is different rather than what is the same. To me, the

acknowledgement of difference, the unique and the unexpected, and the need for all to be open, and

aware of ‘prejudice’ (in the Gadamerian sense), is the basis of all pedagogic interaction. I think this

position comes ironically enough, from when I was in kindergarten in 1948.

I inhabited a Kindergarten classroom in the late 1940’s… a war baby. As a

little girl who lived on an isolated farm, far from playmates of my age, and
with mostly only my older mother as company during all the time preceding
going to school I was somewhat overwhelmed by what being at school
meant to me (especially in that first year).

Each day the teacher laboriously drew chalk rainbows on the aged
blackboard. Arcs of red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet and other
colours ranged across the board painstakingly scored into the surface. Then
from time to time numbers appeared at either end of the coloured arcs, and
unnoticed by me, another significant number sat under the archway. Thus
the teacher was introducing the mysteries of addition, subtraction and
multiplication tables. This enigmatic and beautiful drawing appeared each
day. How the class attended to the activity I do not recall.

92
As a lonely child on a farm I had spent many secret hours trying to find the
legendary pot of gold at the end of the rainbow as I was aware, even at that
young age, that a sudden gift of treasure would ease much of the worry and
anxiety of the adults surrounding me on the farm. Any wet weather seemed
to produce rich colourful rainbows brilliantly etched against a deep purple
sky with the black silhouettes of tall frightening eucalypts stretching up
behind them.

Concurrently I had also spent many hours fantasizing about finding a real
live fairy somewhere in the bush where I lived. In hindsight I was probably
painfully lonely and wanted more than anything to have a secret fairy as my
friend, someone to talk to, to meet, to share things with who would listen to
me unconditionally. (Ironically, sixty years later, the Chinese glass and
metal fairy figurines that one sees commonly in nurseries and garden stores
mimic my childhood vision of the fairy, almost perfectly.)

Somehow in my overactive imagination I thought that if I was quiet enough,

careful enough, ‘good’ enough and searched diligently enough I would one
magic day come upon a lone fairy going about her fairy business,
somewhere on our farm. I spent many, many hours looking for her, and I
have never told anyone about this quest until today’s personal confession.
Because this task was proving so elusive, I started to link the difficulties
with finding my much-needed fairy to the elusive pot of gold at the end of
the rainbow and began to think that perhaps that was where fairies lived. I
remember weeping in secret frustration as the rainbow was always out of
reach and the only explanation could be that I was failing in some way by
not finding where the rainbow ended.

Thus rainbows had a special purpose for me and so when the teacher
required my attention to the mathematical rainbow in her classroom I was
overwhelmed by my little personal history, my little personal life that did
not figure at all in her considerations. I could never answer her questions
that required the numbers to add up or multiply because I was literally “off
with the pixies” as is said, and lost to the pragmatics of her design and to
the mysteries of mathematical logic as she was demonstrating it.

93
 Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective
Journal

This excerpt demonstrates for me Gadamer’s view that “all individuality is a manifestation of universal

life and hence everyone carries a tiny bit of everybody else with him, so that divination is stimulated by

comparison with oneself” (Gadamer, 2004, p.188). I recount this experience because it demonstrates how

difficult it is for teachers to be sure what children are thinking about while they are teaching. How

difficult is the task for teachers to reach a Gadamerian “fusion of horizons” with each individual member

of their classes? It is not possible to know each child’s mind but all educators must allow that something

else might be going on, beyond what they can imagine or have previously experienced. Every child is

unique and their individual set of experiences makes them different to the child beside them.

Whenever, as a five year old, I needed to attend to my kindergarten teacher’s coloured stripes on the old

blackboard, my apprehending of her teaching of mathematics was shrouded by my personal loneliness

and the anxieties that I brought from my family life that was steeped in the fears grown from war time

and the economic depression. I missed what the teacher was demonstrating entirely and had no

understanding of her intentions, because I was not in her space, and I spent the rest of my life unsure of

mathematics and always confirmed, in my mind, as being ‘no good’ at maths.

When kindergarten teachers look at the little sea of twenty faces in front of them a turbulent mass of

prejudices (in the true Gadamerian sense) confronts them and rushes headlong into the teacher’s

prejudices. To do a successful job and not to ‘lose’ any student, teachers need to be alert to the

complexity of the situation and to allow in their judgments of responses that something could be

happening in that child’s life and mind, about which they may have scant knowledge. Each individual

response from any child however is no less a valuable response than the normative response the teacher is

seeking. So much of what is done in schools depends on compliance rather than difference. Children line

up one behind the other, respond to bells at the same time, eat at the same time, come and go home

together and are moulded to be the same, all while we, as teachers or educators, claim to be developing

students as individuals.

94
This study seeks ways to suggest to teachers to be alert to what is different in their classrooms. The

unusual answer, the “wrong” answer, the non-compliant behaviour may well be based in a unique set of

circumstances. The response that fits no previous example and may never happen again is nevertheless

legitimate. I argue that the fleeting response is no less human, no less important, no less correct than any

other response and could perhaps be even more valuable for its unique approach. This is Gadamer’s

Bildung or openness to meaning where one “leaves the all-too-familiar and learns to allow for what is

different from oneself, and that means not only to tolerate it but to live in it” (Weinsheimer, 1985, p.70 in

Turner, 2003).

Summary of chapter two

In this chapter, I describe how I reconciled the apparently contradictory perspectives regarding the

theoretical framework that confront a researcher using hermeneutical phenomenology as the foundation

of a study’s approach. I explain this reconciliation in terms of two pillars that support a theoretical

archway through which the study can proceed. Qualitative interpretive research is introduced and I

explain phenomenology and hermeneutic phenomenology. Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics is

introduced in company with the ideas of van Manen regarding research in education. I refer to theories

from the sociology of childhood, gender and masculinities, and pedagogy. The research design emanates

from this background. I use six Gadamerian propositions for a methodological framework and six steps

for a method of research in education and pedagogy, as proposed by van Manen. I clarify the relationship

of these guiding principles, to the six steps of my study.

In the next chapter, I detail the method I used to conduct the study and explain the processes undertaken,

including the use of the interview-conversation and a range of scaffolds that I introduced in order to assist

in this approach, with young children. These included children drawing pictures about school life, talking

about photographs and line drawings depicting school activities and playing a game about ‘school’ with

the construction toy, Lego.

95
CHAPTER THREE

METHOD
Some people speak of method greedily, demandingly, what they want in work is
method; to them it never seems rigorous enough, formal enough. Method becomes
law…invariable fact is that a work which constantly proclaims its will-to-method is
ultimately sterile: everything has been put into the method, nothing remains for the
writing; the researcher insists that his text will be methodological, but this text never
comes: no surer way to kill a piece of research and send it to the great scrap heap of
abandoned projects than Method.
Barthes, 1986, p.318, in van Manen, 1990, p.125.

Introduction

This chapter describes the method I used to conduct the investigation, while being mindful of Barthes’

exhortation to avoid the “great scrap heap of abandoned projects”. This chapter sets out the six research

activities of van Manen that are used to guide this part of the study as indicated in the research design.

The first two activities inform the confirmation of the research interest, and the selection of the study

participants, (collectively referred to as the sample). The interview process is explained in detail. I

describe how I used four different techniques as scaffolds to the interview process. These were open-

ended questioning, children’s drawings, children observing photos or line drawings, and then playing

games with Lego. I present a justification of the use of field notes and the personal reflective journal, as

part of the data generation process. The importance of reflexivity to this study is justified.

METHOD

The method chosen in a hermeneutic phenomenological investigation can be flexible and suited to the

explication of the phenomenon that is to be studied (Crotty, 1996, 1997; Giorgi, 1997; van Manen,

1990). This kind of research investigation “ought to maintain a certain harmony with the deep interest

that makes one an educator (or parent or a teacher) in the first place” (van Manen, 1990, p.2). Van

Manen states “pedagogy requires a phenomenological sensitivity to lived experience (children’s realities

and life worlds)”. The fundamental model of van Manen’s approach (1990, p.4) is “textual reflection on

the lived experiences and practical actions of everyday life with the intent to increase one’s

thoughtfulness and practical resourcefulness and tact”. The emphasis on the everyday experience of the

world, the phenomenology, is pre-reflective. “It is as we experience it, before we conceptualise,

categorise or reflect on it” (van Manen, 1990, p.9). When translated into a research method,

phenomenology is concerned with the “qualities, values and impressions of experience” rather than a

96
method that promotes abstraction and explanation (Barnacle, 2004, p.59). It should be clearly stated

however, that Van Manen is adamant that on the basis of his readings of the major phenomenologists

(from Husserl to Heidegger) that researchers should refrain from trying to reduce phenomenological

“method” to a series of “steps” and conceptualizing, categorizing, and quantifying) procedures. A

rationalist approach searching for objectivity struggles with the notion of lived experience because this

practice gives researchers an arguable legitimacy both for their own personal experience and to literary

and other artistic modes of expression (Barnacle, 2004). In this study the use of Gadamer’s philosophical

hermeneutics provides the opportunity to reconcile both a theoretical and an intuitive basis. Van Manen’s

phenomenological position provides guidance for the method used so that theory and practice become

two integrated parts of the same investigation, embracing being-in-the-world and relationality. One mode

does not prioritise over the other or discount the other (Barnacle, 2004). The objectivising, theorising and

measuring practices of science do not have to be abandoned but can be re-situated in, and informed by

the world of perception and interest, and valuation and action, that constitutes our everyday experience

(Barnacle, 2004).

In this way method can be “charged with the methodological considerations and the implications of a

particular philosophical or epistemological perspective” (van Manen, 1990, p.28). There are six research

activities in van Manen’s approach that are enmeshed in a dynamic interplay that is described as

hermeneutical phenomenological research. These research priorities were set out in the table illustrating

the research design for this study in the previous chapter. I now demonstrate how each of these activities

is translated into the working plan that garners the information from the participants to illuminate their

perspectives on schooling.

Van Manen’s research activities

Van Manen’s six research activities that provide shape to this hermeneutical phenomenological study are

1. the researcher defining the existence of a phenomenon that seriously interests the
researcher and commits that person to the world
2. the researcher having a commitment to investigating experience as it is lived rather than as
it is conceptualised
3. the researcher reflecting on the essential themes which characterise the phenomenon
4. the researcher capturing the phenomenon through the art of writing and rewriting
5. the researcher maintaining a strong and oriented pedagogical relation to the phenomenon
6. the researcher balancing the research context by considering parts and whole

97
The first activity requires the existence of a phenomenon that seriously interests the researcher and

commits that person to the world. Van Manen (1990, p.30) describes this serious interest as the project

of someone who sets out to make sense of a certain aspect of human experience. They do this in the

context of particular life, social and historical circumstances. The phenomenological description that is

produced is one interpretation of human experience and this one interpretation does not exhaust the

possibility of yet another interpretation that could be potentially deeper, richer and complementary. So

why am I “seriously interested” in boys in kindergarten and their progress through school? As I set out to

make sense of this aspect of human experience (boys’ views of school) in the context of my particular

life, social and historical circumstances, I realised that I have been deeply engaged by the question that

forms the basis of this study for more than half a century. Why do some boys find ‘school’ hard? The

following excerpt from my journal partly suggests why this question is of such deep interest to me.

Fifty years ago when I went to school in the late 1940’s boys and girls were
in separate classrooms for years three to years six. A strong memory for
me, at school was the white chalk line that was somehow drawn on the
asphalt playground, onerously replaced when it rained or wore off. It
separated the play space for the boys and girls and “woe betide” anyone
who dared cross over. It always struck me as odd, and disturbing even
then, that the boys who wanted to sit quietly were forced to find sanctuary
on the edge of the rumbustious football games and wild chasing and
catching games and girls who were keen to hang upside down on the old
steel monkey bars were not allowed near them. If the girls had tried to do
so, then the compulsory heavy serge navy pleated tunic uniforms would
have fallen southwards revealing mandatory large navy bloomers, with
elastic in the legs.

Later when I taught ballet in the bush, it was only little girls from the
neighbourhood farms who were brought for lessons. However sometimes
my little dance groups were invited to appear on television by an
enlightened producer at Channel Seven in Sydney. This person thought
they could see a marketing opportunity in the unique proposition of little
girls off farming lands in the bush to the north of Sydney dancing from time
to time on a popular afternoon children's show. The fathers, the brothers
and the uncles brought their tractors back to the home base at the

98
designated show time, downed hoes and sometimes travelled down the
road to the neighbours (because not everyone had television sets yet) to
watch the five-minute performance segment of their daughters, nieces and
neighbours’ female children. They not only condoned, but actively
supported, this ‘female’ pursuit, and were prepared to spend valuable
working time observing their children. However, there were no boys in the
groups. No red haired freckly faced Australian Billy Elliot was learning to
dance here.

However later still, when I went to teach at Redfern Central School in the
city, I taught ballet as a sport option and to my surprise a number of little
boys, mostly of Greek origin, asked to be included in my dance group. On
concert days at the school, proud fathers, rotund and black haired, beamed
from the sidelines of the school hall and clapped enthusiastically at their
sons’ dancing achievements. Why was this a different experience for me?

Next, came my own two boys and their journeys through school, where the
unique and diverse was generally met with sanctions. My first-born spent a
great deal of his time sitting behind his kindergarten door because he was
not keen to comply with what he, quite rightly, perceived as senseless
regimes, that were being perpetuated by his aged kindergarten teacher. He
frequently spent his precious learning time unravelling his grey school
socks into one long strand of nylon fibre, as a way to pass the time.

Then in my teaching career, I moved into working with children who found
school hard and had “learning difficulties”, which were never described as
“teaching difficulties”. My student cohort was always boys. Very rarely was
a girl referred to me for help. Some boys were finding literacy learning a
‘closed book’, a mystery. Some of them survived it all and went on to
become famous footballers or found success in other ways, but others
struggled and they continued to find school a miserable place to be,
especially as they became older and moved on to high school. Often they
were suspended, or placed on detention or referred to auxiliary services.
Generally they were encouraged to leave school as soon after they became
fourteen as possible. The more serious cases often found themselves
caught up in activities that attracted the attention of the police.

99
Throughout this whole period of my life I was perplexed as to why boys and
schooling seemed frequently to be a mismatch and so many hours were
spent by so many males ‘‘in trouble’, in detentions, in time-out, in
suspensions, in non attendance and in learning difficulty groups? Why, in
young Ellis’ words (a participant in this study) was school ‘not cool’ for
some?

At this point in my learning journey, I have made an opportunity in my life

to explore some of the issues surrounding the phenomenon of schooling for
boys. I am trying to shine some illumination on the experience of schooling
as young males themselves experience it, and from this enlightenment, to
look for alternative ways to make their learning pathways more successful.
As van Manen advised, I have turned to phenomenological reflections
because of my personal engagement and a keenness to explore this vital
“thing of interest” and to make sense of a certain aspect of human
experience that is important to me.
Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective
Journal

This extract illustrates how my life experiences, intuition and logic have fused to motivate me to study

something I have been deeply involved with for many years. As a child in kindergarten, my experiences

influenced my view of school, later throughout my long career in education I have committed to working

with children, and especially boys, who find school difficult. Collectively these facets have brought me

to a phenomenon that seriously interests me.

Van Manen’s second research activity requires a commitment to investigating experience as it is lived

rather than as it is conceptualised. Van Manen draws from Merleau-Ponty (1962) to describe the

researcher’s position in moving within “the midst of the world of living relations and shared situations”

(Van Manen, 1990, p.32). The plausibility of the account of the ‘lived-experience’ is more important

than any so-called factual accuracy (which is impossible to attain anyway). This aspect of van Manen’s

approach supports the phenomenological concepts of Dasein and being-in-the-world. It is grounded in

Heidegger’s understanding that to be-in-the-world is to be consumed by a constant striving to understand

and attach meaning to our own (and others) numerous “ways-of-being” (Robertson-Malt, 1999, p.293).

100
This relates to the context bound nature of human experience. It does not try to separate past

experience(s) from present. Researchers seek to understand the experience from those who live it as an

intimate part of their being-in-the-world.

Van Manen’s third activity requires reflection on the essential themes which characterise the

phenomenon. A reflective grasping of what it is that gives the phenomenon its special significance can

bring what could be obscure into the light and reveal its true nature. Van Manen writes (1990, p.90)

essential themes are not “objects or generalisations; metaphorically speaking they are more like knots in

the webs of our experience, around which certain lived experiences are spun and thus lived through as

meaningful wholes. Themes are the stars that make up the universes of meaning we live through. By the

light of these stars we can navigate and explore such universes.” The themes identified are relative to a

researcher’s context of engagement with the text and so they are one of many ways of understanding

these experiences (Robertson-Malt, 1999).

Van Manen’s fourth activity requires the researcher capture the phenomenon through the art of

writing and rewriting. For the human sciences and specifically for hermeneutic phenomenological

work, writing is closely fused into the research activity and reflection itself. Van Manen (1990, p.127)

claims “Writing externalises that which is internal and gives appearance and body to thought.”

Kleinsasser (2000, p.159) explains that “educational research has been affected in positive ways by styles

typical of what we may be more accustomed to seeing in journalism, fiction and nonfiction – a

conversational tone, use of the first person, and…self revelation…A more interesting written product

results.” The transcribed interview material can become the phenomenological text on which the

hermeneutic analysis is made. The different meanings that the participants place on the experience can be

induced from the analyses.

Van Manen’s fifth activity requires the researcher to maintain a strong and oriented pedagogical

relation to the phenomenon. Educational research takes from other disciplines their language and

techniques and in so doing stretches tenuously the connection of research to actual pedagogy. When the

researchers produce text, they must demonstrate the strength of their exclusive commitment to the

pedagogy that animated their interest on speaking and writing (the text) originally. This can guard

101
against a tendency to abstraction that can be a hazard and cause practitioners to level criticism of “losing

touch with the real world” of teaching (van Manen, 1990, p.138.) The main aim of research in education

is to educate children in a “pedagogically responsible manner” (p.139). At the core of this notion of van

Manen (1990, p.139) is the view of Rousseau who said, “the heart often provides surer insight than

reason” and put “belief in the virtue and goodness of human nature”. Van Manen (1990, p.143) famously

purports that

the notion of pedagogy is ineffable, and no scientific observation or conceptual formation will
lead to an unambiguous definition of pedagogy…Learning to understand the essence of
pedagogy as it manifests itself in particular life circumstances contributes to a more hermeneutic
type of competence: a pedagogy of thoughtfulness and tact.

Van Manen (1990, p.145) points out that the pedagogically important question is “what is this situation

or action like for this child?” He emphasises this perspective “(e)xactly because pedagogy is in an

ultimate or definite sense unfathomable, it poses the unremitting invitation to the creative activity of

pedagogic reflection which brings the deep meaning of pedagogy to light” (p.149). This is a major

challenge and goal for this research.

Van Manen’s sixth and last activity requires the researcher to balance the research context by

considering parts and whole. There is contextual complexity in a human science research study

because it is the study of lived experience, but any particular study should be well-defined and well

focussed so as not to be overcome by the expanse and depth of the surrounds of the topic (1990, p.167).

Throughout this study I have aimed to manage the contextual complexity that accompanies the

researching of lived experience by maintaining a well defined process, steadfastly focussed on my

“serious interest”. While the six steps are followed as a guide for the study, and I describe them in a

linear fashion, they do not stand separately throughout the process, but overlap, and all through the

procedures that I use, there is travel backwards and forwards from one step to the next and then back

again.

The way that the first two of van Manen’s research activities guide the method used in this study, are

detailed in the remainder of this chapter. The research activities numbered three to six are taken up in

following chapters, where they are related to the analysis of the data gathered, and my interpretation of

this material. To pursue the first of van Manen’s activities, the phenomenon of serious interest, and to

102
gain an understanding of what school means to boys in kindergarten I need to elicit the voices of the

individual students. This means I need to locate boys in kindergarten classes and gain approved access to

them. Next, I need to listen to what they say and how they define what happens to them. To do this I rely

on direct interviews with each individual boy. Every interview is recorded and transcribed (Seidman,

1998). Firstly, I identify and interpret the views of each individual participant. Subsequently I look for

themes and patterns apparent in the multiple cases (van Manen, 1990). Eventually I place particular

emphasis on items that I think demonstrate engagement or alienation with schooling. My main objective

is to gain an understanding of what school means to some individuals and to explore their personal

perceptions. I probe their answers and comments and ask them for clarification. Within the limitations

that emerge because of their young age I seek more detailed explanations (Akehurst et al., 2003) and

more elaborated responses. I expect to develop a level of rapport and trust based in part, on my forty

years of experience in schools, so that the information they provide is representative of their perceptions

of school (Krahenbuhl & Blades, 2006).

Activity two of van Manen’s plan, the commitment to investigating the experience as it is lived and

not as it is conceptualised, firstly requires access to the boys who will participate in the study and take

part in interviews. These boys will form the ‘sample’ for the study. In qualitative research, the type of

sampling used is subject to the methodology selected and the topic being explored, not by the need to

create generalisable findings (Higginbottom, 2004). The paradigm of qualitative research is not critically

appraised in the same way as quantitative research so the existing principles and rules are not applicable

(Mays & Pope, 2000) and there are no closely defined rules for sample size (Tuckett, 2004). The

relatively small numbers are studied in depth and for detail (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Tuckett, 2004).

When the sample is purposive (Coyne, 1997; Miles & Huberman, 1994) and not random, it aims to

achieve a depth of data regarding a specific phenomenon and the participants are sought according to the

requirements of the research aim and objectives (Mays & Pope, 2000; Tuckett, 2004). I selected research

participants who are primarily engaged in the experience being researched (Glaser & Strauss, 1967;

Morse, 1991; Maykut & Morehouse, 1994; Silverman, 2000), that is, boys in kindergarten, in their first

year of formal schooling.

103
In addition, the practicalities, the logistics and the research interpretive framework guide the decisions

made in relation to sampling (Miles & Huberman, 1994). It is not total counts, but rather rich, detailed

descriptions, that are the research goals (Patton, 1998; Carey, 1995). I expected these participants would

give a richness of information that is suitable for detailed research (Patton, 1998). I chose purposeful

sampling as it is a common practice in qualitative research and Miles and Huberman (1994, p. 27) suggest

the sample comes from within boundaries and a framework that is designed to uncover the constructs that

undergird the study. It is sometimes described as a nonprobability sampling technique where the

outcomes of the study are not intended to be generalisable and apply only to the specific group in the

investigation. This lack of generalisability may attract criticism for its limited usefulness (Giacomini,

2001; Mays & Pope, 2000; Coyne, 1997). However as phenomenology is essentially concerned with the

meaning of phenomena within the lived experience of an individual (Van Manen, 1990), a probability

sample would be incompatible with the aim of a sample that does not seek generalisability

(Higginbottom, 2004).

I chose the term, ‘participants’ to describe the boys in my study understanding that this does not mean

they had an active role or participated in constructing the research. Some researchers engaging in the

involvement of children in research advocate that the children be part of a study design team to avoid the

charge of adults “doing things to” children. However, most research studies (involving adults or children)

are conceived prior to approaching the subjects or participants, and this study follows that familiar

pattern. A range of terms for those people who make up the sample is used in qualitative studies as

researchers cannot use the word ‘subject’ because this is not philosophically appropriate and additionally,

carries a sense of control that is unwanted. The terms used include ‘interviewee’, ‘conversant’, ‘reporter’,

‘partner’, ‘respondent’, and ‘informant’. I rejected terms such as ‘informant’ as this had a suggestion of

‘telling on’ rather than ‘telling about’. Howe and Dougherty, (1993) in Kleinsasser, (2000), identified

intimacy and open-endedness as two uniquely qualitative research features in relation to work with the

research participants. They state

[q]ualitative research is intimate (in comparison with experimental research) because it

reduces the distance between researchers and ‘subjects.’ Indeed, there is a tendency to
abandon reference to ‘subjects” – for whom ‘treatments’ are to be developed – in
preference to ‘participants’ – with whom ‘meanings’ are to be negotiated (p.18).

104
This perspective in relation to the participant group is elaborated in subsequent chapters. The participants

in this study are young children and this brings unique challenges for researchers.

Challenges for method in research with young children

As described previously in relation to the increasing practice of listening to the children’s voices coming

from a new age in the sociology of childhood, much current research involving children is significantly

enthusiastic about providing opportunities for children’s voices to be heard. However, this enthusiasm

should be tempered by measured consideration of what this means. As we move enthusiastically into the

pursuit of children’s views, we should take stock of where we as researchers, could be heading. There is

little evidence in the literature of a critical approach to the methods used. Methods of research about

children that directly involve children “appear to be emancipatory and democratic, respecting children’s

agency as individuals in their own right” (Gallacher & Gallagher, 2005) and they give promise of

authentic perspectives of the children. However, by definition, adult generated research reflects a set of

values and assumptions held by the researcher, who is frequently personally well educated and possibly

middle class, and could also be race and gender biased in relation to the participants. The deeply adult

motivations and complex adult outcomes of most research is not something that many children can or

would want to understand, regardless of how comprehensively consulted, negotiated with, or involved.

This encompasses all kinds of research, quantitative and qualitative. For participatory research, there

arises an epistemological claim that children are children so they know children (see Clark & Moss,

2001) which compromises the unique and individual characteristics of all children. Careful planning of

the processes and thoughtful deliberation regarding the outcomes of research with children is essential.

The increase in child participation in research about themselves raises a range of difficult research issues,

referred to earlier. For a long time children have been “objects of enquiry”, (Graue & Walsh, 1998) rather

than informants. These earlier studies typically did not examine children’s views or even their world, but

rather examined developmental processes (Aldred, 1998; Curtin, 2001, p. 296). Graue and Walsh (1998)

maintain researchers have assumed children are too developmentally immature to be able to think

conceptually or to have the language necessary to be able to express their ideas. This position has

changed. Children can now be viewed differently from adults and not seen as inferior (Greig & Taylor,

1999; Kortesluoma et al., 2003; Greene & Hogan, 2005) or as “human becomings” but rather as “human

105
beings” in their own right (Qvortrup, 1997). Docherty and Sandelowski (1999) point to the still prevailing

view that the validity and trustworthiness of child interview data is in question. However they argue that

the interview data from children is not necessarily less well developed but simply is different from data

obtained from adults.

However, researchers should not be encouraged by these positive views into thinking that all children

(especially very young children) can become competent participants in research without giving them the

tools for involvement. Firstly they need to be re-assured that some adults really do have an interest in

what they have to say and that they will be taken seriously, and secondly they need to be given

opportunities to practise the language they need to express their ideas. Practice by children in having

conversations with adults where they hold an equal power relationship would enrich child-adult research.

Current knowledge of child development stages suggest that children under age seven tend to have

difficulty answering questions involving abstractions with a variety of dimensions (Hatch, 1990; Curtin,

2001). However the chronological age of each individual is not a marker, except in a general sense, of

each individual’s developmental stage. A researcher meeting a child for the first time has very limited

time to estimate the child’s developmental level and needs to be prepared to be flexible and to adjust

technique early in the interview sessions. Kvale (1996, p.84) states that as a by product of the open

character and flexibility of an in-depth interview and of the natural sites where they take place, interviews

challenge interviewers to make “on-the-spot decisions” about where to pursue a topic raised by the

interviewee, and whether to probe or to follow the interview guide. An additional aspect that must be

considered is the powerfully charged atmosphere that can be created by the combination of the emotional

condition of the researcher, combined with the emotional condition of the interviewee, simply because of

the unusual activity in which they are engaged.

Numerous studies primarily from the education, health and legal or forensic fields (for example, Davis,

1998; Innes et al., 2001; Kortesluoma et al., 2003) indicate that conducting research with children

requires particular consideration of many methodological, ethical and practical issues if the outcomes are

to yield accurate, reliable and valid data (Montandon & Osiek, 1998). The broad list of challenges for the

researcher wanting to work with children in schools, include matters of sampling, data collection and

106
analysis (including features of reliability and validity, ethical considerations (Punch, 2002; Keddie,

2000) and the interactional complexities of the (school) setting (Backett-Milburn & McKie, 1999).

Researchers seeking efficacy have developed a range of strategies. Conversations, interviews,

observations, focus groups, role plays, surveys, questionnaires and auxiliary items such as photographs,

cue cards, drawings, puppets and cameras have all featured in research in early childhood settings ( for

example Pipe et al., 1993; Mauthner, 1997; Lewis, 2002; Smith et al., 2005; Einarsdottir, 2005a, 2005b).

However, there is a paucity of evidence on the comparative effectiveness of the various methods

(Stafford et al., 2003) and more research is needed to provide insight regarding the effectiveness of

different strategies.

Processes for seeking the participants’ views

I have described how decisions about the sample of participants were made and the challenges of

researching with young children. I now clarify the processes for seeking the boys’ views. The interview in

hermeneutic phenomenological human science, serves very specific purposes including the exploration

and gathering of experiential narrative material that may serve as a resource for developing a richer and

deeper understanding of a human phenomenon. It is also a vehicle from which to develop a

conversational relationship with a partner (interviewee) about the meaning of an experience (van Manen,

1990, p.66). There is significant support in the literature (DiCicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006) for the use of

the process of interviewing as an effective data generating technique. Kvale (2006, p.480) states that

“qualitative research interviewing has become a sensitive and powerful method for investigating subjects’

private and public lives and has often been regarded as a democratic emancipating form of social

research.” However, Sheurich (1995; 1997) warns that data generated by interviews must be treated with

caution in terms of the mutual understandings of what is being said by both parties. A phenomenological

description “is always ‘one’ interpretation, and no single interpretation of human experience will ever

exhaust the possibility of yet another complementary, or even potentially ‘richer’ or ‘deeper’ description”

(van Manen, 1990, p.31). Nevertheless the use of interviews in qualitative research is a crucial way to

generate information (for example, Seidman, 1998; Creswell, 2003).

In this study, as described earlier, during term four towards the end of their first year of formal schooling,

I interviewed fourteen students on at least one occasion in their school setting. The schools are in three

localities representing the rural and metropolitan areas of the NSW Department of Education and

107
Training Illawarra and South East Region (NSW DET ISER). The schools are ‘partner’ schools to high

schools where some boys’ academic outcomes are low, as indicated by formal testing processes [for

example, the Secondary Numeracy Assessment Program (SNAP), English Language Learning

Assessment (ELLA) and Higher School Certificate (HSC) in NSW DET ISER office records]. The

participants included all students who volunteered at each of the schools approached by me with the

formal approval of the NSW Department of Education and Training.

Initially four schools were contacted and the school principals in each school negotiated the students’

participation. One school was unable to encourage any volunteers (probably due to the very high ESL

[English-as-a-Second-Language] component of the population) so the fourteen participants come from

three schools. The students volunteered usually at the suggestion of their parents, carers or teachers.

There is opportunity then for the sample to carry several biases. The bias could come as a result of the

specific features of the families involved. These include those families who support unquestioningly all

school supported or based activities (that is, the signed consent form is returned as invited by school

executive, without question). Secondly, it includes those families who have an interest in the outcomes of

studies investigating the education of male students. They may simply be interested or they may have

specific concerns or curiosity about the progress of their son/s at school. Sampling in this way does not

tap into the views of students whose families preferred not to participate or be involved. This avoidance

of involvement by the families, could relate to a range of issues. These include a lack of understanding of

the project, a general lack of motivation, a rejection of the idea of research for young children in the

school setting, forgetfulness in not sending back the consent form, an inability to read or understand the

form, or a range of family stresses making the participation a very low priority. Further research should

investigate ways of seeking the views of children who do not volunteer to participate in an activity like

this, as they could be the ones who later form the majority of those students who are alienated from

school.

The intimacy of the methods used in hermeneutical phenomenological studies makes encouragement of

individual involvement a difficult task. It can be more challenging than the process methods generally

related to quantitative studies, with group administration of surveys or questionnaires. This anonymity

may engage a larger sample but loses the potential to delve closely into personal responses to research

108
questions. In some cases, various individual responses are rejected if the forms are not correctly

completed, so those children’s voices are not heard or valued.

In this study the interview-conversation is the prime method of generating data. I will now explore some

of the difficulties, challenges and successes that this process brings.

DATA GENERATION

The interview-conversation

“Asking questions and getting answers is a much harder task than it may seem at first” claim Fontane and

Frey, (1994, p.361 in Tollefson, et al., 2001). Tammivaara and Enright (1986) add that when the

informants who are to be interviewed are children, the task becomes even more complicated. A good

understanding of the problems that may emerge especially with interviewing young children does not

make the activity any easier or less vulnerable to significant difficulties, but it does help prepare the

researcher for what may lie ahead.

I will discuss four main problems that are encountered when researchers work with young children using

the interview process as the prime data generating strategy. These are

• the adult-child power relationships;

• the perceived levels of child competence;

• the contexts and setting, and

• the skills of the researcher.

I will explain some of the issues that are associated with these features and how they impact on the

successful generation of data from child participants in the research process. The first significant problem

is

109
 • adult-child power relationships

Adult-child power relationships in research involving children have a significant impact on the method

used and the outcomes of the research (Lewis, 1992). Firstly, the most obvious and most difficult hurdle

is that the researcher is an adult, and the participant is a child. Hatch (1990, p.253) states that “the

culturally defined superiority of adult status works directly against the establishment of harmonious

researcher-informant relationships that are vital to qualitative investigations.” Some studies (Mandell,

1988; Thorne, 1993; Corsaro, 1996; James, 1998) claim to integrate the researcher into the children’s

world, to become their friend. Mandell (1988, p.441) stated “…I wanted to indicate to the children that I

did not want to be treated as a directive or judgemental adult, or worse, a teacher.” Mandell’s position

(apart from revealing an anti-teacher bias) ignores the challenges posed by Lincoln (2001, p.5) who states

“constructions of rapport presume that social scientists and those whom they take to be their research

participants (and subjects) can ultimately find some ground in common, some temporary modus vivendi

which permits them to speak as confidant and confider regarding some phenomenon” (original author

emphasis). The outcome Lincoln argues is “the most readily identifiable characteristic of interview

respondents, gender, focuses the interview context in ways which also partly illuminate the nature of race,

ethnicity and class” (Lincoln, 2001, p.6). These characteristics set the researcher apart regardless of

whatever actions they take. Hatch (1995) confirms the irreconcilable difference,

no matter how we position ourselves, how close our relationships, how good our intentions, we
remain outsiders. The physical, social, cognitive and political differences and distances between
the adult and the child make their relationship inherently different from relationships among
adults…The researcher is NOT a child (Hatch emphasis) (p.145).

Corsaro (1996, p.449 cited in Nespor, 1998) claims “ the more different I am from other adults in the

ethnographic setting, the quicker and easier it is for the children to define me as an atypical adult and

accept me into their peer relations.” However, I argue no amount of familiarity or immersing in the

setting is going to change the deep implications of the child-adult relationship. At the obvious level, the

wrinkled neck, the lines round the eyes, and even the grey hair, in addition to the obvious physical size

differences of the adult cannot be hidden, explained away or changed by the length of time spent in the

setting. More importantly, there are well-established norms and expectations that come with these

socialised and collateralised expectations, and this is especially true in the school setting.

Kvale (2006, p.485) cautions

(a) research interview is not an open and dominance-free dialogue between egalitarian partners,
but a specific hierarchical and instrumental form of conversation, where the interviewer sets the

110
 stage and scripts in accord with his or her research interests. The use of power in interviews to
produce knowledge is a valuable and legitimate way of conducting research. With interview
knowledge jointly constructed by interviewer and interviewee, overlooking the complex power
dynamics of the social constructions may, however seriously impair the validity of the
knowledge constructed.

Lincoln (2001) points to a tension between achieving rapport and acknowledging there is always the

element of social conflict that raises the inescapable inequality issues of age, gender, social class, race,

religion, politics and power. These are forces mitigating against the development of true rapport in any

research interview situation (Parker, 1984, p.21; Manderson, et al., 2006). The establishment of rapport is

a complex and important issue in any interview situation but it is especially vital when interviewing

children (Parker, 1984; Partington, 2001; Hatch, 2002). Ironically, this can be especially true if the adult

has credibility with the child (Lewis, 2004), as building rapport may be counter productive in that it may

lead to a greater proneness to suggestibility (Lewis, 2004) where the child tries even harder to say what

they think the adult wants to hear. This is one reason that researchers use soft toys like puppets to distance

themselves and hope that the children may perceive the question is a genuine and sincere effort to gain

information as it is being asked by a less powerful figure (Lewis, 2004).

Because I was sensitive to the impact of these forces in the collection of the information for this study, I

hoped to present perhaps like a sympathetic (non-threatening) visiting ‘grandmother’, and spent as much

time as I could around each participant child’s vicinity in the school. I attended school assemblies,

practices for end-of-year presentation plays, and spent time in some classrooms. I was present in the

playground during recess and lunch play periods and during before-school activities. However, even

when researchers are able to spend long periods of time attempting to become familiar persons in the

children’s world that they wish to investigate, this actual presence changes the relationship and merely

shifts the adult-child focus into a different but still unequal status. This impacts on the outcomes and does

not guarantee superior or even different data.

Throughout the data generating period of this study and in all my actions involving the children, I was

aware of these dangers and despite making the situation as supportive and as encouraging as I could, it

was not possible to eradicate the impact of these factors. It is not possible for this socialised position to be

shed, within a single or few interviews with children, if at all. What can be aimed for, is a truthful

representation to the children of why the researcher is present and why they are asking questions. As the

111
researcher, I wanted to ask the boys about their life at school and this is what I told them. However, this

aim for simplicity brings with it other difficulties.

Among the unique problems that arise because children are socialised in the adult-child power

relationship is their notion that there is a ‘right answer’ to questions asked by adults, and that the adults

and those in authority already know the ‘correct’ answers. The right-answer problem (Hatch, 1990) is

exacerbated if the research is carried out in a school setting (and the researcher is a practising or former

teacher) because of the strong perceptions held by children that teachers are seeking right answers to

questions of which they already know the answer (Lewis, 2004). Most children do not understand the

notion that an adult truly wants to know what they think (Hatch, 1990). The adult remains a source of

power and authority and constraint and children are socialised mostly to comply, obey and respect.

The difference in the power adult-to-child relationship will affect the child’s comfort in expressing their

thoughts and feelings and the adult’s evaluation of the children’s ideas (Curtin, 2001, p.296). The child

thinks they have to provide an answer rather than an opinion of their own (Curtin, 2001, p.297). This

position is consolidated also in many families by the way parents operate. Even continual reassurance that

this is not so by a researcher, has its own difficulties, as the children continue to think they cannot have

an opinion of their own, only that what they have just said must be wrong. Children remain careful about

how they respond to adults (Fine & Sandstrom, 1988, p.43 in Curtin, 2001). These notions are expressed

in a range of ways. For example, researchers returning for second and third interviews may give the

children the idea they were incorrect or inadequate in the original interview, and they may provide

different information regarding the same events when repeatedly asked about them (Docherty &

Sandelowski, 1999, p.181). Likewise, researchers need to avoid repeating closed questions as children

may think the repeat closed question gives a signal that the original response was incorrect (Lewis, 2004)

but sometimes there is benefit in repeating the focus of an open question (Beresford, 1997 in Lewis,

2004).

Other challenges include the possibility that young children will mask negative feelings about matters that

are being discussed and they will withhold information about unpleasant experiences because they do not

want to elicit a negative response from the interviewer or others who might hear what they say. This

112
factor was frequently demonstrated in this study, by the boys abruptly changing the topic of our

conversation to something quite different and totally unrelated to the area that I wanted to explore, but

they wanted to avoid.

Docherty and Sandelowski (1999) indicate that children often have difficulty is ascertaining what the

interviewers want to know from them, and interviewers take for granted that children will see the

obvious. They advise interviewers to take the time to clarify for the child the purpose of the interview

(p.180). I tried to explain the purpose of the activity and the “rules of conversation” for this particular

circumstance that is one that might not have been experienced by the child before (Elbers, 1991; Mulder

&Vrij, 1996). I was conscious that too much talking and scene setting and explanation could be

overwhelming, however it was important that the purpose and intent of the interview was explained

(Docherty & Sandelowski, 1999).

However, there is a fine balance between taking time to clarify and overloading especially young children

with too much researcher talking. The tension between how much to explain about what research is and

explaining why I was talking to the children was a dilemma that I did not completely resolve in this study.

I was conscious that a barrage of female-based language in particular, should not overwhelm boys, but

simultaneously I knew that it was ethical for them to know what we were going to be doing together. I

experimented with varying levels of clarification of the study’s purpose with the participants, and the

outcomes varied with the participants. The outcomes were not improved necessarily, by the longer

clarifications. The responses varied more because of the characteristics of the child I was interviewing

rather than my attempts to explain. This is based on the children’s expectations of adult-authority

requests. There was no need to understand what the research was about because in their view it was going

to happen regardless of their level of understanding of the intent of the activity. They were content to be

compliant and to do what had been suggested to them by their teacher or their parent. In some cases, it

seems they decided to participate because they were keen to do something different, and out of the usual

school routine.

Some boys did not have enjoiner-rejoinder skills but this could be for many reasons. Perhaps they are not

at all familiar with a mutual power-free situation of conversation with an adult, perhaps they were not

113
engaged with my story, perhaps they were nervous or anxious, perhaps they were distracted by something

else quite personal and unrelated to the site and the situation. Other boys did demonstrate aspects of this

skill, particularly when playing the ‘Lego’ game with me.

Much of the ethical requirements and regulations for research with children, can be negated by the

socialised position the child holds in terms of adult-child relationships. It has been claimed by some

researchers that children have the capacity to provide assent (Kleinsasser, 2000; Cameron, 2005; Ford et

al., 2007). They must be told they have the right to dissent, or to withdraw (Thomas & O’Kane, 1998) and

they are entitled to confidentiality (Walker, 2007). However, I argue that they do not necessarily

understand they have the power to exert these rights, no matter how often, or in what way the researcher

expresses them. I have examined in detail, the ethical elements of carrying out research activities with

children in chapter one, and I explore some of the outcomes at the conclusion of the study.

A second important feature in the interview process is

• perceived competency of child

Researchers working with children need to examine personal beliefs regarding children’s competencies

(Kortesluoma et al., 2003). It is possible to recognise children as experts on their own lives, and to accept

that they may have competencies about which adults are ignorant. It is possible to be deceived into

thinking that because we have been a child that we know all about children. When the child cannot

answer or does not answer that does not necessarily mean they are not competent. It is necessary to

examine the entire situation, the context, the child’s age and the researcher’s role in asking the questions

(Curtin, 2001, p.297). The difficulties in communicating have kept researchers from examining the world

of children from the vantage point of children for many years (Tammivaara & Enright, 1986, p.226).

The researcher should try to learn to use ways of communicating that bridge the different styles. This

includes to look for meaning in short phrases, to understand ‘kid’s’ language including the non-standard

use of words, to allow children enough time to answer and to ask questions in more that one way, to learn

the words children understand and try not to use ‘big’ words or complex language (Curtin 2001). Equally

it is important not to speak down or to patronise children.

114
When interviewing children who are at the pre-operational or concrete stage (according to Piaget) it is

important to concentrate on the ‘here and now’ situations (Kortesluoma, et al., 2003). Some children of

all ages, also use “fewer words to encapsulate the meaning of their message” than many adults do. When

asked general or vague questions children may give minimal information (Pipe et al., 1993 in Curtin,

2001). When asked specific questions about their present experience, more information can be elicited.

Communicating with children can take more time and effort if the researcher wants to learn about

children’s perspectives (Curtin, 2001).

Deatrick (1984) suggests starting with the concrete and moving towards the more abstract questions in

line with cognitive abilities. In this study, I began by asking how the children come to school as a starting

point that was designed to be non-threatening and easy to understand. However, each child is different

and the researcher must judge appropriately the path to take, on each separate occasion.

Early developing language skills are particularly significant in relation to interviewing child participants

and especially very young children (Sheurich, 1995; Harrett, 2002). Harrett (2002) investigated the

personal stories of Key Stage One infants in the United Kingdom and found a “lack of vivacity in many

of the personal stories recounted by the children”(p.20). Harrett reported that in most cases the “personal

stories were bland and uninspiring and invited little comment from others”. She questioned whether this

was because they had not developed the technique or maturity or because they lacked confidence due to

insignificant practice. Harrett (2002, p.20) stated “strictures are placed on them by adults and the needs of

the curriculum, rather than by personal needs. They are taught to listen carefully, not to interrupt, and to

do as they are told.” These teachings do not encourage competent participation in interview situations.

Harrett acknowledges that the poor quality of personal discourse that she found, could relate to the false

situation set up for the purpose of the collection of data (David, 1999 in Harrett, 2002) and the probability

that interactions with an unfamiliar adult are inhibiting to young children (Rosen, 1991 in Harrett, 2002).

It is possible that it is the actual format and presentation of the questions that elicits only minimal

information from children, (Pipe et al., 1993, p.25 in Curtin, 2001), and thoughtful and reflective

attention to the quality of the questions is essential. In addition, the researcher must be alert to what may

appear to be meaningless or shallow responses because of their lack of verbal detail, because when

115
examined carefully these same statements may be rich with meaning (Zwiers & Morrissette, 1999 in

Curtin 2001, p.297). There is a view that children’s language is limited in vocabulary and that children

have limited understandings of different language usage. Researchers with children as participants are

challenged to use ways of communicating that bridge the different styles of adults and children. The

children may use non-standard words and they need more time to answer questions in more than one

way. The researcher has to find words and vocabulary that are appropriate.

Uneasiness in the researcher may occur, at the data gathering stage, as during the interview/conversation

the children’s responses may seem minimal. It can seem that there has been little conversation that deals

with the research topic, or that what the children are talking about is wildly irrelevant or they may seem to

be saying very little at all. However, if proper, extensive and sensitive analysis is conducted, these same

few words can reveal significant meaning and be of considerable importance. The statements children

make may appear meaningless or shallow because of the lack of detail but when examined carefully and

sensitively, they are often rich with meaning (Zwiers & Morrissett, 1999, in Curtin, 2001). This is where

careful attention, like the strokes of a brush on a canvas, can add meaning to meaning, and produce

something rich and valuable.

Young children can be “accurate but incomplete in their accounts” (Saywitz & Snyder, 1996).

Confabulation or filling gaps in memory with invention, is well documented as an interview strategy used

by young children. If the question is repeated, they fill in with imagined details that they then come to

believe (Ceci & Bruck, 1993, in Garven et al., 1998; Bjorkland et al., 1998). This relates generally more

to people than events, although the significance of the event to the child is an important factor (Beresford,

1997, in Lewis, 2001).

The literature is replete with suggestions for strategies and laws about how to approach children (for

example, Geanellos, 1998a; 1998b; Hatch, 1990; Bricher, 2000; Harrett, 2002; Punch, 2002; Krahenbuhl

& Blades, 2006). Among these is the requirement to begin with the core question to engage the

participant in providing their account of their experiences in this particular context and school (Ironside,

2006, p.479). Considerable research has demonstrated that making statements, rather than asking

questions, may gain more elaborated responses from children. Others suggest, using a comment instead of

116
a question (da Cunha Rego, 2003, in Lewis, 2004) as a valuable action in sustaining and prompting the

extension of ideas.

Other writers notify of particular characteristics related to levels of development. For example,

Kortesluoma, et al., (2003) warns that a child’s developmental stage may provide ‘illogical’ answers,

from the viewpoint of an adult. There is a range of reasons for why this happens with young children.

Sometimes my comments drew unexpectedly ‘literal’ responses. I was playing Lego with Nigel and he

was adamant that we were not playing ‘schools’, and would not be playing ‘schools’. We had retrieved a

group of Lego figures and he was arranging them on the Lego mat. I asked: “what are you going to do

with these people? There’s one sitting on a box. What are you going to do with them? Oh, look! Who do

you think that is? What you’ve just got there, what’s that?” (and I meant, what are you pretending here?).

Nigel glanced at me, appraising, paused, and then said: “It’s the Lego.” On another occasion I was talking

to Warrick. He was telling me about various school activities.

W People come to read us (sic) and reading’s over…and… (long pause)

RC (I interrupt) What’s the best part about all of that?
W Mmmm….craft.
RC Tell me about it.
W You do some…Chr…Christmas things.
RC What are you doing at the moment? (meaning what Christmas craft activity)
W Talking to you (looking at me with slightly raised eyebrows)
Transcript WTP Lines 88-94, pp. 6-7

This literal response was demonstrated also by Aimon when he was looking at the maths activity picture.

I asked “can you see any children in there that you know?” and of course, because he couldn’t see anyone

he knew, he said “nope”. However when I re-phrased the question to, “do you think if you were looking

at that picture, which one might be most like you?” he answered, pointing to a figure, “that one.”

Ben tried to make sense of the picture of the math activity that was using a coat hanger as a prop, (see

example in the appendices) by asking me, looking at me quizzically, “they making a shirt?” These

responses demonstrate the literal comprehension that means teachers and students are often starting from

very different places of understanding before the desired ‘learning’ can begin. This has resonance with

my reflection about what the mathematical ‘rainbows’ meant to me in kindergarten.

Common sayings were present in some boys’ talk. Cade used the expression “guess what?” at frequent

intervals and Tyson kept saying, “you know what?” often when he wanted to divert me away from my

117
intent and go in another direction. This practice of course, is not limited to young children and talkers of

all ages have habitual, idiosyncratic phrases that punctuate their conversational exchanges.

Kortesluoma et al. (2003) also suggest that ‘yes’ and ‘no’ answers must be judged with care, and efforts

should be made not to ask closed questions. This is often difficult to do, especially if both the researcher

and the participant are anxious about the activity.

Another interview strategy is to encourage children to state explicitly that they “don’t know” what to

answer or do not understand a question (Saywitz & Snyder, 1996; Lewis, 2004; Cameron, 2005). Saywitz

and Snyder found with a study involving young children (six to eight year olds) that they could be taught

to identify non-comprehension and to ask for re-phrasing. I argue that re-phrasing would not always gain

the appropriate response and the researcher needs to check and be cautious around the reasons for the

answer ‘don’t know’. In my study the ‘don’t know’ response occurred occasionally. In these examples,

children sometimes used this response to avoid answering in an area where they were unsure of what the

‘acceptable’ response might be rather than they genuinely did not have an answer or an opinion. It was

also used to halt the process or change direction, or to indicate fatigue or loss of interest.

In the first example, Nigel and I were looking at the picture of the math activity, depicting children

playing a hopscotch type game to explore number concepts.

N They’re playing hopscotch.

RC Are they? Why do you think they’re doing that?
N Don’t know.
RC Does this sort of thing happen in your school?
N Yep
RC And what’s going on when that happens in your school?
N Don’t know
RC Don’t you? (encouraging)
N Nah.
Transcript NQW Lines 767-775, p. 49

Nigel simply had had enough at this stage and did not want to answer, rather than could not answer. Nigel

used ‘don’t know’ on other occasions to signal he had had enough of the direction I was pursuing and

after a dispirited ‘yep’ to one of my questions, followed by a very long sigh (probably due to boredom or

fatigue) he said hopefully, “…and are we going to do the Lego now?” When I responded to this hope by

trying to get another question covered, by asking, “in a moment, what sort of things does your teacher do

118
to help you?” he answered in a very resigned and by now, almost sullen way, “don’t know”. It was a clear

signal I needed to change the activity and my line of questioning.

Alternatively, Cade answered ‘don’t know’ when he both did not have an answer for a difficult question

and he wanted to avoid the question. In this exchange he used ‘don’t know’ as a diversionary device

twice.

C After we works… because we got free play.

RC Oh…tell me about that.
C Sometimes when we nearly finished our work we get to have a play or read a book or get
scrap paper…or go on a computer
RC So work is what…What’s this work you are talking about?
C I don’t know
RC So there’s something that’s work and when you’re finished work you can have free play?
C Yep.
RC And then the free play might be computer or Lego or drawing on scrap paper?
C Yep.
RC Ok, so why do you reckon you have free play?
C I don’t know about that either.
Transcript CGP lines 346-356, p. 19

Tyson also indicated “don’t know” as the appropriate answer when he really did not know. When we

were talking about why we need to learn things at school, he said, “I don’t know” because the question I

asked was too demanding. On a later occasion he answered “Oh… I don’t know” when I asked him if he

could draw a picture of things happening at school, but he was very happy to comply when I suggested

“Let’s have a try.” On other occasions “don’t know” was a kind of conversational marker such as in this

exchange with Niam:

N You know, Isaac – he can’t even do the calendar

RC Oh dear, and why do you think that is?
N I don’t know. Maybe because he doesn’t learn.

Transcript NTP, lines 74-76 p.6

Kortesluoma, et al., (2003) indicates some children will answer “don’t know’ when they are in familiar

circumstances, others will offer answers to every question and never answer “don’t know” even when

they don’t, and some may not be able to express feelings verbally, and will answer ‘don’t know’ in those

circumstances. Others elaborate on their answer immediately, such as Niam quoted above.

At a more pragmatic level, there are further challenges. One is the level of articulation skills of the

participants. McIntyre et al., (2005) sought to elicit pupils’ ideas about classroom teaching and learning in

119
secondary schools. They noted “clear differences among pupils in the articulacy with which they

expressed their views… (some were)…more fluent and more elaborate in their discussion of factors

influencing their learning” (p.153). While the monosyllabic expressions of teenage boys are the subject of

much populist comment, work with very young children is also subject to a similar difficulty. In my

study, the boys displayed a wide range of competency in the mechanics of articulating their thoughts for a

variety of reasons, including their young age, their stage of cognitive development, their experience and

confidence, and their physical condition. In some cases they used gesture rather than say anything. For

example I asked Warrick about his siblings in the following exchange:

RC So have you got any brothers or sisters?

W Just one sister
RC How old’s your sister?
Transcript WTP Lines 33-35 p.3

Rather than answer this question orally, Warrick demonstrated how many years by holding up five fingers

on one hand and two fingers on the other and grinning broadly at me, and then saying proudly “and I’m

six”. The boys often answered with a physical gesture such as nodding, shrugging their shoulders, pulling

faces or using their hands dramatically, as Warrick did when he tried to explain where the house across

the road was, as he described their Christmas lights display to me and he was very keen that I understand

exactly where the house was. He gestured with both his hands, making a square shape, he then drew one

hand across the invisible shape he had created, with the other hand to show the house diagonally across

from his house. In another example Connor was talking to me about getting angry when someone tried to

punch him:

RC I’d get angry about that too. So what do you do when they try to punch you?
C Tell the teacher
RC And what happens?
C Then I …they…I walk away from them.
RC You’re a very sensible boy. Very sensible. Did somebody tell you that was a good thing to
do?
C No. because somebody punched me…and they were pointing at me…James and Warrick
…and no one is allowed to point at this school.
Transcript CTP Lines 197-202 p.12

As he said this, Connor made dramatic gestures of using his fingers to look like a gun and pointing and

waving them at me and then he drew one hand with one finger extended backwards and forwards across

his throat, as if using a knife, while he grimaced, meaningfully.

Shouting was common when understanding dawned, or excitement and enthusiasm took over or in Ellis’s

case, he wanted to be emphatic. For example: Omar on first answering my question of how he gets to

120
school, said “U...um...walk?” (said almost in a whisper) and was intently watching my face. Reading

acceptance and encouragement there, he suddenly confidently shouted, “WALK!” and nodded

enthusiastically at me.

Ellis had other reasons for shouting. He was telling me what he did with the pencil and book which he

had said designated ‘work’:

E I…um…I kind of write stuff. (said very hesitantly and quietly)

RC What stuff do you write?
E I can’t remember.
RC Do you like doing it?
E No.. ooo. WORK IS BORING! (he shouts)
Transcript EQW Lines 46-50, p.3

Mandell, 1988 and Curtin, 2001 cite situations in which preschoolers may use babble or non-standard

English in a way that other children, but not always adults, can understand the meaning. Curtin reported

on the greater reliance on nonverbal language and silence for communication, used by children.

Sometimes children speak in short sentences, and vary the pitch, tone and loudness of their voices to

clarify meaning. Several of the boys in this study were still using the “w” sound for “r” which apart from

emphasising their very young age, also increased the difficulty of understanding them from time to time.

The transcripts show frequent occasions where so called ‘baby’ talk, singing, loud and sudden noises and

what I have termed ‘dramatic’ talk were used. A difficulty that studying transcripts can bring is that these

language behaviours do not translate effectively into written text. I was careful to note these voice

attributes because a child singing, shouting, and dramatising an answer, changes the meaning of the

utterance. It is difficult to report on these verbal exchanges and represent what actually occurred in the

talking, in a written text. For example, Dylan was talking to me about computers, when the following

happened.

RC Okay, and so you have turns or you have to be really good to get a turn?
D Turns.
RC Everybody will get a go?
D Yeah and if you look at the computer you don’t get a go.
RC Okay, so you’ve got not to look? (laughing) As I said this I make a sweeping
‘dramatic’ gesture of covering my eyes with my hands and Dylan responded being
equally ‘dramatic’ and spoke in a very loud and highly exaggerated way
D Y-E-e-e-E-A-H ! You have to C-L-o-o-O-O-O-o-o-S-E your E-e-E-e-Y-E-e-E-e-S!
(and he covered his eyes with his hands too)
Transcript DGP Lines 77-82, p. 5

121
Much of the ‘noise’ making accompanied the drawing of the pictures or the playing with Lego, where

scenes were being dramatically enacted. Often the noises seemed to be an integral part of the game and

were not related to me in any way. One example where the case of singing or other sounds suddenly

appeared included the following singing from Jaden. He and I were talking about an incident he had

described about falling over and hurting himself and he showed me his wounds. As we discussed his

injury I said:

RC Oh, it’s much better! It looks very healthy now. What did your Nan say when she saw
it?
J Um…she said what did you done what did I done?
RC And what did you say?
J I tripped over on my b-i-i-g, b-i-i-i-g elbow (high pitched tone ascending and
descending through the word big)
Transcript JQW Lines 151-154, p.8

He laughed out loud and then playfully sang this response in a long drawn out very sing-song way! Other

occasions were unexpected. I was talking to Darrius while he was drawing his picture of school:

RC So Darrius, you’ve got a very unusual name? (trying to chat conversationally)

D Hmm…
RC Where does that come from?
D You want me to do the laugh? I can do ‘funny laugh’. (he suddenly makes a very loud
high pitched sound like a horse whinnying)
RC Oh! You can!
D I don’t know why I can do it. But I’m magic!
Transcript DGP Lines 383-388 p. 18

Children can use unusual sounds to divert the direction of the conversation unlike anything an adult is

likely to do, in a similar situation.

In some cases I needed to ask the child to repeat what he had said, as I could not understand what his

words were (no doubt complicated by my level of hearing capacity!) For example, I asked Warrick, “…

and what sort of things does the teacher say?” He replied “if you do good work you can pick out of the

treasure box.” I misheard him and I tried to clarify, “out of the choosing box?” He explained for me, and

cleverly linked my comment with his comment and said, “No, treasure box. Toys that you can choose out

except it’s not a real one. It’s just a normal box.”

An important concern expressed by McIntyre et al., (2005, p.155) is the danger of discrimination if the

“medium of consultation is talk and pupils differ in confidence and articulateness with which they can

express their ideas”. These authors note that this difference often reflects social class distinctions so there

122
is a possibility that consultation practices will further divide and silence those who do not fit the dominant

discourse and the academic aspirations of their schools. These students eventually can be alienated and

they are the students whose views, we as educators, looking to make improvements and aiming to help

more students to succeed, need most to hear.

The third important feature to be considered is

• the contexts and the settings

This study contends with the adult to child relationship being especially difficult as it took place in a

school context. Firstly, children are already socialised to conform to adults’ wishes (Koocher & Keith-

Spiegel, 1994, in Curtin 2001) and secondly, children are especially taught to follow teachers’

instructions and school rules, without question. As described earlier children learn that when a teacher

asks a question they need to try to work out what the teacher wants to hear and predict the right answer

(Tammivaara & Enright, 1986; Curtin 2001). This ‘habitus’ is not helpful in this research situation.

Hatch (1990, p.254) refers to the dangers of the inevitable adult-child relationship. During my interviews,

on some occasions I seem directive and I sound like I am exercising authority. This was the result of my

being nervous in this new situation. I was carrying the anxieties of all researchers when they are gathering

data that is to be central to the research exercise. There are occasions when it is evident in my tone of

voice, and the rapidity with which I asked the questions that I was frustrated and uncomfortable and we

both would have been happier doing something else at that moment.. Despite my sensitivity to this very

problem, I had reverted to a controlling teacherly role. It is the same unfortunate motivation that many

teachers carry with them into classrooms where the students are difficult to manage, and has to do with

needing to maintain control, and this manifestation required I adjust my presentation quickly. Later when

I adopted a lively, more friendly approach improved responses were immediately evident.

The setting itself may have unexpected influence on the research process. Schools provide a site as

suitable as they can and I was assisted here, by very helpful staff who gave up their office space for my

visits. However, unintended influences can arise. I mentioned to Nigel early in our talk that it was a bit

hot in the office and we could take our jackets off. He suddenly remarked, “And this is where I went to

Miss Teacher so she knows what if I can r(w)ead well or not”. I confirmed that he came to the office to be

123
assessed for reading skills and asked, “Do you like reading?” he answered that he did, and added “I think

all the kindergarteners come here to do r(w)eading.” I reflected that if the space is one generally used for

testing purposes or assessments, the children may think that the research process with me, was like a test

also, and this could have been adding to their insecurities in making sure they gave the ‘right’ answer, or

the answer they thought I was looking for. The same difficulty could arise when I was using the

counsellor’s room in another school, as counsellors frequently are called on to test children for a range of

reasons, and their office space could be associated with a ‘test’ situation.

Finally, the fourth feature that impacts on the successful outcome of interviewing as a research process is

• the skill of the researcher

Appropriate researchers’ skills and techniques are crucial. Work related to investigating Piaget’s findings

(Curtin, 2001) showed that new researchers asking Piaget’s questions in a way more related to the

children’s life, clarified what concept was being tested and gained different results. Changing the

technique used by a researcher to get children talking will change the outcome (Curtin, 2001, p.297) as

does the skill, experience, and competency of the researcher. The researcher has to demonstrate a credible

desire to learn, a real interest in the experiences and stories of children (Kortesluoma et al., 2003). The

researcher has to convey the importance they feel of learning the children’s perspectives and to “employ

specific strategies to reduce authoritarian, judgmental, and interfering behaviour (Curtin, 2001, p.298). In

my case, I drew on my experience of many years working one-to-one with children with learning

difficulties.

Garbarino and Stott (1992, p.8) state “that in general, the more confident and mature the child, the more

positively familiar the setting, and the more conversational the inquiry, the more effective the process of

communication and the more valid the information will be.” However while the site chosen might be

familiar, (Graue &Walsh 1998; Parkinson, 2001) this does not necessarily promote articulate

contributions especially if the setting is one on school grounds. There can be a range of reasons why this

familiar setting is inhibiting including there is something else more interesting happening, the

relationships are complex and locally constrained. Garbarino and Stott (1992) demonstrate that there are

few fixed and specific formulas for communicating effectively with children and “adaptability to the

characteristics of each child, each situation and each adult is essential” (p.9). The difficulty for the

124
researcher can be that this adaptation may have to occur spontaneously and adjustments made on the go.

Price (2001, p.275) comments on aspects of this dilemma faced by researchers

…in thinking on their feet, gathering information, responding and making mental notes about
where to ask further questions…about whether following a new lead on a different aspect of the
phenomenon might help the respondent keep going, or will prompt the respondent to ‘dry up’.
Asking additional questions on the current topic may signify a compliment to the respondent
(you’re saying interesting things) or represent a threat (I want to find out more).

The action of “thinking on my feet” was exemplified in my study when I needed to adjust to a participant

with autistic behaviour and a significant English language difficulty, only apparent, once an interview had

started. This could have been pre-empted through pre–interview discussion with staff, but the exigencies

will still exist if you believe a researcher should work with all those who volunteer, regardless of their

potential competency in the interview situation. In this case the outcome was positive and the student

provided enlightening data. No participants should be discarded from any study because the process is

challenging or difficult or the researcher’s expectations are not met.

In this study numerous occasions arose when spontaneous decisions about the direction of the

conversation, needed to be made. In hindsight, and on studying the transcripts, it is possible to see where I

could have taken alternative directions and made different decisions and may have enabled further, richer

data to be generated. In the following example I am talking with Omar. Our conversation so far, had

featured very long pauses and often only one word utterances in response to my prompts. I had been

struggling to get him to respond to me in an elaborated way and I decided to move to the activity of

looking at the pictures and line drawings mentioned earlier. I show him the picture of children engaged in

a common classroom activity.

RC And have you seen things like this in your school? (a closed question)
O I think… (a very long pause of ten seconds) eh… (another pause of five seconds)… ah….
(pause of five seconds)…
RC (I break into the long silence…) And the last one, that one there (gesturing to the remaining
picture) So what can you tell me about that picture? What’s in there?
Transcript OQW Lines 97-99, p.6

I moved on, made anxious by the seemingly long pauses. In hindsight, and with the benefit of studying

the transcript, it could be that following his beginning “I think…” he may eventually had something

useful to say, if only I had waited even longer. I should have followed his lead and encouraged him by

saying, “so you think…?” A strong imperative on the researcher to relieve the apparent anxiety of the

participant, can lead to peremptory interruptions.

125
In another conversation with Dylan, I followed a lead where I had two choices, and probably took the one

that gave less important information for the purposes of my study.

RC What do you do in this school instead?

D Do some work and go on the computers.
RC Oh, tell me about going on the computers
Transcript DGPS Lines 61-63, p.4

We went on to talk about computers and in hindsight; I may have gained useful information if I had asked

about ‘work’ instead, and I could have still followed on with talk about computers.

Some of the features of the interview situation are more pragmatic than the complexities of human

interactions, but are no less crucial to the success of the activity. Among the items to be considered is the

use of the tape recorder.

Using the tape recorder

Wiles et al., (2005, p.90) make the point that “in an interview the presence or absence of recording

devices affects the interaction and the nature of the talk, especially for those unfamiliar or uncomfortable

while being recorded. Something happens to the conversational mode of the relationship when you get the

tape recorder out. On the other hand, the use of a tape recorder enables long, intensive study of exactly

what was said between the researcher and participant.”

I thought the use of a tape recorder and microphone was essential to capture all of the spoken

interchanges between the participants and me. I wanted to concentrate on the ‘play’ of the conversation as

it was occurring and I thought that taking too many notes at this time would be constraining of my efforts

to engage the boys in talking with me. I explained to the boys what the tape recorder was for and attached

the tiny lapel microphone to their shirts to ensure clarity for recording. This action generated a range of

responses, including one little boy who continually wanted to put the microphone device wholly into his

mouth and another who wanted frequently to stop our talking together and listen to himself. Some had to

be encouraged not to lean forward towards the tape recorder when speaking or to shout. Other boys

seemed unaware that the tape recorder was operating and several went to leave the interview site still

attached to the equipment.

126
Harrett (2002, p.20) encouraged her subjects to play with the recorder and other researchers have

involved the students in the mechanics of the on/off buttons and let the children control the recorder.

Kortesluoma and Nikkonen (2004, p.214) report that while some researchers state that the use of tape

recorders may cause anxiety and withdrawal (Rich, 1968) they found that the use of the tape recorder

demonstrated that the interview was important and it was a means of motivation in some cases. They

found the children that they interviewed were familiar with the equipment and forgot its presence quickly.

Most children wanted to listen to themselves. None wanted to change what they had said.

I determined how much involvement I would encourage in relation to the individual children as I met

them, and I experienced the full range of responses to the equipment described above. One boy, Dylan,

took the opportunity of access to the recording equipment, to rehearse his Christmas songs, providing a

loud, lengthy but very tuneful rendition of

YOU BETTER NOT SHOUT

YOU BETTER NOT START (and the rest of every verse!)
SANTA CLAUS IS COMING TO TOWN!

Transcript DGPS Lines 506-508, p.23

accompanied by a number of hearty “ MERRY CHRISTMAS ! HO HO HO’s” which he was keen to

listen to several times over, making sure he operated all the equipment himself. He may have just been

enjoying the experience or he may have been diverting me from my course of questions.

I recorded each interview on a separate cassette. I labelled each cassette identifying the participant and

school by pseudonym and my interview code. I followed the cautionary advice (Easton et al., 2000)

regarding the possible threats to the research process from equipment failure and environmental

conditions and carried an additional recorder, fresh batteries, electrical extension cords and numerous

blank cassettes. The tiny lapel microphone was very high quality and ensured background noise and other

interruptions did not interfere with the quality of the recording.

Having explored four of the major challenges in using the interview as the prime data generating activity

in this mixed method hermeneutic phenomenological study, I now address in detail the interview process.

Firstly I explain why I chose the individual one-to-one interview situation rather than talking to children

127
in pairs, or in groups. Then I describe each of the scaffolded situations, the conversation, the drawing,

talking about pictures and playing with Lego.

Individual interviews

Researchers have referred to the difficulties associated with using one-to-one interviewing as the

primary data-generating source (Docherty & Sandelowski, 1999; Graue & Walsh, 1998). Supporters of

group talks suggest that this ensures care is provided to individuals, there is opportunity for greater

openness, someone always responds, there is flexibility, and a group situation replicates a safe peer

environment that children are used to in the school setting. The use of groups tries to redress the adult-

child power imbalance, and other participants are memory joggers (Hatch, 1995). The child participating

in a group may not feel like they are being questioned by an adult but rather that they are sharing an

experience with a group of peers (Levine & Zimmerman, 1996). Parkinson (2001) argues that children

should be interviewed in small groups as they know and understand that setting as it is similar to school

practice.

However, this study relies almost totally on one-to-one interview-conversations, as I wanted to avoid

peer influence, ‘groupthink’ (Carey, 1995) and the follow-the-leader bias that can come from pairs of

children or groups of children talking to researchers. I considered any negative outcomes from one-to-

one interviews to be preferable to the possible dangers of distorted data from paired or group responses

(Carey & Smith, 1994; Ashbury, 1995; Carey, 1995). In my long experience of working with children in

various settings I have observed the child with the most articulate competencies or leadership skills or

peer popularity, leading their companions or others in the group to echo their views. Garven et al. (1998)

provides support for these observations. Studies show when children are told about statements made by

others this creates pressure for conformity and a “tendency to change or modify our own behaviours so

that they are consistent with those of other people” (Ettinger, et el., 1994, p.685, in Garven et al., 1998).

Siegler (1992) points to Binet’s work, discovering that children’s statements regarding factual matters

can be influenced by a desire for conformity. Children will follow the unofficial leader, even when it is

obvious that the leader is wrong. Pynoos and Nader (1989, in Garven et al., 1998) found children even

fabricated stories after hearing the accounts of others. Finally, phenomenological inquiry is concerned

128
with individual experience and this is basically incompatible with a method such as a focus group

(Webb & Kevern, 2000; Higginbottom, 2004).

Interview Strategies – using scaffolds

After taking into account the challenges that could be faced I decided to go ahead with one-to-one

interviews and devised a range of interview strategies to support the process. The scaffolds are different

ways designed to help the ‘talk’ to progress and they are deemed useful for stimulating children to

converse with an adult. I chose the following strategies as scaffolds to assist me in the interview –

conversation situation:

• the researcher asking open ended questions in a conversational way;

• the student drawing a picture relating to school and talking about it with the researcher;
• the student selecting one picture or drawing from a set of two pictures (photocopied
photographs) and two line drawings and talking about the picture. When a line drawing was
chosen, the student was asked to add to it if they wanted. It was suggested that they may like to
add speech bubbles or other objects/items to the line drawings (see appendices for examples of
the drawings and photographs), and
• the student and the researcher playing a game of ‘schools’ using Lego pieces and any on-going
conversation during the game is recorded.

I now describe the features of each of these strategies and use excerpts from the transcripts of my

interviews with the student participants to illustrate particular points.

Conversational interviews

As described earlier, an interview setting in sight of the child’s teacher or in a familiar place in the school

such as the library, or an executive or counsellor office was arranged (Parkinson, 2001, p.141). Generally

when the student settled into the interview site and appeared to be comfortable, I explained who I was

again and described the purpose of my visit and our intended activity. On some occasions I used the walk

from the child’s classroom to the interview site to chat about what we were going to do and tried to

ascertain how much they already understood about the proposed activity. This was intended to brief the

respondent about the nature and purpose of the interview and to permit confirmation of their consent to

participate (Cohen & Manion 1994, p.286). Throughout our times together I made affirming and

encouraging comments and demonstrated positive body language (Cameron, 2005) and I tried to listen to

the children in an understanding and non-judgemental way, avoiding a sense of a time limit. I tried to be

129
empathetically involved with them and show how interested I was, without interrupting or asking

questions as they talked (Sadalo & Adorno 2001).

Interruptions, as they happen in all conversations did occur. A careful study of the transcripts reveals

numerous times when interruptions by me, may have cut off the generation of interesting and useful data.

Efforts to keep the conversation flowing and to encourage the participant to keep talking can lead to these

interruptions. Even with my conscious efforts to allow long silences, the tension of an ‘empty’ space

frequently overcame my intention to wait and I would cut in. The soft whirring of the tape recorder

exacerbates this tension as it relentlessly records the silent seconds, as they slowly pass. As referred to

previously, there were other occasions where I can see in the transcripts when I have taken an unhelpful

direction, when in hindsight, and with the assistance of study of the transcripts, I could have followed a

quite different route.

I needed to adapt the proposed questions and format and modify the technique to make them compatible

with the broad range of individual linguistic and cognitive stage of development of each child

(Kortesluoma, et al., 2003). This also determined whether all parts of the interview plan were used or

whether there was appropriate data gathered from any one of the procedures. Flexibility in the use of time

was crucial (Garbarino & Stott, 1992). In one case where the participant seemed quite anxious and recess

break intervened, I decided not to return to continue his interview, as I thought it was too stressful for him

and it was making me concerned in relation to his well being. However, this is a decision that in hindsight

I regret, as a careful examination of the transcript from our conversation revealed he had many thoughtful

ideas to contribute, and he may well have been more comfortable on the second meeting, and could well

have provided considerably more valuable and useful information.

I was very conscious that the opening question of an interview is significant and determines the progress

of the interview and the way the questions are phrased affects the substance of the responses

(Kortesluoma et al., 2003, p.438). I rephrased the questions frequently. Depending on the depth of

response, a series of probe questions or prompts were used. Probing questions and prompts were applied

where this seemed necessary.

130
The expression, “how come?” often led to useful comment. For example, Nigel had been telling me about

what happens when a student gets a ‘late slip’. He said, firmly and with considerable emphasis, “When I

give the late slip to the teacher…she tells me…the teacher says sit down or go in the next classroom,

unless KD’s in the other classroom, because sometimes seats get in the other room.” I did not really

understand what he meant so I asked “how come?” Nigel replied: “Because Ms Teacher has to work

quietly, but people keep annoying her so she has to move the other …KD …away so she can have some

peace and quiet for a change.” This latter comment, was delivered with firm conviction and emphasis,

and a knowing incline and nod of his head. It was revealing information about classroom practice

following the use of the open, informal expression, ‘how come’?

In addition, it was sometimes appropriate to give a restatement of the response or part of it, which

allowed me to demonstrate I had listened carefully. This restatement provided the base from which to

launch further questions aimed at adding to the initial answer (Partington, 2001). This skill of reflective

listening, is the foundation of all successful interactions.

After interviewing five students I decided to introduce another activity to the process in order to try to

enrich the conversation as I felt at this stage that the children were somewhat inhibited. This early

outcome was supported by the finding of Harrett (2002, p.19) whose research highlighted a lack of

vivacity and a certain bland element to the recounts of the students she interviewed. I located a

photograph of myself with my peers, taken in 1949 in the 1C transition class (the half-year following

kindergarten) and asked the participants if they could pick me out. Then I told a story of my recollection

of school at that time. I was able to follow this with the opening question from the previous interview

schedule. This strategy met with varied levels of success. Some boys seemed unmoved by my story and

others, excitedly interrupted and began to tell me about their school lives.

Other unexpected factors can have impact on the conversation. Just as I had failed to provide water, and

sweets, I also did not think to provide tissues. Despite displaying competency in articulating detailed

comments about school life, Andrew would continually lapse into a series of monosyllabic comments and

I assumed this was related either to his anxiety, or aspects of my questioning, until suddenly he said, very

abruptly, “I need a tissue”. I realised tardily, he had politely been battling a runny nose and that was

131
perhaps the reason his conversation, waxed and waned, and then had become constrained. In hindsight I

realise I may have lost much valuable information, simply because of a lack of tissues.

Drawing a picture of life at school

At a point where there seems to be fatigue, lack of interest or alternatively sufficient early data had been

generated, I moved from the passive talking activity (Parkinson, 2001), and introduced the drawing

strategy (for example DiLeo, 1970; 1983; Alerby, 2000; 2003, Malchiodi, 1998; Parkinson, 2001; Punch,

2002). Dockett and Perry (2003) point out that drawing is being used in research with young children to

avoid a heavy reliance on verbal or literacy skills and to help make young children’s thinking accessible. I

was particularly interested in this strategy for several reasons in addition to my strong personal interest in

art based activities as forms of personal expression. Firstly, I am familiar with the massive literature that

recognises the complexities of interpreting and understanding children’s art, secondly, I trained at the

National Art School for some time with the aim of teaching art in secondary schools, and eventually did

do this at a country high school. Thirdly, for several years I taught aspiring teachers at a city university,

about providing learning experiences in art for children in primary and secondary schools.

For my research participants, I provided a single sheet of A3 white paper and black, red, green and blue

oil pastel crayons. I chose oil pastel crayons as they provided rapid thick texture, and they eliminated the

time consuming practice of putting caps on and off texta or felt pens. The crayons provided firmer lines

than pencils and were easier to manage for young children. The numbers of colours were limited, as I

have found that students spend a great deal of time selecting colours when given extensive choices.

Haney et al. (2004) used student drawings as a way to document the educational environments of

classrooms and schools from students’ perspectives. I used the instructions chosen by Haney et al. after

these researchers had piloted several sets of directions, and “the instruction was designed to ‘elicit

youngsters’ images of their classroom environments and learning activities, not to focus on particular

teachers” (Haney et al., 2004, p. 249).

I remained silent but interested, while the participants drew, unless the student initiated comments or

conversation. Previous experience has shown me that generally the process is very slow if conversation is

132
pursued during the drawing activity as the boys stop to talk and rarely seem to draw while simultaneously

talking. I had to gauge whether the child would talk while drawing or not, and to operate the tape recorder

accordingly. As a result sometimes conversation around this time was not recorded. When the drawing

activity appeared to be waning, I asked the child to talk about the picture (Alerby, 2000). The

effectiveness of using drawing as a scaffold to promoting talking is discussed in more detail in the final

chapter. The use of children’s drawings by researchers must be approached with knowledge of the vast

literature of children’s art, or researchers may be persuaded into making incorrect assumptions about their

young participants’ intentions.

Using children’s drawings in research

In this study, the drawings by the participants are used predominantly as a scaffold to our discussion, as a

way of relieving some of the possible pressure on the boys as I ask them to continue talking to me about

their school day. The physical activity of drawing may reduce some fatigue or anxiety in continuing to

talk about school, and it can be used to relieve the demands that making eye contact over a long period

may bring. My focus is on what they say after the drawing activity rather than what they show when they

draw. It is important to maintain this focus on the oral response and not be tempted to derive much of

their view from what they have drawn. This is important, as the interpretation of children’s drawings is a

complex undertaking. Drawing for children is representative of many things about them including their

stage of development, their personality, their emotions and interpersonal relationships. Cultural and social

influences impact on the outcomes. The drawings are uniquely personal statements that contain elements

of conscious and unconscious meaning (Malchiodi, 1998). In addition, children’s drawings are influenced

by their memory, their imaginations and their views of real life, their attitudes about drawing and their

previous art experiences (Wesson & Salmon, 2001; Cherney et al., 2006; Wright, 2007).

In the last decade, the use of drawings by children to assist in the analysis of their views about many

research topics has grown significantly (for example, Backett-Milburn & McKie, 1999; Alerby 2000;

Haney et al., 2004; Hanke, 2000; Ring, 2000; Dockett & Perry, 2005; Driessnack, 2005). This is partly as

the result of pressure to involve children more directly in research about them and to listen to their views,

and researchers seeking ways to ensure children have a range of ways of expressing their views. This

practice is to be regarded with caution and undertaken with an understanding by researchers from a range

133
of disciplines that children’s art expression is a complex phenomenon. The danger that has emerged is

that researchers may see that looking at children’s drawings is a simple process. Rubin (1984b, p.128 in

Malchiodi, 1998) warns that “one should not assume that any image ‘always’ means something specific,

nor even if its significance is invariant over time for any particular person”. Prior to researchers asking

children to draw, they should understand the complexities of the process that involves a range of ways of

actually doing it, the materials that are used, and the environment in which the drawing takes place.

After the data gleaned from the conversation about the drawing seemed replete, I negotiated with the

participants to retain their drawings. I asked if could keep the drawings to be part of the study and all

boys agreed. One participant appeared to hesitate but I think he did not understand my request, but all the

others seemed to expect that I would keep their drawing. I had intended to seek their approval to make a

photocopy if they wanted to keep their original but this was not necessary. The comments, about life

experiences, that we exchanged were the most important part of the activity.

In order to examine the data generated from our conversation either during the drawing or after the

drawing, I isolated that part of the transcript from the whole and printed it as a separate document. I then

attached the child’s drawing. This enabled me to concentrate on what was said at this time, while

contemplating the drawing. While eventually this part of the data text was re-incorporated into the whole

it was important to consider it, in the first instance, closely in relation to the drawing. This illuminated the

thoughts and views of each child that the act of drawing had encouraged. Examples of the boys’ drawings

accompany their profiles in chapter five.

Talking about pictures and drawings

The next activity involved the presentation of four visual items, two pictures and two line drawings (see

examples in the appendices) depicting common school scenes (Hanke, 2000, p.289). The student is asked

to choose one from the four examples to talk about. If they choose a line drawing, they are asked if they

would like to add to the picture, perhaps adding speech bubbles or other items. I was surprised that it was

necessary in most cases to explain what ‘speech bubbles’ were and it was apparent that some students

were not familiar with the notion. Recently I have reflected that this apparent lack of knowledge in

relation to speech bubbles, could be a signal of the possible demise of ‘comics’ as a form of entertainment

134
for children. Turner (2003) suggests that choices of displayed pictures and drawings can have the same or

similar effect as photographs taken by the participants, and can be used as conversation enhancers.

Photographs can give focus to interviews and maintain attention (Fabian, 1996; Ells, 2001).

The pictures are A3 size and the scenes depicted are

• Children sitting on the floor looking at a ‘big book’ (line drawing)

• Children sitting at their desks in small groups, writing and talking (line drawing)

• Children in a whole group mathematics activity on the floor (photocopied picture from

departmental curriculum support documents for teachers)

• Children in a partnered mathematics activity at their desks (photocopied picture from

departmental curriculum support documents for teachers)

As indicated previously, examples of the pictures and line drawings can be viewed in the appendices in

volume two.

Depending of the depth of response further probes or prompts were used. Further questions designed to

investigate important issues that may have not yet been raised in the responses were introduced at this

point. These were asked following the introduction of the photocopies or line drawings of school life

from unknown settings, to enable some distancing from the student’s own school and teacher. This

distancing was aimed at encouraging accurate or enhanced responses (Messiou, 2002; Haney et al., 2004;

Bishop & Pflaum, 2005; Ready et al., 2005).

Playing a game about ‘school’ with Lego

The success of research with children lies “in seeking to enter the child’s world even if just in a small

way” (Mayall, 1996 in Greenfield, 2004, p.4). The final activity involved playing a game (Parkinson,

2001) of ‘school’ with Lego pieces. The “introduction of toys in an interview situation is stimulating”

(Nigro & Wolpow, 2004, p.562). The Lego pieces were revealed to the student, when we had reached the

stage where a new activity seemed necessary to continue our interactions. A small plastic Lego mat to

contain the boundaries of the game was presented with a transparent plastic box containing a number of

Lego pieces. Some figures had already been constructed, other pieces were loose. When the game had

reached a suitable stopping point, I took a digital photograph of the scene of the Lego pieces on the game

135
board to assist with recalling the activity and elaborating on my field notes (an example can be viewed in

the appendices, volume two).

The boys were all very keen to play and seemed to relish playing with an adult who was giving complete

attention to them and the game. They rarely wanted to stop and several boys suggested “they would come

back tomorrow to play some more.” The boys seemed quickly to accept me as an equal ‘player’ in the

game and genuinely ‘praised’ my ideas and remarked on my manipulative ‘skill’. All boys chatted and

talked happily as we played and talked with me as ‘we’ seeming to ignore any adult-to-child power

relationship and to enter into an equal partnership for the duration of this playtime. For example, Dylan

and I were moving pieces about on the Lego mat casually:

RC You don’t have to get that piece off there (referring to a piece that was stuck)
D (He persists) AH! (triumphantly) I got it off! (he shouts excitedly)
RC Yeah, good on you (encouraging)
D Ready? (he’s asking me and making eye contact) Where could this go? (wanting to
include me)
RC I don’t know. You’re deciding. Maybe in front of that one ?
D Oh, I know. Up here. (confident)
RC That looks good. There’s another bit like it. (indicating another Lego piece)
D Where’s another big one the same size as that? (involving me) Now it can go like this
(showing me) It can go like this can’t it? (asking, wanting to keep me engaged)
RC Of course. No reason why not.
Transcript DGPS Lines 531- 539 p. 25

On another occasion Warrick and I were playing with the Lego and he was happy to have me enter into

the ‘pretend’ of the game.

RC Try that. Maybe it’s the bits underneath that aren’t the right shape or something.
(Warrick continues to struggle with the small pieces)
W (suddenly) IT WORKS! (he shouts triumphantly and is very excited)
RC Excellent! That’s good! That’s what we need. Good work. Now, I’m sure I had some
bits that looked like computers but they seem to have disappeared.
W Just pretend this is a computer.
RC All right. Oh yes, that would make a good one, wouldn’t it?
W And we need to move this person here.
RC Yes, so there’s room for the computers. Excellent. So how many computers are there in
your room? (I try to keep to my research focus)
W Just two.

Transcript WTP Lines 476-469, p. 27

Warrick wanted me to enter the world of pretend and he made me an equal partner, the ‘we’ in the game.

Like wise Aimon was happily playing with me and he confidently directed, “Okay. We need some more

walls. Now you start building the walls and I will start building the doors, this will be it, what I’m doing.”

136
However, not all the boys wanted to play a game of “schools” as I was suggesting, and some were

adamant about what the setting for their Lego game was going to be. For example Nigel is very clear

about diverting me from my purpose:

RC What are you going to do with them? (the Lego pieces) Show me what you’re going to
do with them You could sit them up in the class with the teacher?
N Nope. There’s not going to be no teacher. (very definite)
RC Oh…(disappointed) why not?
N Because it’s a shop. Like I already told you, it’s a shop. (emphatically)
RC A shop? Okay, well don’t teachers go to shops? (I try to keep to my topic and agenda
by persisting)
N To buy stuff? (He asks this in an amazed tone and looks at me hard)
RC Yeah. Don’t you think they do? How do teachers get the things they need? Don’t
teachers go to shops?
N Yeah (resignedly)
RC Well, maybe you might put the teacher in the shop. So what’s happ….(He interjects
and cuts me off)
N Well these are not all the teachers. (emphatic)

Transcript NQW lines 984-999 pp. 61-62

I took transcripts from this section of the text related to the talk during the Lego game and attached them

to the digital photographs that I took of the final Lego constructions. In some cases the boys

photographed their own construction. I was able to concentrate on the conversation that took place during

this phase of our interactions. Eventually I re-incorporated the text back to the total transcription., having

maintained the cyclical to-ing and fro-ing of hermeneutic analysis.

When I neared the end of the interview, I asked a ‘sweeper’ concluding question as suggested by Drever

(1995, p.27). I asked for some demographic background data if this was appropriate at this stage to wind

the interview/conversation sessions to a conclusion. When the data was generated, and I considered that

the student had contributed as much as was reasonable on the occasion, I thanked the student and gave

him a token of appreciation for his participation such as his choice of reward stickers. I ensured he was

comfortable and happy and returned him safely to his class teacher to ensure post-interview equilibrium

was restored (Parker, 1984).

In between each of the activities I suggested we take a little break. This usually meant standing up and

moving about in the interview space. One student took advantage of this suggestion to leap up, still

attached to the microphone and tape recorder, and begin wildly displaying his considerable prowess at

vigorous ‘star’ jumps, arms and legs both going, in the tiny office of a school executive! I asked the

137
students at frequent intervals throughout this interview process if they would like to take a break or to

come back later. As mentioned previously in relation to one participant’s runny nose, I realise in

retrospect that I did not provide access to water, mints or tissues as I may have done if I had been

interviewing adults.

At all times the interview-conversation with the student accommodated the scheduled class activities. For

example, all the usual breaks, such as recess and lunch were taken and events such as assemblies, play

practice, computer time, music and sport were attended by the student unless it was clear that the student

was comfortable to stay talking with me. The age of the students was constantly in mind with the

understanding that young children may fatigue easily. This varied however with individuals.

As a teacher for a long time, I was deeply conscious that the research activity was impacting on each

child’s learning time and teachers' teaching time. I tried not to interrupt any more than was essential to the

interview process and probably erred on the side of restricting my research requirements. The boys’

teachers were all extremely accommodating of my needs and made every possible effort to free the boys

from their programmed school activities, but I still felt I was encroaching on precious teaching-learning

time.

Evaluation of the scaffolded strategies

Lewis (2004) argues there is pressing need for greater rigour and critical evaluation about methods for

exploring views (particularly where children with learning difficulties or disabilities are included). Lewis

sees significant challenges in firstly, the over-formalising of the process of hearing the views of children

and secondly, the issue of defining competence and capability and the limits for participation. Thirdly,

Lewis sees challenges in the process of moving from hearing individuals to formulating collective views

and fourthly having listened , the process for following up, what has been said.

There are numerous important issues to explore in evaluating the process of interviewing. Potter and

Hepburn (2005) point out that little evaluation has occurred related to the design and conduct of

interviews. “Interviewer introductions, questions, responses and so on have received surprisingly little

systematic study… despite its ubiquity (the interview), has remained surprisingly understudied” (p.300).

138
These authors point out that open-ended interviews are hard to do well and even harder to analyse well,

and there are difficulties in assuming that interviewees can helpfully tell researchers about social

processes and causal relations. There is an underestimation of the pervasiveness of interview identities

and practice. They write that a

basic feature of qualitative interviews is to treat the interviewee as a reporter in events, actions,
social processes and structures and cognitions. This kind of explicit conceptual rumination is
treated as a way into participants’ lives or social organisation whatever the topic of the research
project… there is a profound complexity of interview material that is rarely explicitly addressed
(and) to take it into account during analysis is a major challenge (Potter & Hepburn, 2005,
p.297).

Dilley (2000, p.132) confirms “rarely do researchers consider what constitutes good interviewing.” I

evaluate each of the interview-conversation processes and scaffolds used in this study, and report on these

in the final chapter.

Summary of chapter three

I introduced this chapter regarding method, with a quote from Barthes, cited by van Manen, referring to

how the injudicious selection and following of method can lead to abandoned projects. The method I

chose for this study ensures a vibrant and vital approach with the potential for good outcomes.

In the chapter, I have indicated that the generation of data in this study is predominantly through the

verbatim text that is transcribed from the personal semi-structured interviews I held with the participants

(Parker, 1984; Hatch, 1990; Parkinson, 2001; Cameron, 2005). The interview schedule (see appendices,

volume two) was based on a list of broad ranging questions without necessarily fixed wording or

ordering, and was derived from theory, previous research and intuition (Partington, 2001; Potter &

Hepburn, 2005).

Scaffolds support the production of thoughts and recall and assist in maintaining interest in the process.

These scaffolds include a game of ‘schools’ using plastic pieces from the construction game called Lego,

student drawings, photographs and line drawings of school scenes, and probe questions (DiLeo, 1970,

1983; Saywitz & Snyder, 1996; Priestley & Pipe, 1997; Gross & Hayne, 1999; Davison & Tyson, 2001;

Punch, 2002; Nigro & Wolpow, 2004; Driessnack, 2005).

139
I was aware that qualitative research with young children can involve different challenges and research

techniques to those encountered with adults (Curtin, 2001, p. 295). These include the researcher’s belief

regarding the children’s competence, the inequality of power and the adult-child relationship (Fine, 1987

in Curtin, 2001) and the different communication styles. However, children can be reliable informants

and provide accurate accounts of their experiences (Curtin, 2001).

In the next chapter, I describe in detail the processes used to analyse the data. The philosophical

underpinning of Gadamer and the hermeneutic phenomenological approach of van Manen are re-visited.

Importantly, I describe the process for transcribing faithfully the spoken contributions of the participants

so that the intent of their comments is richly captured with verisimilitude. The significant challenges

raised by the development of this enriched transcription, are recognised and clarified.

140
CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS
“But to go to School on a summer morn
O, it drives all joys away.
Under a cruel eye outworn
The little ones spend the day
In sighing and dismay”
From “The School Boy” by William Blake 1757-1827

Introduction

Do they spend the day in sighing and dismay? What do they say they do? How will I find out? This

chapter sets out the processes used for the analysis of the data. I continue the metaphorical framework I

introduced earlier in the study, of borrowing from the world of art, the tools and strategy for my research.

I compare the analyses of data to the observation and interpretation of a painting.

In this chapter, the philosophical underpinning of Gadamer and the hermeneutic phenomenological

approach of van Manen are re-iterated in relationship to data analysis. I describe my approach to the

practical aspects of recording the data that is necessary to provide a detailed basis from which to make an

interpretive case. The provision of a clear decision trail as a form of audit is demonstrated. The process

for the development of transcripts faithful to the participants’ contributions through detailed recording is

explained, including recognition of the importance of ‘silences’ in a conversation. I confront the

challenges of taking into account the contextual environment while translating the spoken words into

written text. The concept of poetization as a solution to this issue is addressed.

141
This chapter continues the third and fourth of van Manen’s research activities, the researcher reflecting

on the essential themes which characterise the phenomenon, and the researcher capturing the

phenomenon through the art of writing and rewriting in relation to each individual participant.

Analysis of qualitative data

Miles (1979, p.593) described the analysis of qualitative data as a “mysterious half-formulated art”.

Despite a vast increase in qualitative studies since that time it seems little has changed. More recently

Thorne (2000, p.68) states “(u)nquestionably, data analysis is the most complex and mysterious of all

phases of a qualitative project, and the one that receives the least thoughtful discussion in the literature”.

This is because qualitative research has no set approach for the generation or the analysis of data (Priest,

et al., 2002). Part of the difficulty arises from the persistent use of quantitative terms to describe

qualitative processes. Some qualitative writers refuse to use terms like data and analyses, however I

think these terms can be helpful for the reader to understand this stage in my study. The process used to

analyse the data is where significant challenges emerge for researchers pursuing outcomes for

qualitative research, because there is no traditionally agreed system to follow.

In quantitative studies, analysis, in simplistic terms refers to the counting of items and the finding of

numerical outcomes that are then interpreted. In qualitative studies the data is not necessarily measured,

although some of it can be coded or categorised and counted, but generally the data is read, considered,

reflected on, ‘taken-on-board’, and the researcher becomes immersed in the information. The researcher

then offers the reader an interpretation of the data. This practice in the analysis process becomes more

about thoughts, feelings, and ideas, rather than numbers. The interpretation becomes the writing down of

these emotional responses and cognitive understandings and as a result, the nature of qualitative analysis

becomes a source of considerable controversy in research circles (Whitehead, 2004). This concern

relates mostly to its dependence on the researcher’s insights and conceptual capabilities and the

perceived dangers of the influence of predispositions and bias on the data.

Acceptance that the researcher’s horizon cannot be set to one side (Gadamer, 2004) is the basis for

understanding the position of this qualitative investigation. Coffey and Atkinson (1996, p.109)

commented “thinking about how to represent our data forces us to think about the meanings and

142
understandings, voices, and experiences present in the data” and to respond to the crucial need to remain

consistent with the philosophical stance that forms the foundation of all the processes throughout the

investigation. As described earlier, this study has its foundation in Gadamer’s philosophy of

hermeneutics. He said the truth in words

lies in what is said in them, and not in an intention locked in the impotency of subjective
particularity. Let us remember that understanding what someone says is not an achievement of
empathy in which one divines the inner life of the speaker. Certainly it is true of all
understanding that what is said acquires its determinacy in part through a supplementing of
meaning from occasional sources. But this determination by situation and context, which fills
out what is said to a totality of meaning and makes what is said really said, pertains not to the
speaker but to what is spoken (Gadamer, 2004, p.483).

Of the researchers who have looked to apply hermeneutics and hermeneutic phenomenology to methods

of data collection and analysis, I decided that van Manen (1990) provides a useful direction by

demonstrating ways of analysing the kind of data that an interpretive or hermeneutical

phenomenological study can generate. This sits firmly within the expressed purposes of this study and

Gadamer’s view of life’s practice that “every experience is taken out of the continuity of life and at the

same time related to the whole of one’s life” (Gadamer, 2004, p.60). Consideration of the parts to the

whole is a constant process as the researcher continually shifts backwards and forwards from one

position to the other.

The analysis of the data in this study is the analysis of the text created from the verbatim recordings of

the students’ responses to the questions and activities described in chapter three. In addition, the

verbatim transcript is enriched with the field notes that record all the surrounding nuances and intuitions

as I perceived them and noted them. As described previously, interspersed throughout this study report

are excerpts from my reflections on my experiences of teaching and learning from my long career in

education, which provides on-going examples of my personal position and demonstrates Gadamer’s

concept of prejudice (see Gadamer, 2004, pp. 276-279). In this way, awareness of the researcher’s own

preconceived opinions and conceptions, memories and experiences are recognised. The retrospective

reflective journal is an ongoing factor of the research process and highlights not only my own

preconceived conceptions, but also the connection to the participants and the readers.

143
This position is explored by Savin-Baden (2004) as the place of personal stance in reflexivity, which is

part of a movement away “from simplistic themed research categories towards in-depth interpretation”

(p.365). Savin-Baden argues that reflexivity in interpretive research is a concept embedded in the

researcher’s perception of self, and perspectives of the world. This emphasises aspects of experience that

go deeper than the cognitive, and reflect the relational, social and agentic character of the researcher. She

argues that it is “often easier to adopt complicated coding strategies than to engage with the messiness,

self-critique and pain that is required if we are to interpret data. Analysing them in a simplistic way just

leaves lists and codes that seem to bear little relation to the biographies of those we have spoken with”

(p.367). This study aims to embrace both these facets described by Savin-Baden, in a comprehensive

way. Personal thoughts, feelings and beliefs are incorporated and included in the final text and this also

helps brings all of us close to the “fusion of horizons” as described by Gadamer (2004). I explored the

lived experience of the boys by drawing from the young interviewees their understanding of school

during their first year. I relived and relearned their experiences as they related them to me of the

phenomena of being a boy in kindergarten. Van Manen, (1990, p.31) points out, ‘the true reflection of

lived experience is a thoughtful/reflective grasping of what gives the experience its significance.”

Qualitative data is a set of assumptions, principles and a display of transparent values about truth and

reality. The relevant reality coming from human experience is that it is subjective, takes place in a social

context and in historical time (Thorne, 2000, p.69). The emphasis on constant to-ing and fro-ing, and the

backwards and forwards movement ranging over the data, is Gadamer’s (after Heidegger) hermeneutic

circle, referred to earlier. This process is demonstrated in the following diagram, in relation to the

process of talking with the participants.

144
STRATEGY ONE

STRATEGY TWO

STRATEGY THREE

STRATEGY FOUR

Figure 2: A diagram showing the generation of the data: the hermeneutic circle

145
As depicted in the diagram above, the circular interpretation is dynamic, as soon as it begins it returns,

goes forward and returns. This movement joins the researcher into the text and avoids the subject-object

distinction found in positivism and quantitative research. This movement could be described similarly to

the observation of a painting from the era of Impressionism (for example Monet’s Water Lily series, see

frontispiece) where light and shade appear to continually shift about and new sights and visions are

constantly emerging, different for each viewer and different each time they are observed. Each person

gathers a personal impression, and develops ever emerging and fresh insights on each viewing. This is

like Gadamer’s ‘fusion of the horizons’ in the interplay of the light and shadow and this is how

understandings are built up, one on another, but never finite.

I considered a range of methods of analysis used in qualitative studies (for example, Miles & Huberman,

1994; Moustakas, 1994; Cohen et al., 2000). Some methods included using codes, categories and

quantitative type summations and I largely rejected these approaches for much of this study as I see this

practice having the potential to turn participants’ comments into rigid, locked expressions that were

perhaps not intended. The comments of participants are always open to misunderstandings. My

participant sample consists of very young children, and this characteristic adds to the imperative to

consider what they said in a sensitive, and perhaps less systematic way, as their level of competency in

articulating deeply held understandings of their circumstance, is problematic.

Scheurich (1997, p.63) states that “the use of the technical procedures, adopted to reproduce the

systematic rigour of the scientific method masks the ‘intractable uncertainties’ and ‘unstable ambiguities’

of linguistically communicated meaning…an elaborate and arcane focus on the mechanics of coding…

with no corresponding focus on the complex ambiguities of language, communication and interpretation”

as restrictive. Scheurich (1997) argues that coded and systematised data from interviews can be texts in

which “all the juice of the lived experience has been squeezed out” (p.63). I aimed to retain as much of

the lived experience as possible while devising a series of comprehensive steps to guide my analysis of

the data. I describe these steps in the following section.

146
EIGHT STEPS FOR DATA ANALYSIS

The data in this study consists “of interview transcripts from open-ended, focussed but exploratory

interviews” (Thorne, 2000, p.68). The analysis occurs as “an explicit step in conceptually interpreting

the data set…using specific analytic strategies to transform raw data into a new and coherent depiction”

of the phenomena under scrutiny (Thorne, 2000, p.69). I took into account van Manen’s advice and the

suggestions of other writers (for example, Colaizzi, 1973; Giorgi, 1989, 1997; Moustakas, 1994) and

derived a set of eight steps to guide my analysis. They are set out in linear sequence for ease of reading,

but they operate in a cyclical fashion in the actual process. They describe the process that I followed

after I had interviewed the children and needed to analyse the information they provided, to enable me

to develop insights into their perspectives on school. As stated, the process is cyclical, without

beginning and end, and sections are re-visited and revised on a continual basis. The exploration of each

piece of data leads to new insights, and this means that ‘old’ data needs to be reviewed and reconsidered

in the light of the fresh view. The process is on going and never finite. I now provide details for the

enactment of each of the eight steps in the data analyses process.

Step one – Interview-conversation

Conduct interviews with participants using the four scaffolded strategies (detailed in the previous
chapter) to generate data

Step one is described here, as a reminder of the process that was used to conduct the interview-

conversations with the participants, described in detail in the previous chapter. Here I re-iterate that the

individual one-to-one conversations between each student and the researcher are scaffolded by

• the researcher asking open ended questions in a conversational way

• the student drawing a picture relating to school and talking about it with the researcher
• the student selecting one picture or drawing from a set of two pictures (photocopied
photographs) and two line drawings and talking about the picture. When a line drawing was
chosen, the student was asked to add to it if they wanted. It was suggested that they may like to
add speech bubbles or other objects/items to the line drawings.
• the student and the researcher playing a game of ‘schools’ using Lego pieces and any on-going
conversation during the game is recorded.

Step two- Transcribe the data

Commission a transcription of the generated data

147
Step two involves the transcription of the audio-taped material. Transcription refers to the process of

reproducing spoken words, such as those from an audio-taped interview, into written text (Halcomb &

Davidson, 2006). In this study a significant decision involved who would initially transcribe the tapes

and how they would be written up. Contemporary literature provides limited direction and guidance

regarding the specifics of the transcription process (Halcomb & Davidson, 2006). I decided that my level

of computer skills would make the initial transcribing a task of considerable length and of no research

benefit (Cohen et al., 2000, p.13). However, I was aware of the importance of deep involvement by the

researcher in the transcription process (Lapadat & Lindsay; 1999, p.82; Braun & Clarke, 2006, p.87). I

knew I would manipulate the data frequently once this initial transcription had occurred and I did not

think it would diminish my deep engagement with the data, if I did not type the original transcription.

I commissioned a professional transcriber who would maintain confidentiality and who placed all the

oral data into a basic two-line format (my talking and the participant’s talking). One of the significant

decisions in the data analysis process is how actually to transcribe the spoken words of the participants. I

designed the seven column format described below, to capture the ‘who said what’ and ‘when’ and ‘what

the context was’ at the time. I wanted to keep the semiotics of the conversation important and in the

foreground so I interspersed or complemented the spoken-words’ transcript with observations of

emotional and physical keys in the interactions. This is essential to keep the meaning that the spoken

words carried when they were spoken as they are translated into written form. Intonation, emphasis and

pauses can change the meaning of a simple statement of only a few words quite dramatically.

Consider for example, a teacher bursting into a staffroom late on a Friday afternoon, exclaiming “year

nine is a great class!” Our interpretation of the teacher’s meaning as she flings her folder on the table and

sinks into the nearest soft chair, requires a correct reading of the text (i.e. her exclamation). This must

come from our understanding of the whole. This part, what we hear on this occasion, has to be

understood in what we know about it in total, and this knowledge is always changing. Year nine may

have done exceedingly well for that teacher today, perhaps for the first time, and she is elated, but then

again they may have driven her to distraction, and she is tired and angry, but then perhaps they are

always like this. A limitless range of possibilities can emerge and our interpretation relies on what we

bring to the text. Maybe year nine is always ‘great’ for us, maybe not. In order to interpret the teacher’s

148
exclamation (the text) we need to know the context, and to take into account how our own experiences

shape our response. Merely reading the written text, ‘year nine is a great class,’ cannot give us the

meaning that was being expressed by the teacher at the time of utterance, without clues to the context.

Lawn (2006, p.47) describes this constant movement between the parts and the whole as “the

significance of the words in a text are not to be taken in isolation but as a unit of meaning that is

constantly in the process of modification in relation to the implied total meaning of the text.” At each

level of this interpretation, all participants are involved in the ‘hermeneutic circle’. What the teacher said

may have been sarcastic, sincere, humorous, ironic, bitter, resentful or delighted. Overjoyed or miserable,

we will not be able to interpret her statement unless we consider the history, allow for the influence of

our history and relate the part to the whole. This means the data transcribed into the text of the study

must be accompanied by details of the context. For this study, I designed a data matrix to facilitate this

requirement and to make the raw data manageable and prepared for interpretation. The next step

describes this data matrix.

Step three- the data matrix

Transfer the transcribed data from the audiotapes to a data matrix consisting of seven columns to
make the study ‘text’. Include information from the field notes.

In step three I describe the process that followed the initial transcription made by the professional

transcriber. Firstly, I re-formatted the conversation into two columns. One column contains the words

spoken by me and one column records the words spoken by the participant. I then listened numerous

times to each audio tape and immersed myself repeatedly in the words (Holloway, 1997; Hycner, 1999;

Ford & Turner, 2001, p.291). I checked for accuracy of reproduction and corrected any minor

discrepancies to ensure no errors remained (Poland, 1995; Halcomb & Davidson, 2006, p.40). It was

obvious that vocal intonations, gestures, pauses, nuances, coughs, and nervous or excited asides were all

part of the rich material available. I wanted to ensure that I lost none of this human element in the

transfer of the spoken words to the written form (Crist & Tanner, 2003; Tilley, 2003, Graneheim &

Lundman, 2004; Wiles et al., 2005; Braun & Clarke, 2006).

149
I annotated the transcriptions to include all of the nuances of the context, including the non-verbal

aspects and the silences (Poland & Pederson, 1998) and interactional features where possible (Potter &

Hepburn, 2005). I wanted to ensure that the essence of what was said was captured as deeply as possible.

Using the philosophy of phenomenology to guide me was likely to enable me to gain insight into what is

happening to small boys in school. Van Manen (1990, p.12) describes phenomenology as a “heedful,

mindful wondering about the project of life, of living, of what it means to live life”. Doing

phenomenological research requires the collection of the “lived experience descriptions” of the research

participants, and then to reflect on the descriptors to discover what it is that makes the phenomenon what

it is, in essence.

Hearing the silence

Kvale (1996) warns that it is important to look not only at what is said and recorded but also what is

‘said’ between-the-lines. The addition of all aspects of the conversation as well as the spoken words are

crucial to allow this to occur. Van Manen (1990) also supports the importance of paying attention to

silence, the absence of speaking, the silence that is unspeakable and the silence of being or life itself.

This is essential in the quest for uncovering what is taken for granted or the self-evident. Poland and

Pederson (1998, p.293) found that silence “can be a potentially troublesome technical feature of

interviewing that requires careful management”. While silence can be used as a strategic device to

improve data collection (Kvale, 1996) in the transcribing process the researcher who uses silence has to

demonstrate what purpose the silence had. The silence is not “always a passive withholding of speech

but can be the active engagement of a listener who is attending to the speaker and working to understand

the speaker’s meaning” (Holstein & Gubrium, 1998).

Attending to Kvale’s notion of reading between the lines and the need for us to pay attention to silence

reminds me of a crucial lesson that I learned during my art school days, that has made a significant

impact on my understanding of the nuances of communication. It is of crucial significance at this stage of

this study as it underlines essential features of a phenomenological approach to understanding and

interpreting data.

150
I am in the drawing class at the National Art School in East Sydney. It is
winter and the room we were using in the huge old sandstone building is
cold and uncomfortable but a group of about twenty student teachers who
were all aspiring to qualify to teach art in NSW high schools is sitting on
high stools with easels and drawing paper and pencils in front of them.
Forward of us, set on high tables that are covered in old green velvet
drapes are sets of marble like bigger than life-sized busts. Two heads of
men and one head of a woman. Our task is to choose one bust to draw
using fine pencils and good quality white paper. I was untutored at this
stage and saw only the outside bulky shapes that I attempted to recreate.
My efforts were reasonable, but not good and the instructor was quick to
pick my errors. No! This is not the way!

Then I experienced a revelation. I was taught to look at the shapes that are
actually the spaces. Forget perceptions, forget cognition that tells me this
is a nose, this is a forehead, this is a chin. Draw the shapes that are the
spaces made by the objects. The rest will follow. This technique has been
described as “drawing the negative spaces surrounding the positive object.
In other words, if you want to draw a chair, don’t draw the chair, draw the
spaces between the rungs, the legs and so forth. The chair will miraculously
appear on the page” (Jones, 2001, p.2). I heard the technique described
recently in another way by a sculptor, during a radio interview when he was
asked “how do you create a shape from this massive piece of stone?” The
commission was for the sculptor to produce a rearing horse from a huge
mass of rock. The sculptor appeared perplexed by the question at first but
then turned in triumph to his questioners and said “why, I get rid of
everything that is not the horse.”

Likewise once I stopped trying to draw what I knew was there in the plaster
busts at the art school, and started to draw what I could actually see was
there, that is, all the surrounding context and substance as well, I began to
render the objects in their true appearance. By acknowledging space (or
silence) equally with substance, my rendition of the sculptured busts in
front of me took on a realistic representation. The experienced artist’s eye
sees the truth, sees what is actually there, not what they think (cognate) is

151
there and what their brain tells them is an object. It is an object but it exists
in relation to the spaces surrounding it.

It seems to me, that if an artist looks harder at the spaces (the ‘silent’
parts) created by the visual objects in order to capture the truth of a visual
item, then the researcher must listen to the silences or the spaces in the
conversation to capture the true meaning of the utterances.
Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective

Journal

This study relies on my listening in an alert and sensitive way to what the boys say during our

conversations, always open to the nuances of their communications with me. Gadamer (2004) states

(a)ll that is asked is that we remain open to the meaning of the other person or the text. But this
openness always includes our situating the other meaning in relation to the whole of our own
meanings or ourselves in relation to it. Now, the fact is that meanings represent a fluid
multiplicity of possibilities…if a person fails to hear what the other person is really saying, he
will not be able to fit what he has misunderstood into the range of his own various expectations
of meaning…The hermeneutical task becomes of itself a questioning of things (author's
emphasis) and is always in part so defined. This places hermeneutical work on a firm basis
(p.271).

The experience described in the journal excerpt above, demonstrates for me the essential importance of

looking and listening to all parts of an experience, the spaces or the silences, and the necessity of being

equally alert to what each part tells us. Jones (2001, p.2) states that we often ignore the ‘negative space’,

that surrounds the dialogue with an assumption that this is high quality listening. However Wengraf

(2001, p.128) points out that most communication is non-verbal citing researchers who claim ninety-

three per cent of communication occurs around the words and only seven per cent is carried by the

words. Dilley (2000, p.134) cites Stamberg, (1993, p.xvii),

(t)alk always begins with a question. Then comes the most important part, Listening.
Listening for what’s said and not said, listening for silences, the cracks between the
words, the hesitations, the contradictions, the glorious expositions.

Game and Metcalfe (1996) go even further, to suggest that all interviews should be transcribed as oral

language and not converted to written language. They claim the spoken word is a legitimate genre and

when it is transcribed, it should be done to maintain the rhythm of the spoken word and the ambience of

the exchange. These authors state that

to remove hesitations, repetitions, diversions and false starts, to add punctuation, to impose a
line of argument, to standardise grammar, to choose spellings, to decide on the position of

152
 capital letters and emphases, to make guesses about the meaning of mumbled words, to delete
‘extraneous’ comments about coffee or the weather [is to be] thoughtlessly patronizing…(pp.
119-121).

In addition to all these factors, I thought also that it was important to avoid adultising the children’s

statements so I decided to transcribe them exactly as they were recorded, and to describe the context as

richly as possible. So the interviews were transcribed in their context, as raw data, un-interpreted for the

transcription. In this way the conversation could be read, as it was spoken (Game & Metcalfe 1996,

p.119-121), as far as it is possible to re-create the spoken word into any kind of written text.

Poetization

Once I had decided to transcribe the spoken interviews in this way, representing as far as possible what

was said and how it was said, it seemed a natural progression to consider a process called ‘poetization’.

The emotional component contained in the participants’ comments about their daily lives is complex and

difficult to represent in textual form and can be lost in the transcription. Van Manen provides a solution

to this dilemma. I have previously demonstrated that phenomenological research is an appropriate

methodology for investigating pedagogical relationships as it has as its ultimate aim “the fulfilment of

our human nature: to become more fully who we are” (van Manen, 1990 , p.12). The analysis of the data

in this study is informed by van Manen’s ideas about writing, so it is subject to the concept of

poetization. Phenomenology is in some ways unlike any other research. There is not to be a great finding,

a new truth, it is rather an individual’s interpretation of the phenomenon before them,

(as) in poetry, it is inappropriate to ask for a conclusion or a summary of a phenomenological

study. To summarise a poem in order to present a result would destroy the result because the
poem itself is the result. The poem is the thing. So phenomenology not unlike poetry, is a
poetizing project, it tries to be incantative, evocative speaking, a primal telling whereon we aim
to involve the voice in an original singing of the world (Merleau-Ponty, 1973 cited by van
Manen, 1990, p.13).

This is why the text, which is the turning into written symbols of the children’s talk, needs to closely

approximate the way in which it was spoken. It is not appropriate to ‘wash’ the text and clean it of its

human qualities, but to retain its very essence, its personal statement. Significant in the literature

regarding various forms of data analysis, is a process of discarding or ‘washing’ qualitative data or

getting rid of or ignoring what is described as ‘the dross’ (Chenail, 1995; Haith-Cooper, 2003; Tavakol

et al., 2006). I think it is necessary to be most cautious of this process as the determination of what is

‘dross’ or the so called “non significant chaff” (Hopper, 1988, in Chenail, 1995) is subject to the bias of

153
the researchers, who could well be discarding data that in fact, illuminates the topic or provides essential

context for the data that is retained. As is common in the generation of data from young children

considerable information or text is generated that on first consideration and even at further analysis can

appear to be unrelated to the research topic. In quantitative data, the discarding of surveys that have not

been completed properly deals with the apparent irrelevancy. I argue that these so-called ‘faulty’

responses might actually say most about the research question or the participant’s view or position. In

this study, all data was considered and analysed and accounted for in the consideration of the research

question.

When I looked at the professional transcription, listened again to the tapes, recalled the situation and

consulted my field notes, I was able to arrange the texts accordingly. When the boys talked about matters

of deep concern or special meaning to them I transcribed many of their words in poetic form. It was

crucial to find a way of conveying the emotional content of our talking as well as the actual statements.

The resultant writings are not prose and perhaps not quite poetry, (Glesne, 1997) but because they use

lines to indicate pauses and verses to indicate longer breaks it has been ‘poetized’. Van Manen (1990,

p.13) states, “Poetizing, is thinking on an original experience and is thus speaking in a more primal

sense. Language that authentically speaks the world rather than abstractly speaking of it is a language

that reverberates the world. So, in the words or even in spite of the words, we find memories” and

moments of human connection.

I experienced this when Nigel was talking to me about the rules in his school. He told me about the

canteen where students could buy their lunch, being situated in the hall, but it was not a place to eat and

drink. As we discussed why that might be the case he said:

Where’s the canteen?

That’s called the hall
But you can’t have drinks
Or eat there…
In the hall.
Because it might be messy
And stinky
And… animals might come?
Yeah?
The monkeys might get the bananas!
Yay!

Nigel Age 6

154
He had intelligently captured the multiple ironies of the moment and expressed this by offering the

humorous line about the monkeys with great glee and we both burst out laughing – a fusion of horizons

indeed!

To demonstrate how I derived a poetization of Nigel’s words I have reproduced the verbatim

transcription of the exchange. While the words in the text present as almost duplicate, the written

reproduction shown above, of Nigel’s words, in lines and in poetic form, gives the words a deeper

meaning and captures the essence of the exchange in a more vibrant and interpretive way.

RC And what happens inside?

N Well, after we’ve finished getting our books we (long pause….) we listen to Mr Teacher read a
…book and there’s the canteen.
RC Yes? What’s that? Tell me about that.
N Well, that’s where you get your lunch orders…and that’s where you have assembly and that’s
called the hall. But you can’t have drinks or eat in the hall
RC No? Why do you think that is?
N Because it might be messy and stinky and animals might come
RC Very good reason. The possums might come down and get people’s left over apples, do you
think?
N Yeah
RC What else do you think might happen?
N The monkeys might get the bananas. ( Loud laughter)
RC (Laughing) Very good answer!
N Yay! (both of us laughing together)
Transcript NQW Lines 408-429, pp. 28-29

To convey to the reader what I heard Nigel say and how it was said, to capture the emotional content, the

humour, the irony, the understanding and our connection, the conversion of the verbatim transcript to

poetic form becomes a useful and necessary tool.

Tedlock (1983, p.109) confirms this position that poetizing is a more appropriate way to record some

interview transcriptions. Tedlock states, “when people talk, whether as conversants, storytellers,

informants or interviewees, then speech is closer to poetry than it is to sociological prose.” Richardson

(1997, p.223) writes that “poetry acknowledges pauses through the convention of line breaks, spaces

between lines and between stanzas and sections so a poem, therefore more closely mimics actual speech

by building its text upon both sounds and silence.” Richardson argues that conventional prose is not the

most accurate (or scientific or valid) way to report speech in research studies. Glesne (1997) describes

experimental writing in research documents as poetic transcription, where accepted boundaries between

155
art and science are blurred, the shapes of intersubjectivity are explored and issues of power and authority,

including that of researcher and author are examined.

Further support for the practice of rendering transcript poetically, is offered by Thomson (1998, p.10, in

Santoro, 2000, p.4)

…it pares down, hones what has been captured on tape to a narrative that tells both emotionally
and intellectually. It creates a stand alone text from transcript rather than encasing the transcript
extracts in commentary. It presents a story rather than having the story told. It does not present
truth but aims to re-present truthfulness.

The meanings are implied, so poetry makes the lived experience more accessible to the reader. Hein and

Austin (2001) in discussing the hermeneutic approach to research, state that poetic language is used

because it is deemed to be “the only adequate way to present human meaning” (p.7) crucial, since it aims

to produce insights into human experience. Richardson (1997, p.180) writes that “(l)yric poems

concretize emotions, feelings and moods – the most private kinds of feelings – in order to re-create

experience to another person.”

This need to find innovative ways to represent data found in hermeneutic interpretive studies is described

by Lincoln and Denzin (1994) as a ‘crisis of representation’ where claims to authority are challenged and

there is a demand for reflexivity. Glesne (1997, p.207) suggests “poetic transcription is also filtered

through the researcher but involves word reduction while illuminating the wholeness and

interconnections of thoughts…somewhat like a photographer who lets us know a person in a different

way.” It concentrates the language of the interviewee and is shaped by the researcher. The practice of

this concept seems to fit the needs of this investigation of young children’s views. This crucial decision

of how to transcribe parts of the spoken words of the child participants maintains a consistency of

approach firmly entrenched in the guidelines of Gadamerian hermeneutic philosophy.

Data matrix organisation

Once these important decisions about what and how to transcribe the spoken word were decided, the next

decision involved how to record this ‘data’ in a manageable and organised way, so that I could access it

accurately to interpret what the boys had said. I derived the ‘data matrix’ as a Microsoft Word table,

consisting of seven columns and placed the information into each of these spaces.

156
I now describe how this data matrix was arranged. The following sample of the table shows one page of

the data text organised into the seven columns as they resulted for different participants. The example is

from the data matrix for participant Aimon. The headings are expanded in detail to indicate the contents

of each column.

Table not included please see print copy

Table 2: Sample of the data matrix with explanatory notes

157
Explanation of the column contents for the data matrix

• Column one (line number) is dedicated to a numbering system to ensure careful tracking of the

original statements. For ease of reference these parts of the text are referred to as line numbers.

• Column two (initials and codes) shows my initials and the pseudonym initial of the student

participant and a code for the school that was the particular research site. These letters show

which person is speaking, either the participant or me.

• The next column, column three (verbatim transcript from interview) is a word-for-word

transcript of my part in the conversation, my comments and questions.

• The adjacent column, column four (verbatim transcript of participant student) is a word-for-

word transcript of the participating students’ contribution to the conversation. This two-column

approach of recording the conversation, enables me to monitor my speech and the contribution

of the participant in a way that demonstrates clearly the ebb and flow of the talking and our

verbal exchanges. Halcomb and Davidson (2006, p.40) state, “a combination of verbatim

description and researcher notation of participant’s non verbal behaviour has been cited as being

central to the reliability, validity and veracity of qualitative data collection”. The record is

beneficial in facilitating data analysis and bringing researchers closer to their data. A study is

credible when it presents faithful descriptions (Guba & Lincoln, 1989). The two column format

for recording speech, used in the data text, facilitates the highlighting of weaknesses and

strengths in the interview process as it occurred. Documenting the attending sounds and actions

and context ensures the actual conversation is represented as closely as possible. (However,

throughout the study, when I use quotes from our conversations to illustrate points I am making,

in the textual report, I generally use the more traditional line-by-line format to show what was

said.)

• The next column, column five (constituted statements from intended utterances) documents

what I have called the ‘constituted statement’ which is constructed from the intended meaning of

158
 the participants’ utterances and the actual substance of my questions. I explain this concept in

detail, below.

• Adjacent to this column, column six (situational data from observations, field notes and recall)

are details of the context, and my reflective comments on the situation. Much of this information

becomes available through frequent and careful listening to the tape sometimes in conjunction

with reading of the text. Written notes made during the interview added to notes of my

recollections of each event become what I have called ‘field notes’ and are used in the

interpretation process.

• The final column, column seven (distillation of data - units of significance related to the

phenomenon) contains the judgments I made, on the units of significance related to the

phenomenon. These units form the basis of the succeeding composite analysis and interpretation

where I look for similarities and dissimilarities across all the participants’ data to develop the

merged picture of what the boys said, as a group.

Next I detail some of the aspects related to the various columns, and in particular, the concept of the

‘constituted statement’. To facilitate the progress of the study I devised a technique I have named

‘constituted statements’ to capture the thoughts of young children who had difficulty in articulating

comprehensively their views about school. The difficulties were based partly in their young age, their

degree of competency in spoken English, their intellectual capacity and stage of cognitive development,

and other conditions they may have had, such as one student with a diagnosis of autism. These

conditions are challenging for the researcher, and require innovative ways of meeting the demands that

are entailed. However, it is important that if we are going to consider seriously the views of children in

school in relation to the provisions we make for them, then no children can be excluded. All children

should have the opportunity to contribute their views in research studies and not be rejected because of

any of these difficulties. Researchers must devise innovative ways of generating data from all kinds of

participants. This is the same challenge faced in other professions where the views of the very elderly,

the sick, those with mental illnesses, intellectual disabilities and others, need to be considered in

researching any aspect of their lives, and particularly those aspects related to service provisions.

159
Details of the contents of the columns

• Column five : constituted statements

The verbatim transcripts in this study illustrate the difficulties that can arise from the interviewing

process. I saw that periods of closed questioning by me encouraged yes/no answers from the children.

However there was more implied or intended in the responses than might show in the transcription and

much of the meaning was sitting within the silences (van Manen, 1990, pp. 112-114; Holstein &

Gubrium, 1998; Kvale, 1996; Jones, 2001). On occasions I noted I began asking closed questions when

my feelings for the children’s apparent discomfort caused me to ask questions that I thought seemed less

stressful and less demanding for the students. The tension of what seemed like very long pauses (usually

ten to twenty seconds or so) was challenging to ignore or overcome at times in the conversations. As

stated earlier, even the sound of the soft whirring of the tape recorder can add to the apprehension and

adds to a compelling pressure to ‘fill’ the silence. In hindsight, and on studying the interview transcripts,

I can see occasions where at the exact time I possibly may have gleaned more useful information from a

student, I introduced what perhaps were unhelpful diversions.

Sometimes a closed question can imply that more than a single word answer is expected as a response,

and adults often (but not always) fill in the implication and answer even closed questions, in an

elaborated away. This happened occasionally with some of the boys. However, generally, as is usual

with most children, because they are not often familiar with the interview type situation and the expected

protocols, they provided a yes or no answer or a shrug, or a nod, or merely made an affirming or

negating sound when confronted with a closed question.

I developed the strategy of ‘constituted statements’ to ‘fill-in’ the meanings embedded in the silences and

the unspoken intentions of the children by taking the substance of the question and linking that to the

intention of the answer that may have been simply expressed as a one-word utterance. Using only the

words spoken by both the researcher and the participant I have constituted a statement that matches the

intention of the child’s utterance. This combination forms a coherent and articulated statement. Care is

taken to ensure the opinions or perspectives are embedded firmly in the child’s utterance and are not

introduced by me. The written text incorporates the researcher’s words derived from the questions asked

or the comments made as recorded. This links to the utterance, sometimes monosyllabic, made by the

160
participant student. One word answers, usually “yes” or “no” are usually the result of my asking a closed

question, the result, as described previously, of my eagerness for getting the conversation to flow and

trying to lessen stress on the participant.

The constituted statement represents the child’s intention and provides accessible documentation for

interpretation. This technique was only used when the meaning the child intended was embedded in the

question and answer text, and was not obvious from the transcribed words. For example, early in my

conversation with Omar the following exchange occurred:

RC Does Mum bring you to school in the car or do you walk?

O (very long pause) WALK! (single word utterance)
RC You walk to school with your sister? (closed and implied question)
O Yeah! (single word utterance)
RC How old’s your sister?
O Um….(very long pause)…8 (single word utterance)
RC So she goes to this school too? (closed question)
O Yeah (single word utterance)

Transcript OQW Lines 7 -14, p.1

The “constituted statement” that I derived from this exchange (showing the speakers indicated by their

initials) reads: I [O = ] walk [RC =] to school with my sister [O = yes] who is [O = ] eight [RC=]

years old.

The constituted statement is: I walk to school with my sister who is eight years old.

Another example from my talk with Omar is:

RC Do you play tips? (closed question)

O Ye-ah
RC (long pause) A lot of running? (closed question)
O Ye-ah
RC Yes? (long pause) Around and around in the playground? (closed comment)
O Yeah
RC And you catch each other? (closed question)
O Ye-ah
RC And do you like doing that? (closed question)
O Yeah
RC Is it good fun? (closed question)
O Yeah
RC And when you’ve finished that what do you do? What happens when the bell goes?
O (long pause) We have line-up-er

Transcript OQW Lines 29-42 pp.2-3

The “constituted statement” that I derived from this exchange with the sources indicated by initials reads:

[RC = ] I play [O =] tips [RC=] with lots of running around in the playground [O= yes] and we catch

161
each other [O =yes] and [RC=] I like doing that [O=yes] and [RC=] it is good fun [O=yes] and [RC=]

when the bell goes we have[O=] to line up.

The constituted statement is: I play tips with lots of running around in the playground and we catch

each other and I like doing that and it is good fun and when the bell goes we have to line up.

In a similar example I am talking with Ben as follows:

RC What did you do this morning?

B Go out and play
RC What sort of games do you play?
B (very long pause) Um….tips
RC Do you have friends you play that with? (closed and unhelpful question – it would be a
hard game to play by yourself)
B Yes
RC So does that have a lot of running about? (closed question: I am trying to encourage Ben
to talk)
B Yes
RC Is that good fun? (closed question)
B Yes
RC Then what do you do?
B Ah (very long pause)…..go to my class
Transcript BQW Lines 40, p.2

The “constituted statement” that I derived from this exchange with the source indicated by initials reads:

[RC=] Playing [B=] tips [RC=] with my friends [B=yes] [RC=] involves a lot of running about

[B=yes] and [RC=] that is good fun [B=yes]

The constituted statement is: “Playing tips with my friends involves a lot of running about and that is

good fun”. These new statements represent the joint meaning or “the fusion of the horizons”(Gadamer)

and has formed the “play”(Gadamer) of the conversation between the researcher and the participant.

• Column six : Field notes

The field notes (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Bogdan & Biklen, 1998) accompanying this data are

incorporated into the data tables as the sixth vertical column described previously. The field notes

represent an additional exercise in researcher reflexivity to the excerpts from the personal reflective

retrospective journal that are interspersed throughout the study. Reflexivity of the researcher incorporates

a process of critical self-reflection on a researcher’s biases, theoretical dispositions and preferences. It is

an acknowledgment of my place as inquirer in the setting, the context, and the social phenomenon, that I

am seeking to understand. It is a means for critical examination of the entire research process (Schwandt,

1998).

162
This researcher reflexivity “represents a methodical process of learning about self as researcher…

illuminating… deeper, richer meanings about personal, theoretical, ethical and epistemological aspects of

the research question” (Kleinsasser, 2000, p.155). Reflexivity in this study, is represented by the two

strategies, the journal and the notes. These field notes assist in the depiction of the boys’ perspectives. I

integrate quotes from this source of data at places in the text analysis where they most illustrate my

position as researcher and the boys’ situate as participants. For ease of recognition, these field notes

appear, in the text analysis for each student, as shaded boxes interspersed appropriately throughout the

text, and especially accompanying the description of the boys’ stories. An example of this technique

follows:

Field notes Transcript NQW. Lines 121-130, p.7

Ellis and I entered into a ‘sparring’ relationship and he was unsettling me, as I was very concerned regarding
where he was going with some of his comments. Many of his remarks were contrary and I was finding them hard to
understand. Was he keeping me wrong footed by doing this or was he as confused as I? Is he about to reveal an
issue I will need to report to the principal? Do I probe? Do I move on? In the end, Ellis moved on and I was left
feeling highly anxious about his well-being and my role in having some ethical responsibility for him…

This is important as my interpretation comes from not only what was said, but also how it was said and

what the context was at the time. Re-examination and reflection can lead to recognition of prejudices and

understanding of linguistic and rhetorical practices and “can gesture towards humility in the research

process” (Kouritzin, 2002, p.133). The field notes incorporated into the interview data complemented the

process that documented and evaluated the various strategies used to scaffold the conversations

(Kouritzin, 2002). I used the field notes to expand and enrich the transcriptions and importantly, to recall

and record the nuances of the moments as the children and I talked. They were an essential aid in

confirming the meaning of the utterances as without them some events could take on a different sense

altogether and they are crucial to the interpretive process.

The text of what I have chosen to label as field notes is made up of rapid and brief notes made while the

children were talking in our interview situation, or immediately after the interview (Halcomb &

Davidson, 2006) and then on reflection at varying times after the interview. In addition, the field notes

text is expanded as the result of my frequent listening to the taped conversations, as this prompted my

recall of many of the details of the context, of each part of my exchanges, with each boy. Contemplation

163
of the drawings made by the boys and the photographs I took of the boys’ Lego constructions,

simultaneous with a consideration of the transcripts, added more information to my field note comments.

The rhetorical, narrative, and linguistic choices researchers make during the recording of field notes

structure the interpretation and analysis (Kouritzin, 2002, p.131). These ‘field notes’ then, are of value to

this study. While they do not have the intent of field notes taken in ethnographic studies, they do share

many of the characteristics of those notes. Field notes are “selective, purposed, angled, and voiced

because they are authored” (Emerson et al 1995, p.106 in Kouritzin, 2002, p.133). Field notes are a

creation of a worldview based on a priori perceptions and interpretations (Kouritzin, 2002). Researchers

“reflect personal and subjective judgments about the state of mind of the people… they describe. They

are subjective people doing a subjective job” (Kouritzin, 2002).

Scaffolded strategies

Part of this investigation considers whether one of the four scaffolding techniques for encouraging

conversation during the interview process is more effective than the others. The research question is

“what techniques are effective in eliciting what young children say?” As a result of this sub-focus in the

study it was helpful to code those parts of the transcript that developed from each of the techniques, for

ease of comparison. The relevant sections of the transcript were marked T (for talking), D (for drawing),

P (for picture talk) and PL (for playing with Lego). Analysis of the quality and quantity of conversation

emanating from each scaffold involved a consideration and comparison of the distilled units for each of

the sections that related to the different techniques. The numbers of units of significance related to the

phenomenon were recorded numerically, and entered into tabular form to provide some element of

consistency. An example of this record for one participant follows.

Table 3: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Nigel

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a Looking at Playing Lego
to one picture pictures
NIGEL 60 14 5 19

This table shows the participant’s name and the numbers of units of significance that I determined

emerged from each part of his transcript. This means that the participant and I engaged in this activity

while we talked. Talking with me, produced sixty significant comments, talking after drawing a picture

164
provided fourteen significant comments, looking pictures and line drawings produced five comments,

and talking while playing Lego, provided nineteen comments. The table summarising all participants

responses accompanied by my analysis and interpretation of the relative effectiveness of each strategy, is

in chapter seven.

Step four- Analyse the data

Analyse this data text by becoming very familiar with the material, reading and listening
frequently to each participant’s conversation, and searching for meaning. Be aware of prejudice
by acknowledging excerpts from my retrospective reflective journal

In step four, I explain the familiarisation process with the transcribed material, and the rejection of both

the use of computer assisted analysis and the process of returning the transcriptions to the participants for

their consideration. The philosophical imperative, use and purposes of the retrospective, reflective

journal is previously described in detail in chapter one.

Listening to the tape and making the transcription

For each participant’s contribution, the process of transcription involved frequent listening to the tapes of

the verbal exchanges between the boys and me, (between four to eight times for each boy’s tape),

sometimes listening to the tapes while reading the text at the same time, and also reading and re-reading

the texts without listening to the tapes. These interactions with the data primarily embraced prejudice,

bias and presupposition, openness, a fusion of horizons and the hermeneutic circle. Searching for

meaning I circled back and forth around all of the participants’ tapes, returning here then there, grasping

understandings then revising them. Insights came during this activity but also at other times when I made

connections, prompted by the literature and previous thinking and professional experience. At this point

in the data analysis process some researchers use computer assisted methods. I will now discus why I

rejected this form of data analysis in this qualitative study

Computer based analysis

Increasingly computer based analytic tools for examining qualitative data are being developed and

refined (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996; Pope & Ziebland, 2000, Priest et al., 2002; Basit, 2003; DiCicco-

Bloom & Crabtree, 2006). I saw computer programs as essentially potentially helpful to sort and

organise sets of data but could not see them conducting the intellectual and conceptualising process

165
needed to transform the data into meaningful statements (Thorne, 2000, p.69). An over emphasis on

standardisation coming from computer analysis may detract from contextual meaning.

Other authors, (for example Burnard, 1991; Coffey & Atkinson, 1996; Priest et al., 2002) point out the

methodological pitfalls that can be associated with standardised coding and the possible development of

‘empty’ categories from computer packages used to analyse phenomenological data. It is also argued that

a proliferation of the computer based ‘code and retrieve’ form of data analysis is leading to a “loss of the

many layers of meaning at which an interview operates” (Wiles et al., 2005, p.90).

Other researchers state their preference for sorting their data manually and argue that this ‘hands-on’

approach helps the researcher to develop a more intimate knowledge of the material (Cohen et al. 2000,

Pope & Ziebland, 2000; Creswell, 2003; Williamson, 2005). This appealed to me as it seemed the

researcher could retain a strong personal connection with the participants and it reflected the personal

bias that had led me to choose qualitative research originally. I wanted to discover the underlying

structure or essence of the experience through an intensive study of individual cases. It needs

“exhaustive, systematic and reflective study of experiences as they are lived” (Thorne, 2000, p.69) and

the analysis requires “an intense and prolonged period of deliberation” (Basit, 2003, p.152). I wanted to

retain an intensely human and personal connection with what the boys said, so I did not use any

computer based analysis tools.

Return to the participants

In adult research of this kind, it is common to come back to the respondents after the data has been

transcribed and interpreted to confirm that the record of what was said is correct. Kvale (2006, p. 485)

points out that there are limits to such attempts to equalize the roles of the researcher and subjects and

that there are emotional barriers on interviewees accepting critical interpretations of what they have said.

Kvale (2006) comments, that in practice, few interview researchers let the subjects have the final say.

In this study, I considered that the age of the students meant they were not competent to affirm that their

views had been recorded faithfully and I considered it too intrusive a practice with young children

(Parker, 1984, p.28). In any interim period, they may have lost interest, or forgotten what we were doing,

166
or they may not understand what the task of confirmation of their views means (Seigal et al., 1988). They

may think their previous efforts were ‘not correct’ and try to change what they originally said in order to

please the interviewer. Finally, my prime interest remained what they said about school on the occasion I

talked to them, so it was not necessary to return to the participants.

Step five – Interpretations

Write my interpretation of the meaning of what each boy said, directly from the data text

Step five describes the process of single case analysis, presentation and interpretation. The writing of an

interpretive summary of each student’s perspective was a significant task. The interpretative process

required deep involvement with the text and complete familiarity with the outcomes of each boy’s

interview. Apart from the original involvement when I talked with the boys and the complex, rich, and

emotionally charged impressions and understandings that I gained at that time, I ‘relived’ the interviews

repeatedly by listening to the tapes. I then left the tapes for some time, and returned, after a period of

reflection, and then repeated this process on numerous occasions. I wrote many interpretations of each

individual boy’s comments and the eventual interpretation that is documented in this study text represents

one point in my view of what each participant meant. This writing and re-writing exercise is van Manen’s

fourth research activity, expanded later in this chapter.

This part of the process is frequently a controversial element in qualitative studies. At this stage I am

reflecting on the individual views of each boy on the occasion that he talked to me. What he said is

coloured by a range of human interactional pressures. He could have been telling me what he thought I

wanted to hear, or telling me something that was important to him, or telling me an idea that just

happened to come into his head at that moment. As Cade said, when I asked him how he knew

something, he told me, “I used my brain”. Each boy talked under the constraints or otherwise of the

moment, limited or liberated by what he thought was happening at the time, and his responses were

subject to his personal motivations and experience. His purpose could have been ‘to do what Nan told

me’, or ‘to do as I am told’, or ‘to get out of boring schoolwork’, or ‘to send up the researcher’ or ‘to

impress the visitor”, or ‘to get this over with quickly’ or some other motivation or combination of

motivations. A complex swirl of human emotions and incentives shape what we say to each other at any

167
one time. This is especially so if the situation is unfamiliar or unusual and outside our general

experience, as is the case in the research situation.

My interpretation of the data text (that is, the contextually annotated transcription of what was said in

the interviews that I have named in this study, the data matrix) is not shaped by any adherence on my

part to any codes, categories or extant organisation of a specified kind. Rather it encapsulates my

understanding of what the text says to me, at this time, and I express this ‘message’ in a prose statement

relating to each boy. The reader, in turn, interprets my writing. This process is like the process of

observing a painting. The outcome for this written activity, is the same as if an observer of a work of art,

say a painting, was asked to construct a written report of their viewing of the artist’s expression. The

observer would look, reflect and interpret what they saw and write this experience down, trying to

capture in words what emotions and understandings were generated, in the viewing of the painting.

In this study rather than ‘viewing’ fourteen artistic creations, or paintings, I am writing a report of

‘hearing’ fourteen creations. What I ‘view’ is the written text that derives from the audio-recording of

what they have said. A way of understanding my proposition is to ‘view’ the following collage of

several boys’ comments taken randomly from the transcriptions of their talk. Imagine what they are

saying is coming to you as a visual image (not as words but as a picture) and try to respond in the same

way as you view a painting. Can you ‘see’ the talking? This is how I viewed what each boy said in the

same way as if I was looking at a painting. I view and interpret this ‘painting’ of spoken words. I

respond to this ‘hearing’ of the boys’ perspectives and I interpret this response. To codify or categorise

my response to my ‘hearing’ of each boy’s comments would be like coding or categorising into a

systematic table what my responses are to a painting. It is not necessary to codify a ‘viewing’ of a

painting to get meaning. I argue it is not necessary to codify a ‘hearing’ to get meaning, either.

The following figure depicts this description visually.

Figure not included please see print copy

168
Figure 3: Word collage of participant transcript

169
It is important to note, that the position and process I have described above relates to this specific part of

my data analyses, where I am analysing what each individual boy said. When I look for commonalities

in the boys’ views, a system of codifying is used to help provide a sense of consistency in my

interpretations across all parts of the study. I expand on this slightly different and supplementary,

process in the next section.

Step six -Units of significance

Seek common themes in the data text by highlighting common units of significance

In step six, I describe the multiple case analysis, presentation and interpretation. Following on the process

of arriving at an interpretation of each individual boy’s perspective, came the activity of considering each

individual view as a part of a composite whole. Van Manen (1990, p.93) suggests three approaches

towards uncovering and isolating thematic aspects of a phenomenon. He expresses these as questions that

can be asked to uncover or isolate thematic aspects of a phenomenon that have been captured in textual

form. The questions he suggests are:

• what phrase may capture the fundamental meaning or main significance of the text as a whole?

(or the holistic approach)

• what statement(s) or phrase(s) seem particularly essential or revealing about the phenomenon or

experience being described? (or the selective or highlighting approach)

• what does this sentence or sentence cluster reveal about the phenomenon or experience being

described? (or the detailed line by line approach).

I decided to use aspects of all van Manen’s three approaches, but re-shaped the emphasis to ensure an

appropriate fit for the purposes of my study. In using the ‘highlighting approach’ I practised a selective

reading process. I listened and read the text many times searching for essential statements or phrases

about the phenomenon that reveal its essence. Grbich (2007, p.84) states “essences are objects that do

not necessarily exist in time and space like facts do, but can be known through essential or imaginative

intuition involving interaction between researcher and respondents or between researcher and texts.”

From the text that I have created from each boy’s conversation with me, I highlighted the statements that

illustrated themes that I have perceived as commonalities. I selected thematic phrases or words on the

170
basis of my reading and my other research activities and this linguistic transformation is described as a

“creative hermeneutic process” (van Manen, 1990, p.96).

I used another of van Manen’s suggestions, to evaluate and check my suppositions. I looked at every

meaningful statement from each boy’s text formulated from their verbatim transcription, and

underlined/highlighted the key topic words. I then checked that these topics were adequately represented

in my interpretive text analysis. Further I brought together any ‘essence’ or recurring themes that might

seem common to the group.

Moustakas (1994) advises that units of meaning or significance can be linked thematically from each

child’s data by grouping like-type thoughts or similar topics together. To do this, I literally cut out from

enlarged pages of the transcript (or sometimes I wrote out by hand) every constituted statement made by

each boy. I considered what ‘essence’ was embodied in each of these statements and I pasted each of

these thematic statements onto ‘topic’ sheets that were then placed into numerous topic folders. I found

fifteen topics that seemed to encapsulate the most commonly recurring themes that appeared often

across the data. This means that I determined that the boys had made remarks that could be categorised

under, or related to, a particular topic heading. An example of this process follows. The table shows the

topic name, for example ‘PLAY’, and the boys’ statements from their transcripts that I thought related

to this topic.

171
 Table 4: Units of significance distilled from data

PLAY
Boys’ statements from Phenomenonological Distilled unit of
transcriptions phrase significance
related to the
phenomenon

The best thing about what I do in the day is

The best thing is just playing
just playing in the playground because you
can play whatever you want You can play whatever you PLAY
want
Transcript Aimon

I might just draw myself playing in the

Myself playing
playground or trying to have free play time PLAY
because these are the things I like best I like trying to have free play
time
Transcript Andrew

We can play and do puzzles at our desk and

We can play
we have got some scrap paper we can draw PLAY
on

Transcript Andrew

The best thing about coming to school is

Playing activities is best PLAY
playing activities

Transcript Jaden

When you’re finished your work you can

You can play
have free play. That might be computer or
Lego or drawing on scrap paper PLAY

Transcript Cade

In the playground at school at lunchtime,

We’re allowed to play
we’ve got some soccer balls and we’re
allowed to play soccer. At recess and when
we’ve just come to school all the classes get PLAY
a turn on the equipment unless they don’t
want to go on it. One class is allowed on it
at a time

Transcript Andrew

From their statements I derived a phenomenologically based phrase, and then distilled the single word or

phrase that most represented, in my view, the topic of the comment. It can be seen from these examples

that there is overlap in the possible topic categories, as parts of these statements contain elements of

school routines and school rules, as well as indicators of teacher control. In this study, these overlaps or

multi-faceted units of meaning are picked up in the interpretations. This demonstrates why coded and

categorised data analysis is restricted in its value in a hermeneutic phenomenonological study.

172
The topic headings were developed by assessing all the boys’ remarks carefully and deciding what

characteristic they had in common. Often they related to the subject matter of the questions I had asked,

and on other occasions they entered the conversation as a result of the boys’ thoughts. As stated above,

the remarks generally had elements that overlapped with several categories, and I determined which

category I thought was the most appropriate, by considering the context and the main intent of the boys’

comments.

This categorizing action could have been performed by using the cut-and-paste functions of Microsoft

Word tables but I wanted ensure I stayed completely engaged with each boy’s remarks and the intent and

meaning of what had been said. What I interpreted as similarities I grouped together under headings that I

thought most closely conveyed the essence of the boys’ perspectives, derived from what they had said,

what was not said, but was implied, and what was demonstrated in other ways. I extracted or isolated

statements that illuminated the researched phenomenon (Creswell, 1998; Holloway, 1997) and formulated

meanings from significant statements. In this way I engaged with van Manen’s third research activity

reflecting on the essential themes which characterise the phenomenon.

I linked together all comments made by each of the boys that contained any elements of similarity and

checked for consistency with the list of distilled significant units of meaning that had been recorded in

the original data analysis tables, in column seven. I recorded the occurrence of each distilled unit of

significance in relation to how often they occurred in each boy’s transcript. An example of the tabular

recording of these significant units of meaning related to the phenomenon follows. This recording of the

source of each significant comment grouped according to theme, is part of the “audit trail” process

(Koch, 1992).

The data is recorded in tabular form, with the units of significance shown in a simple tally using the *

symbol as well as numerically, to provide a pictorial representation of what events occurred most, for

instant assessment. Then the line number and the page number from the original transcripts are shown as

line number (stroke)page number, for example line six/page five shows as 6/5 in the table. In this way

173
the units of significance can be traced back to the original transcript and the audit trail is maintained. The

following table is an example of this practice.

Table 5: Units of significance in themed categories-Cade

Units of significance Tally No Source: Transcript C Line and page

Curriculum/learning ****** 19 32/3; 42/3; 58/4; 80/5; 326/18; 410/23;
****** 420/23; 434/24; 1068/52; 1089/52; 1165-
****** 1166/56; 1210/57(X2); 1213/58;
* 1216/58(X2); 1230/58(X2)
Play ****** 19 84/6; 160/10; 228/13; 252/14; 292/16; 346/19;
****** 388/21; 398/22; 537/29; 549/30; 567/30;
****** 586/31; 666/35;674/35;688/36; 764/39;
* 852/43; 1172/56; 1198/57
Teacher technique ****** 13 8/1; 10/2; 18/2; 74/5; 624-625/33; 734/38;
****** 888/44; 948/47(X2); 1024/50; 1137-1138/55
*
Home/family ****** 11 96/6; 120/7; 128/8; 134/8; 140/8; 150/9;
***** 444/25; 468/26; 475/26; 704/37; 710/37
Behaviour ****** 9 370/20; 618/33; 636/33; 882/44; 1093/53;
*** 1106/53; 1130/54; 1134/54; 1136/55; 1258/60
Work ****** 9 298/16; 304/17; 352/19; 402/22; 536/29;
*** 538/29; 1169/56; 1183/57; 1206/57
Trouble ****** 8 194/11; 330/18; 445/25; 456/25; 938/46;
** 940/46; 1099/53
Sanction ****** 8 200/12; 208/12; 212/12; 454/25; 636/33;
** 942/46; 950/47;956/47990/49; 1102/53
Rules ****** 8 256/14; 516/28;646/34; 654/34; 656/34;
** 776/40; 1122/54; 1250/59
Hurt ****** 6 180/11; 372/20; 380/21; 780/40;
920/45;1158/56
Friends ***** 5 494/27; 530/29; 554/30;802/41; 817/41;
Self efficacy *** 3 50/4; 70/5; 216/12
Rewards/awards *** 3 260/15; 274/15; 358/19
School routines *** 3 610/32; 895/44; 1246/59
Emotions ** 2 338/18; 1227/58

Step seven – Reflect on common themes

Study and reflect on the common themes

Step seven explains how thoughtful considerations and deep reflection on each of the comments in the

topic folders led to the eventual reduction to fifteen topic areas and then to the three overarching themes.

When I finished sorting the comments, I returned to the tape and listened again to ensure my

interpretation of the students’ views remained faithful to their intentions at this point in time. I repeated

this process of listening and checking, for each of the fourteen participants. At the completion of this

stage in my investigation, I compared each of the fourteen summaries to each other and looked for any

further similarities and differences. The careful reading of the comments allowed me to reduce and

combine these topics to three “essential themes which characterized the phenomenon” (van Manen, 1990,

p.106). Most inductive studies report the establishment of between three to eight categories in their

174
findings is appropriate (Jain & Ogden, 1999; Campbell et al., 2003). Any larger number than this would

indicate further combining should be contemplated.

Step eight - The Composite Boy

Write an interpretation of the common themes and develop a ‘composite boy’ view of what
kindergarten means

This final step incorporates van Manen’s fourth research activity. Van Manen’s fourth research activity is

“the researcher capturing the phenomenon through the art of writing and rewriting”. This writing

activity is an important part of the method described by van Manen (1990, p. 125). He states “…for the

human sciences, and specifically for hermeneutic phenomenological work, writing is closely fused into

the research activity and reflection itself.” Van Manen describes the process of writing and re-writing as

reminiscent of an artistic approach, revising repeatedly, moving back and forth between the parts and the

whole to devise pieces that reflect the personal style of the author. Van Manen (1997, p.368) makes the

point that a thoughtful text “reflects on life while reflecting life.” Phenomenological texts are written

from “the midst of life experience where meanings resonate and reverberate with reflective being”. So

phenomenological research requires the application of language and thinking to an aspect of lived

experience and writing is an important part of the research process. (van Manen, 1990).

My aim is to make visible to readers my interpretation of the thoughts of the boys in kindergarten about

their school life, and how they made meaning of their experiences. This process is linear in a document

but readers may move backwards and forwards through the text in a non-linear way, just as the researcher

has moved backwards and forwards through the data, over and over again. These practices fit comfortably

with the philosophical position of Gadamer and my allegorical notion of the creation of a painting in

relation to this investigation. It emphasises an art-based approach rather than a scientific one – hence no

analytical computer program sanitising the data, but rather van Manen’s suggestion of poetization, as

described earlier.

As part of this investigation into boys’ perspectives on schooling, there is a question concerning the

engaging and alienating aspects of school life. The third question in the study asks “how does what they

say contribute to our understanding of what is alienating and what is engaging in school activities?”

175
This required that I determine from the boys’ statements and my interpretations of them, what features

could be considered alienating and what features could be considered engaging.

I decided to look at this concept in relation to each of the schools as the local environment could perhaps

significantly impact on what features of alienation or engagement, were raised. I separated the fourteen

boys into their school groups, and assembled the key features from their interview data. I chose the three

most frequently talked about issues that each boy raised and condensed this matter into a one or two

word feature. I then looked for commonalities across all participants and listed the most frequently stated

features that were common to all boys. I then determined whether these features were negative

(alienating) or positive (engaging) in relation to school activities, by examining the context of the

remarks. This information is demonstrated in the following diagram. I used this diagram as a summary of

these findings to enable me to construct the answer to the research question above. This outcome is

expanded in the final chapter.

176
 Table 6: Participant units of significance related to school

School Student Unit of sig. Multiple case Distilled Alienating Engaging

code name
curriculum
Niam rules
routines
family Curriculum
Conner values X3
trouble
ATPS
self efficacy
Rules
Tyson curriculum Routines
family X3
routines
Warrick curriculum
work
friends
Omar family
curriculum
curriculum
Ben routines
play Curriculum
work X2 Curriculum
Ellis play X5
friends Play
Play
BQWPS routines
X3 Play
Aimon play
X6
friends Rules
Rules
rules Routines
Jaden routines X5 Rules
teaching X14
rules
school
Nigel
organisation
play
rules
Andrew teaching
school org
routines Rules
rules Routines
Dylan sanctions School
organisation
work
CGPS Sanctions
teaching
X6
play
Cade family Play
teaching X2
rules
Darrius play
work

Curriculum matters featured in one school site more than the other two sites, rules (and sanctions)

routines, and school organisation were frequent at all sites and play was a consistent comment at all sites

also. However, most noteworthy is the result that each boy presented in his own, unique way with a

different combination of comments to his peers.

177
Summary of chapter four

This chapter opens with a quote from a poem by William Blake suggesting in part, that school “drives all

joys away.” In order to consider whether this pessimistic view is really an outcome of contemporary

schooling practices, in the views of a small group of boys, I analyse the data generated by engaging in

conversation/interviews with fourteen kindergarten boys in three New South Wales schools.

I explained the eight steps that I devised for shaping the analysis. These steps encompass the

transcription process, the organisation of the transcribed data into a matrix and the ensuing search for

meaning. I describe the writing and re-writing of my interpretations of those meanings and the process

used to derive individual and then common themes.

The next chapter demonstrates some of what the boys in this study say about school. While they seem to

come more or less ‘willingly to school’ and there is no obvious ‘sighing and dismay’, as suggested by

William Blake’s poem, a deeper look at the phenomenon through their eyes may reveal more than is first

seen, and whether Blake’s dismal view could be applicable, in some ways. Each single case is analysed

and I develop my interpretation of their perspectives of life in kindergarten.

178
CHAPTER FIVE
SINGLE CASE ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
“Your son marches to the beat
of a different drummer ‘comma’
But don’t worry
We’ll have him joining the
parade by the end of term”
The little boy went first day of
school
He got some crayons and
started to draw
He put colors all over the paper
For colors was what he saw
And the teacher said…What
you doin’ young man
I’m painting flowers he said
She said…It’s not the time for
art young man
And anyway flowers are green
and red
There’s a time for everything
young man
And a way it should be done
You’ve got to show concern for
everyone else
For you’re not the only one.
And she said…
flowers are red young man
Green leaves are green
There’s no need to see flowers
any other way
Than the way they always have
been seen
Harry Chapin (1942-1981)
“flowers Are Red”
From the Album “Legends of the Lost and Found” 1979
But the little boy said…
There are so many colors in the
rainbow
So many colors in the morning
sun
So many colors in the flower
and I see every one
Well the teacher said…You’re
sassy
There’s ways that things
should be
And you’ll paint flowers the
way they are
So repeat after me…
And she said…
flowers are red young man
Green leaves are green
There’s no need to see flowers
any other way
Than the way they always have
been seen.
But the little boy said…
There are so many colors in the
rainbow
So many colors in the morning
sun
So many colors in the flower
and I see every one
The teacher put him in a
corner
She said…It’s for your own
good…
And you won’t come out ‘til
you get it right
And are responding like you
should
Well finally he got lonely
Frightened thoughts filled his
head
And he went up to the teacher
And this is what he said…and
he said
flowers are red
Green leaves are green
There’s no need to see flowers
any other way
Than the way they always have
been seen.
Time went by like it always
does
And they moved to another
town
And the little boy went to
another school
And this is what he found
The teacher there was smilin’
She said…painting should be
fun
And there are so many colors
in a flower
So let’s see every one
But that little boy painted
flowers
In neat rows of green and red
And when the teacher asked
him why
This is what he said…and he
said
flowers are red
Green leaves are green
There’s no need to see flowers
any other way
Than the way they always have
been seen.
“But there still must be a way to
have our children say…
There are so many colors in the
rainbow
So many colors in the morning
sun
So many colors in the flower
and I see every one.”
179
Introduction

In this chapter, I introduce my initial observations of and interactions with the boys and the context in

which we conducted our conversations. Then I describe and interpret what they talked about in terms of

their experiences of school in the first year of formal education. I provide the background to the

interpretive process and revisit aspects of the methodology and method that are important for this part of

the study.

The fourteen boys are introduced individually, and my interpretation of what they say follows. I have

used direct quotes from the text that I have derived from the verbatim transcripts of our taped

conversations. I have included examples of the situational context and field note information at sites

throughout the text where these notes are particularly relevant to increase our understanding of what the

boys say.

Here, I engage van Manen’s fifth research activity of maintaining a strong and oriented pedagogical

relation to the phenomenon. Van Manen is critical of modern educational theory and research, for

confusing pedagogical theorising with other discipline-based forms of discourse. He sees a tendency to

abstraction that loses touch with the lifeworld of living and working with children and he is critical of

what he describes as a failure by researchers to observe an erosion of pedagogic meaning from the

lifeworld (van Manen, 1990, p.135). He comments that researchers may see that it is one thing to try to

understand what a child experiences, but another thing to act pedagogically upon this understanding. He

argues that a teacher’s eye is trained by a pedagogic orientation and that an adult’s understanding of the

child’s experience has to do with the way that adult stands in the world. Van Manen writes (1990, p.138)

“a researcher who sees himself or herself as an educator and who wants to arrive at better pedagogic

understanding of questions concerning children’s experiences…needs to enquire (reflect, speak, and

write) in a manner that is both oriented and strong in a pedagogic sense.” This study maintains this

orientation throughout each of the described processes, including the excerpts from my personal

retrospective reflective journal, which document significant pedagogic moments throughout my teaching

and educational career, and through the processes developed to ascertain and then analyse what the boys

say about school life.

180
What do the boys say about school?

As described previously, this investigation sets out to see what a group of boys in kindergarten say about

school when they are asked about their experience, in a one-to-one conversational/interview situation.

Wing, (1995, p.224) states “(y)oung children negotiate meaning from events, situations and interactions

in their classrooms which gives them a framework for their understandings of what school is to them.” I

was searching for this meaning, mindful of the advice given by Hatch, (1990, p.252) that “the success of

any qualitative research depends on the researcher’s ability to gain clear understandings of the

knowledge that ‘insiders’ use to make sense of their world.”

The individual stories

It is important that these stories be presented initially, one by one. Van Manen has stated that the ultimate

challenge for teachers is to know what is appropriate for an individual child in a specific situation. For it

to be genuine, “pedagogical theory has to be the theory of the unique, of the particular case…Theory of

the unique starts with and from the single case, searches for the universal qualities and returns to the

single case” (van Manen, 1990, p.150). In emphasising the individual differences van Manen describes

each child’s learning experience as “astonishingly mercurial and transitional in terms of moods,

emotions, energy and feelings of relationship and selfhood” (p150). Researchers can attempt to capture

life experiences, actions or events in an anecdote or story because this retrieves what is unique,

particular, and irreplaceable. These stories can stand alone as data that can raise awareness and increase

understandings of teaching practice. What is different one from the other is as important as what is the

same.

The difference, or the uniqueness of the artists of the Impressionist era, was their use of short, sharp

strokes of paint to capture quickly the essence of the subject. In their works, colours are applied side by

side with as little mixing as possible, creating a vibrant surface. Wet paint is placed into wet paint,

producing softer edges and an intermingling of colour. The play of natural light is emphasised. Close

attention is paid to the reflection of colours, object to object. There is a sense of freshness and openness.

In the way of the Impressionists, I seek to capture similar outcomes as I analyse each boy’s talk.

181
Not only the individual stories but also every remark and each comment are considered in the fabric of

the canvas of the study. There are many possible perspectives upon the phenomenon. The inquiry is

circular (Hein & Austin, 2001). The questioning does not end with the researcher, but continues with the

readers of the text, who must bring an attentiveness and thoughtfulness “to what is said in and through the

words” (van Manen 1990). Each utterance comes like a brushstroke, each one is different, a different

colour here, contrasting texture there, and unusual shapes emerge as they come forward, dab upon dab,

stroke across stroke. Up close each one is clear and separate, and then viewed from further away they

begin to merge to make a glittering whole, a landscape of life in school that I am creating in this study.

They can evoke in each observer an individual response. Under the auspices of Gadamer’s exhortations,

in this chapter you the reader, and I, will engage with the participants in hermeneutic circles and a fusion

of horizons, as we seek understandings.

The interpretive process

As described elsewhere, hermeneutics acknowledges that all interpretation is situated (Kinsella, 2006).

The interpreter in critical hermeneutic interpretation has an active role summarised by Gardiner (1999,

p.63) stating that “the hermeneutic approach stresses the creative interpretation of words and texts and the

active role played by the knower. The goal is not an objective explanation or neutral description, but

rather a sympathetic engagement… (with the text)… and the wider socio-cultural context within which

these phenomena occur.” Lawn (2006, p.39) summarises

hermeneutics reveals that all human understanding is ultimately interpretation. A perspective on

the world is always just that: it is never an unmediated picture of the way things really are, it is
necessarily provisional and limited and can never be a view of the way things really are because
the way things really are is as illusory as the philosopher’s stone. What we must never forget is
that we are always part of what it is we seek to understand.

I have consistently argued throughout this study that it is inevitable that all interpretation is mediated by

the researcher’s own position within the research process (Lather, 1986) and that the interpretation of any

form of communication is subjective (Skattebol, 2006, p.511). My interpretation of what the boys in this

study say, draws primarily on a long period of teaching young boys who found school hard and learning

difficult in the settings in which they were placed. I remember one occasion in particular, described in the

following excerpt from the journal, and it exemplifies many, many other similar occasions. The

disturbing nature of these experiences as I helped young boys begin formal schooling has impacted on my

view of teaching and shapes my interpretation of what they say now.

182
The little boy crawled up the leg of my chair and into my lap, his thumb
crept round to his mouth and he turned his head into my shoulder. I was a
complete stranger but I was preferable to the scene being enacted in front
of him. It was day one for him of formal schooling. He was one hour into
kindergarten. As he buried his head in my neck, he whispered, “when is
mummy coming back?” Was this the start of some sense of alienation?

The scene in front of us was common for day one in kindergartens

everywhere. Tables are laden with ‘fun’ things to do. Boxes of fresh crayons
and stencils neatly arranged on desks. Beautifully scribed in lower case, the
first names of the children in the class have been carefully laminated and
attached to desks. The hard working teacher sat on a soft chair near the
‘big book’ frame and asked all the children to come to the front. They were
now being asked to leave the colourful equipment and games they had
been engaged in as each one arrived. Their parents, grandparents, and
siblings had been nicely encouraged to leave with the offer of morning tea
in the assembly hall where an adult reassuring welcome ceremony would be
held.

“Everyone come and sit out the front please.” Panic, What does this mean?
Where were the chairs? The teacher had a chair but no one else did. A flurry
of little girls rushed to sit at the feet of the teacher. One started to stroke
the teacher’s leg, who at this point chose to ignore this action. Some boys
finally looked up from the towers they were making and followed the girls,
who by now, were sitting crossed legged, pulling their brand new uniform
skirts over their knees and gazing up adoringly at the teacher, with their
heads tilted at an uncomfortable angle as they each persevered to outdo
their neighbour in measures of compliance. Some boys pushed each other
as they made their way to the front. Some knew each other from preschool
and had already established their status and others were feeling their way
and flexing out a position in the group. Others hung back, watching and
waiting, reflecting, and there was the one who had come to sit on my knee.

My job was to assist the teacher with the ‘settling-in’ process, to help with
the ones who might cry, to help with the ones who would not read the

183
‘hidden curriculum’ quickly enough, and generally assist to start the process
of demanding conformity to the process of formal schooling. As a support
teacher for learning difficulties, I was to size up the likely candidates for my
services during this initial period. It was not hard to see who were going to
be amongst my first referrals.

I extricated my arms from the clinging child and suggested quietly that he
might like to sit on the floor beside me, looking a bit like all the others, but
not quite in the group yet. He reluctantly slid down, conscious now that he
was somehow different, conscious of the quiet that now reigned and the
sense of expectancy that had been raised in the room. Sitting cross-legged
was going to be hard for him, as slightly overweight, the hems of his shorts
cut into his chubby thighs. Needing to look up towards the ‘big book’ stand
from this position on the floor would soon give him a crick in the neck. He
would not be able to sit still like that for long, without becoming restless and
inattentive.

Two boys wrestled with each other at the back of the group, like a pair of
puppies playing in the yard. They were called to order by the teacher who
pointed out how nicely the girls were sitting, as an example of her
expectation, and she then directed ‘all eyes’ to the ‘big book’. The girls had
been mostly patiently waiting…and waiting. One or two of the boys also,
alert to the messages, were also waiting…and waiting.

“We’re going to do reading now.” More panic. What does she mean?
Reading! I can’t read yet! How will I do that? I could feel the heart thumping
away beside me. I whispered. Watch the teacher…see where she is
pointing, listen, she will read the story…

The teacher read the story aloud, interrupting her narrative frequently to
ask questions designed to test for comprehension. Girls already familiar
with the story answered these questions quickly and they were praised
lavishly for their ideas. The teacher then gave a new instruction. It took a
moment to realise that this was not part of the narrative. Maybe it was
another perplexing question. No, it was an instruction.

184
“Go to your desks now. Look for your name and sit down. We are going to
do some writing.” Panic. My desk? Which desk? My name? I don’t know what
my name looks like. Writing? I can’t write yet. How will I do that?

School can be such a scary place for those who don’t know how to ‘do
school’.
Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective
Journal

This excerpt illustrates how I interpreted this boy’s feelings about his first day in school and I introduce it

here, because it describes not a neutral description or objective explanation but rather my view of his

responses, filtered through my own view of the situation, and prejudices. As Turner, (2003, p.9) states “it

is important to be aware of one’s own bias, so that the text can present itself in all its otherness, thus

asserting its own truth against one’s own fore-projections.”

Presentation of the data

A significant challenge emerges at this point in the presentation of the data generated by each participant.

How much data and what data to present at this stage, is a perplexing decision to make. It is important

that you, the reader, know that I analysed each transcript in detail, as described in the previous chapter. I

engaged deeply with all of the transcribed text. My interpretation of the boys’ data comes from reflective

consideration of their complete interactions with me. However not all this material is quoted in this

chapter. While some quotes from parts of the boys’ conversation are used here, it is necessary carry

forward to the multiple case analysis, in the next chapter, much of the original data supporting my

interpretations. Chapter six and chapter seven should be read in concert for the reader to gain a strong

sense of the depth of data generated, and the basis on which I made my interpretations.

I am presenting each boy’s story individually as ‘parts’ of a text before relating them to the ‘whole’ to be

consistent with an hermeneutic phenomenological approach. Van Manen (1990, p.86) writes “ we try to

unearth something ‘telling’, something ‘meaningful’, something ‘thematic’ in the various experiential

accounts – we work at mining meaning from them.” As I labour to mine the data, I interpret the boys’

comments and responses during our conversations and write about them as individual findings. Following

the prose passages that reveal my interpretation of what the boys said, I derive the meaning of those

185
statements. The process of searching for possible commonalities in their views comes later. At this time,

these cases stand importantly as individual stories.

As described earlier, I worked in three schools and conversed with fourteen boys, all aged six. The

conversations were transcribed as delineated previously. In the following passages, I introduce each boy

through the initial impression he made on me, as we met for the first time and walked to the spaces

allocated to me by the school executive to conduct the research. I did not gather any data from other

sources about each boy, other than what they told me during our time together. I wanted the child’s voice

to not be coloured by any other information that I might be given.

In order to build a context suggestive of the data set, I describe briefly the outcome of each part of my

discussion with boys, prior to the presentation of my interpretation of what they said. I present this as it

was conveyed in each of the different scaffoldings, as this will assist in an evaluation of the relative

effectiveness of each technique in the last chapter. As described in the previous chapter, in order to

support this evaluation, I recorded in tabular form the number of units of significance related to the

phenomenon, as they were generated by the scaffolds. The initial conversation and talk, is supported

mostly by my long experience as a teacher and my knowledge of the literature pertaining to interviewing

children. The second scaffold engaged the boys in drawing pictures related to school life. This too, was

supported by my experience, both as an artist, and also as someone who has taught aspiring teachers

about children’s art. The third scaffold involved the boys looking at pictures and line drawings about

school activities and talking about them. The final scaffold consisted of the playing of a game using Lego

pieces where the boys were encouraged to make constructions related to school activities and to talk

about them. Where useful I have demonstrated the parts of our conversation that generated rich and

evocative data relevant to the research questions. The boys responded differently to each of the scaffolds

and they were stimulated to talk in different ways and provided enlightening and interesting information

according to their individual characteristics. In the presentation of each boy, I focus on the periods of

interaction that revealed most usefully, their views of school life.

In some cases, I have included aspects of their conversation that I have transcribed in poetic form. The

theoretical basis for this use of poetization is described in chapter five. Some information was so

emotional or unique (van Manen, 1990, p.22) I decided that only a poetization of the data was a suitable

186
method for making text from what was said. Often these poetic passages provide deep insight into the

views expressed by the individual, or provide contextual material relevant to the act of interpretation.

The boys are presented in no particular order, so that their unique contributions are not influenced by

other criteria. Pseudonyms are used for all persons’ names and places that appear throughout all the texts.

I have used the word ‘Teacher’ when the boys used a teacher’s name.

THE STORIES OF FOURTEEN BOYS

AIMON

Aimon came to me appearing a little apprehensive, but seeming quite keen to participate in something

different and out of the usual school routine. When we reached our worksite, I saw that he was clearly

intent of ‘doing the right thing’ and doing well at the task and I thought he was most overtly being

‘good’. He talked coherently and at considerable length. He sat comfortably and very neatly, in the low

chair and expressed a quiet interest in the working mechanics of the tape recorder and the microphone.

He developed in confidence quite quickly and soon began to elaborate his ideas in a mature and

conversational manner.

I felt he had been strongly encouraged by his parents to participate in the research activity and he was

eager to report a successful outcome to them. Throughout all the period of time with me, Aimon seemed

quite comfortable in the situation and happy to participate.

CONVERSATION WITH AIMON

Aimon described the routines of school life in detail. Life inside the classroom and outside in the

playground were explained to me and he was very serious about the importance of knowing how to

respond to practices such as the ringing of the school bell, and other rules and routines.

Aimon talked at length about the importance of listening to the teacher and the penalties if this

requirement was not followed. He talked of sanctions like time-out and he had a good understanding of

the subtleties of the different levels of time-out punishment. He talked about other children and proffered

reasons as to why they might be getting themselves into ‘big trouble’.

187
In regards to play, Aimon indicated a preference for small toys and lived out his fantasies in miniature,

often in the school sandpit or round the base of trees in the playground. These small toys were often used

as connectors for building relationships with his friends.

Field notes, AQW Lines 2-4, p.1

Aimon seemed very relaxed right from the very beginning of our time together. He leaned forward as he started to
answer my opening question, if you were describing a school day, what would it be like? and told me in a very
confidential tone of voice, lowering his voice to talk about his friend Charlie…this was something he clearly thought
was confidential, but he seemed happy to trust me with the information…

He told me with deep seriousness

Um…I’d play with my friends outs-i-i-i-de, and if I had a car I’d play with Andrew with it…
because he’s my best friend…and I like playing with him because…he’s my friend and Kate
and Charlie. And um…It’s a bit funny because Charlie can understand us but we can’t
understand him. …he just talks funny…a bit. He has to go to speech every Wednesday.

During our talking Aimon frequently gave long detailed and involved responses. They were not always

clear to me but they did provide useful and enlightening information about many aspects of school life as

Aimon perceived them. For example in one exchange the following occurred.

RC Oh, okay. So after maths what might happen?

A Um sometimes we do in the afternoon – when Ms Teacher’s here sometimes we do three...and
Ms Teacher 2’s here...then after little lunch um …we have a bit of maths and then we have free
play so we play with toys…then usually (N/C) used to play was dinosaur Lego. Usually I play
with dinosaur Lego
RC Tell me about that.
A You have to like…you can build with ships with it and there’s dinosaurs and you can like
connect it together like…like…It’s like a square piece and there’s a thing that goes like that and
they’re tiny and you can just put one down and get another part and put another piece down and
they’ll be connected. And they’re not very stable. They can break easily and if something’s too
big it just falls down and they can break.
RC Do the girls play that?
A Yeah, sometimes. When me and Jade play it with um…Mobilo…the girls play with it. That’s
when I play with Jay inside.

Transcript AQW Lines 27-32, p.3-4

During this description Aimon was very demonstrative with his hands and arms trying to clarify what he

was wanting to tell me. While his explanation was not clear at all times, I was impressed with his use

and understanding of words like ‘connected’ and ‘stable’ and the learning that had taken place during

this play time, in terms of experimentation and exploration.

188
DRAWING WITH AIMON

Aimon’s drawing is filled with happy characters. The children and the teacher are all wearing big smiles,

the teacher placed out the front of a group of children who are sitting on the floor, and the teacher

appears to be holding a book towards them. Aimon told me, “we are doing maths”. Aimon drew his

picture with great care and attention, sometimes silently and at other times making unsolicited

comments, so that it was difficult to know whether to turn the tape off or to leave it running.

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH AIMON

When I displayed the pictures to Aimon, he made his choice quickly as if keen to get the activity done.

He described the scene quickly, “Um…there’s kids working. They’re writing stuff or drawing stuff and

there’s a kid putting his hand up…because he wants to tell the teacher the questions.”

PLAYING LEGO WITH AIMON

As Aimon and I played Lego, he ranged backwards and forwards from the construction he was making,

to going along with the school theme that I was encouraging and engaging in some interesting asides

about school life. For example, the following exchange raised school practices and some insight into his

home life as it relates to school. We were chatting easily and Aimon had been busy building when I said:

RC That’s an interesting idea. So what are you making there?

A Making some walls
RC So what’s that going to do?
A It’s like a wall that’s different and they’re all dressed up because there’s…there’s…at this
school it’s a dress up day.
RC Does that happen?
A Yep, one day it did.
RC Was there a special reason for that?
A Um, yep, because to raise some money for the poor kids in Africa
RC Oh, okay. That’s interesting, and did you raise money?
A Yeah, you have to bring in a gold dollar coin.
RC And what did you dress up in?
A You don’t…you could just put your normal clothes on but some people dressed up
RC So you didn’t wear school uniform?
A Nah, but my sister did because she was grounded but my mum still gave her money
RC So why was your sister grounded?
A Because um…she stole my money and she lied about it.
RC Oh and that got her into a bit of trouble did it?
A No, not a bit of trouble, heaps of trouble because she lied
RC Oh well, that’s no good.
A And she’s still grounded because then she stole my Mum’s money
RC So what was she wanting the money for?
A So she could just buy something…without anybody knowing
RC And what did she want to buy?
A I don’t know cause I didn’t see it

189
 Transcript AQW Lines 483-506, p.36-37

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the
boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different
scaffolds generated, during my time with Aimon.
Table 7: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Aimon

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
AIMON 70 6 16 15

Aimon made most contribution to the data when he was talking with me. Looking at the pictures and

playing Lego generated about the same level of response and the drawing of the picture was not a

scaffold of great support in Aimon’s talking, about his experiences in school.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy. The table summarising these

units for Aimon follows.

Table 8: Units of significance in themed categories-Aimon

Unit of significance Tally Number Source Line number/page number

School organisation/routine ****** 17 14/2; 20/3; 36/4; 48/5; 56/6; 70/7; 130/12;
****** 146/13; 160/14; 216/19; 246/21; 298/25;
***** 374/30; 370/30;438/33; 450/34; 490/36
Play ****** 15 2/1; 6/1; 28/3; 30/4; 76/7; 122/11; 132/12;
****** 156/13; 194/17; 196/17; 212/18; 218/19;
*** 342/27; 370/29; 416/32
Friends ****** 12 10/2; 132/12; 170/15; 212/18; 256/22;
****** 264/22; 272/23;(2) 326/26; 330/26; 350/28;
370/29
Sanctions ****** 9 94/9; 100/9; 104/10; 108/10; 172/15; 174/15;
*** 176/15; 178/15; 500/37
Work ****** 7 16/2; 41/5; 52/5; 54/5; 57/6; (2) 280/23
*
Family ****** 6 10/2; 506/37; 547/40; 550/40; 578/42; 588/42
Curriculum ****** 6 18/2; 34-36/4; 62/6; 64/6; 248/21; 452/34
Rules ****** 6 22/3; 26/3; 82/8; 84/8; 162/14; 164/14
Teaching technique ****** 6 44/5; 60/6; 80/8; 192/16; 338/27; 516/38
Behaviour **** 4 180/16; 182/16; 190/16; 334/27
Rewards *** 3 112/10; 228/20; 571/41
Hurt *** 3 156/14; 170/15; 390/31

190
Trouble *** 3 87/9; 92/9; 524/38
Learning ** 2 208/18; 584/42
Gender ** 2 32/4; 392/31
Self efficacy ** 2 288/19; 240/20
Bullying * 1 166/14

During my conversation with Aimon, he raised many concepts related to school routines and

organisation. His view of what would be considered by other boys to be school rules, he presented more

as organisational requirements that were unavoidable and appropriate for the setting. The items he spoke

about next most frequently were play and friends. Data from Aimon generated forty-four pages of

transcript.

MY INTERPRETATION OF AIMON’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

Aimon views school primarily as a place in which playing with friends and being in control, is
paramount. He says “the best thing about what I do in the day is just playing in the playground because
you can play whatever you want”. Aimon sees play as crucial to the enjoyment of his school experience,
“usually I play outside heaps because it has equipment.” If he had authority in the school (if he was the
‘boss’) he would organise the school so “every day after little lunch we could have free play until it’s big
lunch.” Aimon is very clear about what gets kindergarten children into trouble telling me, “they’re not
doing what the teacher says”.

He has worked out in this first year that the most successful way of working your way round school is to
obey the teacher’s directions implicitly and immediately. He has a very clear idea of what the rules are,
and has no trouble interpreting them and accepting them.

Not everything goes well, but he has accepted that there are rules to protect children from hurt, both
emotional and physical. He talked to me at length about rough happenings in the playground. He said
“when you get hurt in the playground, you have to say, ‘stop it, I don’t like it’ and if they keep on doing
it you just tell on them”. He was very matter-of-fact about this. He repeated in a forthright tone, “You
just tell on them.” He went on to detail, “sometimes they might kick, punch or hit, because really at
school, heaps of people get hurt, sometimes kids in my class and they’re my friends, and sometimes they
hurt me, but I don’t really tell on them, I just say ‘stop it, I do not like it’ and then they stop, but usually
with Andrew when I say ‘stop it, I do not like it’, he keeps going so I have to tell on him.”

Aimon is aware of children with disabilities, such as Charlie, and while he does not understand why
Charlie is unable to speak clearly, he is very comfortable in having him in his friendship group and
speaks admiringly of another friend who seems to be able to communicate well with Charlie. Aimon sees
the problem of communication as his own problem rather than Charlie’s.

191
Aimon’s view of schoolwork is that it is something that is enjoyable even if sometimes he thinks it is
challenging, “it’s too hard to find every single word (in a find-a-word activity) but I like doing it” and
he indicates that a balance of work with activity is best for him “most of all I like Secret Sentence
because when you have finished, checking and cutting and pasting, you can draw a picture.”

Aimon has a positive outlook on life at school. He told me, “I don’t like nothing. I like everything I do at
school.” He adds to his positive views about play expressed earlier, by indicating the “best thing about
school is learning”. He went on to illustrate the personal satisfaction he enjoys from knowing things. He
told me with confidence, “I like learning about maths because you can get smarter and I have a
calculator at home and I still know what seven plus zero is, it’s like seven and no more, it just keep
seven, just seven, but seven plus one will be eight. You add one more and it’s eight.”

Aimon sees school as a safe and confirming place. He has formed definite ideas about why school exists
and proclaims that “if you learn you can be smarter” and he demonstrates what this means by telling me
confidently, “if you want to tell what plusses are, you’ll just get them right.”

CAPTURING THE MEANING

In summary, the dominant and recurring views expressed by Aimon are

• that friendships are paramount and playing with friends or alone, is a very important part of his
school life
• that school is organised into a set of routines and rules and if these are obeyed, then trouble is
avoided

Quotes are from Transcript AQW, Lines 1-597, pp. 1-43.

192
A copy of Aimon’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

193
Figure 4: Aimon’s drawing

ELLIS

Ellis bounded over to me at the classroom door, when the teacher indicated I was there, with impulsive

eagerness …leaping about, jumping and lurching towards me. I greeted him and we turned to go towards

the office where we would work. As he bounced up and down beside me, I commented on his very red

hair, which was abundant, long and thick and wavy. It was outstandingly noticeable but the moment I

commented I wished I could have withdrawn what I had said. I mumbled about how I expected

everybody remarked about his hair and he firmly assented to that. He displayed obvious exasperation and

I clearly dipped rapidly in his estimation straight away. “It doesn’t you know…” he said plaintively.

When I sought an explanation to this remark, he described how he had travelled recently to Hong Kong

with his mother and everyone had wanted to touch him on the head, because they thought his hair held

some kind of healing powers. This experience had obviously not been enjoyable for him.

I saw Ellis as excessively hyperactive. He seemed unable to sit still at all. When he was on his feet, he

was constantly moving, jumping up and down on the spot, running a few steps to the right or left, going

away, returning. If seated he did not stay still, he lay on his back, put his legs in the air, waved them

around, lay on his stomach, stretching his arms and legs out wildly reaching for and touching things

constantly. He folded his arms, unfolded them, reached in the air, and waved one arm at a time.

The lapel microphone was in constant danger of being ripped from the tape recorder socket. While he

was constantly on the go, he would frequently glance at me, to check that I was attending to him. The

teacher in me wanted to direct him to sit still and to engage with the task, but as the researcher I was

keen to let him be himself and for me to observe. I was not entirely surprised to hear Ellis tell me how he

194
gets sent from his classroom for not listening and has to go and spend time in his teacher-mother’s

classroom down the hall.

On one occasion, I picked Ellis up from his classroom after the recess break. The recess break had been

held inside because it was raining so there had been no chance for any excess of energy to be readily

diminished. When I went to the classroom door, he was sitting still, cross-legged on the floor, apparently

intently listening to his teacher who was reading a story to the class from a low chair at the front of the

room. Impressed by his attentiveness to his teacher and the story, I was about to say he could stay and

hear the remainder of the book and I would come back later, when he leapt up and rushed towards me

saying he did not want to stay with me until lunchtime, but could we start playing with the Lego now?

As Ellis bounced down the hallway beside me, he said excitedly to me, “do you know what COOL

means? I know what COOL means!” I indicated I was interested, intrigued by whatever might be

coming, and he cheekily cocked his head to one side and shouted triumphantly, “COOL, Constipated-

Overweight-Old-Lady!” and then his chubby little body rushed ahead of me towards our work space. He

was challenging me, as clearly I would fit at least two of the criteria, so I just laughed and refrained from

comment or any other response. I reflected as I watched him run ahead, that it was unlikely that his

spirited, risk taking behaviour will fit easily into the usual school expectations and that he will have to

re-direct his energies and imagination if he wants to avoid sanctions in the school setting.

Back at our research space, he refused to engage in anything resembling a game about ‘school’ with the

Lego but keenly played with it, and he persistently resisted talking about any aspect of school, cleverly

changing the direction of our conversation whenever I tried to come back to the topic of my interest. He

demanded to stay with me until lunchtime, and to come back the following day.

CONVERSATION WITH ELLIS

From the outset of our conversation, I find Ellis a challenging participant. His very active and unusual

presentation and his constant movement is distracting and worrying. Ellis ensured that talking with him,

kept me alert and focussed on what he might be going to do or say next. Right from the beginning, he

answered in an unusual way of drawing out every word, and using high and low tones unexpectedly.

195
Field Notes Transcript EQW Lines 1-10, p.2
I look expectantly at Ellis and he nods but he does not speak. He is wriggling around on the chair. He reaches up
and places both on his head briefly, then stretches them upwards, making loud yawning noises. He throws his legs
forward. He makes throaty noises softly indicating I think, that he understands what I am asking about. He begins to
answer I surmise, by making a deep throated ‘arrh’ sound. I finish my question and laugh softly trying to get him to
relax. He appears to be doing his best to get my full attention by waving his arms about. He pulls both feet up on to
the chair and begins playing with his shoes. He makes a strange groaning type sound…then says just ‘playing with
them’ When I ask who? He says ‘playing with girls”, I think to be provocative and he expects me not to believe him.
I continue on, brightly, expectantly, trying to get him to engage with me…

He told me he comes to school early (with his mother, a teacher) and he goes to the school’s computer

lab while waiting for the bell to go. I asked him what happens after that. He responded “Um…then I go

ooo-uuuu-tttt-ttt, and play games” in a singsong long drawn out voice. I think he is trying to get me to

tell him to stop making these sounds, so I ignore them. Then I asked what sort of games do you play, and

apart from saying “um”, he seemed reluctant to add anymore. We were having great difficulty in moving

on, and he was waiting more than twenty seconds to give any indication he had heard me, which I found

disconcerting. Also disconcerting was his continual movement.

Field notes. EQW Lines 34-36 p.3

He angles himself on his back on the low soft chair, with his foot hanging over one side and his head touching the
ground hanging over the other edge, his arms dangling down to the floor on either side. He was staring at the
ceiling. From the loud confident voice, he switched suddenly to a very soft, hesitant voice. He suddenly wriggles into
an upright position and then slides forward in the chair. I steadfastly ignore the continual, what seems to be,
provocative behaviour because I suspect he is doing this to get me to comment or give him an instruction to sit up
and sit still...then again this might not be the case, is he nervous, anxious or..?

Throughout all of our talking time together, he shifted from a loud voice, often shouting, to a soft voice

and at times a whisper, but the change in vocal effect seemed to have no connection to what he was

talking about. Sometimes he ran phrases of words together such as “ I do all-the-work. I do all-the-work”

with the linked words said in a sing-song voice, changing in tone and volume.

Field notes. Transcript NQW Lines 121-130, p.7

Ellis and I entered into a ‘sparring’ relationship and he was unsettling me, as I was very concerned regarding
where he was going with some of his comments. Many of his remarks were contrary and I was finding them
hard to understand. Was he keeping me wrong footed by doing this or was he as confused as I? Is he about to
reveal an issue I will need to report to the principal? Do I probe? Do I move on? In the end, Ellis moved on and
I was left feeling highly anxious about his well-being and my ethical responsibility for him…

196
DRAWING WITH ELLIS
Ellis’s drawing represents his characteristics very closely. It is an extremely ‘busy’ picture with lots of

figures and movement, filled with a sense of action and ceaseless activity. He drew the teacher, the

blackboard and many children at their desks. While he was drawing, he chattered to himself and I left the

tape running. For example as he quickly drew, he said:

Arrrh…a lucky last… (mumbling) A square table… (long pause) I think there would be
chairs….(highly dramatic voice) Chair, chair, chair, chair, (as he keeps drawing) This one…no
one is there…only the teacher. Chair, chair, chair, that’s the small table…Okay (he picks up
another crayon) …and green…and another cray-o-o-on…colour blue… (long pause)…and the
cr-a-y-o-o-n b-l-a-ck. OK. She’s drawing something…

Field note EQW Lines-184, p.10

While Ellis draws he talks in high and low tones with lots of drawn out words – very dramatically. Each time he said
chair, he emphasised the “ch” sound dramatically, perhaps re-living a recent phonics lesson? I am watching
carefully, but trying not to talk for long periods. Suddenly he makes loud shooshing noises and then gives a big
sigh…

He drew one little figure in the lower left hand corner of his picture and said, “now I remember. He sits

here, right here, mostly naughty.” I think the figure is Ellis.

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH ELLIS

I had already spent a long period of time with Ellis over two sessions and as the work with him had been

so draining I decided to leave out this part of the activity. I regret this in hindsight as I may have

generated further useful comments.

PLAYING LEGO WITH ELLIS

The session for playing with Lego with Ellis began after he had been for a recess break. He was adamant

he was not going to play a game that had anything to do with school, and he shouted “I DON’T WANT

A CLASSROOM” while saying he wanted very much not only to play, but to play for an extended

period of time. He clearly intended to make the most of this unexpected opportunity to play rather than

‘work’. However in order to prolong the play session he compromised once, by combining his interest

and mine, and told me, “it’s my classroom. I teach all the kids in there. I teach them Karate. I don’t go to

karate. I just get this stuff from my head.”

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

197
As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Ellis.

Table 9: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Ellis

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
ELLIS 16 10 NIL 11

Ellis generated sixteen significant comments when talking conversationally with me, and about the same

number from playing and drawing. I did not show him any pictures or line drawings.

I was completely perplexed by this little boy, and I felt concerned for his well-being. This was a situation

where the interviewer-interviewee ‘shock’ was occurring. Sands and Krumer-Nevo (2006, p.950)

describe the “cognitive emotional reactions of the interviewer to the unexpected”. Rubin and Rubin,

1995 (cited in Sands Krumer-Nevo, 2006) describe how an interview can be “wonderfully unpredictable”

but this unpredictability can be unnerving for the interviewer. Ellis demonstrated that the world of the

child is different for each participant and their life out of school and their emotional worlds influence

heavily what they are thinking about in school. His last comment to me, ironically summed up the

experience for me. As he left the room he paused, turned and looked meaningfully at me, and said, “I

like to scare people.”

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy. A table showing the outcome

from our interactions follows.

Table 10: Units of significance in themed categories-Ellis

Unit of significance Tally Number Source: Transcript EQW

Work ****** 7 36/3; 40/3;49/3;60/4;110/6;112/6; 264/15
*
Play, playing ****** 7 5/1; 60/4; 88/5; 422/22(X2); 508/26(X2)
*
Friends ****** 6 77/5; 96/5; 218/12; 224/13; 306/17; 442/23;
Family ****** 6 91/5; 130/7; 136/7; 142/8-148/8; 280/16;
288/16
Misbehaviour, trouble *** 3 257/14; 412/22; 608/32

198
Curriculum *** 3 218/12; 564-570/30; 597/31
Teacher activity ** 2 190/11; 396/21
Sanctions * 1 264/15

During my conversation with Ellis, he spoke mostly about work, play, friends, both in negative terms and

positively, and family happenings, especially his holiday in Hong Kong and the air travel involved. He

referred less to matters of ‘being-in-trouble’, the teacher’s activity and sanctions in school. Data from

Ellis generated thirty-six pages of transcript.

MY INTERPRETATION OF ELLIS’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

Ellis’s view of his world at school is a permanently shifting one for him as he has to be always moving,
in a constant state of animation. His perception is one filled with anomalies, just like his out-of-school
life. He starts to view things positively and then is overwhelmed by the negatives and it is as if there is a
great wilderness in his world that he must battle and overcome. School for him is predominantly that it is
hard and boring and not cool, as he exclaimed with emphasis on one occasion, “Maths is not fun!” He
endures a sense of needing to be outstanding in all he does while in reality he finds the academic and the
social sides of his school life uncomfortable and hard. He told me “sometimes it is hard to do all the
schoolwork. So I just wait until the teacher tells me.”

There is a sense that he gets into trouble for rough aggressive play and that he has few real friends. He
sees schoolwork as what is done with a pencil and paper at the desk and he does not like doing it
because it is boring and hard. He would rather be playing games preferably with toys, rather than his
peers. Play is an anomaly for Ellis, because of his contradictory view of life. For him, school is already
not engaging and he says “I don’t like doing work because it’s boring. I’d rather be playing games.” He
is finding the work hard and it seems that the sense of not doing as well as he wants might be
embarrassing for him.

He expounds a stereotypical gender imbalance saying “they don’t get into trouble like boys” and early
in our conversation he told me he was “playing with girls”. He said this in a way to ‘shock’ me, raising
his eyebrows and daring me to comment, as he thought this would be an unlikely, and probably
unacceptable situation to describe.

Ellis describes his friends as “boring” and their games as “boring, I’ve got much cooler games…I know
lots of things that are cool and my friends know lots things that are boring”. Friends do not figure in his
talking about school as they do in other boy’s conversations. Then conversely, he speaks mournfully of
the possible loss of a friend if he is changed from his current reading group. In his school world he
needs to present as overtly confident and in control, when in reality he is anxious and unsure.

199
Ellis’s conversation had moments of poignancy and surprise or shock that cannot be adequately
expressed in formal academic writing and yet it is important that these parts of his “voice” are heard.
Some of what he said is relevant to the poetization of transcript text as described in the previous chapter.
In response to a question about what he was doing, when he should have been ‘working’ he said the
following that I am compelled to report in poetic terms:

You just sit there

Doing nothing
Because it’s boring.
I’d rather be trying
Being dead.
I’d rather BE dead.
I just want to know
What it’s like
Up there in heaven?
You can just
Jump through the clouds
And you just…
Fall down,
I’m nearly dead.

I just tried to kill

My brother.
He’s always the one who attacks me
I get into trouble
For hurting him.
He throws me on the ground
At home.
I think I can get him
And spin him in circles
But…
I don’t ever know
What he’s going to do
Back.
Ellis Age 6
Transcript EQW Lines 264-288, p.15.

Ellis’s experience of kindergarten seems not to be going well. He continually shifts from black to white,
from negative to positive in a contrary way. As he stretched and yawned loudly at one stage in our
conversation I asked him if he was tired. He replied “I’d like to be home in bed. I’m tired every day.” I
responded by asking him why he thought he was tired and he shouted at me, “NOTHING makes me
tired” and went on to talk about visiting his father (who lives apart from him) on weekends.

School has not met Ellis’s expectations and he thinks he is not meeting everyone else’s expectations, as
he finds what he has to do difficult. “Oh, reading, that’s hard. Reading is really hard, but if you cheat
you lose your whole book. Oh, (when) the teacher’s not watching…you cheat. Maths is not fun!” He has
a kind of adolescent way of handling this dichotomy. His almost final remarks with me sum up his
position about where he would really like to be. “At preschool I jumped off slides and it was mostly fun
and I never got into trouble. The difference between school and preschool is that it is boring.”

200
CAPTURING THE MEANING
In summary the recurring and dominant views of school expressed by Ellis are

• that he experiences ambivalence in how to maintain friendships with his peers

• that school is hard, not engaging, it is boring and not cool

• that school is a confusing mix of anomalies for him
Quotes are from Transcript EQW Lines 1-693, pp.1-36

A copy of Ellis’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

201
Figure 5: Ellis’s drawing

202
BEN

Ben appeared to me as a small neat boy of Chinese appearance who was sent to meet me by his teacher

when I arrived at the door of his classroom. He walked quietly with me, and seemed to me, to be very

respectful in his bearing, only nodding slightly as I spoke to him. I started to talk to him about what we

would be doing, but he seemed apprehensive, and I thought perhaps even speechless with anxiety. I

lowered my voice and spoke very gently commenting on the pictures displayed on the walls and other

hopefully non-intimidating topics as we moved towards the office where I would be working with him. I

was certain he had absolutely no idea who I was or why he was leaving his classroom with me. When we

reached the office, I tried to explain why I was at the school and what we would be doing and why. I

demonstrated the tape recorder and microphone but he seemed to hardly notice as I attached it to his

collar. He seemed happy to ignore it totally and I do not think he understood what it was for or how it

connected with the tape recorder, or perhaps he just accepted it as something being done to him, over

which he had no control.

He appeared very eager to show that he was compliant and indicated with his body language, that he

would agree to whatever I said or suggested. He nodded vigorously every time I spoke and stared at me

intently. In the office, he sat very neatly on the low soft chair with his feet close together and his hands

on his knees. He stared at me as if I was about to pronounce a most horrible punishment, which made me

very conscious of a need to make him feel comfortable and at ease.

203
The more I chattered nervously to him the more timid he seemed to become. Our level of interaction was

so stressed I began to consider terminating our meeting but I pressed on, and began to see that he was not

really distressed, just unwilling to speak. He seemed in awe of some perceived kind of authority coming

from this adult stranger who wanted to talk with him. After a while, he began to relax, but many

comments or questions from me were met with a soft “yes” regardless of what I was asking about or

commenting on, and I realised that as well as his apprehension of the adult-child relationship, his

understanding of English was limited.

CONVERSATION WITH BEN

My conversation with Ben started very hesitantly. He responded to most of my prompts in brief and

frequently one-word answers, however when linked to my questions or remarks, they did contain implied

detail. Careful examination of the transcript revealed useful information that he delivered in a thoughtful

and careful way. Apart from his reticence in speaking, he seemed to display very little obvious emotion. I

thought perhaps he was nervous but as our talking continued, he evidenced a very measured, thoughtful

and quiet response to everything we did.

Field Notes Transcript BQW. Lines 2-6, p.1

Ben is staring at me intently. I am trying to use a very encouraging voice that is not threatening in any way. His answer
here is literally correct (he said he did not know where to start) as he did not know what to say. He speaks with an
appealing accent and finishes each statement with an upward inflection. I am not waiting long enough for him to think
about his answers, but I am trying to overcome this by rushing, and trying to give him clues that are supportive, but
that are not leading his opinion in any way…I am struggling and it is hard work…I have doubts I can make this work…
my thoughts constantly are what to do next…

DRAWING WITH BEN

I asked Ben to draw his teacher teaching and him learning. Then I turned off the tape while Ben was

drawing, as it was obvious he was not going to speak while he was intent on this task. He followed the

request exactly. A larger figure obviously an adult stood at one side of the page with two children sitting

at desks in front of her. When we began to talk about his drawing, I asked if he wanted to put any other

204
people in the drawing. At first he declined, and then decide to draw one more figure, which he named as

his friend, Matthew.

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH BEN

During this period together, Ben was sighing a lot. He very quickly chose one picture to look at and

seemed to want to get the activity over. He related the activity shown in the picture to his knowledge.

The picture shows a coat hanger being used to hold tabs for a counting exercise which he describes as

“making a shirt” no doubt because of the coat hanger, but then he perceived they might be rolling dice

and this led him to talk about a favourite game in his classroom that he obviously enjoys, playing word

Bingo. He explained to me how this happens, in detail.

Field Notes. Transcript BQW Line 67, p.4

When Ben says yes, the “s” sound is softly sibilant and with the upward inflection, it is as if he is seeking approval
from me of his comments – I must avoid leading him as I want his views, but I get anxious to have some talking
happening
Line 42, p.3 I wait as long as I can manage the tension of neither of us speaking, there is a great deal of noise of
children outside, but he seems not to be aware of that distraction…my heart is pounding, so probably is his….

PLAYING LEGO WITH BEN

During our time together, I frequently suspected he did not understand the language I was using, despite

my best efforts to re-phrase and modify my talk. When I gave him the box of Lego pieces I asked if he

had played Lego before and he said no, however he very efficiently found the pieces he wanted and set

about constructing a classroom scene, deliberately and carefully placing the pieces exactly where he

wanted them to go. He made the scene with no reference to me and he did not speak while he played. He

did not include me in his game at all, and seemed to ignore any of the tentative comments, enquiries or

suggestions that I made, while he played.

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Ben.

205
 Table 11: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Ben

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
BEN 24 3 5 3

None of the additional scaffolds, beyond our conversation, provided significant support for Ben to talk to

me. He told me most about his school life in our conversation and seemed to find the doing of the

activities a diversion rather than support for prompting ideas that he could raise.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy.

Table 12: Units of significance in themed categories-Ben

Units of significance Tally Number Source: Transcript BQW Line and page
Curriculum ****** 7 144/8;148/8;160/8; 304/15; 372/18; 422/20(2)
*
Play ****** 7 37/2; 88/5; 102/5; 112/6; 214/11; 222/11; 260/13
*
Friends ***** 5 28/2; 77/4; 204/10; 392/19(2)
School routine/organisation ***** 5 28/2; 126/7; 126/7; 164/9; 262/13
Rules *** 3 40/2; 104/5; 167/9
Family ** 2 14/2; 322/16
Teaching techniques ** 2 134/7; 290/14
Work ** 2 140/7; 144/8
Sanctions * 1 52/3
Trouble * 1 46/3
Behaviour * 1 66/4

In my conversation with Ben he talked more about curriculum, play, his friends and school

organisational matters and less frequently he made references to concepts of behaviour and trouble and

the ensuing sanctions. Data from Ben generated twenty-three pages of transcript.

MY INTERPRETATION OF BEN’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

School for Ben is a place where he has adopted a routine that he can adhere to so it is comforting and
stable and alleviates his anxieties. His greatest concern would be to leave the school confines and to go
outside the school grounds, unaccompanied or without clear permission. He is very obedient and follows
all the rules and schedules impeccably. Ben respects authority deeply and has no expectation that he
could in any way question anything an adult may ask him to do.

206
As a boy with little English yet, school is a place where the familiar is important and he moves almost
silently from one place to the other, completely compliant. He imitates those around him and relies on
the company of his friends to show him what is happening next. Playing with his friends is the most
comforting and secure part of each school day. “I go out to play, tips, with my friends. You be good to
your friends. You help your friends by picking them up. I have to pick up my friends very often.” In Ben’s
world, his friends are a constant important element. “You play with your friends in the classroom with
toys and cars and blocks. You play with your friends and build a tower.” Play is crucially important to
him.

Ben knows that you need to “be quiet” because “if you make a noise you get into trouble and you go to
the time-out chair”. He is unlikely ever to experience this sanction as he is totally compliant but he has
observed “children in my class (who) have had to go to the time-out chair because they were being silly
like jumping around, and doing it again”. He sums up the way to succeed and survive in school, telling
me, “you sit down and be quiet and be sensible and be good…”

“Listening to the teacher” and always obeying “if your teacher says” are the parameters of Ben’s
school world. His school day is one of following autocratic directions rather than making personal
choices. For example he tells me, “You have to play” (at designated times), “you get put in groups,”
“the person has to tell what he has got”, “you have to stand out the front”, “you have to sit on the
chair”, “you have to do some works”, and you even “have to play again” before “you have to go home”
(my emphases).

His school life is one of being directed by those with more power. He is not complaining about this
situation and accepts it as the inevitable way of his world. However Ben demonstrated a spark of spirit
when I asked him what he would do “if he was the boss.” He quite firmly and quite assertively replied
that “if I was the boss I’d do what I want.” He then indicated he would not be averse to holding the
position of power when he suggested “I’d say you have to get some activity and you have to play with it
and you have to pack it up, if I say it” (my emphases).

However he does not see school as a place where he can question and he waits passively for each event
to happen to him. He listens to the teacher, he looks at the teacher and he waits for the directions. In his
world, he has no power and he has every expectation that he will be told what to do. It does not occur to
him to disobey.

CAPTURING THE MEANING

In summary the recurring and most significant views expressed by Ben are
• that the friends he has at school are the rocks he clings to for support and they are essential for
him to maintain any sense of security
• that the school is a place for him bounded by directions that he expects to obey without question

207
 Quotes are from Transcript BQW Lines 1-505; pp. 1-23

A copy of Ben’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

208
Figure 6: Ben’s drawing

OMAR

Omar is a little boy of Indian appearance with a diagnosis of autism that enables the school to employ a

teacher’s aide for short periods to assist with his learning needs in his classroom. He leapt up quickly

when the teacher indicated he was to come with me. When he reached my side, he stared up intently at

my face with very large very dark eyes, not unfriendly but curious. As we started the fifty metre walk

from his classroom to the executive’s office that the principal had allocated to me as my research space, I

chatted to him about why I was at the school and why I wanted to talk with him. He seemed not to hear

me at all, but concentrated on maintaining exactly the same length of stride as me as we walked. He

seemed very calm and was mildly interested in his surroundings.

When we arrived at the office he looked intently about at the furniture in the room, the low chairs and the

little round table where my tape recorder was set up. I explained the microphone and the tape recorder to

him, and the purpose of the equipment. His understanding of my explanation of the device led him to

want to shout at me, and he kept grasping at the tiny lapel microphone (about the size of a small marble)

and was continually putting it and part of his shirt, totally inside his mouth. I needed to rescue it on

numerous occasions throughout our talking sessions. This proved to be a significant distraction for him

(and for me).

In the beginning of our talking, I had the sense that we were not really connecting with each other, but

his constant enthusiasm and his great pleasure in playing Lego with me, eventually dispelled this fear for

me. At one stage early in our conversation, a school bell rang loudly. It was not the usual bell, but one to

209
 signal that because it was raining, there would be no outside play for recess. Classes would be supervised

inside for the break period. Perhaps because of his autistic condition, Omar became very agitated by the

unexpected bell and was highly anxious about obeying its commands immediately. It took me some time

to calm him and reassure him that it was appropriate for us to keep talking.

Field notes: Transcript OQW Lines 125-6, p.8

Omar was constantly trying to pull the microphone from his shirt and put it in his mouth. He was most conscious
that what he was saying would be recorded by this device. Before most utterances he would grasp the tiny mike
and pull it towards his mouth. I decided to let him hold it in his hand but he still kept raising it towards his
mouth. I considered trying to use the tape without the mike. This was one of those research in-the-field incidents,
requiring thinking-as-you-go; decision making on the run. As I was anxious to get useful data from each of my
participants I decide to leave it be, and in some way, just hope for the best!

CONVERSATION WITH OMAR

Talking with Omar was a challenging exercise as he seemed not to understand me some of the time and,

on occasions, I had difficulty understanding him. His English was limited and I was often not sure we

were talking about the same idea. However, our conversation ranged over topics such as family, and his

pleasure with many school activities, particularly those involving his many friends. Getting into trouble

and the consequent sanctions formed no part of his talk at all. He had clear ideas about what he does at

school. His great enthusiasm for everything and the intensity with which he reacted to all stimuli, made

my time with him, a period of trepidation (that it might all come to nothing) juxtaposed with a time of

deep engagement and enjoyment. A time for me to savour his youthful exuberance.

DRAWING WITH OMAR

Field notes : Transcript OQW lines 70-80, p.5

I stopped the tape while Omar drew. This is a most interesting experience for me as Omar drew the whole picture
horizontally, but what he was drawing was to be viewed vertically. So the sky was drawn from the top of the page to
the bottom but at the right hand end of the sheet so that when the page is turned vertically the sky sits at the top of
the page. All the figures (people) were drawn as if lying on their sides but when the page is turned vertical they are
standing up in conventional poses. When he seemed to have finished I turned the tape back on…

As indicated by the field note above, Omar’s execution of his drawing was unusual. He took the A3 sheet

and placed it horizontally towards him (i.e. the longer side near his waist) and proceeded to draw the sky

running vertically top to bottom on the right hand side of the page. He then added the school, the people,

the sun and other items (I think ‘ducks’ and a pond) as if they were lying on their sides. When he had

210
finished he triumphantly showed me his picture by holding it vertically, so that the sky was at the top of

the page, and the buildings and figures were presented in perfectly upright positions. The colouring-in or

crayon strokes appear to be going side to side, but he had actually drawn them going up and down. Omar

chose green and blue to represent the school building and placed a conventional red sun in the blue sky.

Unusually though, he drew ducks in a pond at the front of the school, as a kind of wishful thinking

perhaps as there is nothing in his school grounds to suggest water or birdlife. Perhaps a number activity

on a stencil, or one of his reading books has imprinted a concept of ducks on a pond?

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH OMAR

Omar looked at the line drawings of the classroom and was quick to ask “where’s me?” and then

nominated one of the figures as himself. He was most definite about which drawing was representing

him, “that one, here”. I asked what he was doing and prompted several times with the question “and what

else?” He was well able to enumerate a list of activities, including drawing, colouring, writing sentences

and writing the alphabet. We engaged in a significant conversation about friends, school rules and the

routines involved in lining up and being the leader.

PLAYING LEGO WITH OMAR

Omar immediately entered into the spirit of playing the game of Lego with me. He had some difficulty in

getting the pieces to fit together, but when he was successful, he gave loud triumphant noises of pleasure

and he exhibited very high levels of excitement during the game. He was giggling and laughing and was

quick to attribute names to the Lego figures. As he decided one was his good friend Amy, he shouted

loudly “Haa…ohhh LOOK AT HER!” As he grouped some figures together, I asked him, "Oh what

could that be?” and full of pleasure and excitement he shouted “a class” however apart from naming

more figures after his friends, and his teachers, the activity did not provide me with any further ideas

about his views of school, other than some indication of school routines when it is raining.

Field Notes OQW, Lines 214-228, p.12-13

Omar demonstrates that he is very keen to keep me playing with him and reaches out his hand to grab mine to keep
me attentive, and playing with him…constantly calling out with pleasure, making noises of delight…he keeps
interspersing what I am saying with squeals of joy…at one stage he expressed amazement that one of the Lego
figures had no features on its face. As I tried to draw features on the face, he leaned in very close looked intently at
the figurine…he became so excited I could not understand what he was saying…

211
 USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Omar.

Table 13: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Omar

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
OMAR 9 4 9 11

Omar was most stimulated by the game of Lego to engage in conversation about school matters, and we

spent more time engaged in this than the other activities. Talking to me and talking while looking at the

pictures and line drawings of school scenes provided a means for Omar to enter into both a realistic and

an imaginative world of school. The provision of these support mechanisms enabled him to expand his

conversation despite his limited grasp of English.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

As stated previously, in chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of

significance related to the phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy.

Table 14: Units of significance in themed categories-Omar

Units of significance Tally Number Source: Transcript OQW Line and Page
Friends ****** 12 26/2; 57/4; 128/8; 170/10; 173/11; 180/11; 184/11;
****** 186/11; 211/12; 249/14; 296/16; 297/17
Family ****** 6 8/1; 76/5; 81/5; 146/9; 152/9; 156/10
Curriculum ***** 5 55/4; 60/4; 112/7; 271/15; 288/16
Rules **** 4 41/3; 87/6; 144/9; 152/9
Play *** 3 20/2; 25/2;154/9
School ** 2 80/5; 83/5
organisation/routine
Self efficacy * 1 140/9

Reflecting on the data from my conversation with Omar, I found Omar talked more about his friends

than any other aspect of his school life, and family and curriculum matters are the next most frequent

references. He less frequently made references to concepts of school organisation and routines. Data

from Omar generated nineteen pages of transcript.

MY INTERPRETATION OF OMAR’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

212
Omar’s view of school is a setting where there is excitement and where he has positive experiences. In
his drawing activity, he drew what he described joyously as “my beautiful school house”, with emphasis
and dramatic effect.

He exhibited some anxiety on several occasions, at the ringing of bells (unusual bells because they
related to unexpected and heavy rain around recess time) but he was easily diverted and reassured,
despite his diagnosis of autism. His expectation of school is that it will provide him with many friends
and activities that he enjoys. He plays “tips” with his friends in the morning when he arrives at school
and he likes that, so each day starts in an affirmative way for him. He has expectations of having a turn
at “being a leader” of the line of peers, like his friends Amy, Rachel and Cohen, and he looks forward to
the challenge with complete confidence, and anticipated enjoyment.

He sees school as happening to him, he has no need of any control, and he accepts without questioning
what it offers with a kind of jubilant excitement.

Omar’s delight in playing the game of Lego with me highlights the broad range of developmental stages
that all kindergarten teachers face within each group of children they teach. One time he shouted with
happy emphasis “I LOVE PLAYING GAMES!” He demonstrated this pleasure repeatedly throughout
the time we played with the Lego pieces. At one stage, he grabbed my hand to place on the pieces to
make sure I kept playing beside him. All kinds of play are important to him, especially in his early and
unique stage of development.

Everything that is introduced into Omar’s school life is met with unqualified enjoyment and joy. He
entered into the spirit of our game of ‘schools’ completely and immediately, and he was highly motivated
throughout this part of our time together. Especially during this time, the importance of playing and his
friends, was a constant that he kept emphasising.

Despite the constraints of limited English and autism, Omar contributed to the data in many important
aspects. His picture of school is a place of social relationships, rules and learning activities. He has a
sound grasp of the curriculum offerings telling me “I am here doing handwriting, drawing, colouring,
writing sentences, writing the alphabet.”

His school life and home life he perceives as bound by rules. “Go to bed” is a rule at home but just like
school, he loves playing games and “does not want to go inside”. His possibly family based perception
of a female stereotype is being maintained because at home, “the girls put rubbish in the bin and the
girls put the dishes in the sink” but, perhaps ironically, or perhaps obviously due to the influence of his
female siblings in the school setting, his best friends are female. When I asked Omar who he plays with
most, he immediately responded “Amy Hawkins.” Quite some time later in a different context I asked,
“and what do you do next?” and he replied quickly, “talking to Amy Hawkins”. In other comments he
happily listed numerous friends, including Amy, with Ellen, Rachel and Brendan.

213
CAPTURING THE MEANING
In summary, the recurring and dominant view of school expressed by Omar consists of the concepts
• that school is a place of enjoyment and satisfaction
• that friends are an essential feature of his school days
• that play is crucial to his well being and enjoyment
• that it is a place where routine provides security
Quotes are from Transcript OQW Lines 1-311 , pp. 1-17
A copy of Omar’s drawing follows.

214
Figure not included please see print copy

Figure 7: Omar’s drawing

JADEN

Jaden presented to me, as a stereotypical Australian schoolboy if this means a boy dressed properly in his

school uniform, his face shiny clean and his hair well brushed. He told me that he lives with his Mum

and his Nan. He did not say much as I chatted to him about what we were going to do and why and

where we were going to do our talking. He seemed to accept that he was about to be involved in an

activity where you just did as you had been asked. I indicated to him that he did not have to participate

but he looked a bit surprised at that and I thought he was beginning to think that he was doing something

wrong already so I stopped talking about this.

Jaden was comfortable with the recording equipment, adjusted the microphone slightly on his shirt collar

and sat ready to start. He exuded an air that this was an important task and he was going to try to do well.

He had a persistent dry cough that I think perhaps may have been a sign of some degree of nervousness.

This cough is punctuated from time to time with whooshing and sucking noises before and after his

responses. The cough persisted throughout the whole of our time together. Because I was conscious of

his apparent discomfort, I may have talked too much, too quickly and too sharply, and this probably

compounded the problem, rather than alleviating it.

Field Notes. JQW Lines 39-46, p.3

I am sounding too sharp and too demanding and this is not helping him to relax. It is not my intention to speak so
quickly and so as he starts to answer my queries with “I don’t know...I don’t know” my immediate response has
been to shorten the questions but then they still sound too demanding… I expect I am frustrated because my
expectation is that he will be able tell me about what happens in his classroom. I change tack, and try to be more
gentle, speaking more softly, using a more encouraging tone…

215
CONVERSATION WITH JADEN
Conversation with Jaden felt like very hard work as he seemed not relaxed and was especially conscious

of doing the right thing and giving me the ‘right’ answers. During our talk he revealed various situations

in which he is not comfortable. We were talking about how he feels when he is doing his ‘work.’ He told

me

(It is) hard.

Because it is making me sweaty
And
Something’s biting me on the back.
(Whispers)
The creatures.
The creatures
They live on the floors
They just stick out
Bugs!
When I’m sweaty.

Jaden Age Six

Transcript JQW Lines 103-121, pp. 6-7

Later Jaden was able to tell me a way of reducing the influence of the ‘bugs.’ He said “the bugs are

always asleep when I sit on the floor. We need sleeping spray. You get it from the shops.”

DRAWING WITH JADEN

Field notes Transcript JQW Lines 172-176, p.9

Jaden begins making singing noises and whoo-whoo noises so I decide to change the activity as I estimate he is
bored with talking now…I start him on his drawing and stop the tape. Jaden draws with periods of talking almost to
himself rather than engaging with me. He began and continued in a very businesslike way demonstrating that when
an adult asks you to do something then you are expected to get on with it to the best of your ability. I keep making
encouraging noises, leaning forward, nodding my head, murmuring affirmative sounds as I try to encourage him to
tell me what he has drawn…

When I enquired what he was going to draw, he answered, looking at me for approval, “I’m just drawing

the class…OK?” He looked questioningly at me, checking he was doing what was required, before he

216
continued, “I’ll do the chair first. Here’s the person. Riley. Doing his sentence. And here’s his other

hand.”

Towards the end of drawing his picture I asked Jaden, “what’s happening there?” He began to describe

the children in his class, “he’s doing his sentence” and then he began to write his name, telling me about

big ‘B’ and little ‘b’ and that he knew how to write because he “already sounded out B.” I followed this

exchange by asking him to tell me more about school life, and he abruptly responded:

Some boys cry and some boys don’t. It is easy to cry isn’t? Easy to cry because they get hurt
from tripping over or hitting someone…when they’re mental. Some boys don’t cry because they
do the right thing. They don’t do any naughty stuff like hit the windows or glass or if they hit
people or if they hit teachers.

I found these comments deeply moving as it seemed he was trying to sort out some personal learning that

was taking place as a result of his experiences of kindergarten. He ranged back and forth from first

person to third person, but always it was a personal revelation, a somewhat tentative exploration of his

observations and new understandings of the place of others in his world, and where these new insights,

were re-positioning his understanding of self.

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH JADEN

Jaden showed little interest in the pictures and the line drawings and appeared to have become fatigued at

this time and may have been bored by my constant efforts to talk about life at school. He made relatively

few comments of any depth and seemed keen to move on. He expressed most interest when referring to

the boys shown in the picture to be rolling about on the floor, commenting, ‘they should be listening to

the teacher, they’re kicking, these two boys and they’re going to tell the teacher and they’ll go to the

time-out book or timeout chair… you can stay there for four or five minutes.”

PLAYING LEGO WITH JADEN

Jaden immersed himself in constructing a classroom, with the Lego pieces. At times he ignored my

talking completely and at other times he told me what he was doing. He indicated, “This is my teacher”

and then went on to describe a concept of school organisation:

I’m going to make her sit there. Watching everybody playing. And these are the kids. And this
is the boss of the teacher up here. There’s supposed to be (a boss) so if the teachers don’t know
what to do or if they do the wrong thing…because they might just forget what to do with the
children. If I was the boss I’d tell them not to hit the children…we could call him Carefully.
That would be a good name, wouldn’t it? Because the boss wouldn’t hurt anyone if he is
Carefully.

217
There is an interesting play on words happening here, and it is conjecture to write the text as Carefully or

Care Fully, or is it reminiscent of a current television character?

As he played (and also while he was drawing) he frequently began singing, often in a high pitched tone,

as he described what he was doing, and sometimes suddenly calling out in an excited voice, very loudly.

He puffed loudly and sighed frequently as if constructing with Lego pieces was an exertion.

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods described as scaffolds to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Jaden.

Table 15: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Jaden

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
JADEN 32 14 6 11

Talking with Jaden derived most key concepts, the drawing of his picture was next most helpful, while

playing Lego and looking at pictures were less supportive as scaffolds to generate conversation with

Jaden.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

As stated previously, in chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of

significance related to the phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy.

Table 16: Units of significance in themed categories-Jaden

Units of significance Tally No Source: Transcript JQW Line and page

Rules ******** 24 2/1; 4/1; 12/1(2) 20/2; 24/2; 26/2; 27/2; 30/2;
******** 52/3; 58/4; 68/4; 70/4; 169/9; 225/11;
******** 228/11; 233/11; 301/14; 303/14; 329/15;
414/18; 578/24; 601/25(X2)
School organisation/routines ******** 12 80/5; 125/7; 132/7; 169/9; 251/12; 323/15;
**** 344/16; 483/21; 491/21; 541/23; 571/24(2)
Teaching techniques ****** 8 36/2; 74/4; 80/5; 99/6; 102/6; 180/9;323/15;
** 531/23

218
Trouble **** 4 293/14; 416/18; 584/25; 703/29
Work *** 3 104/6; 123/7; 505/22
Play *** 3 96-105/6; 299/14; 667/27
Being hurt *** 3 136/7; 142/8- 155/8;2 83/13
Sanction *** 3 161/9; 416/18; 424/19
Curriculum ** 2 10/3; 317/15
Rewards * 1 58/4
Self efficacy * 1 280/13
Family/Home Life * 1 376/17

From my conversation with Jaden, I found rules form a very big part of school life for Jaden, as he raised

ideas about rules more frequently than any other aspect of his school life experiences. Data from Jaden

generated twenty-nine pages of transcript.

MY INTERPRETATION OF JADEN’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

Jaden’s view of school is a place of rules that it is best to follow and to follow unhesitatingly the
teachers who tell you what to do. In his world, it is clearly best to listen carefully, for there could be dire
consequences. For example when the teacher tells boys not to go into the toilets when they are shut
(closed for some reason) it is wise to obey because “there might something in there. Spiders.” He says
this in a most serious tone, looking intently at me and giving a little knowing nod of his head.

His days at school are made up of a series of teachers’ directions. The teacher tells you “to do your
homework,” “write a sentence,” “ stay on the lines,” and “wait if it is someone else’s turn.” For
Jaden there are many rules and regulations, “you eat recess inside when it is raining”, “you eat it
outside when it’s not”, “you go on the grass with a hat, not on the grass if you don’t”. Jaden is very
clear and very definite on all these matters. He summed up his position that it will all end badly if you do
not comply by telling me most emphatically, “you won’t get a sticker, if you are not doing the right
thing”, or even worse, “you could go in the yucky room, if you’ve done something really bad.”

He exudes that it is very important to do what the teacher tells you because “if you don’t listen, you
might not know what to do.” This would be an uncomfortable situation for Jaden. For Jaden the worst
thing that can happen in school “is not listening to the teacher” and he is most anxious about this as it
could lead “to doing the wrong thing”. He says “when I am doing my work it feels hard because it’s
making me sweaty.”

He talked to me about rough play in the playground and the mishaps that occur, and at one stage he very
firmly stated “someone pushed me over on my elbow. Was it an accident? I think NOT!” Jaden did not
talk about play as a pleasurable activity very much throughout our conversation, so I was surprised
when near the end of our talking I asked if he had anything else he wanted to tell me about school, and
he said “school is about playing” but would not then go into any details. I think periods of socialisation
for Jaden are not always congenial times.

219
CAPTURING THE MEANING
In summary, the recurring and dominant view expressed by Jaden is

• that school is a place of rules and regulations and you will do best if your obey them

• school means the successful negotiation of social relationships is challenging for him
Quotes are from Transcript JQW Lines 1-720, pp.1-29

A copy of Jaden’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

220
Figure 8: Jaden’s drawing

NIGEL

I saw Nigel as a good looking, neatly dressed boy wearing obviously newly acquired glasses. When I

commented on how well they looked on him, he told me he had acquired these glasses in the last school

holidays and they “helped a lot” because prior to this time “I couldn’t see the blackboard…I couldn’t

even see what I was doing.” He is confident and articulate. He presented with a very serious and

important demeanour, and seemed much older than six. I knew from his consent form that his

grandmother was an important part of his life and I thought perhaps this relationship contributed to his

mature presentation.

He was most interested in my description of the microphone and in the operation of the tape recorder and

my explanation of why we were talking together. I thought he would agree to whatever was suggested

because the authority figures in his life, the principal, his teacher, his mum and his Nan, would have

expected him to participate. He asked if he would be able to listen to the tape of what he was saying and

I agreed. He requested this several times during our conversation however I subsequently thought that

perhaps he was using these requests to listen to the tapes more as a diversion from a question or a topic

area that he preferred to avoid rather than any deep interest in listening to our conversation. As I talked

he nodded, and made affirming sounds. I was quite anxious at the beginning and he sensed that. We

worked together, to calm the atmosphere, and I tried not to overwhelm him with my nervous chatter.

221
I felt I started talking with Nigel far too briskly, and on the tape, to me, I sound teacherly and directive.

He started answering hesitantly, checking my face intently, to ascertain if his answers were satisfactory.

When I realised how I had started off, I adopted a much more conversational tone, and tried to soften my

approach, to try to lessen the impact of the adult-child power relationship.

He was hard to divert from playing with the Lego pieces and he had no interest in returning to the

drawings or pictures of school life or to talk about the, once we entered that phase of our talk.

CONVERSATION WITH NIGEL

Field note. Transcript NQW Lines 1-7, p.1,

I begin the interview too briskly, with too sharp a tone, due to my anxiety, and appear to be far too task oriented,
nervously trying to get on with my goal, my tone was friendly but too quick, the adult-power relationship obvious,
Nigel was sitting forward in the low chair and making good eye contact. He was intent on getting this right and
doing his best…

In conversing with Nigel I was slow to get started and he was most keen to ‘do well’ however we quickly

established a more comfortable rapport, once he grew confident that he could manage the task (of talking

to me) competently. We ranged over his clear understanding of the rules and regulations, and his

knowledge of the school routines. At a personal level, he talked about his new glasses, his enjoyment of

games, his friends, and some issues related to bullying.

Field note Transcript NQW Lines 24,p. 3.

Very hesitant, very nervous sounding, Nigel looks at me expectantly as if checking to see if this was going to be the
‘right’ answer, the answer I want, the name of the street where he lives, he appeared to be thinking this is a trick
question, or he may have been thinking it was information not to give to a stranger…

DRAWING WITH NIGEL

Nigel had demonstrated that he wanted to move away from my topic where he felt uncertain of his

capacity to do well. He suddenly gestured at a teacher’s bag that was sitting in a nearby chair and said,

“Well, what’s in there?” – a comment quite unrelated to the counting to one hundred, which was what we

222
had been talking about. I decided to introduce a new activity, to relieve him of anxiety and to get us back

on topic. His response to my suggestion of drawing a picture, was brimming with confidence. “I’m really

good at drawing”, he said confidently, “I can draw the classroom.” Our conversation following Nigel’s

intent work on his drawing enabled him to talk about numerous activities in his classroom. He told me

confidently, “in my picture there are the teachers, the blackboard, the wall and the teacher’s chair, that’s

actually the chalkboard but we call it the blackboard and that’s the one where we have the fingernail and

stuff”. He explained how what he called the “fingernail” was a device for teaching the days of the week,

but he had not yet drawn it in his picture, but he was confident he could do this, “I know how to draw it.

It’s easy.”

As Nigel talked about his drawing he covered areas of emotional content in his school life. He had drawn

his friends with sad or happy faces, and he talked about his teacher, being sometimes angry when children

are not doing their work, he mentioned naughtiness, doing the wrong thing, and the teacher being in

control of everything that happens, in the world of school.

Field note Transcript NQW Lines 567-569, p.39

Drawing the picture enabled Nigel to recall other activities in his room and he talks about them even though he has
not drawn them in his depiction of his classroom

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH NIGEL

Nigel chose the picture of the children playing a number game, set out like hopscotch. We talked around

this idea for a while but he seemed to have little interest and may have been fatigued at this stage. He

tried hard to say something that would impress me, and said the children would be playing the number

game, “for fun… (then abruptly) that’s what narratives are for.” As I tried to establish the connection,

and explore what he thought narratives were, he exclaimed, “Don’t know” followed swiftly by “Well, I

know what fun is…It means like playing.”

PLAYING LEGO WITH NIGEL

Nigel demonstrated his highly rule conscious nature as we began taking the Lego out of the box. “You

have to be very careful”, he admonished confidently, “Cool, you’ve just got one?” he asked in an

encouraging way as I gave him the single baseboard. He quickly dispelled my hopes though as I asked,

223
“would you like to make a classroom?” He was adamant, “Nope”. He was tired of our conversation

about school matters and he was clear that making a game about school would not be fun. However, not

long afterwards, I asked what the figures were doing as he arranged them on the board and he humoured

me by saying “They’re going to be doing maths…by playing and doing”.

As Nigel manipulated the Lego pieces his game ranged over police actions, shops, school uniform, fire

stations and being naughty. The introduction of this idea led him easily back into talking about school

matters and the importance to him, of free play and how this can be curtailed by not listening to what

teachers (or mothers) say.

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Nigel.

Table 17: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Nigel

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
NIGEL 60 14 5 19

Nigel engaged in talking to me, with a high level of seriousness. He approached each task

conscientiously. He clearly wanted to do his best, as he does in all his endeavours, and has a high regard

for rules and regulations and the consequences for getting into ‘trouble’. He produced considerably more

units of significance related to the phenomenon of school life during our conversation. This was followed

by his talk during playing the game of Lego, despite his resistance to playing anything to do with school.

He was fatigued and bored while looking at the picture of the number activity, and would say little

related to school life, and then was quite matter of fact about his drawing, where he was not sure of his

competency, and worried about the quality of his outcome.

Nigel spoke at length about school routines, and the sanctions for ‘naughty’ behaviour and he expressed

opinions about the success or otherwise of these sanctions changing children’s behaviours. He made

thoughtful comments about school rules in which he implied that there was little logical or justifiable

224
reason for some of the rules. He talked thoughtfully about the place of friends in his daily experiences

and raised matters of bullying and personal relationships. Nigel described in detail some of the school

practices including, Kindergarten Orientation and other activities, including visiting artists.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy. From my conversation with

Nigel, I have derived following table to show how many units of significance were distilled and placed

into commonly occurring themes.

Table 18: Units of significance in themed categories-Nigel

Units of significance Tally No Source: Transcript NQW Line and page

Rules ****** 20 15/2; 19/3; 52/6; 55/6; 58/6;64/7;69/7; 75/7;
****** 253/19; 280/20; 377/26; 384/26; 414/28;
****** 473/32; 798/51; 824/52; 863/55; 918/58;
** 923/58; 1930/64
Play ****** 20 52/6; 173/14; 192/15; 334/24; 342/24;
****** 693/44(X2); 700/45; 707/45; 716/46; 766/49;
****** 777/50; 786/50; 1036/64; 1050/65; 1076/67;
** 1087/67; 1102/68; 1132/70(X2)

School organisation/routine ****** 16 23-25/3; 32/4; 37/4; 45/5; 71/7; 86/8; 93/9;
****** 103/9; 109/10; 113/10; 168/13; 283/20;
**** 283/21; 398/27; 494/33; 503/34
Friends ****** 8 208/16; 214-216/16; 452/31; 489/33; 514/35;
** 545/37; 606/41; 803/51
Curriculum ****** 7 141/11; 475/32; 530/36; 571/39; 724/46;
* 897/57; 901/57
Trouble ***** 5 684/44; 1020/63; 1031/64; 1144/71; 1221/75
Sanction ***** 5 76/7; 237/18; 256/19; 299/22; 308/22
Teacher technique **** 4 620/42; 673/43; 689/44;710/45; 735/47
Family *** 3 10/2; 79/8; 150/12
Hurt ** 2 221/17; 245/18
Bullying ** 2 224/17; 231/17
Self efficacy ** 2 562/38; 593/40
Gender ** 2 1205/75; 1213/75
Rewards * 1 380/26
Work * 1 521/35

Nigel talked mostly about rules, play and matters of school organisation and less frequently he made

references to concepts of work and rewards. Nigel generated seventy-six pages of transcript.

MY INTERPRETATION OF NIGEL’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

Nigel’s perception of school is a place where the adults are to be obeyed and there are numerous school
rules and organisational arrangements that control most factors of his school day. He has no sense that

225
he has any personal autonomy and he is unquestioning in his compliance. Nigel has learned that
compliance and adherence to the rules is the way to stay out of trouble. He is keen to obey the rules. He
enters by the correct gate, puts his bag in the designated line at the correct time. His life at school is
profoundly shaped by rules and regulations. He knows to respond to bells that tell him when to play,
when to line up, when to eat, and when to listen to teachers to be told what to do next.

He knows obeying the rules will gain extrinsic rewards “if you line up beautifully you get line-up
awards” or exemplary library practices will earn library awards. He does not always understand why
the behaviour or the practice is required, but he has learned what to do for success. Nigel accepts the
“necessity” for rules and applauds aspects of the school organisation. He thinks painting lines on the
playground to indicate where to put school bags is a good idea and this saves the children from getting
“mixed up into different lines”. Getting to school late generates a process of a mother’s signature on a
late slip, the involvement of the front office staff and direction by teachers to designated places. He
knows that “not finishing your work” (at home) and “haven’t got dressed” and “forgot your shoes” are
three actions that can cause a boy like him to be late for school.

Listening to the teacher is highly important in Nigel’s world and is the key to survival, “we all have to
listen to what the teacher says”. The school hall is a place for assemblies and houses the canteen for
lunches but it is not a place for eating and drinking because “it might get messy and stinky and animals
might come”. Nigel understands that school is a place to demonstrate your competence. He referred to
his skill in reading, his ability to draw and his knowledge saying confidently, “I know what fun is.” He
showed a significant awareness of curriculum matters.

While Nigel places importance on his relationship with his peers and he described his friends playing
cooperatively to construct foam towers with foam blocks, he actually displays a preference for more
solitary behaviours such as “playing with play dough. He emphasised that he “loved” this activity. He
does enjoy playing at school and he said he liked the equipment, something which is fun but he
understands somewhat regretfully that this cannot be done in the mornings, only at little lunch and big
lunch, but he seems to accept this limitation. I suspect however, that his play on the equipment is also
carried out in a solitary way. Significantly, he had preferences for watching DVD’s, visiting aquariums
with his family and enjoying all of the activities associated with Thomas the Tank Engine. Play for Nigel
is important in two ways. It is a solitary occupation that absorbs him and that provides individual
satisfaction and it also enables him to develop friendship connections.

He is acutely aware of his ‘place’ in the scheme of things, and told me that a year six class, has “got
really big people.”

Nigel raised incidents of bullying in which he was the victim, hurt by his friend Trent, who pushed him
over and punched him and Nigel responded by going to tell the teacher on duty but he was still waiting
for the consequences to be carried out. These sanctions he clearly understood as telling the boy’s

226
parents and putting the culprit on time-out detention. He describes bullying as “punching and doing
other stuff that is not nice”. Nigel has clear ideas of the sanctions in place for naughty behaviour
especially the use of timeout detention, which is “a place where naughty kids go” and where a study of a
written copy of the school rules is required. Nigel has observed that for some, the sanction of timeout
has not worked to modify their behaviours, telling me which boys still misbehaved even after this
sanction.. Alternatively, he thinks it has worked for others who were “a little bit frightened” by the
punishment. He told me he had “not been in time-out this November” but seemed not to want to pursue
this aspect of punishment-taking by then abruptly changing the direction of our conversation and telling
me, “I like Thomas,” quickly clarifying that he means Thomas The Tank Engine. This diversion led us
away from the uncomfortable topic of sanctions for misbehaviours, and further confirmed how strongly
influenced and constrained he is, by rules and regulations.

CAPTURING THE MEANING

In summary, the dominant and recurring views expressed by Nigel are
• that school is a place of rules and regulations that must be obeyed

• that listening to the teacher is essential for survival

Quotes are from Transcript NQW Lines 19- 1237, pp 1-76

227
A copy of Nigel’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

228
Figure 9: Nigel’s drawing

ANDREW

Andrew is a blond, blue-eyed boy with what I saw as attractive, even features. He seemed very nervous

at first but he eventually relaxed and became calmer as we chatted. He presented as being very keen to be

highly compliant, and to do the ‘right’ thing. Andrew sat very neatly in the chair opposite me, knees

together, hands in his lap, looking directly at me, with intensity. He was happy to have the microphone

attached to his shirt, expressed polite interest in the workings of the tape recorder and my re-iteration of

the purpose of our meeting.

He presented as a very self-contained, individually confident and competent, independent boy with a

strongly developed sense of self-efficacy. He seemed not to need friendship or peer group support. He

did not refer to ‘friends’ anywhere in our conversation, which is unusual in this group of boys. He is

strongly supported by his family environment.

However when we began to speak it was clear that he had considerable anxiety, based in his desire to do

well and the importance that he was attaching to the exercise. He wanted to excel in this, as in everything

else, and he maintained a serious, competent approach throughout our time together including during the

drawing activity and Lego playtime.

CONVERSATION WITH ANDREW

229
Andrew engaged very seriously in our conversation and presented as very mature, if somewhat reserved,

in his demeanour. At times I worried about the degree of seriousness he attached to the task.

Field notes A.. Line 44, p.5 …

he seems to think long and hard about this… I am not sure whether he can’t think what to say or he is
contemplating what would be appropriate to say…he looks at me intensely... and from whispering, he loses his
voice…almost completely…he is breathing heavily and he sighs audibly before answering…I smile, I hope
encouragingly…and nod…

Our conversation covered topics such as the curriculum, school organisation, and play. He described the

teacher’s role in the class very precisely and obviously carefully observes all aspects of how various

routines are put in place.

DRAWING WITH ANDREW

I invited Andrew to draw his picture at a time that I felt we had exhausted his capacity to talk with me.

His voice was becoming strained, and his apparent level of anxiety was not diminishing. I prefaced my

suggestion about drawing as follows

so if you were drawing a picture and we were going to call it ‘school’ or ‘being at school’ or ‘my
teacher and me at school’ or ‘being here’, what would you draw? Say if I wanted to send (the
drawing) off to somebody to show this is what it’s like at this school, what sort of things might
you put in it?

Andrew replied: “well I might just draw myself playing on the playground or trying to have free time.”

He began the activity of drawing apparently quite confidently and quite happily and he seemed relieved to

be able to stop talking. I turned off the tape recorder and we sat companionably together. Andrew drew

quietly and he did not speak or make any sounds while he was drawing.

His picture was totally unlike any of the other boys’ drawings. By chance there was a pen and pencil

within his reach, and despite my offering the oil crayons to Andrew, as I did with all the other boys, he

picked up the pencil and very painstakingly drew eight vertical lines with a single line across the top.

Then he reinforced two of the lines with the red crayon. Andrew paused at this stage for some time, and

then located a red biro on the table. He proceeded to draw a single figure representing himself alone, on

the equipment. He then indicated he was finished. He put the pen down neatly and looked at me

expectantly. At this point, I decided to ask him what was happening in his picture. He told me, “Well, it’s

230
on the equipment because there’s these big bars that we can climb across and there’s these little things

that we can use to get across the bars”.

I asked him if he wanted to draw the teacher or some other children in his picture, and he categorically

and quite simply said “no”. Significantly, although the figure is solitary, the tiny face is smiling. We

continued to talk about play and the playground and despite the paucity of details in his picture, we had a

most interesting conversation about ‘plover birds’ as detailed poetically later in this text. He displayed

significant interest in and knowledge of these birds, and he imparted a self-contained, individual view of

school life.

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH ANDREW

While Andrew and I looked at the picture and line drawings, he was able to move with ease, backwards

and forward from imagining what might be happening in the pictures to talking about his classroom

situation. He expressed clear ideas about how the classroom should operate pointing at one boy in the

drawing who is apparently rolling on the floor, “he should be on detention” and then showing me one

who was doing ‘good’ things, “because he’s sitting up nicely how he should” and others in the picture

“they’d be being quiet because they’re good children.” He separated what he called the ‘KindyStart’

activities from ‘real’ kindergarten, telling me that in KindyStart “you don’t really do work at your desk

and stuff.”

PLAYING LEGO WITH ANDREW

Andrew played very gently, unlike some of the other boys who had rifled through the box of Lego pieces

energetically, he carefully selected each piece, thoughtfully. As he placed them into a scene representing

the classroom, he engaged in a conversational tone, more relaxed than previously about various

classroom practices. He told me “we only sit on the mat when the teacher explains work to us.

Sometimes we have really hard maths and stuff like that and we’ll sit in a circle on the mat and we do it

together. But I can do it by myself though. The teacher usually explains year one work first and then they

go and do the work and then the teacher explains kindergarten work.”

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

231
As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Andrew.

Table 19: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Andrew

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
ANDREW 55 2 21 22

The table above shows most units of significance related to the phenomenon were derived from the

conversation with Andrew. Next he had most to say while looking at the pictures, playing Lego and least

to say related to the phenomenon, as he drew his picture, however his drawing underlined the solitary

nature he had demonstrated, in most of what he had to say.

In relation to his experience of Kindergarten, Andrew talked predominantly about rules and routines, and

school organisation, and he summarised competently what most of the boys thought regarding school

rules and routines. He talked knowingly of how other children would interpret the rules. He described the

sanctions that can occur if the rules are broken. Andrew expressed very thoughtful views of the success

or otherwise of punishments and sanctions, as he discussed the observations he had made of other

children’s behaviours. While Andrew talked about play and his preference for free play time, he also

demonstrated a firm grasp on the importance of learning, especially in the area of literacy, despite some

risky strategies to succeed. His many comments about these facets are quoted in the following chapter.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy. From my conversation with

Andrew, I have derived following table to show how many units of significance were distilled, from

what he said to me, placed into commonly occurring themes.

Table 20: Units of significance in themed categories-Andrew

Units of significance Tally No Source: Transcript AGS Line and

page
Rules ****** 17 192/20; 390/37; 394/37; 396/37; 404/38;
****** 406/38; 410/39; 414/39; 449/42; 452/42;
***** 474/44; 482/44; 490/45; 492/45; 494/45;
496/46(2)
School organisation/routines ****** 16 44/5; 56/6; 60/7; 74/8; 94/10; 122/13;

232
 ****** 162/16; 208/21; 239/24; 300-303/30;
**** 338/33; 356/34; 382/36; 424-436/41;
468/43; 502/46
Teacher technique ****** 12 16/3; 104/11; 130/13; 296/29; 303/30;
****** 314/31; 326/32; 330/32; 338/33;462/43;
472/44; 498/46
Curriculum/Learning ****** 12 14/2; 16/3; 30/4; 44/6; 92/10; 96/10;
****** 100/11; 102/11; 106/11; 142/15; 152/15;
304/30
Play ****** 11 6/2; 78/8; 80/8; 130/13; 132/13; 136/14;
***** 192/20; 224/22;229/23; 233/23; 462/43
Family/Home ****** 8 8/2; 34/4;40/5;21/9; 176/18; 186/19;
** 188/19; 366/35
Self efficacy ****** 6 26/3; 82/9; 108/12; 118/12;308/30;
506/46
Work ****** 6 134/14; 138/14; 330/32; 460/43; 516/47;
518/47
Fighting *** 3 196/20;198/20(2)
Sanctions *** 3 202-206/21; 218-222/22; 476/44
Hurt ** 2 202/21; 224/22
Rewards * 1 18/3
Friends * 1 60/7
Emotions * 1 66/7

Andrew generated a significant number of relevant comments, and expressed numerous ideas about what

schooling means to him. The table shows he talked more about rules, school organisation and teacher

technique and curriculum, and less frequently he made references to concepts of friends and learning.

Data from Andrew generated forty-eight pages of transcript.

MY INTERPRETATION OF ANDREW’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

Andrew has a very matter of fact, mature and accepting view of school. He participates in all of the
activities competently and with success but seems to have an underlying perspective of not being
sufficiently excited or challenged by his school life. He attended the school excursion to "Dorothy the
Dinosaur" but came away with a sense of disappointment but he was not quite sure why. It is as though
he has been disappointed before and has learned to accept life as it unfolds but he dreams of being a
'wildlife warrior' working with alligators or salt water crocodiles, saving animals out of the sea and
helping them live. He has a strong interest in all things natural and displayed exceptional knowledge
about the plovers in his school playground. His interest in all things natural was also demonstrated in
other parts of his talking, as shown in this following example from the text.

I would like to be Blizzard That black cat

(Wistfully) Is white (Warning)
A wild life warrior And sort of greyish black. Comes to our house
When I grow up. The other one And fights out
They catch alligators Is black. The other cats.
Salt water crocodiles She just turned up
And things like that (Surprise) If cats get hurt
(Mournfully) At our house (Warning)

233
Out of the sea. She just kept coming back They bite you.
So we thought My little baby brother
They help We should keep her Approaches
The animals live. As a pet. (True)
But for now There’s a little hole The other cats
(With resignation) (Curiously) And hits them
I look after The cats go under (Of course)
Two cats To get He’s been bitten
By feeding them. To the neighbour’s house By both the cats.
They Where there’s another Cat.
Just walk around.
Andrew Age 6
Transcript AGP Lines 171-189,
pp 18-19

He leads a very ordered life both at school and at home “after I've done my homework I go to tennis
sometimes or I go to swimming lessons but mostly I just stay home and have my afternoon tea” which
not surprisingly he told me is “mostly just apple and orange or stuff like that.”

The playground for Andrew is a scene that he observes seriously. “In the playground at school at
lunchtime we’ve got some soccer nets and we’re allowed to play soccer. There’s a lot of people play
soccer and they chase each other and push each other over. Some people go on detention but they still
fight especially if they’re in Ms Teacher’s class. There are a couple of boys that fight and they fight a lot
in soccer.” Andrew also observes that there is fighting on the fixed equipment and that there are rules
about this. “Mostly people fight on the equipment and we don’t want too many people on the equipment
at the same time. They fight because there isn’t much room on the equipment. There are things that some
people want to go on when it’s already full of other people and they don’t want to wait their turn.”
Andrew observes closely not only the human elements of the playground but the natural ones as well.

I see plovers… The boys go down

On the other side And plovers
Of the playground Try to swoop them
Sometimes. Plovers do.

Up, onto the oval Children should stay

The plovers On the top oval
Come. To play
When they’ve hatched And not call the plovers
Their eggs. There.

They come They’ve never been

A couple of times Swooped.
To get food No one has.
For the babies.
They live… Which is just as well
The plovers live Because
Down the bottom They have
On the primary side A poisonous spur
We used to play In the bottom of their foot.
Near the equipment

234
 There.

Andrew Age 6
Transcript AGP Lines 239-251, pp. 24-25

Andrew is very clear about what is learning and what is not. He told me that when he “was making the
Santa Claus with cutting bits of paper I was not really learning anything” but he learns things at 'work'
time and “an example of learning is to learn what shapes are. The teacher has a box of shapes and I
know most of the shapes. There’s a cylinder, and a cube and a rectangular prism and one I don’t
remember what it is called but I think it is a sphere.” He is proud of his academic success “I’ve got no
mistakes”.

He is keen to distance himself from anything that may be considered as preschool or young, and it could
be that his disappointment in the Dorothy Dinosaur presentation lay in its ‘fun’ presentation and early
childhood “look” (Dorothy appears as a kind of green Humphrey bear figure and is associated with the
Wiggles group). He was ready for something more academic and more representative of historical fact.
This demonstrates the kindergarten teachers’ eternal dilemma of picking class based activities at a level
that is appropriate for all the members of any one-class group. Andrew was also keen to demonstrate
advanced skills in reading by telling me “I don’t really like sounding (the letter sounds) out because I
like to try to read without sounding them out.” He talked at length about computers and his skill levels in
various computer activities and seemed disappointed that “we don’t do writing or spelling on the
computer.” He told me, “sometimes the teacher just writes all the work we need to do up on the board
and once we’ve done all the work we just get free time. With work we don’t get any play. We just do our
work in our work book and stuff.” Andrew would not want work and play to be confused but when he
was drawing he revealed to me, “I might just draw myself playing on the playground or trying to have
free play because these are the things I like best.”

In Andrew’ world at school, he stands independent of his peers. He rarely mentioned the other children
in his class and he seemed to be like an observer, noting the behaviours and activities of other children
in the school. While friends seem not a significant aspect of his school life, the opportunity to play
remains important but he seems self contained and happy to play alone, often observing closely
happenings around him, and being deep in reflection. His comments on the line drawing that he chose to
talk about revealed most significantly his view that “they’d be being quiet because they’re good
children”.

In my final discussion with Andrew I eventually confirmed, “there’s nothing you would want to change,
or alter or make different?” He answered without hesitation, “no, not really”.

CAPTURING THE MEANING

235
In summary the recurring and dominant views expressed by Andrew are
• that school is proceeding exactly as he expected
• that he is looking for something more challenging but he is unsure what that is
Quotes are from Transcript AGP Lines 1-531, pp.1-48.

A copy of Andrew’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

236
Figure 10: Andrew’s drawing

TYSON

When I arrived at the school to begin work with Tyson, his class, along with all the children in the

kindergarten class, year one and year two were engaged in a full scale rehearsal for their end-of-year

concert presentation assembly to be performed at the end of the week. I sat off to one side in an ante-

room where I could hear some of the performance but I was not in view of the children. I thought I could

wait there out of sight but know when they had finished. Then I could begin the talking session with

Tyson.

A teacher came by who knew my purpose for being at the school. She insisted that it would be no

problem to get Tyson to come out of the concert practice activity. I explained that this was not necessary

and I would rather he took part in the rehearsal. She would not agree to this and went to get him so I was

a little nervous about how he would take that. I genuinely did not want him to miss something like this

and I also did not want him coming to talk to me, when he would rather be somewhere else.

I need not have worried. I said to him as we were introduced by the teacher, that I was very happy that he

keep rehearsing and I would come back later. He indicated he would prefer to miss the remainder of the

rehearsal and to come and talk to me now. I was concerned that he may have been caught, as I was, in

237
the insistence of the teacher that he would not be missing anything vital to the presentation. My disquiet

was more with whether he would rather be on the stage than with me, and this could colour his opinions

and perspective about school life, and what he would say.

I talked about this with him as we walked slowly back to where the interview was to take place. As it

turned out it seems he genuinely preferred to be with me as the rehearsals had been going on for some

time and he had lost interest in them. He was keen to do whatever it was with me because this was going

to be something different. This was another moment in the fieldwork experiences of a researcher where

the ethics and the realities congregate with some poignancy.

As we started to talk I realised that part of why Tyson was happy to come and talk with me, was because

he had such definite opinions about everything and he was keen to enlighten me. He took very seriously

my explanation of my research, that it was a long time since I had been in kindergarten and I wanted to

know what boys thought about being in school these days.

CONVERSATION WITH TYSON

Our conversation flowed easily and he was keen to chatter about all sorts of family based and school

based topics. He was very confident and seemed very relaxed. His optimistic life view was summed up

in his answer to my open question, “what happens here?” he was quick to reply, “I have lots of funs (sic)

and I play games with my friends, Justin and Ben and Oscar and Sam.” Along with this tendency to

chatter happily, came a degree of typical non-sequitor discussion as seen in the following contribution. I

had asked if people get into trouble in his classroom:

Yeah. Isaac does lots of times because Mrs Teacher always yells at him because he always be
(sic) annoys people. And do you know what? Yesterday it was my Pop’s birthday…I got him a
shovel for his birthday because he didn’t have none shovels. Yeah. Because he had a dog and
there was pooh.

He lowered his voice as he added the last part and looked at me questioningly to see if I approved of this

last confidence. He was happy when we went on to talk more about dogs and told me:

Yeah, I’ve got a dog and she’s named Lucy and she’ s just – and her birthday is in July like I
am. I’m in July and I’m the 31st of July. First I was one and then I was two and then I was three
and then I was four and then I was five and now I’m six. Yes, I’m six about now.

Field Note TPS Lines 54-59, p3.

Tyson is intent on my understanding of what he is saying…he is leaning forward in his seat, looking

238
directly at me, making little nodding movements with his head... he wants me to comprehend…

DRAWING WITH TYSON

Drawing with Tyson followed in much the same way as our conversation, he chatted amiably about a

range of topics, mostly about family with ease, exuding self confidence throughout the activity, and

finally telling me very proudly as he completed his picture, “I can write my name very big.” Tyson’s

drawing portrays his personality as I see it, it is open and confident, his figures are all smiling, and the

objects are drawn with certainty and some flourish. There is a substantial school building surrounded by

an ideal environment of grass and sun and trees.

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH TYSON

This was also a fruitful activity with Tyson although it generated less significant units or key concepts

than the other activities. Tyson talked in positive ways about his teacher, revealing in an affectionate

tone, “sometimes she get’s mixed up, and sometimes she gets…when it’s fruito time she’s says its

lunchtime”(said with a kind of a shrug of his shoulders), and at other times, I say can you help me and

she always does it” he added positively.

PLAYING LEGO WITH TYSON

In response to my invitation, Tyson was happy to play ‘schools’ with the Lego with me, asking

companionably, “what are we going to make?” and then “Let’s make outside. This could be the

classroom. This can be the people.” Without hesitation, he made me an equal partner in the game,

engaging me totally in the process, “How about we can tip it all out?” and “where’s another hat…oh it’s

Okay. I’ve got this guy.” Throughout our playing time, he was happy to relate parts of our construction

to questions I asked about his school experiences and provided significant items of interest during this

time. His high level of self-confidence still in place, he asked if we could show our construction to the

principal.

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Tyson.

Table 21: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Tyson

239
Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
TYSON 37 8 1 9

Tyson derived most units of significance related to the phenomenon, during his conversation with me.

Drawing his picture and playing Lego provided similar amounts of comment related to his views of

school life, while his observation of the photographs and line drawings produced the least outcome.

Tyson talked about school rules and also the processes involved in some of the games played at school.

He described some of the personal relationship issues he had negotiated with his peers. He talked

positively about learning, and the place of school in that process. He talked confidently of his own skills

in the acquisition of learning.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy. From my conversation with

Tyson, I have derived the following table to show how many units of significance were distilled, and

placed into commonly occurring themes.

Table 22: Units of significance in themed categories-Tyson

Units of significance Tally No Source: Transcript TPS Line and page

Rules ****** 9 56/3; 62/3; 70 /4; 76/5; 176/10; 226/13; 350/18; 438/22;
*** 500/25
Curriculum/ Learning ****** 7 20/2; 26/2; 80/5; 102/6; 170/10; 370/19; 565/28
*
Self efficacy ****** 6 87/5; 88/5; 100/6; 168/10; 234/13(X2)
Family ***** 5 34/2; 108/6; 152/9; 160/10; 400/20
Trouble ***** 5 112/7; 138/8; 152/9; 536/27; 552/28
Play **** 4 19/2; 48/2; 56/3; 490/25
Friends **** 4 18/2; 48/2; 285/15; 478/24
School Routine *** 3 70/4; 92/4; 263/14
Work *** 3 94/5; 297/16; 380/19
Sanction *** 3 128/7; 138-146/8; 194/11
Bullying/ Fighting ** 2 108/6; 215/12
Gender * 1 306/16
Teacher technique * 1 370/19
Rewards * 1 558/28

Tyson talked more about his competency in various activities, matters to do with the school curriculum,

his family, school rules and trouble, frequently about friends, play and rules, and less frequently he made

references to concepts of fighting, gender, teachers, and bullying. Data from Tyson generated twenty-

240
nine pages of text. Further quotes from the transcript of my interview with Tyson are found in the next

chapter.

MY INTERPRETATION OF TYSON’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

Tyson’s view of school is a very positive one. He told me “at school I have lots of fun and I play games
with my friends Justin, Ben, and Oscar and Sam. I come to school to learn stuff and to get very smart.
You need to be smart because that how you learning. That’s how you learn.” His school world is one full
of satisfying challenges that he mostly meets quite easily and with enjoyment.

He has very detailed understanding of the games he and his friends play and the reasons for the various
rules. He told me “it’s good fun to play tips. We play it on the grass, not on the concrete because if you
get on the concrete you’re out of the game.” He went on “you can play line tip on the concrete where
you go on a line and someone has to be in, and you have to tip them on the line and if you go off that line
that means you are in. You walk fast on the line and one circle is big and that’s bar. You go in there and
no one can get you because that’s bar.”

His view of learning and work in school is substantial. He is confident of his learning capacity, “I can
read in kindergarten because I know some words. I know words like ‘this’, ‘the’ and ‘is’. Tyson is
confident about his maths competency also. He said, “I’ve got a dog and she’s named Lucy and she’s
just… and her birthday is in July like I am. I’m in July and I’m 31 st of July. First, I was one, then I was
two, then I was three, then I was four, then I was five and now I’m six. I’m six about now. I’m six until
next July and then I’ll be seven. I can count really well.” Tyson is keen to learn and enjoys being
challenged and feels confident and secure enough in his learning environment to seek his teacher’s
assistance. “I want to be helped about numbers. Hard numbers. Hard numbers like one hundred. That’s
a bit hard. One hundred. It’s hardest because sometimes we have to spell very big numbers like a
thousand. That was super hard for me.”

However, his learning world is not all easy. In telling me about the activities the class had been doing in
preparation for Christmas he told me “I did the Secret Colour. That was a bit hard for me. Only two
things were very hard. It was supposed to be six and one hundred and that was very hard. It was hard to
put the six in and the one hundred because I thought it was 799. That was some work.” Those around
him who do not have his determined view irritate him. “The annoying part is they talk to me when I am
trying to do your (my) work. I am a very good worker.”

No doubt because school is a place of success for him, he has little interest in rules and regulations and
just takes them as they come, although he did raise the “annoying” behaviour of several boys.
“Sometimes they want to fight me and I just go away and tell on them. The teacher comes and stops
them. They tell them that’s a school rule.” He indicated that his going to tell on his peers sometimes

241
leads to them calling him a bully but he was unfazed by this. “William thinks I’m a bully because he
doesn’t like me. I just tell on him.” His world is one of facts and certainties. It is entirely predictable.

The key to this clear understanding of action and consequence is found in a story he told me about his
brother fighting. The children were still in the school playground, after school had finished for the day.
“They were punching and pushing and kicking. I grabbed Isaac again and I said to my brother Sam, go
tell Mummy. But he didn’t listen cause Sam came toward Isaac and I let him go and they kept on
fighting. Then when my mum saw them, Mummy said, ‘Samuel, you’re in big trouble’. He got a smack.”
Tyson followed up this incident by telling the teacher. Isaac was “in big trouble and he went on the
veranda. If you go on the veranda for four times or three, you go on a level. A level is a note what says
you’ve been very naughty at this school. This note goes to your parents and they would get very angry.”

Tyson’s very concrete view of right and wrong can cause him some peer problems that he deals with in
the same matter-of-fact way he views his whole school life. In talking about friendship, he lists numbers
of the boys in his class as friends. He told me he sometimes plays with “Ryan or Zach or Ben…when I’m
out of Justin’s friends’ group. Sometimes I’m out. Sometimes I’m back in. When I’ve been naughty
sometimes. And I say I’m sorry and they let me back in.” He confirmed his way of handling this peer
group manipulation when playing Lego with me. At one point as he was arranging the Lego figures he
said, “sometimes I play over here with these people and sometimes I play over there with those people”.

When I asked Tyson if there were any other things he could tell me about that happens at school he
confidently responded: “ lots of things…being good and have some free time and drawing some pictures
and colouring some pictures”. And when I asked what he would change if he was the principal, he said:
“I would just be a good principal. All the teachers and all the kids be nice.”

Tyson’s whole straightforward view of school life of was summed up neatly in his final words to me
“there goes the bell. We’ve run out of time” and that was that.

CAPTURING THE MEANING

In summary, the recurring and dominant view expressed by Tyson was
• that school is a stimulating and satisfying place to be

Quotes are from Transcript TPS Lines 1- 583, p1-29

242
A copy of Tyson’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

243
Figure 11. Tyson’s drawing

WARRICK

To me, Warrick seemed to be a very intense and serious boy who at first I thought was displaying

considerable anxiety. He kept grimacing and moving his mouth uncomfortably as if he was gritting his

teeth and clenching his jaw. He frequently looked to his left, averting his gaze from me and showing

little interaction with me. He seemed to be thinking for very long periods before offering responses to my

comments or questions.

Warrick projected no expectation that he was permitted to have his own opinions or to express any ideas

of his own, despite me trying to reassure him that there were no right answers and we were just talking

about school as it seems to him.

As we walked the considerable distance from his classroom to the counsellor’s office that I had been

allocated by the principal as my research space, Warrick launched into a description of a trip to the snow

to learn to ski that he had experienced some months earlier. It was now December so it was not a very

recent experience and I was intrigued as to why he would launch into this story moments after meeting

me. I decided he had been told that I would be asking him to tell me a story about himself or his

activities and he had chosen this highlight in his life. His ski trip was not school related but had been a

family excursion with his siblings.

244
After we had been talking for some time I began to think that he was not actually anxious but that he was

really just not too animated by the activity, and just generally did not present in a vivacious way.

I introduced the session with a very long description of my time in Kindergarten, hoping to set the scene

and provide some modelling about the kinds of things we might talk about. This bombarded him with

language and I think it was not helpful as he took a long time to talk and all his utterances were

punctuated with very long and apparently very thoughtful pauses.

Warrick spoke to me in a very soft voice for most of the time, interposed with very long pauses, and

many ‘ums’ and often just soft affirmative sounds. He was very pleased when I suggested he could draw

a picture and seemed relieved that talking was no longer our prime focus and he became his most

animated when we were playing Lego together. While he did not say much during this period he was

happy and made many warm and affirming sounds as we played and occasionally he surprised me by

shouting out suddenly with enjoyment, about some aspect of our game.

CONVERSATION WITH WARRICK

Talking with Warrick was difficult as he thought for long periods of time before committing himself to

any answers, and the long periods of silence were hard for me to manage, as I felt he was anxious and I

was concerned not to place him in that position.

Field notes WTP Lines 101-102, p.7

For me waiting for these periods (for example, (six seconds... ) Warrick says “Mmm...(3 seconds pause) …Mmm...
(3 seconds pause)... Mmm...(8 seconds pause)... I don’t know…” was concerning as I did not want to get Warrick
embarrassed or distressed when he seemed not able to think of what to say…I am finding it a difficult thing as the
‘interviewer’ to decide between giving sufficient wait time but not to cause the participant to feel distressed…I try to
speak softly and slowly and use encouraging body language, nodding gently, and leaning forward, looking
interested, trying not to be in any way intimidating…

One example of how my difficulty with long waiting times is shown by the following exchange:
RC Oh OK. So what’s the best part about that day? When you have a day like the one you’ve told
me about what would be the best part about that?
W Doing some craft.
RC Right. Why is that the best part? Why do you like that most?
W Because we are getting ready for Jesus’ birthday.
RC Right. That’s very important isn’t?

245
 And what would be the worst part?
What’s the bit you don’t like?
What’s the bit you wish you didn’t have to do?(I am re-phrasing to aid comprehension but I talk
too much, too quickly, am too overwhelming)
W We didn’t have to do… (seems like a long pause…it was eight seconds…) mmm… (still no
comment)
RC (I cut in. I cannot restrain myself) It sounds like you like pretty much everything? There’s not
anything you don’t like? (If I had waited longer Warrick may have given me some more
interesting data)
Transcript WT Lines 115-121, pages 8-9

DRAWING WITH WARRICK

Warrick expressed interest in drawing a picture, but preferred to demonstrate to me his prowess in writing

and reading. He drew his friend Niam and Tyson sitting with him at a table, and this started a

conversation about sitting with friends and a classroom activity of swapping chairs, but he was not sure

why this happened in his room. He was much clearer about why it did not. Seats were swapped “not when

you’re being naughty, when you’re being good”. I suggested to Warrick he might like to draw the teacher

in his picture, which at this stage only consisted of three tiny figures towards the bottom of the page. As

he drew the teacher, I asked what was happening. He said:

(The teacher is) drawing on the board and telling kindergarten how to do…(long pause) we’re
going to do a story you write a story in your books. We have a dictionary, it’s an ABC one. The
teacher can write the words in the dictionary. (You can write about) Christmas or a party or a
sheep or…

Following on from this information I asked Warrick if he would like to write a story on his page and he

immediately began to work laboriously, writing, “I am going to the beach”.

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH WARRICK

Field Notes WT Lines 515-516, p.30

Because I am having such difficulty in getting Warrick to talk with me, I am either talking far too much, and being
confusing, or I’ve lapsed into asking lots of closed questions and actually lead him into many answers that consist
of “yep” or other one word replies, or frequently “I don’t know”

Despite my concern that I was making little progress with Warrick he actually did provide considerable

insight into what his views of school are. He chose the line drawing of the reading activity to discuss and

competently described what he could see. He said, ‘they are looking at the board to find out what to do…

but those ones should not be rocking or lying down.” He describes what happens when the teacher leaves

the room but said he and his friend “just sit down, not to be in trouble.” He said, “the children are

watching the teacher to know what to do. If you don’t do what the teacher tells you they get cross with

246
you and you get into trouble. The teacher chose that child to go to the computer because he was being

good.”

PLAYING LEGO WITH WARRICK

Warrick reacted very positively to playing Lego and his voice became very assured as he described what

he was making. He was perfectly happy to make a classroom and to describe school-based activities. He

raised matters connected to the place of girls in his class, and the games they play as shown in this

exchange:

RC When you’re out in the playground what do you play?

W Tips, soccer, cricket, um….(long pause)
RC And the girls play all those games?
W No. Girls actually play fairies or barbies or…you know.

Transcript WT Lines 405-413, p.24

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the
boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different
scaffolds generated, during my time with Warrick.
Table 23: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Warrick

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
WARRICK 23 2 16 22

Talking to me and playing Lego generated about the same level of response from Warrick, however I

gained little from him regarding school matters as he drew. His drawing depicted tiny figures and he was

more interested in writing his sentence, and demonstrating this ‘school skill’ for me. It shows that he has

developed a strong sense of school as a place of skill acquisition.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy. From my conversation with

Warrick, I have derived the following table to show how many units of significance were distilled, and

placed into commonly occurring themes.

Table 24: Units of significance in themed categories-Warrick

247
Units of significance Tally No Source: Transcript WTP Line and page
School routines/organisation ****** 12 2/2; 10/2;50/4; 309/20; 360/22; 394/24; 436/25;
****** 450/26; 470/27; 492/28; 520/30(2)
Work ****** 9 14/2;20/3; 26/3; 46/4;62/5; 84/6; 282/18; 512/29;
*** 526/30
Curriculum/Learning ****** 8 90/7; 96/7; 104/8; 118/8; 242/16; 330/20;
** 478/27(2)
Gender ****** 6 66/5; 391/23; 400/24; 404/24; 408/24; 418/25
Teaching practice ***** 5 174/12; 284/18; 496/28; 498/29(2)
Behaviour ***** 5 254/16; 291/18; 296/19; 300/19; 344/21
Play **** 4 10/2; 84/6; 504/29; 508/29
Rewards *** 3 62/5 X3
Friends *** 3 122/9; 365/23; 530/31
Trouble *** 3 128/9; 150/10; 264/17
Rules *** 3 268/17; 290/18; 504/29
Sanction * 1 128/9
Family/home life * 1 336/21
Self efficacy * 1 326/20

Warrick talked more about school routines, work and curriculum and learning activities and less

frequently he made references to concepts of home life, sanctions and his self efficacy. Data from

Warrick generated thirty-one pages of transcript

MY INTERPRETATION OF WARRICK’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

Warrick’s view of school is that it is a place where risks are not to be taken too often. To Warrick it is
safe and more comfortable to sit enclosed within a circle of your friends and not to draw any attention to
yourself. School for him is a series of gentle activities, none of which are too challenging or disturbing
of his sense of equilibrium. It is almost as if he is cocooned from any harsh realities, they would just pass
him by. He told me about a typical day all in a single statement. He spoke very softly and slowly. “After
we line up we go into class …and we do work …and we do some Christmas craft …and we do different
things …and we do some maths …and we have free time, … quiet reading …and lunchtime …and quiet
reading …and free time …and quiet reading …and home time.” He sees school as an unending series of
relatively quiet times, whether he is reading or not!

He expresses enjoyment in working, in fact the thing he “likes doing most is work” and work is the
activities you do “using pencils” and “the best work is ABC work” that you do “to learn”. Warrick is
affirmed in this enjoyment because he says that “if you do beautiful work you get to choose out of the
treasure box.” Beautiful work is “no going outside the lines and no scribbling”. Near the end of our
talking I asked if he wanted to tell me anything else and he was gently insistent in ending our
conversation by saying, “school is about work and… I don’t know nothing else.”

His best friend is someone who “be’s nice to people”. When Warrick talked about the line drawings he
thought the child with his hand up might be telling the teacher that someone was crying and that the best

248
person was the one “working quietly”. Observations like these are indicative of the emotionally aware
position that he holds, within the school setting.

His world is one where rules and regulations make little impression on him and he is not overly
conscious of them and does not interpret many of them as punitive or having a sense of sanction. He
talked to me about the closure of the library (it is stock-take time in the final weeks of the last term). He
told me ‘they need to count how many books there is and I can’t find mine because they’re hiding. They
don’t want to go back to the library. The teacher says some books don’t want to go back to the library.”
I asked what happened if the books were not found and he told me, ‘we actually get…not in trouble. We
get a funny sticker for can’t finding the library books, you take the sticker home and then I don’t know
what else.” Kindergarten is not a world where Warrick has any personal responsibility yet. It is a school
where for Warrick “only a little bit of people get into trouble”, and if people “are annoying you”
simply “go somewhere else to sit”. He thinks “going to the beach” and “going to school” are equally
both fun.

Warrick’s perspective on school life can be summed up in the way he described an out of school event, in
the surf, at the local beach. “One of my mates (and me) were doing a boogie board fight …except it
wasn’t a rough one …otherwise we’d fall down. You crash into each other. We just do it softly … so we
don’t get hurt.” Warrick sees school as somewhere where if you just do everything softly (and
compliantly) the chances are you won’t get hurt.

CAPTURING THE MEANING

In summary the recurring view expressed by Warrick was

• that school is a place where you do your work, preferably writing and reading, quietly and
unobtrusively
• that school flows on and around in a seamless fashion
Quotes are from Transcript WTP, Lines 1-541, pp 1-31.

249
A copy of Warrick’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

250
Figure 12: Warrick’s drawing

DYLAN

Dylan has only been at his current school for three weeks, having transferred with his older female

sibling from the local independent school due, he said, to her being bullied. He presented very

confidently, arriving at the office door before I had time to go to his classroom to collect him. He rapped

on the door with assurance and greeted me in a very businesslike manner. He exuded a sense that he

intended to maintain control of the situation and that he was going to take charge. This need for control

seemed important to him.

At one stage during our talk, we came close to a recess time and other boys began to hang around the

door of the office, trying to see what we were doing. I glanced at them in a friendly way, but Dylan

rapidly and firmly told them to move away as we were not finished yet.

In a later part of our talk, Dylan became quite excited and highly stimulated by singing Christmas songs

at length, and then listening to his rendition of these on the tape. I think he was expertly diverting me

from my purposes in the conversation on several occasions, by demanding that we stop, so he could

rewind the tape and listen.

CONVERSATION WITH DYLAN

251
Our conversation nearly stopped before it began. We had not been talking long, and had really only

discussed his previous school setting, as a confidence boosting and relaxing start, when Dylan suddenly

announced “…And I’m finished talking.”

Field Notes DGPS Lines 120-129, p.7

Now this is a dilemma for a researcher from an ethical point of view…he has understood that he can ask to stop,
at any time. I’m a bit nonplussed. He clearly re-iterates his wish to stop, by repeating, “I’m finished talking
now.” I’m trying to think – do I stop now? When I’ve hardly started? I decide to press on but I am not sure about
the ethics of this…I suggest a perhaps less stressful activity and he responds apparently happily, “I want to draw
some pictures.” I continue but I feel uneasy…

I suggest a diversion, saying that perhaps he would like to draw which he accepted happily, then I put

out the art materials, still shaken by the unexpected event, and I checked, “you’re not going to tell me

about all the things you do in school all day?” and Dylan responded very firmly and succinctly, “Nah,”

and put his head down and began to draw.

Nevertheless, during the conversation that eventually continued, the process of asking closed or open

questions and the impact this may have on encouraging conversation was demonstrated. Elsewhere I

have commented that this skill of conversation is that one person can ask an apparent closed question and

an experienced respondent (e.g. adult) will build out and elaborate the answer as is expected. It is argued

(Faux et al., 1988; Heshusius, 1995) that children do not often exhibit that skill. However, in my

conversation with Dylan, he demonstrated the competency to take a closed question and elaborate as

shown in the following example. I ask, in relation to Dylan’s father and the putting up of Christmas

decorations, “He puts up lights?” This closed question may have only elicited a one word response with

some participants, but Dylan responds “Yeah. And he put on some yesterday and he put up the Christmas

tree up and the inside things up. Yep. And Saturday he put outside things.”

DRAWING WITH DYLAN

As I have shown above, Dylan’s drawing was important because it was the diversion I used to keep him

engaged with our task. Already he had firmly told me twice, “I’m finished talking now.” I decided to

leave the tape recorder running while Dylan was drawing, fearing that if he again declined to talk any

more, that would be the end of our conversation altogether. Dylan talked about colours “Grass is green

isn’t?...And there’s a little bit of mud in there isn’t there? What’s the colour of mud?…I’ll do mud black.”

252
I agreed this could be so, and he was becoming very relaxed and chatty… “Yeah, look at the mud, it’s

going like triangle” referring to the directions of his colouring – in strokes.

Field notes DGPS Lines 160-210, p.9-10

Dylan was the second of my participants (in a different school) to draw a picture on its side! Was this a feature of
the shape of the paper (A3) or the desk or some other reason? When I questioned the putting of the sky along the
right hand side of the paper instead of the more conventional place, at the top of the page, he looked at me as if I
was a bit silly not understanding that. He was dismayed by the restricted range of colours I offered, particularly in
relation to a lack of yellow.

He showed his indoctrination already into stereotypic colour selection and shape as he drew the sun. He

exclaimed loudly, “Oh no! This will be hard. Sun! Sun. Yellow is sun.” I suggested he could use the red

crayon. He drew a large circle with stripes emanating round the circumference, while making a loud

rolling sound. Then he said, “Yeah, and there’s strips isn’t there? They’re strips on the sun. They’re

making a sun.” And then, in confidential tones, as if he is letting me into a secret, he commented “looks

like a spider doesn’t?”

Field Notes. DGPS Lines 205-209, p.10

Dylan suddenly put the crayon down and covered his face with both hands. There were only four crayons so there
was not much choice. I asked him what he was doing and he told me “I’m trying to think”. He was choosing which
colour he would use to draw his friends.

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH DYLAN

Dylan expressed no interest in looking at the pictures and wanted only to do other things such as write on

the whiteboard behind him, or play more with the tape recorder. I decided not to pursue this activity.

PLAYING LEGO WITH DYLAN

Dylan, in control again, decided when we would begin playing Lego. In the same way as he had decided

he had finished talking and he wanted to draw some pictures. He turned the tape off, after listening to

himself singing Christmas songs and indicated we could play some Lego now. During his play with the

Lego pieces, he happily talked about a number of concepts, stimulated by, but not related to the

construction process, about school and home activities.

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

253
As explained in chapter three, I used four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Dylan.

Table 25: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Dylan

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
DYLAN 12 3 NIL 23

With Dylan the most rewarding time for our conversation came while we played Lego together, when he

relaxed and made most of his comments about school life.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy. From my conversation with

Dylan, I have derived the following table to show how many units of significance were distilled, and

placed into commonly occurring themes.

Table 26: Units of significance in themed categories-Dylan

Units of significance Tally No Source: Transcript DGPS Line and page

School organisation/routine ****** 8 8/2; 18/2; 22/2; 76/5; 114/7; 382/18; 492/23;
** 558/26
Work ***** 5 6/1; 62/4; 288/14; 296/14; 309/15
Rules **** 4 80/5; 108/6; 112/6; 330/15
Play *** 3 64/4; 422/19; 491/22
Gender *** 3 516/24; 522/24; 528/24
Sanction *** 3 332/16; 336/16; 344/16
Teaching practice *** 3 26/3; 32/3; 408/19
Curriculum ** 2 566/26(X2)
Hurt ** 2 436/20; 440/20
Friends ** 2 228/11; 232/11
Family * 1 469/21
Self efficacy * 1 152/8
Behaviour * 1 554/25

Dylan talked more about matters of school organisation and work and less frequently he made references

to concepts of family and friends. Data from Dylan generated twenty-six pages of transcript.

MY INTERPRETATION OF DYLAN’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

254
Dylan has recently changed schools and his view of his new school is that he is doing less “work”
because of a different organisational structure. In his ‘old’ school, he moved around in groups going to
different rooms with different teachers for varying activities and he was “doing heaps of work”. He
described his work as “activities where there was some stuff to make (like) TV’s” and he was “drawing
pictures”.

At his ‘new’ school, Dylan does spelling tests on Fridays. He perceives the words for year one are too
hard for him (he is in a composite k/year one class) and he does not consider them as a challenge,
simply as none of his business. He has no curiosity about this other work, and was quite dismissive of the
idea of considering it. He demonstrated the problems and complexities inherent in phonics acquisition
when he was telling me about the words he learns. We were playing Lego while we had this interchange.

RC Can you do the year one words too?

D No way.
RC So what sort of words would they be?
D They’re like dark and that.
RC Dark …is that one of your words?
D Yep
RC Dark…hark…?
D Duck
RC Duck? Alright?
D DuCK (with the “ ck” emphasised)
RC Duck? With a “ck” on the end is it?
D “D”… “U” … “K” Duk. (he sounds the letters)
RC No…mmm……what about “ck” ?
D Nah.

Transcript DGPS Lines 307-320 p. 15

Dylan would not contemplate asking a teacher about the purpose of an organisational practice. He told
me “it would be mean to ask the teacher why we were doing something like moving around in groups”.
The classes were moved around because “my teacher said we had to do that.” Dylan’s school world is
totally dependent on the authority of the adults in his life. They control his work and his play, “The
children can’t do what they want in the classroom. The teacher says what to do.”

Play is not a dominant part of his view of school but this lack of comment on this feature of school life
could be due to his short period at this school. He may not have developed a peer group of friends or it
may be that his nature, apparently somewhat bossy, (he sharply told some boys near where we were
talking to go away) and his eagerness for control may not encourage strong friendships. He said his
favourite game was football but “my football went in the tree and it didn’t come down. Zane kicked it
into the tree. He kicked it really high but it went straight in the tree and it didn’t come down. The teacher
said maybe the wind will blow it down.”

CAPTURING THE MEANING

In summary, the recurring and dominant view expressed by Dylan is

255
• that school is a place where all aspects of life are directed by others
• school is a place where it is important to feel in control

Quotes are from Transcript DGP, Lines 1-574, pp.1-26

A copy of Dylan’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

256
Figure 13: Dylan’s drawing

CONNOR

Connor at first appeared to be highly anxious about the activity and kept putting his whole fist into his

mouth and sucking it nervously. I talked gently and quietly at length about all manner of inconsequential

items, while I considered whether to continue with the exercise. I demonstrated the tape recorder, but

apart from being polite and listening carefully, and watching intently while I did this he seemed

otherwise disinterested in the equipment. Eventually he seemed to calm, but I remained concerned at his

apparent anguish. The level of worry seemed to rise when we started talking about school matters and

then reduced considerably when he told me about facets of his home life.

I ceased our session when we reached a break time and then I needed to leave the school with the

intention of returning the next day. Overnight I decided that due to his apparent anxiety, I would not

continue with his conversation. I thought I would go through another long period of trying to re-assure

him and I was unhappy about being responsible for apparently making him quite anxious.

In hindsight, I regret this decision as more familiarity with me and some previous experience with the

research situation may have relaxed him and he may have had more to say. Perhaps I should have

returned and talked to Connor again, however my judgement at the time was that he was so anxious that

another session of similar disquiet would not be good for him and be of concern to me.

257
Ironically, when I reflected on the talk we did have even in its shortened timeframe, and I studied the

transcription of our taped conversation, he provided rich material.

CONVERSATION WITH CONNOR

Field Notes Transcript CQW Lines 1-2, p.1

Connor is sitting awkwardly on the soft chair, perched right forward in the seat with his feet together on the floor,
bending over slightly. He is trying to put his whole fist into his mouth. I am very conscious that Connor appears very
anxious at this stage, as a result, I am nervous also, talking too much, too fast, and I am rushing along, pouring out
information. He begins to answer very quickly, as if a quick answer will be what I want.

Our early conversation was somewhat strained and was not flowing easily. I aimed for topics that may be

less concerning for him. Connor talked about doing Christmas craft activities and the difficulty he was

having trying to cut out the Christmas tree, “it was a little bit hard on the little bits, on the sharp parts on

the end”.

Field Notes Transcript CQW Lines 33-39, p.3

Connor is sighing heavily as he talks to me. He uses a very soft voice and everything he says is said in a rush.
Connor is almost whispering in a husky, nervous voice. I try to match the level of his voice and I speak very softly
and hesitantly. Connor responds positively to my softer voice, and he begins to tell me things in a confidential tone
as if he is telling me a secret…a very personal thing

I encourage him to talk about whatever he wants to tell me.

I put my Christmas tree up
Already
With the lights
I put some Christmas lights
In my room.
From my mum
They were in the Christmas box
I put the big Christmas tree
In the big Christmas box
I saw the lights across the road
Pretty ones.
They were a rainbow
On the house
I saw lots of Christmas lights
On Friday night
We went Christmas hunting
To see lots of Christmas lights.

Connor Age Six

258
 Transcript CTP Lines 39-69, pp. 3-4

DRAWING WITH CONNOR

In his drawing, Connor demonstrated a positive outlook on school by drawing a blue sky and eight clouds

with a colourful rainbow overarching his school building. In front of the school building he had “the

teacher with the bag” and he told me “that’s me and that’s my friends there”. He was clear that despite the

numerous clouds “it was not raining” because they were big white fluffy clouds. The teacher has a bag

“because the kid – the little girl, gave it to him. And that girl gave the bag to the teacher because she

needs it. It had ‘R’ on it so it says Rainey, and that’s why it had an R.” Connor went on to tell me that the

teacher was holding the bag “because she (Rainey) was going to drop it”. The children in the picture are

lined up “because they are playing tiger tip”. Connor’s drawing in which he could see much detail

enabled us to talk about school rules. I asked him what he does with his bag when he comes to school. He

told me that the rule, or routine or practice is “to put your bag next to the classroom and when the bell

goes you have to sit down and then you have to walk to your bag and then go inside”.

Connor eventually became more relaxed and happy with the interview-conversation situation and

especially so when playing the Lego game with me, and indicated that he did not want it to end. After he

had taken several digital photographs of his Lego constructions, he said somewhat wistfully, “we’ve

finished it all.” I agreed and acclaimed his efforts and told him I was glad he had taken several

photographs. He suddenly suggested, obviously hoping to prolong the experience, “maybe we could draw

another picture?” Both these comments are interesting in that he has made me an equal partner, “we” had

together finished it all, and “we” could draw another picture. He wanted me to hang his first picture up

somewhere. He started his second picture and said, “this time I’m going to draw myself at home. He drew

his brother and himself “coming home from …(he names the school with its full title)… school and my

hat on the top and my bag is there with a badge on it and a zipper…and Mum is up there, with the baby.

There. And the keys. And the bag.” When I asked him what he would say to mum, he firstly answered “I

don’t know.” I pressed on and asked the question differently and he obliged by saying that he would tell

her, “I done some work and wrote some stories and I done some drawing and writing”. This was a good

example of the interviewee or student saying what they think the adult wants to hear.

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH CONNOR

259
I intended to do this at our second meeting, but decided not to proceed with the meeting as I thought

starting again with a new session would be hard for him, and could take a long time, and so I lost this

opportunity to elicit perhaps more information.

PLAYING LEGO WITH CONNOR

Connor was very happy and comfortable playing Lego with me. The following exchange indicates how a

special kind of equity is reached in our dialogue during the play sequences. The companionable to-and-

fro nature of the conversation continued throughout all the game period.

C Hmm…this could be tricky (engaging, looking at me)

RC Mmm…what could it be?
C It could be a little hole that you look through? (questioning tone?)
RC Like a kaleidoscope or a telescope?
C This could do something? (picking out another piece)
RC What could it do? It could be a light too, I suppose? Couldn’t it?
C It could be a light on the top there.
RC On top of that big door? That’s a pretty good idea.
C That’s the light. (firmly, decided)
RC That’s an excellent idea. That’s the light … for what?
C For the TV if the DVD player gets too hot. (confident)

Transcript CTP Lines 460-470, p.25

When we were playing Lego, Connor was satisfied to construct a school scene and originally thought he

would make it “out in the playground”. He wanted all the children figures to be “sitting down” but he

thought “maybe we can make the teacher standing up.” As he constructed his scene, I asked what the

children were doing and he told me, “watching the teacher what to do”. He was able to say that if the

children do not do what the teacher tells them, “they get cross with you” and that means “you get in

trouble” and that means, “the teacher gets angry with you.”

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Connor.

Table 27: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Connor

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
CONNOR 35 12 (two) NIL 17

260
The table above shows most units of significance to the phenomenon were derived from the

conversation/interview situation with Connor. Next he had most to say while playing Lego and least to

say related to the phenomenon, as he drew his pictures. I did not attempt to use the third scaffold with

him.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy. From my conversation with

Connor, I have derived the following table to show how many units of significance were distilled, and

placed into commonly occurring themes.

Table 28: Units of significance in themed categories-Connor

Units of significance Tally Number Source: Transcript CTP Line and page
Home and family ****** 19 42/3; 48/4; 62/4; 70/5; 148/9;150/10;
****** 156/10; 160/10; 162/10; 170/10; 174/11;
****** 252/14; 256/14; 259/15; 260/15; 644/33;
* 654/33; 658/33; 666/34
Rules ****** 15 180/11; 184/11; 197/12; 202/12; 236/13;
****** 290/16; 298/16; 306/17; 370/20; 374/20;
*** 432/23; 454/25; 506/27; 512/27; 536/28
Curriculum ****** 6 16/2(X3) 94/6 (X3)
Play ***** 5 215/12; 222/13; 300/17; 314/17
School organisation/routines **** 4 36/3; 102/7; 116/7; 240/14
Trouble **** 4 180/11; 374/20; 380/21(X2)
Work *** 3 76/5; 82/6; 128/8
Gender ** 2 618/32; 620/32
Self efficacy * 1 88/6
Fighting * 1 180/11
Sanctions * 1 184/11
Friends * 1 486/26

Connor talked more about his family and home life activities than any other topic, and less frequently he

made references to concepts of friends. In relation to his experience of kindergarten, Connor talked

predominantly about rules and routines, the prime importance of listening, especially to the teacher, and

the controlling role of the teacher. Connor was keen for me to understand the various games played by

the boys and talked at length about the rules for some of these games. Outside of the comments regarding

his view of school, he had considerable observations to make about his home life and talked in an

interesting and elaborated way about several out of school experiences. His many comments about these

facets of his transcript are quoted in the following chapter. Data from Connor generated thirty-four pages

of transcript.

261
MY INTERPRETATION OF CONNOR’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

Connor’s view of school is one of total compliance to adult power. Connor has no view that he could
shape his destiny or have a say or a voice in what impacts on him. He was adamant that “kids aren’t
allowed to be the boss” and you “would not be allowed to be changed into a boss. You aren’t allowed to
be the boss” He said this in a perplexed and worried way as if not understanding how I could even
suggest such a revolutionary and dangerous idea. He did not want the status quo changed. His
perception is that he has no power of his own. When things go wrong, “you tell the teacher” and at all
times “you listen to the teacher to be told what to do”. At this stage in his school life, Connor is not
unhappy that his world is organised for him. His view of school is described comprehensively when he
states, “when I come to school the sort of things I do are working. You draw on paper and you write a
story. It’s easy to write. You do an “I”. It’s easy to write ‘I like my baby’ because I’ve got my dictionary.
It helps me write something. I put my dictionary in my chair bag and I’ve written my name on the inside.
When I don’t finish my work I take it home and finish and keep it at home. When you are doing your
work you trace and colour in when you’ve finished writing. I like colouring the most.” He feels secure
when he is following the firmly established routine.

Connor is very clear about what the expectations are at school and he is comfortable in fulfilling the
requirements of what he needs to do. “When you first go in the classroom, you sit down and listen to the
teacher and you do some work”

Connor was more elaborative when he was talking about his life outside of school. He frequently
recalled family happenings leading directly from some comment about school activities as is shown by
this example from his transcript.

The worst thing I went on fast boat I saw

To colour in To the Zoo. Lots of animals
Is a zebra It had an anchor There
But Kicking the rocks I saw monkeys
I like giraffes. So it doesn’t sink. Eating bananas in the tree
I saw one giraffe If the rock Swinging on the branches
And then Gets up to the boat Swinging on a green string
I saw another one That means it sinks Tigers
Behind it. Down. Fighting with other tigers
I saw a zebra That’s why its got an anchor. Orange and black
With one star on it I saw a big bridge. Lions
It didn’t look good The Harbour Bridge. Fighting like the tigers
Because it had one star I saw a train on top Too.
On it. I went on a fast boat
I saw one more It was black and white
Next to it. Like a zebra.
It didn’t have a star I went on the bus
It just had stripes. I went on the boat
The giraffe I saw the island
Was at the Zoo And it said…
ZOO.
Connor Age 6

262
 Transcript CTP Lines 136-175,
pp 8-11
His life outside of school is filled with family and family events, a variety of rich activities that he talks
about in detail. He is excited to talk about visits to the Taronga Zoo and can recall a myriad of details
about the experience. Conversely, when he talks about school the scene is more sterile and less filled
with enriched activity and he does not see school with the same enthusiasm. His view of school is a place
where “you do your work.”

CAPTURING THE MEANING

In summary the recurring and dominant view of school expressed by Connor was
• that there is security in listening to the teacher and doing as you are told
• that school is a place of dependable, reliable and consistent practices and routines that he
understands and that compliance is not a problem for him
Quotes are from Transcript CTP, Lines 1-677. pp.1-34
A copy of Connor’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

263
Figure 14: Connor’s drawing

NIAM

To me, Niam is a very handsome boy with thick black curly hair, whose personality immediately showed

itself to me as very affable and engaging. Within minutes he had told me of his unusual birthplace in the

south western region of Russia. He told me his mother was very sick and his dad had left work to stay

home and look after her and his son. There are no siblings.

He skipped happily I thought alongside me, keen to tell me about the buildings and classrooms in the

school, and the other children in his class. He was most interested to know what we were going to do

together. To me he seemed to have impeccable and quaintly adult manners and he asked after my health

and how I was, on the second occasion he met me. He acknowledged children from other classes as we

passed them in our walk, and they happily returned his greetings, even though they seemed to be much

older, and while being very confident he was also diffident. He lived up to the description given him by

one of his peers that I talked to who claimed him as a friend and said, “ Niam? He be’s nice to people.”

CONVERSATION WITH NIAM

Unlike some of the other boys, Niam presented as totally relaxed and happy and seemed not at all

anxious or concerned. He seemed very keen to talk to me and to be as helpful in our task as he could be.

He revealed many moments of deep understanding of what was happening in his world of school.

DRAWING WITH NIAM

264
I suggested to Niam as I introduced the drawing activity that he might like to show the things he does in

his classroom, such as the teacher teaching and him learning and he interrupted and offered quickly “…

or having free time?” He drew a re-creation of the scene in his classroom, telling me the items that are on

the back wall, “that’s the jellyf…the octopus, that’s a fish and that’s a shark …” and he had drawn

himself at his desk ‘learning’ and his teacher talking, ‘teaching.’ He asked me to write in the ‘speech

bubble’ he drew near the teacher, “pack up time”.

Field Notes NTPS .lines 130-235, p.18

While I am talking about the paper and the crayons and what he might like to draw, Niam was making affirming
noises and listening to me intently. I stopped the tape while he was drawing and resumed recording when he
appeared to have finished. Then we began to talk about his picture. He was obviously disappointed when I had to
say that I had not seen the movie, ‘The Incredibles’ as it seemed he wanted to talk about it…

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH NIAM

Niam was unique in the group of boys in that he engaged confidently in talking about the pictures and

line drawings of classroom activities and generated large number of key concepts during this part of our

meeting. During our talking at this time he demonstrated some deep understandings of classroom

pedagogy and the practices of his teacher. The following exchange occurred while he was looking at the

picture of the two children doing a math activity together.

RC So they’re working together. Would they be talking to each other?

N No
RC Why not?
N Because they wanted to get their work finished.
RC So is it a good idea not to be talking when you need to get your work finished?
N Yep
RC Does that happen in your classroom? Is that a rule?
N Yep
RC Is it? So when you're working there’s no talking?
N Sometimes
RC So can you tell me some things that your teacher does that help you?
N Help you with your work
RC Are there ever any times when she doesn’t help you?
N Sometimes
RC What would be the reason for that do you think?
N Maybe because she wants you to figure it out by yourself and try and read them by yourself
RC Why would she do that? That’s a very good thought. Do you know why she would do that?
N To let you learn.
Transcript NTPS Lines 486-516, pp. 34-35

PLAYING LEGO WITH NIAM

Niam seemed to me, to enter happily into playing ‘schools’ and engaged me with him immediately. He

spoke all the time in terms of ‘we’, making sure I was part of the action. As we manipulated the

265
construction pieces he said, “Wait. We don’t need them there. They’re more back.” He sometimes said,

“Why don’t we…?” and “What can we use this for…?” as he rifled through the pieces and held up some

for my consideration. I asked Niam some questions about the ‘teachers’ in our Lego game.

RC What are all these three teachers doing out the front there?
N They’re watching a show and that’s calming them down first…before they’re watching the
show.
RC So how do they do calming them down? How do you do that?
N By…listening to the teacher.

A while later Niam had posed some more figures to represent teachers. I again asked, “what are they

doing, those teachers?” He replies, “Making sure everybody’s quiet.”

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Niam.

Table 29: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Niam

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
NIAM 37 15 32 15

Niam’s data was generated largely by conversation and almost equally by our conversation as we looked

at the pictures and line drawings. In this way Niam’s response to the scaffolds was different to all other

boys, as he seemed quite interested in the pictures and line drawings and was competent in relating what

was depicted to his own school experiences. Drawing a picture and playing Lego elicited similar

numbers of worthwhile comments.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy. From my conversation with

Niam, I have derived the following table to show how many units of significance were distilled, placed

into commonly occurring themes.

266
 Table 30: Units of significance in themed categories-Niam

Units of significance Tally Number Source: Transcript NTP Line and page
Work ****** 14 32/3; 56/5; 78/6; 186/14;202/16; 206/16;
****** 210/16; 326/24; 354/26;
** 408/30;412/30;414/30; 630/43; 634/43
Rules ****** 13 128/11;130/11; 142/11; 160/13; 398/29;
****** 464/33; 497/35; 586/40;588/40; 729/50;
* 798/56; 816/57; 876/61
Curriculum/ Learning ****** 13 8- 10/2; 36/4; 70/5; 76-82/6; 88/7; 200/15;
****** 233/18; 310/23; 342/25;420-429/31;
* 446/32; 482/34; 620- 632/43
School organisation/Routines ****** 11 168/13; 296/22;305/23; 376/28; 404/29;
***** 418/30; 532/37; 623/43; 672/45 706/48;
870/61
Play ****** 10 156/12; 172/13; 176/14; 228/17; 243/19;
**** 276/21; 290/22; 293/22; 326/24; 640/44
Behaviour ****** 9 98/8; 102/9; 110/9; 112/9; 455/32; 494/35;
*** 522/36; 818/57; 904/62
Teaching technique ***** 5 52/4;473/33; 505/35; 514/36;1036/72
Sanction ***** 5 105/9; 118/10; 124/10; 461/33; 895/62
Family/home life ***** 5 218/16; 243/19; 256/20; 552/38; 560/38
Rewards *** 3 838/59; 1073/74(X2)
Friends ** 2 176/14; 656/44
Trouble ** 2 762/52; 888/62
Emotions * 1 154/12

Niam talked more about work, rules, school organisation and play and less frequently he made references

to concepts of friends and trouble. Data from Niam generated seventy-six pages.

MY INTERPRETATION OF NIAM’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

Niam’s view of school is a pleasurable place of work and play. He is relaxed, confident and comfortable
with his competencies and skills. School life for him is well balanced. He explained, “he is pleased to be

267
here when I can play, free time and play, do some work and do some Christmas stuff”. When asked if he
would like to change anything he firmly said no, “I am happy with the way everything is going.” He told
me all year “we have been doing work. Kindergarten boys do work. You have to write stories. I can
write super hero stories. I write words in them. I know what to write because I have a dictionary. The
teacher writes the words I want in my dictionary. Then I draw them on my paper or my book.” He
described math activities with the same happy acceptance. “With numbers we do the calendar which is
easy. You have some cards and it has the days on them like yesterday, today and tomorrow.” Because he
thinks well of everyone, he seems perplexed though, that learning was not easy for all. “But one person,
he can’t do it. I don’t know why he can’t do it, maybe because he doesn’t learn.”

He is not demanding of his school provision and he has easily satisfied needs. He thought the Christmas
craft activities were “fun” because “you can use textas and metallic pens.”

His view is one of happily accepting things just how they are. He has an understanding that this part of
his life is on a continuum and this is a beginning point and he is already future oriented. He said
“learning is to make you good at writing so when you get to high school you are good at it and make
sure you put the words the right way round.” He was very matter of fact when he told me that “you have
to do your writing so you can spell so you can get work and get money when you grow up. I know that
because my dad tells me about it.”

He holds a similar fated view about school rules. He told me the “school rules are no fighting, no
kicking, no punching. I can’t remember the other school rules. There’s lots more” and when I asked how
he would know when he was breaking them if he doesn’t know what they are he shrugged his shoulders
and said “someone will tell me if I am breaking them.”

Not only does Niam have a grasp of the future but he was able to tell me about the past too. “I remember
when I was in pre-school, I’d be mean and then I’d be nice to other people in my preschool. I’m nice
sometimes but not all the time.”

Play for Niam is a desirable part of his school day. He likes to have the freedom to choose the activity
and to play with his friends but he is happily resigned to the inevitable “after we have been playing then
we have to do our school work”. All is predestined and predictable and in that, he finds a satisfying
security.

CAPTURING THE MEANING

In summary, the recurring and dominant view expressed by Niam was

• that school is a place of comforting routines and pleasurable activities

• that school is the path to his future

Quotes are from Transcript NTPS, Lines 1-1089, pp.1-75

268
A copy of Niam’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

269
Figure 15: Niam’s drawing

CADE

Cade presented to me, as a very earnest and thoughtful boy, eager to participate in the conversation. He

seemed particularly keen to talk. As we moved from his classroom to the ‘interview’ space that I had

been allocated by the principal, he told me he had been waiting for me to come and had been concerned

about when it would be his ‘turn’. He seemed to be looking forward to participating in something

different from the usual school routines, and he showed a reasonable idea of what we would be doing

and why.

He expressed interest in the equipment, about where we would sit and then, as we were getting settled,

about most of the objects in the room. He wanted to know how long we could be together and if I was

coming back to talk to other boys. He wanted to know who the next boy would be and checked with me

about which boys had already had a ‘turn’. He presented as a highly curious, and inquisitive boy.

During his conversation with me, he spoke in depth about his family and his home life and some of his

talking is transcribed in poetic form, as it cannot be presented in any other way. He frequently used the

expression “guess what?” but did not seem to care if I answered or not and just launched into whatever

he wanted to say next.

CONVERSATION WITH CADE

Field notes CGP Lines 7-9, p.1

270
I am talking about my kindergarten teacher drawing Christmas pictures on our old blackboard at my school. (I
remember a very large rotund Father Christmas very well, and the way the black flaking paint broke through the
white chalk of his beard, making it less than perfect) when Cade interrupted me, nodding wisely, “like our
teacher.” He is connecting with me modelling how he might recall episodes of his own…

Cade talked about school rules and routines. He expressed knowledge in the outcomes of being naughty

and knew about trouble, and how the principal is the source of all authority in the school. He was clear

that play was the best time in school, but thought that it had to be earned and that free time (for play) can

only come after work had been completed.

Cade talked about his family and activities out of school whenever he could. He was keen to tell me all

about his life out of school. He often predicated his sudden diversions with “guess what?” before telling

me a snippet of information about his life. On one occasion, Cade told me

I got some Kangaroo blood

From my friends
Guess what?
These people found a kangaroo
They chopped its leg off
Then gave it
To the dog next door.
Not a good idea
Because
It’s one of God’s creatures
They killed it first
With a gun
They just went
To the people’s dog
Next door.

Cade Age Six

Transcript CGP Lines 701-71, pp .36-37

DRAWING WITH CADE

Cade immediately peopled his drawing about school, with friends playing hide-and-go-seek. He was clear

that playing was preferable to work, and that any increase in work time in the school day would be

“boring”. I asked Cade, as he drew “what’s the best part of school?” and he was definite in his answer,

“you get to have playtime.”

The words of Henry Chapin’s song shown at the beginning of this chapter, again come to mind as Cade

tells me, “I’m going to draw some sky, the sky can’t be red…No, it can only be blue…because God wants

it to be, and sometimes when he wants it to rain, it has to be grey…” After surveying the limited colours I

271
deliberately had provided, he seemed suddenly to decide pragmatically “the sun’s going to have to be

red. Yep… and the clouds will be black. OH, HOLD ON…RAIN! … he shouts triumphantly as he draws

the big black clouds. Quite a significant occurrence in Cade’s drought stricken town! I asked about the

school rules and routines in the event of rain. Cade told me “in this weather (as in his drawing) we

sometimes have a little play, then we’ll go inside and watch a movie, or watch cartoons”.

Later I asked Cade if he had drawn his teacher in his picture. He paused for a long time before answering

“Mmmmm….Forgot her.” But a bit later he added “and there’s a brick wall right there so she can sit on it.

To have a little talk and drink her coffee.” I asked Cade what the teachers do while they are on duty

outside. He was very clear about the purpose of playground duty for teachers, “they look around to see if

people are being good or naughty”. In discussing how teachers work out who is being good and who is

naughty Cade referred to a list in his room “that tells you to be good and listen and don’t tell you to…do

the bad stuff,” and a clear school rule is “like when she’s talking, you don’t talk.”

We moved on in our conversation as Cade added more very large ‘raindrops’ to his picture and

consolidated the school building with some very firm colouring. I asked Cade a question about change

saying “what would he have happen to the school if he had a magic wand?”

If I had a magic wand

I would turn everybody
Into a frog
Into lots of them
They would say
Rupet, rupet, rupet
Until they go out the door
And go into the rain
And play in the pond.
Then
I would turn myself into a spider
If some people come
I would bite them
Because I was a redback.
It’s funny!

Cade Age Six

Transcript CGP Lines 688-700, p36

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH CADE

Cade engaged happily with the line drawings and the pictures of class activities and he was comfortable

relating what he saw in the pictures to his own classroom, providing helpful insights into his views of

school life.

272
PLAYING LEGO WITH CADE
Cade was pleased to play Lego and he entered into the world of school quite readily, looking

immediately for a figure to be the teacher. He decided to portray both inside and outside school

concurrently.

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Cade.

Table 31: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Cade

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
CADE 53 23 25 20

Each of the scaffolds was helpful in getting Cade to talk about his school life, with the most productive

being our conversation. The other three scaffolds generated similar numbers of key concepts.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

In chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units of significance related to the

phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy. From my conversation with

Cade, I have derived the following table to show how many units of significance were distilled, and then

placed into commonly occurring themes.

273
 Table 32: Units of significance in themed categories-Cade

Units of significance Tally No Source: Transcript CGP Line and

page
Curriculum/learning ****** 19 32/3; 42/3; 58/4;80/5; 326/18; 410/23;
****** 420/23;434/24; 1068/52; 1089/52;
****** 1165-1166/56; 1210/57(X2)
* 1213/58;1216/58(X2) 1230/58(X2)
Play ****** 19 84/6; 160/10; 228/13; 252/14; 292/16;
****** 346/19; 388/21; 398/22; 537/29;
****** 549/30; 567/30; 586/31;
* 666/35;674/35;688/36; 764/39; 852/43;
1172/56; 1198/57
Teacher technique ****** 13 8/1; 10-11/2; 18/2; 74/5; 624/33;
****** 734/38; 888/44; 948-949/47; 1024/50;
* 1137-1138/55
Home/family ****** 11 96/6; 120/7; 128/8; 134/8; 140/8;
***** 150/9; 444/25; 468/26; 475/26; 704/37;
710/37
Behaviour ****** 9 370/20; 618/33; 636/33; 882/44;
*** 1093/53; 1106/53; 1130/54; 1134/54;
1136/55; 1258/60
Work ****** 9 298/16; 304/17; 352/19; 402/22;
*** 536/29; 538/29; 1169/56; 1183/57;
1206/57
Trouble ****** 8 194/11; 330/18; 445/25; 456/25;
** 938/46; 940/46; 1099/53(X2)
Sanction ****** 8 200/12; 208/12; 212/12; 454/25;
** 636/33; 942/46; 950/47;956/47990/49;
1102/53
Rules ****** 8 256/14; 516/28;646/34; 654/34;
** 656/34; 776/40; 1122/54; 1250/59
Hurt ****** 6 180/11; 372/20; 380/21; 780/40;
920/45; 1158/56
Friends ***** 5 494/27; 530/29; 554/30;802/41; 817/41
Self efficacy *** 3 50/4; 70/5; 216/12
Rewards/awards *** 3 260/15; 274/15; 358/19
School routines *** 3 610/32; 895/44; 1246/59
Emotions ** 2 338/18; 1227/58

Cade talked more about matters of curriculum, play and teacher technique. In addition, he contributed

considerable information about family issues. He less frequently referred to concepts of friends and

274
school rules. Behaviour, work, trouble, and sanctions were topics he raised to a similar degree. Data from

Cade generated sixty pages of transcript.

MY INTERPRETATION OF CADE’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

My interpretation of Cade’s views about life at school includes several poetic expressions of part of what
he told me as we talked. He was very serious as he described these incidents and as he lives in a city
where a state jail is a central point of much of the local community I thought that what he was saying
needed to be reported in the spirit in which he relayed it.

Cade’s perspective on school consists of stark contrasts between a violent place of punching and trouble
and a more gentle one of learning and being rewarded for your efforts. Some of it seems like a part-time
sanctuary from his “other” life but mostly school seems impacted by his “other” life experiences.
“Nothing in my classroom makes me feel sad in there,” he said, implying that there were other places
and events that did make him feel sad. Learning for Cade is “helping other people and playing with
people”. When I asked him how he knew this, he told me “I used my brain”. Even with this aid, his view
of the classroom is one in which not much makes sense. In the classroom the children are “doing work.
We have to write out a list with ten words. I don’t know what for. The words are just right beside us. We
copy them from here down that list. I trace over them real…real carefully.” In talking about writing
stories Cade told me, “Sometimes I get confused because somebody keeps on annoying me…and it’s not
funny…cause I can’t get my work done.”

He speaks of the importance of being ‘good’ which means “sitting down and listening to the teacher”.
For Cade “If you don’t listen you’ll probably get the wrong answers on your work.” He advises that it is
best “to not listen a little bit, but listen a lot. If I listen a lot I listen full speed and if I listen low, I don’t
know what to do. If you go full on that’s gooder.” He summed this up when he emphatically and
succinctly told me about the teacher, “when she’s talking, you don’t talk.”

In Cade’s world even the good times are based on power and control. People are given permission to do
things. “When you’re good, you’re playing with other friends, letting them play with your soccer ball,
letting them play with your transformers, letting them play with your army men. Let other people play
with your magnetics” (my emphases). Everything in his world returns to a state of control by physical
means. When I asked him what he would change about school if he had a magic wand he said, “I would
let the kids go out and play in the rain if they were being good” (significant in a city beset by drought for
years). Firstly, he decides to turn everyone into frogs, playing in the rain in a pond, but then he intrudes
a red back spider to bite anyone passing by. A peaceful world at first, then invaded by physical and
violent control.

He told me about a recent assembly. “It’s a place where you get awards and all that. I got a certificate
yesterday from assembly. A special one. I got something. I forgot what for. It was a yellow certificate. My

275
mum took it home for me. She came to watch and my dad, they both saw me get it. Dad took a picture of
me.” He knows to do well brings its rewards but he is not sure what or why.

In the more painful part of his school world there is trouble that starts even on his journey to school. “I
catch the bus. On the bus, this Year Six kid punched me in the mouth and in the nose. He’s in year five
but he’s actually in year six. I telled Mrs Teacher which is his teacher and he got in trouble.” Cade
seems satisfied with the outcome and thought justice had been done and he does not have any further
trouble on the bus. He describes being naughty with the example of Alice. “ She’s be naughty. She hurts
other people by punching and kicking them. All the other kids did nothing and she just comes up to them
and says nasty words and punches and kicks them. Nobody even tease her.” Cade was able to describe
the consequences of being “in trouble”. He told me “sometimes you might have to write down lines,
sometimes you might get detentioned. That means you’re in big, big trouble. My brother’s been in
detention three times.”

There is a seemingly inevitable saga of mishap in Cade’s world. In talking about what happens on arrival
at school Cade related, “when I get to school I just play outside. Sometimes I’ll play with my friends,
handball. I can’t even play it any more because my ball went down the drain all because of my brother
about three weeks ago.” It seems being 'grounded' is the usual outcome for such events and Cade
proudly told me
I’ve been grounded once a long time ago because guess why? Do you know what I done? I put a
big hole through the wall…well, the door. I grabbed it hard and pshsssss…then a hole came
through the door. My pop came up with a hammer and tried to whack me with it. My other pop,
he drive in a car, right? He came down and hit the pole, because he just got right out and didn’t
put the brakes on… and then it rolled down and hit the pole. Pop was OK he was outside. Me
and my brother could get damaged because we were in the car. I’m glad there were soft seats
there.

Cade finds some sanctuary at school but does not understand the subtle workings of the system. He has
trouble in understanding the reasons for various actions ( such as award recognitions) but has learned
the ‘game’ of achieving satisfactory outcomes, such as being rewarded or simply staying out of trouble.
He is learning that the way some of the actors in his life solve problems, is not by using the complicated
language of negotiation, but rather by physical force.

Guess what ? Guess what? Guess what?

Who makes you come to My dad went My uncle…
school? To this really scary house His finger came off
My mum and my dad All he could hear
Make me come to school When he was asleep Guess what?
Cos’ this girl will come Was voices screaming This man put bombs
Knocking on your door Along time ago In his cigarettes
And she will take us When Every single time
To the Boys’ Home. He was a little boy He lit one
I don’t want to go He thought His fingers came off
Guess why? It was funny. It was in jail
Too.
They make you eat snakes
My dad told me Guess what? Guess what?
They hang you up One of - This man killed another man

276
By the wall first Three of - It wasn’t his fault
He told me. His friends died They sent him to jail for it
Guess what? This man came up Cos’ he saw it happen
With a knife and a gun
You should go to the haunted Chopped a head off Guess what?
house And shot the other two Actually it was
It used to be a girls’ school He doesn’t think Another murderer
And now it’s haunted It’s really funny He stabbed him.
It’s really really scary Now Guess what –
People who go in there That his three friends died. Happens in Harry Potter?
Get dead.

Cade Age Six

Transcript CGP Lines 96-150, pp. 8-9

CAPTURING THE MEANING

In summary, the recurring and dominant view of school life expressed by Cade is

• that listening to the teacher is the key to success

• that transgressions of the rules leads to punishment and trouble
Quotes are from Transcript CGP Lines 1-1274, pp.1-60.

277
A copy of Cade’s drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

278
Figure 16: Cade’s drawing

DARRIUS

Darrius seemed to me to be a very unusual and talkative boy. He is a blue eyed, light haired little boy

with lots of freckles and a quick smile. His hair is cut very short all over and he energetically

accompanied me to our talking spot, part skipping and part running beside me. I am sure if I had offered

he would have trustingly taken my hand.

We talked about the playground and things we saw on our way. He kept glancing up at me brightly and

seemed to be looking forward to whatever our activities were going to be. I explained what I wanted to

do and I do not know whether he understood or not, just that he was content to be involved.

This raises the ethical question as to young children giving assent/consent in terms of how they agree to

do something and while they may say they understand and that they are happy to participate but do they

really know what that means? Are they merely assenting to what several authority figures (the teachers,

the principal, their parents and the researcher) have suggested to them?

CONVERSATION WITH DARRIUS

Darrius’s immediate summing up of what kindergarten is like for him was to say, “I play with my

friend.” He talked with me confidently about a range of school and home related matters.

DRAWING WITH DARRIUS

279
The activity of drawing with Darrius enabled him to provide rich and useful data about his school life. He

told me he would draw “a big school to fit all the people in”. As I encouraged him, to begin drawing he

said suddenly,

I’m gonna draw me. I’ll have a cranky face. You get cranky at school sometimes. I get cranky
when people hit me sometimes and kick me and when I fall over I sometimes cry.

A short time later as he continued to draw he commented,

I’m going to draw my friend Brocky. Brocky is so happy. He’s always happy when I come to
school. He looks angry, I don’t know why he looks angry. Maybe because he doesn’t like going
to school? He maybe likes playing games at home?

Darrius chose to use only the one colour crayon, blue, and seemed not interested in any of the other

colours. He seemed stimulated by his choice of just this one colour to enter a fantasy world of water, and

drew over and over his earlier depictions as each new idea came.

I gotta draw us in water…swimming. I gotta draw it. Ah …there’s a long water, there’s heaps of
water…And we'll all have to swim…it’s hard to swim though, it’s deep. You could even drown.
Jayden’s a good swimmer and Brock’s a good swimmer. But I can’t even swim…we’re all in
the water now. The wave got Mrs Teacher, aw…the water is all over her now. ..
I’m going to draw a big surfboard OK? So we don’t fall off and there’s a big wave ohhhh…
ho….come…coming… but I can’t surf, I can’t swim…

Field notes. Transcript DGP, Lines 452-470, p20-21

Darrius entered into a dramatic fantasy game as he was drawing, he was shouting and gurgling and
making gushing waterlike sounds, he swirled the blue crayon round and round imitating the surf and
then showed himself and his friends, and then his teacher, all on surfboards…

After he had finished drawing I took his picture and said “that is a very interesting picture Darrius” and

he promptly responded, saying firmly “very interesting” and nodding his head with pleasure and

satisfaction.

LOOKING AT PICTURES WITH DARRIUS

Looking at pictures and the line drawings together was a useful exercise with Darrius. He was definite

and succinct about what he saw in the line drawing. Most of his comments related to behaviour and

sanctions. He pointed at the figures saying, “he’s working, he’s painting…he’s the best person in the

room…because he’s putting his hand up”. Later he told me “If I was the teacher I would say ‘no don’t lie

down’…I would put them on detention…that means you sit on the green chair and then you have to sit

there till play and when the bell rings you can get off the green chair.”

280
PLAYING LEGO WITH DARRIUS
Darrius became very excited when I indicated we would be playing with the Lego pieces. He was

pleased there were so many figure pieces and immediately nominated two of them to be teachers. He said

to me,

Hey, look. Mrs Teacher is doing something. She’s sitting down. She’s working non-stop. She’s
working on the computer while all the other kids are playing outside….there’s two teachers
actually. This is .. um…Mrs Teacher Y. She’s working on too…playing games I think.

As Darrius played, he effortlessly moved from the classroom scene to a hospital scene, all the time

making singing noises, and other dramatic sounds as he manipulated the Lego pieces. He talked about

the rules and routines associated with lining up, “you have to get into lines in school because you have to

listen to things and that makes it easier to listen because you don’t chatter to each other.”

USING THE SCAFFOLDS

As explained in chapter three, I use four methods, described as scaffolds, to elicit information from the

boys. The table below shows how many key concepts and units of significance each of the different

scaffolds generated, during my time with Darrius.

Table 33: Units of significance generated by scaffolds-Darrius

Participant views Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four
Conversation one Drawing a picture Looking at Playing Lego
to one pictures
DARRIUS 36 7 20 16

The table above shows most units of significance to the phenomenon were derived from the

conversation/interview situation with Darrius. Next he had most to say while looking at the pictures, and

playing Lego. He had least to say related to the phenomenon as he drew his picture, due probably to the

excitement he generated related to the topic of surfing and the unusual use of a single colour crayon. This

focussed him on water and water based activities, and he referred only in passing, to school related

matters. In relation to his experience of kindergarten, Darrius talked predominantly about rules and

routines, the prime importance of listening, and the controlling role of the teacher. He talked about

different aspects of good and bad behaviour, and the sanctions that can occur if the rules are broken.

UNITS OF SIGNIFICANCE

281
As I have stated previously, in chapter four, step six, I described in detail the process used to distil units

of significance related to the phenomenon from the data generated by my conversations with each boy.

From my conversation with Darrius, I have derived the following table to show how many units of

significance were distilled, and placed into commonly occurring themes.

Table 34: Units of significance in themed categories-Darrius

Units of significance Tally No Source: Transcript DGP Line and

page
School rules ****** 20 42-44/3; 16/4; 92/5; 114/6; 124/7; 130/7;
****** 164/8; 226/11; 614/27; 624/27; 650/28;
****** 690/30; 725/31;747/32; 890/37; 894/37;
** 914/37; 1001/40; 1008/40; 1044/42
Play ****** 9 10/1; 14/2; 28/2; 44/3; 230/12; 554/24;
*** 673/29;732/31; 768/33
Family/home ****** 8 22/2; 64/4; 182/9;188/10; 211/11;
** 322/15; 534/23; 988/40
Friends ****** 7 28/2; 36/2;44/3; 92/5; 310/15; 332/16;
* 350/16
Work ***** 5 226/11; 234/12; 242/12; 771/33; 786/33
School organisation/routines **** 4 70/4; 796/33; 942/38; 950/38
Teacher technique **** 4 58/3; 104/6; 494/22(X2)
Sanction **** 4 76/4; 883/36; 904/37; 963/39
Curriculum/Learning **** 4 50/3; 150/8; 930/38(X2)
Trouble *** 3 92/5; 130/7; 960/39
Gender ** 2 434/19; 450/20
Rewards ** 2 104/6; 114/6
Hurt ** 2 280/14;302/14
Self efficacy * 1 474/21;

Darrius talked more about school rules, play and family and less frequently he made references to

concepts of learning and self efficacy. He made less references to matters of school organisation and

curriculum. His many comments about these facets above are quoted in the following chapter. Data from

Darrius generated forty-three pages of transcript.

MY INTERPRETATION OF DARRIUS’S VIEWS OF KINDERGARTEN

282
Darrius’s lived world of school is one in which he can slip in and out of a fantasy life and back to the
real world with consummate ease. He assumes his imaginary personas seamlessly and any pressures or
demands from his academic world are quickly subsumed and dealt with by lapsing into other realms of
fantasy where he is in control.

School for Darrius is a place of playing, friends, listening to the teacher and not much else. It is
comfortable and predictable and for Darrius this is satisfying. Listening forms a large part of his school
day. He told me “in school we listen and learn. When we learn we listen and you put your hands on your
knees. Listening is important because if you don’t listen in class you get in big trouble. That means you
have to sit on the thinking mat. Then you have to sit there for a while and when you be good and think…
the teacher lets you go back to your desk and draw. It’s hard to be quiet and listening because other
people talk and then they make me talk. You aren’t allowed to talk because you have to listen to the
teacher because if you talk to your friend the teacher will get angry.” He reiterated the importance of
this telling me, “if you talk and she’s talking then you’ll get into really big trouble.”

In Darrius's school world there are good reasons for everything, which makes obeying them perfectly
logical. He says “that you come to school because you can’t learn things if you can’t come to school.
When you learn things you can count.” He has practical outcomes for counting, “because if you want to
go up to the park, you have to count up to numbers, because if you don’t know where the park is, you can
just count. If there was numbers on the footpath and you went to the park, you could get there easily.”
He demonstrated his perception of the good sense behind the rules by advising me “after you went to the
toilet you have to wash your hands. You have to put salt on it. Soap. Because you get all the germs off
there…Bite ya. You can’t see them, they make you sick.”

Darrius talked of his home life in positive terms too. In talking about school he would unexpectedly
divert to the domestic scene.

283
You know… She’s old. I throwed the ball
If I was going Really old. Up on the roof
To paint Someone owned her I throwed it really high
Sarah my dog And then
Climbing up the slippery dip The owner let us have her. You know what
She would go right down She was in a big cage Sarah wants?
Right down And we got her What Sarah wants for
Again. In the park somewhere Christmas?
The colours My grandad was with me The ball down
Of my dog And my Mum and me From the roof
Are black and white Then That’s all she wants
And brown. I saw Sarah For Christmas.
She has black spots And I said That’s all.
In the brown fur Mum look at Sarah
On her back. Look at Sarah!
White fur And I knewed her name
On her chest. Somehow.
Giving her a bath? We got her in the car
Sarah We went back home
Doesn’t like it. I’ve loved her
When you put soap Ever since.
On her
And water
She shakes her body
Hard
Then she goes near a tree
And wipes her back
And things like that.

Darrius Age Six

Transcript DGP Lines 185-217, pp. 9-11

CAPTURING THE MEANING

In summary, the recurring and dominant view of school expressed by Darrius is

• that it is a place of listening and doing as you are told

Quotes are from Transcript DGP L1-1062, pp.1-43.

A copy of Darrius’ drawing follows.

Figure not included please see print copy

284
Figure 17: Darrius’s drawing

THE MEANINGS DISTILLED

The hermeneutic approach to an enquiry seeks a deeper understanding of the phenomenon by analysing

accounts of human experience in a specific setting. At the conclusion of my interpretation of what each

boy tells me, I seek the meaning in the interpretation. What is it that this boy is saying about school?

What does school mean to him? What does it mean to him, to be a boy in kindergarten?

285
The following is a summary of my interpretations of the recurring and dominant views, of the meaning

of life in kindergarten for some boys. The boys I talked to in this investigation said

• that in school it is important to try to be in control

• that friendships are paramount and playing with friends or alone, is a very important part of
school life
• that school is organised into a set of routines and rules and if these are obeyed, then trouble is
avoided

• there is ambivalence in how to maintain friendships with peers

• that school is hard, not engaging, it is boring and not cool

• that school is a confusing mix of anomalies

• that the friends at school are the rocks clung to for support and they are essential for the
maintenance of any sense of security

• that the school is a place bounded by directions that are to obeyed without question

• that school is a place of enjoyment and satisfaction

• that friends are an essential feature of school life

• that play is crucial to well being and enjoyment

• that school is a place where routine provides security

• that school is a place of rules and regulations and you will do best if you obey them

• that school means the successful negotiation of social relationships is challenging

• that school is a place of rules and regulations that must be obeyed

• that listening to the teacher is essential for survival
• that school is a place where you do your work, preferably writing and reading, quietly and
unobtrusively
• that school flows on and around in a seamless fashion
• that school is a place of comforting routines and pleasurable activities

• that school is the path to the future

• that school is proceeding exactly as was expected

• that there must be something more challenging but it is unclear what that is

• that there is security in listening to the teacher and doing as you are told

• that school is a place of dependable, reliable and consistent practices and routines that are
understood and compliance is not a problem
• that listening to the teacher is the key to success
• that transgressions of the rules leads to punishment and trouble

• that school is a place of listening and doing as you are told

• that school is a stimulating and satisfying place to be

286
The commonalities and the differences in these distilled meanings are considered in the next chapter.

Summary of chapter five

At the beginning of this chapter I quote the song, “flowers Are Red” by Harry Chapin in which he

describes a young boy starting school who is asked by his teacher to colour flowers red and leaves green,

saying ‘there’s no need to see…any other way.” He was “put in a corner…for his own good and you

won’t come out until you get it right”. The picture is of one of seeking compliance and closing down

individuality for the sake of obedience. Eventually the boy moves to another school where his creativity

is encouraged. The song is relevant because many of the initial sentiments in the song, are echoed by the

boys in this study as they describe to me, how they spend their time and what they do in kindergarten.

They are confronted by expectations that there is a right and correct way to do things and they

understand clearly that anything happening outside those parameters will be met with sanctions.

Sometimes these sanctions do not seem to be logical consequences for the unacceptable actions.

This chapter records my initial view of each boy. Then I show the outcomes of the data generated by

interviewing the fourteen boys. I demonstrate the analyses, the organisation, and then the interpretation

that was used to determine what each boy said individually. I highlight my interpretation of the most

significant ideas that they expressed. I included both textual and tabular records of what the boys said.

In the next chapter, all of these individual interpretations are brought together and considered as a whole.

The major themes that were apparent in the individual stories are distilled down to three main features,

rules and routines, play and friends and learning and work. The way in which these themes are

presented provides a picture of the ‘composite boy.’ It is my creation that summarises the meanings

expressed by each boy, as I interpreted them.

I use the process described in detail, by van Manen (1990), to write a phenomenological text that is

constructed in ‘thickened' language that uses evocative expression in order to consider the phenomenon

in a different way. This use of language has the effect of providing a new view of “the particular

phenomenon that is the object of the researcher’s interest” (Hyde, 2005, p.34). The completed writing

287
represents a hermeneutic and phenomenological perspective, generated through a Gadamerian lens, of

these boys’ views of life in kindergarten.

288
CHAPTER SIX

MULTIPLE CASE ANALYSES AND INTERPRETATION

“We don’t need no education

We don’t need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Hey, teacher, leave those kids alone
All in all we’re just another brick in the wall.”
‘The Wall’ Pink Floyd 1979

Introduction

The previous chapter explored what each boy said and set out my interpretation of his personal views of

school. I developed an individual profile on each boy in relation to the experience of being a male student

in kindergarten. I extracted the essence of their views by highlighting the recurring themes in each boy’s

conversation. It is now useful to move from the ‘parts to the whole,’ to see “the bricks in the wall”, as

described by Floyd above, and to consider what each individual story brings to a total picture. I

investigate what common elements are apparent from the individual statements.

In this chapter, as I describe the commonalities in the recurring units of significance that are distilled from

the data, I have indicated sources in the literature that either confirm or conflict with my interpretations. It

is at this stage that I engage van Manen’s sixth activity, balancing the research context by considering

parts and whole (van Manen, 1990, p.31).

In maintaining the allegory of the construction of this work to the creation of a painting, I again refer to

the Impressionist artists who re-created the sensation of the object of their attention, in the eye of the

viewer. Their aim was not to re-create the subject. To capture sensation, they used a flurry of techniques

and forms. They pursued an art of spontaneity, sunlight and colour, and illuminated their topic by

suggestion, in the eyes of their beholders. The viewers step back, distancing their gaze from the unique

strokes, and dabs of colour and texture, and look at the merging of these individual features to form a

whole, to gain an overall total sensation. Instead of peering intensely at each stroke and texture, line and

shape, the viewer lets the forms and colours merge, and perceives the whole. This is what can happen

with this investigation now, at this stage in the study. At the end of the chapter I write a prose description

of my interpretation of the commonality of views expressed by the boys in this study.

289
There is no suggestion that there can be generalisations made to any other setting from the summary of

the data, the individual stories or the commonalities of the group. However, what may happen is the

writing can strike a chord deep in the experience of readers and provide a glimmer of an idea that finds an

echo within some incident or some perplexing moment, of a reader’s experience. This will provide new

knowledge against which to test the reader’s own ideas, understandings and practices. Readers bring to

my text their interpretation, and the hermeneutic circle and a fusion of horizons can occur.

An important part of this process of seeking meaning by phenomenological reflection, takes heed of

Gadamer’s (2004, p.269) statement,

(f)or the interpreter to let himself be guided by the things themselves is obviously not a matter of
a single, ‘conscientious’ decision but is ‘the first, last and constant task.’ For it is necessary to
keep one’s gaze fixed on the thing throughout all the constant distractions that originate in the
interpreter himself. A person who is trying to understand a text is always projecting. He projects
a meaning for the text as a whole as soon as some initial meaning emerges in the text. Again, the
initial meaning emerges only because he is reading the text with particular expectations in regard
to a certain meaning. Working out this fore-projection, which is constantly revised in terms of
what emerges as he penetrates into the meaning, is understanding what is there.

A Phenomenological Reflection

A phenomenological reflection sets out to “grasp the essential meaning of something” (van Manen, 1990,

p.77). We have all been to school so we all have a pre-reflective lived understanding of the meaning of

schooling but that is different to a reflective grasp of the phenomenological structure of the lived

meaning of school. To gain insight into the essence of a phenomenon requires us to reflectively

appropriate, then clarify and then make explicit, the structure of meaning of the lived experience. To

make explicit what the boys in this study experience as schooling I have to first appropriate, then clarify

and then make explicit what the structure of that experience is for them.

Van Manen (1990) describes phenomenological themes as “knots in the web of our experiences”(p.90)

and any “lived experience description is an appropriate source for uncovering the thematic aspects of the

phenomenon it describes” (p.92). The meaning or the essence of a phenomenon is multi-layered and

multi-dimensional and is communicated textually as organised narrative. Van Manen (1990, p.79) states

“making something of a text or of a lived experience by interpreting its meaning is more accurately a

290
process of insightful invention, discovery or disclosure … (it is) a free act of ‘seeing’ meaning.” I

contemplated the boys’ statements, and I searched for key units of significance.

Seeking the common themes

The approach I used to search for the common themes coming from the units of significance is explained

previously in chapter five where I detailed the process I used to move from the large range of significant

concepts to a smaller group of themes. I revisit that process briefly now. As indicated I highlighted the

statements that illustrated themes that I perceived as commonalities. I wrote thematic statements in

phenomenological sensitive paragraphs on the basis of my reading and my other research activities. I

formulated phrases to describe the themes I had identified. The fifteen topics were the most commonly

recurring themes that appeared most in the boys’ data. I developed these topic headings by assessing the

remarks and deciding what characteristics they shared. I interpreted similarities grouped together under

headings that conveyed the essence of the boys’ perspectives. I followed van Manen’s advice and I

reflected on the essential themes, which characterise the phenomenon. I used a “creative hermeneutic

process” (van Manen, 1990, p.96) to evaluate and check my suppositions. I looked at every meaningful

statement from each boys’ text formulated from their verbatim transcription, and I confirmed these topics

were represented in my interpretive text analysis.

The fifteen topics derived were the most commonly recurring themes that appeared frequently across the

data and I engaged with van Manen’s third research activity reflecting on the essential themes, which

characterise the phenomenon. The outcome is described in tabular form below. The table shows the most

commonly identified concepts, and the number I allocated them for ease of reference later. The

frequency of occurrence is shown in descending order.

Next I recorded the common occurrence of each distilled unit of significance in relation to how often they

occurred in each boy’s transcript as a total of all boys, in the following table. The number in the first

column represents the concept and is used in the table below as that reference point.

291
 Table 35: Frequency of units of significance for all participants

Numerical Phrase representing the unit of significance Number

representati
on
the unit of
significance
3 Rules 151
11 Play 120
15 School organisation and routines 113
9 Curriculum/Learning 97
5 Family/home matters 82
14 Work 74
13 Friends 68
10 Teaching technique 65
2 Sanctions 47
7 Bullying/fighting/behaviour 41
1 Getting into trouble 37
6 Self efficacy 25
8 Being hurt 20
4 Rewards/awards/extrinsic motivations 18
12 Gender, about boys and girls 18

The frequency of appearance for each boy of the key units of significance distilled from the text of the

boys’ transcripts is shown in the following table. This shows a numerical estimation of the units as they

appeared in each boy’s transcript. This table also provides a numerical estimation of the numbers of key

units of significance generated by each boy and a total for the whole sample. While this is interesting it

must be emphasised that this kind of analysis is merely supplementary to the philosophic thrust of this

investigation. The data comes from my interpretation of what each boy said to me at the time of our

conversation.

292
 Table 36: Units of significance derived from each student’s transcript

Unit Ai E B O J N An T W Dy Con N Ca Da Total

1 3 - 1 - 4 5 - 5 3 - 4 1 8 3 37

2 9 1 1 - 3 5 3 3 1 3 1 5 8 4 47

3 6 - 3 4 24 20 17 14 3 4 15 13 8 20 151

4 3 - - - 1 1 1 1 3 - - 3 3 2 18

5 6 6 2 6 1 3 8 5 1 1 19 5 11 8 82

6 2 - - 1 1 2 6 6 1 1 1 - 3 1 25

7 5 3 1 - - 2 3 2 5 1 1 9 9 - 41

8 3 - - - 3 2 2 - - 2 - - 6 2 20

9 8 3 7 5 2 7 12 7 8 2 6 17 19 4 97

10 6 2 2 - 8 4 12 1 5 3 - 5 13 4 65

11 15 7 7 3 3 20 11 4 4 3 5 10 19 9 120

12 2 - - - - 2 - 1 6 3 2 - - 2 18

13 12 6 5 12 - 8 1 4 3 2 1 2 5 7 68

14 7 7 2 - 3 1 6 3 9 5 3 14 9 5 74

15 17 - 5 2 12 16 16 3 12 8 4 11 3 4 113

Total 104 35 36 33 65 98 98 59 64 38 62 95 124 75

Thoughtful consideration and deep reflection on each of the comments in the topic folders led to the

eventual reduction of the fifteen topic areas to three overarching themes. The careful reading of each of

the comments allowed me to reduce, and combine these topics to

293
three “essential themes which characterise the phenomenon.” A diagrammatic representation of this

reduction follows. The essential themes derived by this process are:

• Rules and Routines

• Play and Friends
• Learning and Work

1 Getting into trouble

2 Sanctions RULES
3 Rules
4 Rewards/extrinsic
and
7
Bullying/fighting/behaviour
8 Being hurt ROUTINES

PLAY
5 Family/home matters and
and
Coming to school
11 Play
12 Gender – boys/girls FRIENDS
13 Friends

LEARNING
6 Self-efficacy
9 Curriculum/Learning and
10 Teaching techniques
15 School
organisation/routines
14 Work WORK

294
Figure 18: Essential themes derived from common units of significance

At this stage in the investigation, I state what the ‘whole’ looks like to me and then I explicate my

interpretation of the data, which guided me to the position that I adopt. As shown above three themes are

developed. The first deals with the place of rules and routines in the boys’ view of school life. The

second is the topic of play which is commented on mostly in a positive way by the boys, and especially

if it is undirected ‘free play.’ Closely allied to their talk about play, is comment about friends. Thirdly, I

explore learning and ‘work’ as they are strongly related in the perspective of the students. Then I show

how I think this area of the boys’ school lives is constrained by routine procedures and rigid presentation.

Lately I’ve been winning battles left and right

But even winners can get wounded in the fight
People say that I’m amazing
Strong beyond my years
But they don’t see inside of me
I’m hiding all the tears

From the song “The Warrior is a Child” 1984

Words and music by Twila Paris Wright

RULES AND ROUTINES

This initial section examines the first theme rules and routines. Firstly, I introduce the general aspects of

rules and routines that the boys talked about. Secondly, I focus on ‘being seen and not heard’. This part

examines the extent of the focus on listening and not talking, which was remarked on by the boys.

Thirdly, I focus on the controlling aspect of the teachers’ behaviours, and the effect of the various

sanctions that ‘bad’ behaviour can earn, as reflected in the boys’ comments. Finally, I display the extent

of the focus on rules as it relates to the playground.

General aspects

The rules and routines that shape the lives of children in school have been commented on widely in the

literature. Thornberg (2008, p.37) claims, “classroom rules and other school rules are constructed and

upheld by an ongoing social process”. The rules provide guidelines for how to act and they evaluate

295
actions in terms of good and bad and so they are expressions of morality. If they are such an on-going

moral influence embedded in everyday school life, the way in which students reason and make meaning

from them is essential knowledge to consider in relation to the curriculum aims of the school (Thornberg,

2008). Reichert and Kuriloff, (2004, p.568) claim: “day to day school practice with its rituals, rewards,

policies and habits, reinforces the domination of a particular cultural class and style – (all) tightly

controlled by a rigid invisible practice.” The data in this study provides support for this position and

further confirms the findings of Dockett and Perry (1999). They found a strong focus on rules was

evident in the first month of kindergarten. They found predominance of conventional rules, and within

these, rules about routines. These authors suggest that “what teachers interpret as social adjustment, in

terms of children fitting into the large class group, children interpret as rules … teachers believe they are

achieving (fitting in) by establishing cooperative, interactive environments, focusing on social rights and

obligations, children believe they are being taught the rules” (Dockett & Perry, 1999, p.116). The

evidence from this study indicates that not only are they being taught the rules, but also they are being

taught unquestioning compliance with the rules.

The boys in this study were preoccupied with rules and routines and their comments frequently reverted

to this topic. They often described the importance of being ‘good’ and the sanctions that being ‘bad’

would bring. Darrius summed up his view of schooling when I asked him what he would tell somebody

new to the school about kindergarten:

RC If you were telling somebody about your school who didn’t know anything about
this school, what would you tell them?
D Um… You have to put your hand on your knee.
RC Yes?
D You know Kindergartens…? (He is looking at me with raised eyebrows and asking
in a questioning conversational tone)
RC Yes?
D We teach them what to do right and what to do wrong.
RC OK, what you do right and what you do wrong, …that’s what happens in
kindergarten, is that what you said?
D Yep, we teacher them to do things right.
RC Is that what kindergarten is about?
D Uhhuh.(he nods)
Transcript DGP Lines 999-1009, p.40

Andrew summarised how many of the boys perceived the rules in their school. He said, “The rules in the

school are fair. I don’t really know what the main rules are. I just know what the rules are. Just mostly be

good.” While he is not sure what the rules are, he has learned a way of obeying them that will keep him

296
out of trouble. Niam expressed a similar understanding (or lack of it). He told me, “school rules are no

fighting, no kicking, no punching. I can’t remember the other school rules. There’s lots more. Somebody

will tell me if I am breaking them.” Darrius had a simple view, “after you stop being bad, you be good

again.”

Nigel described school routine as follows.

In the morning the bell goes and you line-up and then you have to wait until the teacher comes
but if you’re lined up beautifully you get a line-up award. We’ve got two lining up awards and
the whole class has to sit up straight. The teacher who is running the assembly is the one who
gives out the awards and at assembly, they get a library award. The library award is for finishing
(books) and borrowing them. If you want to borrow a book, it has to be important. If you haven’t
borrowed that’s OK. If you can’t find it that means they have to buy another book about it.

Many of the boys described lining up and putting school bags in particular places.

Connor said,

When I come to school I put my bag on the ground. You don’t have to put it in a line. You put
your bag next to the classroom and when the bell goes you have to sit down and then you have to
walk to your bag and then go inside.

When you first go into your classroom you sit down and listen to the teacher and you do some
work. You have to draw and write.

He used the words “have to” frequently as he described the usual day’s activities.

Aimon also described the routines he experiences, in detail. He told me

We get our food and then the bell goes. Then we have to go outside and eat our lunch and at the
first bell at little lunch you have to line up so you don’t get very much play. At big lunch, there’s
three ones. There’s three. That’s why it’s called big lunch. There are three bells. The middle one
so you can go to the library and if you have a book, you can change it. After lunch we line up
and the teacher opens our classroom and she says we can go inside. When we get back in the
afternoon if it’s a Monday we have Miss Teacher and we do a bit of work and then we can have
free play.

Sometimes when we’re working and we go and sit on the floor. Pencils are usually all over our
table and sometimes all over other people’s table. Miss Teacher asks some people to pack up.
Sometimes she says that some people can pack up and then you have to pick the pencils up and
put them back in the tins. Sometimes we all do it but sometimes she just picks some people.

Aimon was very conscious of the importance of understanding the meanings of the bells. Bells control

activity in all the schools. Cade told me, “A bell goes. You know you’ve got to stop because of the bell

and then you come and sit down at lines.”

297
Being seen and not heard

Being ‘seen and not heard’ is still a popular requirement, even centuries after it was first introduced as a

control mechanism to keep females in their ‘place’ (c 1400 AD). Connor said, “you put your hand up to

be allowed to speak.” Andrew told me, “We’re not allowed to do any talking.” Ben said, (in class) “you

sit down and be quiet and be sensible and good and be good to your friends”. He added, “After play you

have to pack it up, then sit down, be quiet and listen to the teacher, then you eat your recess and if your

teacher says, you go out and play”. The phrase “listen to the teacher” also appeared on a regular basis in

Connor’s talk, and underlined the significant importance all boys placed on “listening to the teacher”.

The participants demonstrated listening to the teacher is a significant understanding to acquire quickly in

kindergarten. When I asked Jaden what kindergarten was all about he replied, “Listening to the teacher

and you have to do what Miss Teacher does and listen to the teachers. I don’t know any more. That’s all

of it.” Later in our conversation he told me that the worst thing that can happen “is if you’re not listening

to the teacher and you’re writing the wrong sentence.” Andrew was succinct. “You have to listen when

you are in the classroom.”

When I talked with Andrew about one of the curriculum photographs that shows two children working on

a maths activity together he knowingly suggested, “they would not be allowed to talk if they were sitting

like that.” He thought that “a fair bit of time in the classroom there’s no talking.” Dylan was clear that

“the children can’t do what they want in the classroom. The teacher says what to do.” When we looked at

a line drawing of the children in a classroom setting, Jaden told me, “they should be listening to the

teacher”. Connor reiterated this view when he looked at the same drawing saying, “The children are

watching the teacher to know what to do”. He added, “If you don’t do what the teacher tells you they get

cross with you and you get in trouble. When you are in trouble, the teacher gets cross.”

Darrius told me (when you are) “in lines sitting, listening is important because if you don’t listen in class

you get in big trouble. That means you have to sit on the thinking mat. Then you have to sit there for a

298
while and when you be good and think, the teacher let’s you go back to your desk and draw.” He

confirmed this situation a short time later saying “you aren’t allowed to talk because you have to listen to

the teacher, because if you talk to your friend the teacher will get angry and she’ll put you on the thinking

mat.”

Aimon provided a similar example “usually Azara gets in trouble because she doesn’t listen but that’s

because she been in Serbia for a long time. She’s not listening because usually when we’re doing maths

she always calls out the questions.”

There was a consistent view that not listening was not a good idea and can bring with it serious penalties.

Aimon told me, “the teacher says she wants you to listen to her because she says things and then you

speak to the other person and then you get into trouble because you’re talking. She be saying ‘Shhh….’

things like that and if you talk and she’s talking then you’ll get into really big trouble.” He also mentioned

a more significant and deeper meaning associated with not talking, when he said “in maths you can’t talk.

If you tell your friends the answers, that’s cheating.” There is no sense that talking collaboratively with

your peers, could lead to learning, no suggestion of talking to learn. This emphasis on ‘being quiet’ and

‘not talking’ is a direct contradiction of a major goal of kindergarten of enhancing “children’s general

language development (by providing them) with multiple opportunities to practise their language skills

across a range of curricular activities” (Hadley et al., 1994).

Teacher in control

Everything is controlled by the teacher. Warrick says, “because when the teacher says you’re not allowed

to have free time, you can’t. If the teacher says you are allowed to have free time that means you can.”

Darrius agrees. “You can’t do what you want in the classroom because you have to listen to the teacher.

You can only do what you want when you’re playing in free time. That’s when you can do what you

want. The teacher doesn’t say, ‘you can have that toy’. You just like pull (down) your own toy.”

Therefore, the teacher does not control choice within an approved activity, but nevertheless controls what

the activity will be and when it will be allowed to occur.

299
There is growing interest in understanding young children’s concepts of authority (Laupa & Turiel, 1986;

Braine et al., 1991; Tisak & Tisak, 1990; Tisak, 2000). This is another area where investigators are

breaking free of the Piagetian concepts that have bound researchers to particular views about children for

so long. The Piagetian view that young children consider the commands from those in authority to be

unalterable, is now being challenged, as there is evidence demonstrating that young children do not have

a unitary construct of authority (Tisak, 2000). Even in the small sample of this study, the participants

demonstrated different approaches in their acceptance of authority, from total compliance and

unquestioning acceptance, to a paradigm of showing signs of resistance. This was evidenced in Ellis’s

talk about what he would do if he were the principal. He said, “I would change the school so that kids can

always be naughty. It wouldn’t be good. Later he told me “when you are naughty you get into trouble and

that’s bad. We get a number one, AND THAT IS NOTHING!” he shouted these last words loudly.

What the teacher says is supported by the various sanctions imposed by each school. These were

generally time-out, which takes place in a variety of sites, such as in each classroom, or ‘on the verandah’

or more mysteriously, in the time-out book, which inferred the simple writing of one’s name in the book,

was somehow a punishment. Other sanctions include detention, and letters home to one’s parents. The

boys described these sanctions in detail although few of this sample of students had actually experienced

being “in trouble” as they said. For instance, Darrius told me “I have never been in the time-out spot, but

heaps of people have”.

Nigel described time-out in great detail, saying

Time-out is a place where naughty kids go in my classroom and in Miss Teacher’s classroom.
Our time-out space has sticky –tape (to mark it out) but our classroom has changed. Miss T’s is
still the same, and Miss Teacher’s still the same. You would find the time-out spot where the
toys are, near the reading corner facing away to Miss L’s classroom. The time-out spot is a chair
where you have you read what the school rules are. We can read what the school rules are
because we’ve got them on a piece of paper which has all the stuff on it and Miss T puts blu-tac
on it so it doesn’t fall down and land on the person’s head. If the school rules fell on the person’s
head they can’t read the words. They would have to be reading upside down if it was on their
head. (Children) stay in the time-out until the teacher says they can go back to class.

I asked Nigel if he thought time-out stopped people doing the wrong thing. He told me

Alex is still naughty and Trent still bullies. Sunny used to bully but he doesn’t now because he
was a little bit frightened when he got into time-out. Sunny did not like time-out because he
wanted to see what we were doing but the teacher kept turning to him and saying to him to keep
looking at the school rules. I’ve been in time-out but not for some time, at least not since
November.

300
Children get into another kind of time-out at Aimon’s school. Aimon spoke about “the time-out book”

which seemed to carry great power of threat without the kindergarten boys actually knowing what

happens when your name gets put in the book. It is another level of time-out beyond that of the classroom

because it rests in the school front office. The actual punishment has lost its deterrent factor and the

sanction has been taken over by the concept. Aimon described the process as

if children do a really bad thing they have to get in the time-out book and the time-out book is
not a very good thing to get in. It’s a bit bad if you get in the time-out book. At big lunch you
have to stay in like a class when other people are playing for heaps of time and you come out
when it’s nearly lining up time and you only get two minutes of play. You get to spend heaps of
time in the classroom…

Usually you have to go down to the office to get in the time-out book. When they get in the
timeout book you have to run back because some people are being really, really naughty. One
day one of my friends Jay bit Andrew on the arm and he got in the time-out book. He did for no
reason. He just came up and went 'srrrrh...' like that but he accidentally bit him and he was
pretending he was going to bite him and accidentally bit him.

Getting ‘in trouble’ is to be avoided if possible. Ellis said, “when you are naughty you get into trouble

and that’s bad. We get on a number one, but that’s nothing. You go on a chair in another room. I’ve been

on the chair two times. It happens when you don’t do your work and you just sit there doing nothing

because it’s boring.” Ben says, “after playing tips I go to my class and be quiet because you’ll get in

trouble. If you make a noise you get in trouble and you go to the time-out chair. Children in my class

have had to go to the time-out chair because they were being silly, like jumping around and doing it

again.” Darrius told me “People get into trouble in my room because they’re not doing what the teacher

says…they can go on the bad side (of the board) and if they get two crosses, they go on the time-out spot

in our classroom.” Jaden understands that while you might not get into trouble there are other ways to

control you for he said, “You won’t get a sticker if you are not doing the right thing.”

When Nigel was drawing his picture of aspects of his school he told me,

that happy looking person is the teacher, but sometimes she’s angry when we’re not doing our
work. I know she’s angry because her face is down and her eyebrows (are down) The teacher
would not be pleased about us not doing our work which is when you’re not doing the stuff she
said and just mucking around instead. You should not muck around because that is a naughty
thing because you’ll get into trouble.

It seems that an action (for instance, ‘mucking around’) is not necessarily understood as ‘naughty’ in

itself, but it becomes ‘naughty’ when you get into ‘trouble’ for it.

301
Detention is another form of punishment. Cade told me that “detention means you’re in big, big, trouble.”

He has “not even once been in detention (but his) brother’s been in detention three times”. Cade had wise

advice to share “if you tell the truth you get in less trouble. I knew that myself and I was only one.” At

Andrew' school, detention is used as a behaviour modification strategy also but it does not always have

the desired outcome. He told me

detention is just when people sit on the green chair out in the playground while everybody else
gets playtime. They have to do that for all of playtime. It’s not good to be on detention but it
does not stop the fighting. Some people go on detention but they still fight especially if they are
in Miss Teacher’s class. There are a couple of boys that fight and they fight a lot in soccer.

All the boys had ideas about what would get a person into trouble. Generally, it involves some kind of

behaviour described as naughtiness. When I asked Cade what being naughty was, he said “because

there’s this list in that room that tells you to be good and listen and don’t tell you to do the bad stuff.” He

then offered me the example of Alice. He told me,

she’s be naughty. She hurts other people by punching and kicking them. All the other kids did
nothing and she just comes up and says nasty words and punches and kicks them. She’s not
angry about something and nobody even teases her and she just comes up and punches and kicks
them. Even when she’s not being teased.

Cade also knows that a child can get sent to the principal. He understands that this is a person in authority

who has ultimate control and power. “If this happens you’ll have to write out lines. Sometimes if you lie,

you have to write ‘I must never lie’. It means you just write these words.” The connection between the act

of lying and the writing of the lines is not clear to him, but he accepts this ruling as being just how it is.

Throughout much of the conversation related to rules and sanctions the boys provided data that confirmed

the findings of previous studies that “the connections between consequences and rule violations was

autocratic and not logically related (Vartuli & Everett, 1998, p.4, in Dockett & Perry, 1999). These

authors suggest that teachers need to consider carefully the sanctions that follow rule violations to ensure

they match the seriousness of the rule and its infraction. Dockett and Perry (1999, p.116) argue, “(t)he

imposition of rules and the use of consequences that are not logically related, will do little to enhance

concepts of social justice.” It could be predicted that as the boys grow older, this lack of social justice will

become unacceptable to them and lead to resistance.

I argue that this view of school as a controlling place that consists largely of rules and routines, has the

potential to lead to significant alienation over time. As the boys gain maturity and chronological age,

302
they will reject this controlling position and seek personal autonomy and yet they will have been de-

skilled in the gaining of independence. The boys in this study are already practising for the resistance

that will come later in their game playing behaviour. This was demonstrated as they played Lego with

me.

I introduced the Lego to Nigel after a long period of talking and when he seemed to lose interest and

appeared fatigued. As I revealed the pieces of Lego, he became alert and very interested “cool!” he said

but this renewed interest dissipated rapidly when I suggested we play “schools”. He responded firmly,

“nope (I am going to) make something which is fun” which clearly playing ‘schools’ was not going to

be. Genovese (1972, in Jordan & Cowan, 1995), described the ‘accommodation and resistance’ that takes

place once the male students enter school and encounter the expectations of their kindergarten teachers.

Young boys come with and expect to persist with their already established masculinities, guns, fast cars,

fighting. This position is confirmed and demonstrated by the kindergarten boys in my interviews. Aimon

told me about what he likes to play: “I play Hot Wheels, and I’m trying to save up for a Lego Star Wars

thing and the person is a robot and it’s a ‘baddy’ and it has 1,2,3,4 arms.” Aimon also talked about

I like playing free play because when I play Mobilo you can build stuff now. I have watched
Transformers. I am starting to build Transformers because I am trying to build this Scorpion
because the Scorpion is the coolest Transformer because it doesn’t blink. It’s like a red thing
straight down. Its eyes and that inside its eyes because they're robots they don’t transform into
anything. It just transforms to underground.

In relation to their investigation of the lived experience of young boys, Jordan and Cowan (1995)

introduced the idea of ‘warrior narratives’. They describe the ‘warrior narrative’ as the way male students

define a ‘private’ masculinity that the school setting forbids. Instead, the school imposes a different

‘public’ masculinity based in rationality and responsibility. Constrained by rules on the school site, the

boys can only experience the ‘private’ mode through fantasy play or sport.

Jordan and Cowan (1995) call these contests “warrior narratives” to encapsulate the notion that violence

is acceptable if it is framed within a battle between ‘good’ and ‘evil’. Classical and popular literature,

television and the media, is replete with examples that could find beginnings in Beowulf to Superman and

Batman and Robin Hood to Luke Skywalker. The point at which the ‘public’ and the ‘private’ can be

simultaneously displayed for males is in the arena of sport, particularly football, where the ‘tribes’ battle

to fill the back pages of newspaper and the screens of household televisions. I interviewed the boys late in

303
fourth term so there was little coverage of football on any media and it was not football ‘season’ but the

six year olds still raised the topic as important to them in their school lives. It could be predicted that in

the ‘in’ season this activity could perhaps be more dominant in talking about their lives at school (Keddie

2002).

Andrew was telling me about fighting and how going on detention did not seem to be much of a

deterrent to the violent acts, and he said, “there are a couple of boys that fight…and they fight a lot in

soccer”. I asked him why he thought they did that. He said: “a lot of people play soccer…and they…

chase each other and push each other over…especially the people in Miss Teacher’s class (a year five

class)… sometimes the people playing soccer come up quite late (to lines) and they only get a detention

if they do it a couple of days.” He seemed quite in awe of the soccer players and how they had special

privileges in relation to being late to lines, but he was also very wary of the potential for hurt and injury

that the soccer games incur.

When I played with Dylan with the Lego pieces, he opted to construct a scene depicting the school

playground. As we chatted he described the following incident:

RC What do you do in the playground?

D We can play football and basketball and we can go on the equipment.
RC What’s your favourite?
D Football. (Time passed while we manipulated and talked about the Lego pieces)
RC You play football out there? Do people get into trouble playing football?
D No. My football went in the tree but it didn’t come down.
RC Oh, far out! What did you do?
D Zane kicked it in the tree. He kicked it really high but it went straight onto the tree but
didn’t go down
RC Didn’t come back out? So it’s still there?
D Yeah
RC Did you tell anybody?
D Mrs Teacher told. (He means he told the teacher Mrs Teacher)
RC And what did she say?
D She said maybe the wind will blow it down.
RC Is it your own football, or the school’s football?
D Mine
RC Your own? Are you allowed to bring your own?
D Yeah. My mum said. (said very firmly)

Transcript DG Lines 381 – 414, pp. 17-18

As the “new” boy at school (he’s only been at the current school for three weeks) he is using the

production of his own football as a strategy to win friends, and to assert his position in the peer group as

304
a ‘good player’ of football. He is aided in this by his mother’s action in permitting him to bring the ball

to school. I know that in this school, it is a school rule that balls are not brought to school because of the

arguments that can ensue and the perils of the balls becoming lost or not retrievable, as in this case. Our

conversation continued on and sometime later the topic of football was raised again:

RC You’re hoping it (the football) will fall down by lunchtime?

D Yeah. Because I want to play footy. Me and Zane won four nil.
RC So how do you pick a team? How do you get a team?
D Um…you just choose somebody, some kids, and they will go on the team.
RC So how do you get to be the boss? Because you bring the ball? Are you the boss of the
game if you’ve got the ball?
D Yeah. It’s my ball so I’m the boss.
RC Okay. So that sounds pretty right to me. So how many people would have been playing in
this game?
D Um…I think there was twelve.
RC Don’t you all crash into each other in the playground when you’re doing that ?
D Nah. We were playing touch footy but not tackle.

Transcript DG Lines 419-428, p.19

So he suggests that ‘real’ football, where there is tackling, could lead to crashes and injury. Dylan has

indicated that his position of “bossing” twelve of his peers is consolidated by his ownership of the

football. This is important in this early part of his entry to the new school group, for him to be

acknowledged and to negotiate socially his dominant role.

Keddie (2002) describes the interrelatedness of the gender and (hetero)sexual binaries underpinning

boys’ dominant understandings of masculinity and how these binaries parallel with their understandings,

and investments in, football culture. She claims that football plays a significant role in providing a

vehicle through which the boys can successfully perform, validate and perpetuate a desired masculinity

as epitomised by physical violence within essentialist perceptions of gender and (hetero) sexuality as

difference and opposition. Keddie (2002) indicates that recent research with young boys in the primary

school setting, has shown the significance of football in the social construction and negotiation of

hegemonic masculinities (Renold, 1997; Skelton, 1997; 2000, Swain, 2000; 2004). In these studies

‘football’ is positioned at the top of the playground hierarchy in terms of membership and space

domination (Renold 1997, p. 8). It is seen as providing a highly legitimate and visible arena for young

boys to perform, achieve and maintain a conventional form of masculinity (Keddie, 2002).

305
The cultural and social capital associated with the successful achievement of this form of masculinity is

also said to provide boys with more ready access to privileges than other groups (Skelton 1997). Young

boys regard football ability as a “major signifier of successful masculinity” (Epstein et al., 1998, p.7

cited in Keddie, 2002). Swain (2000; 2004) notes a good footballer is a ‘real boy’ who is practising to be

a ‘real man.’ While there are positive elements of this successful masculinity in terms of developing

boys’ fitness, physical strength, competition, discipline, adventurousness and risk taking, there is also

concern that football encapsulates opportunities for exercising many negative elements of hegemonic

masculinity (Skelton, 1997). These include emotional neutrality, power and domination (Swain, 2000;

2004) and the active subordination of other masculinities and femininities (Renold, 1997; Skelton, 1997,

Swain 2000; 2004).

But because there is “no overt invitation to explore warrior narratives” (Jordan & Cowan, 1995) the boys

convert what is offered (e.g. Lego) into cars, crashes, weapons, swords and similar items. This conversion

is a characteristic of resistance and the boys do not acknowledge that at this stage. They are merely

accommodating their needs to the classroom requirements. There is a significant contradiction operating

in the school setting. Jordan and Cowan (1995) state that teachers aim to create democratic environments

where students can work independently and learn at their own pace and explore their individual interests.

Then the teacher belief system generates a series of rules that make this impossible including no running,

no shouting, and the pervasive requirement of a low noise level.

Jordan and Cowan argue that this ‘outlaws’ games children want to play using speed, (for example, no

running on the concrete) body contact, ‘touch’ not tackle, gross motor self expression and skill. Most

games like these are banned (see Paley, 1984, p.71, p.166). The boys discussed outside play mostly in

terms of fighting and trouble, Tyson described a fight between his brother Samuel and another boy, “they

fighted, they fighted down in the playground on the grass…they were punching and pushing and

kicking…” Tyson told the teacher and as a result, the boy “was in big trouble, he went on the verandah.”

Rules and the playground

306
Rules were a significant part of play that takes place outside. When the boys’ references were not about

fighting and trouble in the playground, the game most mentioned was ‘tips.’ Connor was keen to explain

the intricacies of the different kinds of ‘tips’ to me,

when you play Tiger Tip you tap them on the shoulder. You don’t scratch them or smack them.
You just tap them when you play Tiger Tip. The game Tiger Tip is played on the grass, not on
the concrete because it’s rough. If you fall over you have to go to the office get a bandaid and
then walk back.

He has some sense of leadership because of his confidence in knowing the rules of ‘tip’, at another time

he told me, “in the morning when I am playing, I’m telling everyone how to play Tiger Tip and you tap

them on the shoulder if you’re a Tiger. Tap them, then you run. It’s an easy game.” The game is bounded

by rules and routines that have to be followed. At another school Ben thought, “playing tips was good

fun” as did Tyson, but in his school “if you play tips on the concrete you’re out of the game because

that’s the one rule about tip.”

Tyson then expanded on this “one rule” by explaining

you can play line tip on the concrete where you have to go on a line and someone has to be in
and you have to tip them on the line and if you go off that line that means you’re in, you walk
fast on the line and one circle is big and that’s bar. You go in there and no one can get you
because that’s bar. In ordinary tip you have to run but you have to hide somewhere. You can’t
run on the concrete because you’ll fall over.

We play (another kind) of tips that means two people have to be in and they have to count and
all the people who’s not in they have to hide somewhere. The two people have to go and hide
and then when they spot them they run and then when the people are not in they have to run
away but they do fast walking on the concrete. That keeps you safe from falling over and
skinning your knee.

In the same school, the process for playing soccer was described by Tyson. He said, “in the corridor we

have a bin with heaps of soccer balls in it and sometimes children just go in and get one. Once the bell

goes, if they’re playing soccer they put the balls away.” The rules for packing up get ignored sometimes,

“most people forget about the soccer nets, once I (Tyson) had to put them both away by myself”. But the

rules reigned, as Tyson was keen to tell me how relieved he was that he was not late for lines and so he

was not placed on detention for putting the balls and net away, after everyone else had left them behind.

Children in our society are defined from a power-authority perspective (Mayall, 1996). The

powerlessness of children in the school setting can be compared with their powerlessness in other settings

where the expectation might be that they had rights. Bricher (2000) describes the lack of power

307
experienced by children when they enter the health system, where the situation is exacerbated as they are

usually ill or injured and even more susceptible to being ignored. Work being done in health and nursing

research is useful for educators to heed, as the practices, both good and bad, can be used to illuminate our

practices in the school setting.

When Nigel arrives at school first thing in the morning, he seems to be confused between what he would

like to do with what he is allowed to do. He said, “After I put my bag in the line I do something which is

fun like playing on the equipment but you can’t do that in the mornings only at little lunch and big

lunch.” He knows you cannot play on the equipment in the mornings because “the teacher will see you

and say line up, then the bell has to go before you can play. When the bell rings, we all have to listen to

what the teacher says. You can play in the mornings but only near the seats in the playground.” There is a

sense that while he accepts this is the rule, he does not understand why this is the school practice.

For schools there is tension and contradiction between the rights and responsibilities of individuals and

the need for compliance in order to manage the requirements of the school setting. Devine and Irwin

(2005) in writing on autonomy, agency and education stated

(i)n schools, it is still unusual to act on the assumption that students are individuals despite the
concerted effort to undermine the individuality in nearly every regard – by making students
conform in their clothing, their conduct, and their learning. Failure to conform often elicits a
stern speech based on the discourse of ‘choice’, and evoking the notion of autonomy. The child
is admonished for not exerting their own will, that is to say, for not conforming to the
expectations of adults rather than their peers. It is extremely useful to be able to appeal to the
individuality and autonomy of the student – it places blame on a relatively powerless person, and
not on the teacher or the parent, and therefore manages to avoid calling into question the
practices of the school, the classroom or the home… (there is) a certain confident injustice in the
way we treat young people…(p.329)

In summary, my interpretation of what the boys said about rules and routines in school confirmed

previous research ( for example, Dockett & Perry, 1999 ) that children in kindergarten are preoccupied

with the place of rules in their lives. The boys in this study expressed most of their experiences in terms

of the rules, especially the overwhelming priority of having to be quiet and to listen to the teacher. Their

view is that the teacher has total control and it is wise to obey. The boys were also concerned with the

place of rules in the playground, and their relationships with their peers were explained often in terms of

rules. Closely allied to school rules are aspects of school routines and organisation that also hold high

importance in their lives and that they are most concerned to comprehend.

308
PLAY and FRIENDS

In this section, I examine the second of the major themes elicited from the boys’ talk, that I have entitled

Play–Fading Away. Firstly, I briefly acknowledge the massive literature devoted to all aspects of play and

young children and the many definitions, theories and descriptions. Secondly, I briefly engage the large

and at times emotive literature devoted to supporting the retention of play in the early years. I describe

how there is an international position that describes play as being under threat of extinction as the

movement for accountability through assessment, and evidence based measurement of outcomes is

implemented in school systems in many countries. Thirdly, I consider play as it emerges as a major theme

in this study and my observation of the diminishing nature of play in the early years. Later I explore the

idea that this early reduction leading eventually into an absence of play in the middle years, could be a

factor in the alienation of some boys from school.

Play - Definitions, theories and points of view

The most striking element of the vast literature regarding ‘play’ is the breadth of claims for the outcomes

of play experiences. Almost every aspect of human development has been attributed to play, suggesting a

lack of consensus about what play is, and what it can do.

While the overwhelming direction of the literature is in terms of a positive, supportive view of the place

of play, (for example, Wood & Bennett, 1998; Hedges, 2000; Leseman et al., 2001; Evans, 2007),

especially in the early years, there are other opinions. Ailwood (2002) describes play “as a heterogeneous

bundle of ideas and knowledges” that have been classified and decided and normalised in early childhood

education and as a result, “play has been a key concept through which adults have tried to produce,

understand, monitor, regulate and govern childhood.’ Ailwood (2002) cites Brown, (1999, p.76), stating

“the space of child’s play is one of the sacred places of modern life, a realm rationalised and promoted by

psychology, a domain celebrated and perpetuated by literature, a sphere served and stocked by

innumerable products…” Some authors (Anning, 1991; Bennet, et al., 1997, in Ailwood, 2002) claim

there is little empirical evidence for the pedagogical value placed on play in the early years. This critical

view of the position of play provides a balance to the overwhelmingly supportive, sometimes saccharine

presentation by the ‘play’ supporters. Ailwood (2002) quotes Burman (1994) “the glorification of play as

309
functional, voluntary and cooperative soon turns out to be idealised, since this ignores the coercive, cruel

and dangerous aspects of many forms of play…” while in strong contrast, Almon (2003) pleas, “our

children deserve the right to grow and ripen at a human pace. A major part of this is allowing time for

play.”

Ailwood (2002) sees three major discourses, the ‘romantic/nostalgic,’ the ‘play characteristics,’ and the

‘developmental’. Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel, Montessori, Dewey and Bruner are associated with these

views. From the dominant influence of the developmental psychologists, such as Piaget and Vygotsky,

comes the concepts of motor/physical play, social play, constructive play, fantasy play and games-with-

rules. Play characteristics, encompass the assertions regarding play behaviour, raising terms like active

engagement, intrinsic motivation, attention to means rather than ends, nonliteral behaviour and freedom

from external rules. Erickson and Kohlberg promoted the concepts that play not only has a significant

role in cognitive development, but also physical, emotional and social development. However, there are

other considerations. The sociological influence (see King, 1992) introduces classroom contexts,

historical contexts, and societal contexts including implications of gender. What can emerge is a view of

play as a “topdown, repressive view of power” (Ailwood, 2002) and this introduces the concept of the

governing of childhood by adults and other children in terms of gender, sexuality, race, class, school

readiness, social competence and morals.

Pellegrini and Smith (1998, p.55) also argue the “role of play in children’s development is still a

controversial and unresolved topic.” These authors are critical of the serious internal validity problems for

many play enrichment experiments. Despite the endorsements of many, research on play in educational

settings indicates it does not have a secure place in the curriculum and that the quality of learning through

play is often questionable (Wood & Bennett, 1998).

These views stand as contrast to the prevailing literature exemplified by considerable research linking

children’s play to their learning and development in the domains of cognition, language, morality, social

understandings and social competence (Nicolopoulou, 2005). For example, Bruner (1983, p.65) stated,

“the most complicated grammatical and pragmatic forms of language appear first in play activity.”

Phonological awareness, print awareness and background knowledge can all find foundations in play.

310
More recently, Bergen (2002) claims that “high quality pretend play is an important facilitator of

perspective taking and later abstract thought, that may facilitate higher-level cognition… and there are

clear links between pretend play and social and linguistic competence”.

Play is a complex phenomenon and there are many definitions. Some are multidimensional, but one

common definitional criterion for play is “it does not seem to serve any apparent immediate purpose”

(Pellegrini & Smith, 1998, p.51) which contradicts another common understanding of play as

“purposeful and unproblematically imitative…able to acknowledge fully the socially constructed

character of childhood” (James, 1998). Many theories propose that the benefits of play are not immediate

to the period of childhood but are deferred until later in development, and so the purpose of play is

understood for its value in later life rather than in the immediate childhood. The alternate view is that play

is not an incomplete version of adult behaviour but that it is beneficial at the time of occurrence.

Pellegrini & Smith (1998) review the different kinds of play and they differentiate exploration, fantasy

and locomotor as the three forms that occur primarily during childhood and these forms have distinct

antecedents and possible functions. Exploration is generally an information-gathering venture. Fantasy or

pretence, peaks with the kindergarten age group and then declines.

Play-Under threat

These unresolved understandings of the complexities of play, give some credence to a world-wide

movement that thinks that play is being considered by administrators and policy makers, as being not

relevant to instructional time and that play has no benefit for high priority cognitive outcomes (Fernie,

2001; Pellegrini & Bohn, 2005; Ranz-Smith, 2007). This is seen as a threat to forms of teaching that

include children’s individual discoveries and meaning making, including play (Zigler & Bishop-Joseph,

2004). The very qualities that some argue make play valuable are the qualities that place it under threat. It

does not fit systematic control because it is fluid, flexible and unpredictable.

As an example of the views of the play-under-threat movement, Bergen (2002) writes, that due to

(government) emphasis

on proficiency test performance, even the small segments of pretend play time that had been
allowed (if not encouraged) in school such as kindergarten ‘choice’ time and recess breaks are
disappearing. The press for academic readiness through concentrated and direct teaching of
alphabet, number, color, and other skills is now affecting the amount of time allocated for play…

311
 this trend has had a negative effect on social pretend play, which requires extended uninterrupted
time periods to develop complexity (p.8/13).

There is evidence (Pellegrini & Bohn, 2005; Evans, 2007) in Australia, England and the United States,

that in order to maximise ‘learning’ time recess breaks and play opportunities, are being reduced or even

abandoned.

Play-Fading Away

“Work consists of whatever a body is obliged to do. Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to
do.” Mark Twain

The boys in this study raised play and free time as a significant part of their school experience. They

generally were positive in their views of play, but they pointed out the differences between doing what

you want to do and the restrictions on other kinds of play. Cade said, “the best part of the school is that

you get to have play time” and Jaden agreed, “the best thing about coming to school is playing

‘activities’. You can make castles with the blocks and cars that go zooming fast in a circle.” Aimon

thought the “best thing about what I do in the day is just playing in the playground because you can play

whatever you want”. Aimon also said that “in the afternoon we have free play and we play with toys.

You can build things.” Building things is a favourite activity and it was mentioned on several occasions.

Andrew had a great deal to say about play. He told me,

free play is when we just get playtime in the classroom because we have some toys in the
classroom and sometimes we are allowed on the computer in the classroom in free playtime and
can play and do puzzles at our desk and we have got some scrap paper that we can draw on. In
the playground at lunchtime, we’ve got some soccer nets and we’re allowed to play soccer.

At recess and when we’ve just come to school all the classes get a turn on the equipment unless
they don’t want to go on it. One class is allowed on it at a time. We get to talk at free playtime,
but sometimes it gets too loud and we’ve got to be a bit quieter. We get to talk around in the
playground.

It seems that there are restrictions even in the world of play and participation is something that students

are allowed to do rather than encouraged to do, or free play depends on the completion of other activity,

Cade said that free play is allowed “after we works” or ‘we get free play sometimes when we nearly

finished our work. We get to have free play or read a book or get scrap paper…or go on a computer.”

When we came to the drawing activity Andrew said, “I might just draw myself playing on the playground

or trying to have free play time because these are the things I like best.” This view was supported by

312
Nigel when I asked him what he would change about school, if he was the ‘boss’. He told me “I would

change that the school can have play whenever the children like” but when I asked him why, he said

“don’t know”. We did revisit this idea a short time later:

RC If you were the principal in this school, would you change anything?
N Yep
RC What?
N About not letting people play…If they want to they can play. I would tell the teachers
that.
RC And the teachers would then make sure that when the children wanted to play they
could?
N And they could say, you can go and play.
RC So you don’t get to play enough now?
N No, you don’t get to play.
RC Don’t you?
N Not when you want to.

Transcript NQW Lines 1075-1089, p.67

Nigel maintained this view when I asked some time later about what he would change if he had a magic

wand:

RC And if you were able to wave your magic wand around what would you change?
N All of it.
RC Oh, what to? What would you have?
N People playing in the morning

Transcript NQW Lines 1096-1102, p.68

What is surprising and worrying is that the boys’ view of acceptable play is a world in which they have

access to construction toys, computers or drawing on scrap paper. So ingrained is this latter activity that it

has acquired a schema of its own and the activity itself is called ‘scrap paper’ as in ‘doing scrap paper.’

Playing with small toys is favoured by Aimon, Ellis, Ben and Cade. It seems their access to pretend play

is limited to small cars or figurines or similar commercial items. I asked Darrius what happens when he

comes to school and he said “…you go into the classroom and listen, then you draw and then you paint

and at recess you can play with your little Ninja Turtle toys”. Aimon had his Hot Wheels cars and Lego

robots, for outside play time when more gross motor types of activity may have been possible or

preferable.

In their talk about play, the boys do not mention pretend or fantasy settings such as cubbies, or dress up

clothes or ‘Wendy’ houses. The traditional ‘Wendy’ house or the ‘kitchen corner’, because of its sexist

313
connotations did need to be revised. However, rather than being removed altogether it could be replaced

with a gender neutral play area, of large items suitable to gross motor activity, that could be imaginatively

constructed to suit whatever life scene the children wanted to construct, whether ships, houses, planes,

trucks, ambulances, hospitals, garden sheds or offices, or some other imaginative and fantasy play space.

I argue that these large play activities are being removed too suddenly from the access of some children

who may still need opportunities for this imaginative play scene that allows the use of their hands and

body, as well as their minds.

The element that was largely missing from the boys’ views about play at school was the concept of

‘pretend’ in any large scale human way. Goncu and Perone (2005) argue against the dominant

developmental theories (e.g. Piaget, 1973; Vygotsky, 1978) that suggest that pretend play is limited to

early childhood. Those aged twelve to sixteen will engage in fantasy play if the opportunity is provided.

Chances to do this, seem restricted to an elite few as demonstrated by attendance at drama classes. Goncu

and Perone illustrate that pretend play is an adaptive human activity of adulthood as well as childhood. I

argue that it spans the whole continuum of human growth and ignoring it during adolescence could well

be the basis for some alienation to school life for that age group. This study shows that already in

kindergarten the characteristics of play and playtime are losing the sense of pretend and free imaginative

thought is being shut down.

Olafsdottir (1996, p.361) writes of the desirability for children to have significant access to “unstructured

material, such as everlasting wooden blocks, sand, water, and the tables and chairs” and an avoidance of

commercial toys. Over time the system has developed functional difficulties in providing such access.

Many classrooms that are now used for kindergarten classes, even with only twenty children in them, may

not be physically large enough to accommodate the kind of large indoor play equipment, which could

facilitate fantasy and creative play. Some schools have maintained the classrooms with ‘wet’ areas, sinks

and access to water, as the kindergarten rooms, others have not. However the water is for cleaning up not

for play. Rooms with space for dancing and physical games are rare. These spaces disappeared when

space for afternoon ‘naps’ was no longer required. Instead classrooms now have to find space for banks

of computers, further restricting the available space for physical and play activities.

314
Connor’s explanation to me about what he is allowed to do in his ‘free time’ demonstrated that ‘playing’

as a worthwhile developmental activity is slipping away into a more academic-type pastime. He said “in

free time you play with textas on the whiteboard outside in the corridor …(and then he added as a kind of

afterthought) …and we’ve got Lego.”

Nigel provides further insight into the way the movement away from creative imaginative play to a pencil

and paper ‘work’ mode can raise regrets and a sense yearning for this immediate past, even before

kindergarten year is complete. He spontaneously raised the practice of Kindergarten Or(w)ientation, and

told me in detail about what happens. His on going use of the “w” sound for the “r” sound emphasises the

poignancy with which he reminisced:

N …before you go into (this school) you have to have Kindergarten Or (w) ientation.
RC Yes…tell me about that?
N The pre-schoolers come in and then they…then KD and all the other classes…just the K’s
get splitted up into different classes and …(very long pause)… I LOVE PLAYING WITH
PLAYDOUGH (suddenly shouted)
RC Mmmm…ye…and what else do you do?
N Mmm…I do jigsaws and r(w)eading…. there’s hammers and nails…and foam blocks …
which is my favourites (said in a big rush)
Transcript NQW Lines 166-178, pp. 13-14

His preference for play dough and foam blocks over reading and jigsaws was clear. Ironically, these

activities are set up to make the pre-schoolers feel comfortable about coming to ‘big’ school. Nigel

obviously enjoyed being able to assist with the orientation but he was re-living the pleasure of these

activities with a deep sense of nostalgia, for what had been gradually removed from his school life in the

past few months.

There are educational implications of conceptualising pretend play as a life-span activity. There are some

disciplines that already recognise that play is necessary throughout life for the individuals’ growth and the

ongoing evolution of culture. In anthropological terms play is an activity in which adults interpret and

experiment with the established societal norms and re-create them. In clinical psychology there are

descriptions of the therapeutic relationship of adult play with its own form of communication, symbolic

meanings and developmental functions (Goncu & Perone, 2005, p.144). Theorists focus on play as a self

motivated activity that serves a reflective and reflexive function. This means that it mirrors the current

functioning of the individual and culture, and enables further growth and understanding.

315
Goncu and Perone (2005, p.145) argue that at all stages of development, pretend play enables the

development of representations of experiences with affective significance. In the free, spontaneous,

social, imaginative, fun, and improvisational world of play what is initially intuitive and personal

becomes symbolic and dialogic. “This process simultaneously leads to the construction of knowledge and

awareness about self and its relationship to the community.” It is necessary not to assume that pretend

play disappears after early childhood, it is necessary to know at what stage in a person’s development

they become aware that pretending is one way of negotiating and constructing meaning. The connections

between pretending and cognitive, affective, moral and communicative development need to be

established. It could be that pretend playing is an effective way of teaching and learning in schools with

learners of different ages (Goncu & Perone, 2005, p.145).

From this position, I argue that a seamless strand of organisation in schools that allows for the provision

of creative and pretend play opportunities along a continuum of primary school through secondary

school, and therefore not leaving out adolescents, will lead to less alienation and improved school

engagement, especially for male students, throughout their whole school period. It is alarming that this

study is able to demonstrate that while pretend play might be already absent in secondary students’ school

life, there is evidence that it is rapidly being diminished even as early as the first year of primary school.

In summary, the vast literature on play is a constantly evolving collection of varying points of view.

Many authors present the positive view, aligned with an almost desperate plea for the retention of play as

an essential feature of school life, particularly in the early years. Other authors seek a quality-based

approach, claiming it is the quality of the play experience that is the key to improved outcomes. Others

see play as a device of control or governance, and question the real purposes of play.

I listened to what the boys in this study said about play, and I gained a sense that opportunities to play are

diminishing. There is little apparent quality based play (demeaned to offerings of textas and ‘scrap

paper’) with obvious teacher intervention for a defined purpose. An increased understanding of the role of

the teacher in shaping quality opportunities for play is needed (Leseman et al., 2001; Sandberg, 2002).

While debate still runs regarding the cognitive advantages to be gained from high quality play

316
experiences, the social development outcomes are less open to argument. In the next section, I show the

importance that the boys in the study placed on friends, in the play setting

FRIENDS

Play and friends have emerged in this study simultaneously. Pellegrini and Smith (1998) report that

children’s pretence play is more sustained and complex when they are playing with friends, compared to

acquaintances. Emotional commitment and mutuality may motivate children to sustain cooperative

interaction. The ‘socio-dramatic play’ described by Smilansky (1990) involves acting out quite complex

narrative sequences. Closely linked to the topic of play in the boys’ conversations with me, were

comments related to friends. Aimon told me, “in school each day I play with my friends outside. If I had a

car, I’d play with Andrew because he’s my best friend. I like playing with him and Kate and Charlie.”

Niam told me “People play with me and they are my friends and we decide on the one game to play by

just looking at the toys I want to play with”. One of these friends is Warrick who said of Niam, “my best

friend is Niam because he be’s nice to people.”

Nigel told me about how to get cooperation with others when playing with the foam blocks to construct a

town. I asked him how you get to be happy or accepting about what the other person is doing in your

game. He was very confident and enthusiastic to tell me, “well, because all of them are my friends!” Ben

expressed the care and attention friends deserve. He said, “you help your friends by picking them up. I

have to help my friends up often. You play with your friends in the classroom with toys and cars and

blocks. You play with your friends and build a tower, you can make a tunnel and put some cars and other

cars and play with it.” He was keen to describe this example of cooperating and collaborating. When Ben

was building his Lego site with me, he said, “this person is important to me, it is my friend …I put some

blocks near my friend and some toys I like to play with them most.” The importance of friendship is

displayed by Connor when he exhibited a sense of empathy for a figure in his Lego game, “this kid is

playing outside. He needs another friend because he doesn’t have another friend.”

On other occasions, friends are not always ‘nice.’ Nigel was fairly certain that Trent was his friend, “he

wears glasses too” but it is not always a comfortable scene. “He’s…he’s my friend but sometimes he tries

317
to hurt me by bullying. It means punching and doing other stuff…which is not nice… sometimes he

wants to bully people just because he wants to.”

One boy described his management of peer group pressures. Tyson told me he is friends with “Ryan or

Zach and Ben. Sometimes I play with them when I’m out of Justin’s group. Sometimes I’m out.

Sometimes I’m back in. When I’ve been naughty sometimes. And I say I’m sorry and they let me back

in.” What is interesting is that Tyson sees the problem as one of his doing, and not that Justin and his

group are calling the situation. It is surprising to see such sophisticated peer group pressure, common in

the later years of school, so clearly described by a boy in kindergarten.

While the role of friends, especially in relation to play, was generally confirmed in this study there were

other examples showing that not all the boys seemed to have the strong need of friends that is reported

elsewhere. For example, Dockett and Perry (1999) found a focus on friends and on the having and the

making of friends. They stated, “Adults do not ascribe the same level of importance to children’s

friendships” (p.116). Participants in this study, in particular Andrew and Nigel exuded personal

confidence and maturity that again emphasises the danger of making generalisations in relation to the

needs of individuals. These boys presented as confident students, demonstrating little need to rely on

particular friendships or alliances. Concurrently there was evidence of maturity in their empathy with

others, as with concern for Charlie and a disability, concern for friends’ tardy payments for excursions

and imaginary peers who need a friend in the Lego game.

An interesting feature of the discussion about friends by these boys was the frequency with which a

female friend was mentioned. Omar’s best friend is Amy, and other girls are in his immediate friendship

group, and Aimon plays with Kate. Ellis told me he plays with the girls, and other boys mentioned girls in

their conversations.

The oft-quoted statement recorded at the beginning of this section, attributed to Tom Sawyer by Mark

Twain, is a concept supported by writers like Flaxman (2000, p.1) who states “(t)oday’s young children

are controlled by the expectations, schedules, whims and rules of adults. Play is the only time they can

318
take control of their world”, but it seems that the boys in this investigation find that during much of their

playtime they are still being controlled.

LEARNING AND WORK

In this section, I examine the third theme, expressed by the boys in this study, that I have entitled

learning and work. Firstly, I focus on the boys’ views of learning related to literacy. Secondly, I consider

their views on learning and mathematics. Thirdly, I focus on learning and other aspects of the school

curriculum. Next, I examine life out of school, as it was a significant part of our conversations and should

not be disregarded, as the impact of home life on school life is well documented.

Students in this study generally express positive views about learning. Tyson told me, “I come to school

to learn stuff and to get very smart. You need to be smart because that’s how you learning. That’s how

you learn.” A bit later Tyson expanded this thought, saying, “this is a school, you learn lots of things, you

go to the teachers and learn stuff, like letters. Write letters. The ABC’s. To be smart.” Cade told me that

he “comes to school to learn. Learning is about “helping other people and playing with people”. When I

asked him how he worked that out, he told me “I used my brain”.

Aimon also expressed this view about school making you smart when he enthused “the best thing about

school is learning. I like learning about maths because you get smarter” and it is an idea that is confirmed

for him by his parents, “My mum and dad tell me if you don’t go to school and just wait ‘til you grow up

you’re not going to know what to do and you’re not going to be smart.” Aimon talked about reading

groups where

sometimes you have to read with the teacher and then sometimes you do your secret sentence
and sometimes you do your worksheet that you’ve done before about your work and sometimes I
have a Find-A-Word. I can only find a couple of words, not every single word, it’s too hard to
find every single word, but I like doing it…We read books sometimes and we get other work,
but we have to go back and start again if you get a word wrong, the teacher says ‘No’ and you
have to go back and start again”

Niam knows the purpose of school. “Children have to come to school because they need to learn.

Learning is doing work. You have to work to do your writing so you can spell so you can get work and

get money when you grow up.” Niam knows this because his dad told him. The idea that learning is

‘work’ is introduced by other boys too. I asked Nigel to tell me more about some of the other things the

319
children do in his room. “I don’t know much about it but we do work. We have to concentrate and listen

to what the teacher says and I think that’s about all.”

Learning and literacy

Learning in Kindergarten for these boys is revealed as a heavily literacy based experience.

Andrew told me
In school, I do my spelling test and on some days, I write out my spelling words and do another
page in my book. A spelling test is where we need to write words that the teacher tells us to
write. The teacher calls out the word that we need to write and we need to make it so we get no
mistakes and we have ten words to write out…and to copy into my homework…

In our room, we do writing… and words and we’ve got to fill in some letters in some words.
We know what to write because there are pictures there to show us and after we’ve written all
the missing letters, we just write the whole word. There’s a couple of those words, so there’s a
different missing letters in all the words so mostly I just look in the other words in the same
spot.

Andrew has worked out a method to get the right answer that does not necessarily rely on knowing how

to spell.

Ben told me “to do writing you do some letters. I like doing that. For reading, we do some books. Read

and be quiet.” While the reading activity may have elements of practising the skills of learning to read, it

is also an activity that brings with it “no talking” and “being quiet” and perhaps another opportunity for

the teacher to have some “peace and quiet” as Nigel described earlier.

Niam’s complete view of learning was expressed in terms of writing, “when you learn you do your work

to make you good at writing so when you get to high school you are good at it and make sure you put the

words the right way round.” He went on to say, “For work we do books that have words on the top and

pictures of things and you have to write them down. I copy ones and you learn from them.”

These examples demonstrate how the boys in this study view the curriculum as almost all literacy based.

This emphasis is not surprising as there has been so much focus on literacy by succeeding governments,

both state and federal over the last twenty years. This emphasis raises the question of curriculum balance.

If literacy subsumes other important learning processes and the boys’ results continue to be of concern,

then more of the same, in terms of literacy, may not be the answer to the learning needs. There is an

assumption that more literacy for boys, will improve literacy for boys, rather than investigating other

320
ways of increasing the requisite skills. It could be that more singing, more poetry or verse speaking, more

drama and more true and deep, meaningful art experiences could increase the literacy skills needed for

improved reading and writing. The boys in this study generally indicated they liked reading and writing.

Ben described a language game that he likes to play, “I play Bingo in my room. You make a cross so you

go Bingo when you get some words. You have to cross it out when you have it. Show a word and call

out. You look for it on your card and it’s good fun.”

It is necessary to acknowledge again that they are a biased sample of boys given they are volunteers in

this study. They think they are doing quite well at their schoolwork. For example, Andrew said, “the

first time I did spelling I thought I would get a couple of mistakes, but I didn’t get any,” and he had

views about reading too, “we are allowed to sound them out (the reading words) but I don’t really like

sounding them out because I like to try to read without sounding them out.” Tyson told me “I can count

really well” (despite his demonstration for me going just a little awry) and he explained that he “can read

in Kindergarten because “I know some words. I know words like ‘this’, ‘the’, ‘is’ and he confidently

exclaimed, “I am a very good worker.”

The concentration on ‘literature-literacy’ raises the question of the boys who do not relate to such a

heavily literature based literacy curriculum. Does this mean that with such an emphases on literature-

language based activities that some other boys may be finding school, right from Kindergarten to be a

mystery-misery and not suitable for their learning needs?

There is an odd discrepancy in the dual apparent practices of constraining opportunities for fantasy play,

while simultaneously providing literacy programs requiring participation in fantasy based reading. It is as

though teachers are compensating for removing opportunities for boys to live out their ‘warrior-

narratives’ in action and play and trying to replace this with a literacy based action field where fantasy

can thrive. Popular in kindergarten classrooms are stories like “Where the Wild Things Are?” (Maurice

Sendak, 1963), encouraging journeys into imaginative mind space.

However fantasy and imagination based literature as a vehicle to encourage reading and to teach reading

skills, does cause problems for some boys. The following journal excerpt recalls an example of these

deep and frequently unrecognised issues for some boys.

321
I remember working with a boy in a year one class who had been referred
to me for learning difficulties. He had his frustrations described as an
‘anger management’ problem and he had at one stage, when frustrated
beyond control, tried to strangle a school counsellor with the counsellor’s
own tie.

But Ronnie loved his dog, and the rough farm where he lived with his
father, and he had an excellent working knowledge of how to fix, and I
suspect drive, even at his young age, the old farm ute. He often talked to
me at length of the things he saw when he was out playing in the bush,
with his dog. I worked with him on the reading book his teacher was using
at the time. It involved two magpies talking to each other and showed
pictures of the birds with speech bubbles coming from their beaks. As we
struggled together with the words, Ronnie finally looked at me in despair.

“Miss,” he said“, them birds don’t talk like that.”

Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective
Journal

This excerpt demonstrates that policy makers could perhaps benefit from a critical examination and

review of totally literary-based literacy teaching. Such reconsiderations might lead to improved

outcomes for some boys whose worlds are replete with harsh realities, differences, and individual

contexts.

Learning and mathematics

I needed to prompt the boys to talk about maths or number work, as they rarely raised this topic

independently in our conversations. When Tyson mentioned number, it was encircled by literacy

activities. He said, “You need to learn the alphabet and numbers and write sentences and learn some

words.” Later when he was talking about being helped in the classroom, he raised the topic of numbers

but he seemed to place a literary focus on the difficulty of the numbers work. The following exchange

demonstrates this point.

RC How do you want to be helped?

T About numbers, hard numbers like 100. That’s a bit hard.
RC Mmm… they’re big numbers aren’t they?

322
T Yeah. 100. It’s hardest because sometimes we have to spell very big numbers like 1000.
That was super hard for me. And 100. They were very hard for me to find.
RC Were they?
T Yeah.
RC Did you have to look for them somewhere?
T Yeah, in the Find-a-Word. In the Find-a-Word, it was very hard.

Transcript TPS Lines 377-384, p.20

Looking for numbers in a Find-a-word is a literacy based approach to numerical knowledge. Warrick

listed maths in with other items also, “work is craft, and we do some spelling and some stories and we do

some countings and taking-aways and writing numbers”. Other boys confirmed this literary bias towards

number when I asked about their experiences with number or maths. Andrew chose to tell me about

shapes including ‘the rectangular prism’ and Niam, also expressed a literacy based view of number

saying, “with numbers we do the calendar which is easy. You have some cards and it has the day on

them like ‘yesterday’, ‘today’ or ‘tomorrow.’ The operations were mentioned, “we’ve mostly got plusses

(Andrew).

Nigel lost some of his confidence in his professed mathematical competency when I gently suggested he

could demonstrate. I had been asking Nigel if he did things with numbers and he replied, “you have to

read about the numbers. If you know it, you can tell the teacher what it’s called.”

RC And what numbers do you know?

N Lots… all of them, but not the one hundred numbers.
RC So how far can you count up to?
N One hundred!
RC Can you? Goodness gracious me, can you do it now?
N Yes!
RC Have a go!
N I am not going to do it.
RC Aren’t you?
N No, you better ask one of my friends if they can do it.
RC OK so you’re not quite sure that they would come out right?
N Yep.
RC That’s alright. You don’t have to. I bet you can though, I bet you could go from one to
one hundred easy.
N Well! What’s that in there? (indicating the teacher’s bag on the floor nearby).

Transcript NQW Lines 534-554

p.36

Nigel talked about ‘reading’ the numbers and then he did not want to pursue any testing of his number

knowledge and adeptly changed the subject by gesturing to an unrelated item.

323
When Nigel talked to me about the curriculum picture I showed him of children engaged in a math

activity that involved a hopscotch-type game-board he said. “they are playing hopscotch for fun. I know

what fun means. It means like playing.” He did not recognise the “play” based mathematical activity as

being a number game. Niam, however did recognise the hopscotch game as a mathematical activity, but

he was not impressed.

RC What are those people doing?

N Learning…about numbers.
RC Do you see scenes like that in your classroom?
N No.
RC No? Why doesn’t that look like your classroom?
N Because it’s for little kids.
RC Is it? They’re smaller than you are they?
N Yep. Because I’m six.
RC How do you know those ones are littler than you?
N Because they’re doing that… And I already know that.
RC Oh. OK.
N I can count by 100’s and …200s.
RC Can you? Can you show me?
N 100 and 100 makes 200, and 200 and 200 makes 400.
RC Oh! You’re so clever!
N 400 and 400 makes 800.
RC You’re just too clever. You’re way ahead of those ones aren’t you!
N Yep. Because I’m six. But I don’t know what 108 and 108 is. I don’t know that one.

Transcript NTP Lines 419-435, pp 30-32

Cade raised the topic of maths without being prompted. We were talking about the different things that

can be done in the classroom and after a long list of literacy based activities almost as an afterthought he

added “or your maths.” I asked him to tell me about maths:

RC Oh tell me about maths, you haven’t told about maths, I didn’t think you did any!
Tell me about maths.
C Yeah well kindergartens’…maths is easy.
RC What is it?
C Sometimes you have to label stuff.
RC Like what?
C Like rulers…all the tables.
RC What… You write the names on them?
C Chairs.
RC Yeah…you write their name on them?
C Yep.
RC Tell me more about maths.
C Sometimes we just have to write out numbers or maths and then when we get down
the bottom we will just have to count how many worms or toys or whatever they
are…
RC So you might have a row of things like worms did you say?
C Yeah or lollies
RC Or lollies?
C Or go-karts
RC And you count them?

324
 Transcript CGP Lines 409-425, p.23

We continued to chat on about numbers but when I suggested Cade might like to do some counting, he

refused.

I engaged Aimon is some talk about maths, but his explanation proved confusing to me. He sighed

heavily throughout his description, but seemed intent that I should know how important this was to him.

He said

When…sometimes when we do maths we have like… we have to have a whiteboard and cover
our sheet…um our work…so nobody…so when you make a mistake you um… you look at
other people’s work and you’ll get wro… might say oh that’s wrong and then um… they’ll …
um… just write it in the book again. So you have to cover your work…so they keep…that
question…so they think like you’ve done the same question as them but you migh… you don’t
because everybody makes different questions

I asked about the teacher’s role in this activity and he replied

Cause she tells us (he is swallowing deeply and sighing) …what to do, but she doesn’t tell us
what to do. She has to say which …answer and we can’t call out because everybody will just
write it in the box.

I confirmed that there was no talking, and he said:

You don’t. In maths you don’t. In maths you can’t talk. Because if you tell your friends that’s
cheating.

While individual assessment of student outcomes does require careful monitoring it seems the testing

process could make maths for some students an activity unnecessarily stressful or boring.

A heavily literacy based approach to the implementation of the mathematics curriculum, accompanied by

an emphasis on testing, raises questions related to the demise of a numerically and science based

approach to the teaching of mathematics. These may be underlying features that need scrutiny in light of

the increasingly poor results in mathematics in many schools, demonstrated in recent world-based

assessments in the outcomes for Australia,.

Learning and the curriculum

In the transcriptions that I examined there were few spontaneous references by the boys to science,

(environmental or experiment based or any kind of science), the visual arts (as in painting, drawing,

sculpture and free expression), music (instrumental or voice) (except for Omar’s brief expression of

325
pleasure of singing a song in assembly and Nigel’s anticipation of the visiting singers) or drama or

dance. Organised physical education was not mentioned, and no other features of Personal

Development, Health, or Physical Education. History or geography as social studies or Human

Society and Its Environment (or HSIE) did not feature in any way. This does not mean that these

curriculum requirements are not met, or that the boys do not experience these subjects. It does mean that

the students in this sample, do not see these ‘subjects’ or key learning areas, as outstanding in their

perspective of what kindergarten means to them or having any characteristics they thought worthy of

telling me about, during our conversations.

The boys made only passing references to excursions, visiting celebrities, or special events. One event

was being looked forward to with great anticipation. As mentioned above, Nigel described a musical

event to be staged at his school the day after my visit. I asked him to tell me more about it. “Well it’s

really exciting and I’m looking forward to it. Because I get to sing lots of songs and you can…I don’t

know a…more about it.” He was worried about the children who had not yet brought in their money to

attend this event and he told me they have to “bring it in tomorrow or they miss out. That’s really sad

isn’t?” This is an expression of regret by a boy in kindergarten, for the missed opportunity of some of his

peers for this event of curriculum enrichment. Both the boys who mentioned excursions were concerned

and anxious for their friends who were not going to attend because they had not paid for the experience,

which raises a social justice issue, which is shown to impact not only on the children who are not

permitted to attend the excursions, but also on their friends. There are funds available to schools to avoid

this discrimination, but even the thought of friends missing out has been an anxiety-ridden experience for

these boys.

Participation in end-of-year activities for Christmas or the coming long holiday season was usually

described by the boys, in terms of low-level craft. In the opening part of my conversation with Niam, I

asked him “what sort of things do you do in kindergarten?” and he replied:

I like doing Christmas stuff. I made a leaf, I made a Christmas tree, I made a Santa Claus. The
Christmas tree was with paint and glitter…and you have to cut out other things out so you can
put ‘em on the Christmas tree. I like doing it because its fun and you can use textas and you can
use metallic pens. You take the lid off them and then draw…and colouring in…”

326
Jardine et al. (2000) writes scathingly of the use by teachers of black line stencils, year after year, with

the same ‘mind-numbing’ activities, and simplified Christmas art experiences. Jardine describes visiting

schools in the weeks preceding Christmas and noting

(t)he photocopied black-line Santa faces, all ready for colouring and gluing, were already
beginning to appear, an appearance as consistent as the disappearing of red and green
construction paper through the school-system supply cupboards.

He raises the point of young children being willing to trust their teacher’s images and understanding of

the world, as depressing. He says, “therefore how many children even by grade one have already come to

‘enjoy’ such (low level) ‘art’ activities…children who are already inculcated into a thin and hyperactive

(Jardine, 1996) version of ‘schooled’ activities.” Jardine (2000) wrote “in a horrible turn of events,

children’s enjoyment of such activities can be too easily offered as an adequate pedagogical case for their

continuance. Worse yet, such enjoyment can sometimes be offered as an adequate reason for dismissing

(as ‘theoretical’) any critical consideration of what such activities actually portend about the lives of our

children and our lives with them in schools” (Jardine et al., 2000).

This practice was reflected in Ben's understanding of play that was caught up in craft activities of a non-

challenging kind with little opportunity for creativity to develop. I had noticed twenty almost identical

pirate faces hanging in the classroom corridor. I asked him about them and he said

You play with different things and play with pirates. I did a pirate on the wall outside the
classroom. It looked liked a plate and hat made from paper and the eyes. It had one eye covered
over and then we have to draw a nose and a smiley face.

Each boy had made a similar face following a set of directions like a recipe to ensure they all arrived at

the same outcome. Useful for developing fine motor skill from the cutting and pasting and colouring in

that is involved, this kind of craft/play is limited in providing opportunity for other knowledge, skill, or

creative development. Has this kind of activity degenerated into a routine that has lost its original purpose

and has become a meaningless habit in the school curriculum?

There is growing concern particularly in primary school education, that it has become a “singularly

intellectual activity devoid of imaginative, emotional, intuitive and contemplative paths” (Trotman,

2006) as there is a preoccupation with literacy and numeracy and statutory testing and assessment.

327
In summary, my interpretation of the boys’ views regarding learning and work was that much of what

they are expected to do is based in a relatively didactic construct, with stencils and pencil and paper as

the most common tools for learning. They were clear about what was work and generally, it was not fun,

but they seemed to accept that this is what life is about. This group of boys, with only glimmers of

resistance here and there from few of the participants, are firmly institutionalised already.

Life out of school

There is a contrast between the boys’ views of school life and life out of school. When they talked about

this other side to their lives, they often were more animated, more confident, and more elaborated in

what they said. They were more likely to use metaphors and language that is more colourful. Boys talked

about their pets and family happenings in warm tones, Connor described his visit to the Zoo, and several

boys were full of excitement and anticipation in relation to the erection of Christmas lights and their

family involvement in this. There were infrequent demonstrations throughout the remainder of the

conversations of similar excitement in relation to school activities. The emotional content of home life

and out of school activities was not apparent in the talk around school life. It is important to

acknowledge this ‘other’ side of the boys’ lives as it demonstrates in somewhat stark contrast, how

differently they respond to alternate stimulation. This is like a painting where an artist places light or

dark shades of colour adjacent, or smooth textures next to rough, in order to emphasise one or the other,

and to dramatise more effectively one aspect of the painting by the use of contrast. Without reference to

the boys’ talk about life-out-of-school, the capture of their life-in-school would be less sharp, colourless

and without texture.

THE PHENOMENON

Maintaining the focus

I have been conscious throughout the study of the words of caution that resonate in the literature summed

up by van Manen (1997, p.67) that the researcher “needs to be oriented to one’s question or notion in

such a strong manner that one does not get easily carried away with interviews that go everywhere and

nowhere.” Crotty (1996) described this as the task of the phenomenologist maintaining focus on the

phenomenon, not on the individuals experiencing the phenomenon. Therefore, the study is not about the

boys, it is about what the boys say about the phenomenon of schooling in the year of Kindergarten. It is

328
the object of the subjective experience, a description of the structure of the experience, not the

characteristics of the group having the experience (Polkinghorne, 1988) that remains the goal. Van

Manen (1990, p.62), states “…the deeper goal which is always the thrust of phenomenological research,

remains oriented to asking the question of what is the nature of this phenomenon…as an essentially

human experience.” I am seeking the experience of being a boy in kindergarten, I am seeking meaning

and staying true to the phenomenon. However in doing just that, it has been crucial to become close to

the participants and to acknowledge all aspects of their lifeworlds.

Bringing the perspectives of all the boys, to a composite whole, is a daunting task. I have considered

each boy as an individual and interpreted what he said and then I have aligned these views with the

views of all the others in the group, to reach a totality. This combined view has been interpreted in the

prose text that follows. It has emerged as more negative than my comprehension of each boy as he spoke

as an individual, which is a powerful indicator towards the underlying dangerous trend in our practice as

educators. What the students seem to manage and accept as individuals could become less manageable

when compounded into a group view. It must be remembered that these boys formed a sample of

volunteers so their perspective is shaped by whatever individually motivated them to participate in the

study. While the study firmly asserts that these views are only of this sample and are presented as

interpreted by me, it is tempting as an educator, to contemplate an extrapolation, and to reflect on what

this might mean, for our school population as a whole.

Van Manen (1990) maintains that phenomenological texts have to be constructed in ‘thickened' language

that is richly descriptive and uses evocative language so that the reader is encouraged to encounter the

phenomenon in a new and fresh way. “It acquires a certain transparency, it permits us to ‘see’ the deeper

significance, or meaning structures, of the lived experience it describes” (van Manen, 1990, p.122). “Such

language has the effect of dispelling the everyday and taken-for-granted meanings about a particular

phenomenon that is the object of the researcher’s interest” (Hyde, 2005, p.34). The following text is my

final summation of my interpretation of what the boys in this study told me about the phenomenon of

being a boy in kindergarten, written as van Manen suggests, to encourage readers to view the ‘taken-for-

granted’ in new and fresh ways. While this summary has a hermeneutic and phenomenological

329
perspective, generated through a Gadamerian lens, it has also drawn on an eclectic use of mixed method

and methodologically diverse means of reaching the outcome.

The Composite Boy – a warrior in waiting

I stand here, uncertainly…but ready for orders to move on. I am a fledgling warrior in waiting,
huddled in a landscape of rules and routines. I expect the time will pass… somehow. Schooling
is a web of laws. It comforts me. It gives me security and I crave support. I will comply because
I see the sanctions that my comrades suffer, who do not comply. I find calm behind the blockade
of the endless regulations. There is no unknown for me if I follow blindly along the path of
direction. I know the primacy of listening to the teacher in order to be told what to do and I see
dire consequences for failing to listen and failing to do as I have been told. For now, I trust
unconditionally those in power to know what is best for me and I am learning to follow
directions implicitly without question. I already speak of those who do not or cannot comply
with terms of sympathy, with perhaps perplexity or even with disdain. I am afraid of not only
the sanctions and punishments for failure but I also harbour deep fears of being without rules
in a world where I have no personal control.

History is re-cycling itself and my ancestral childhood selves are found again in me, there is no
progress from the boys of the past, who were empty vessels to be filled, who had no competency
unless adult led and condoned. Where did the ‘garten’ of my ‘kinder’ go? It seems there is still
the fear that given reign I will take control, so I am held here, immobilized. I am being shut
down and constrained. Is it from here, the seed of alienation grows?

I am so helpless to act in an independent way that I do not even consider that the ‘status quo’
could ever be changed, even if I could imagine a better way. I am directed along pathways that
are safe and rewarded. In this first year of school, I have become institutionalised. Others hold
the power, control, and authority, while I practise compliance, and this is the outstanding facet
of my school life. My view of school offers few opportunities for developing personal
independence or autonomy. How will I emerge a leader from this restricted universe of
domination?

Literacy is all, but only in its tight little frame of exercises and patterned learning where I can
follow the plan and emerge with skills that help me read and write, but where did creativity and
wonder go? Did I sing, recite some verses, or play with words upon the stage? Did I explore,
experiment or imagine beyond a tiny, safe, controlled environment? Did I get to take a risk?

330
In my world “play” is the only partly autonomous element in a place of governance and
authority where structure and support are built on the rules and routines that demand
unquestioning compliance. After almost a full year of formal schooling, I have learned to be
quiet, not to talk, to listen, and to do as I am told. Worse, I have learned to learn by following
routines and set strategies. For me the key to success and survival in the world of school is to
comply. This is confirmed sometimes, by my life experiences at home where there are similar
expectations.

Yet I speak in positive tones, and I have thoughts for the future. I have not yet lost or subsumed
all my masculine aspiration, be it mostly hegemonic. I dream to be a man of action, a
policeman, a race-car driver, a builder or a fire fighter, or perhaps a ‘wildlife warrior’ at best.
My views, cloaked in a veil of bravado, hide quiet insecurities that only rarely escape to surface
in unguarded moments. Yes, deep inside this armour, this warrior is a child.

This interpretation of the views of the boys in kindergarten who talked to me, aims to bring deeper

meaning to the “taken-for-granted” life experiences. Van Manen, (1990, pp. 92-93) provides a caution

regarding single statements

No conceptual formulation or single statement can possibly capture the full mystery of this
experience. So a phenomenological theme is much less a singular statement (concept or category
such as decision, vow or commitment) than a fuller description of the structure of lived
experience. As such, a so-called thematic phrase does not do justice to the fullness of the life of
the phenomenon. A thematic phrase only serves to point at, to allude to, or hint at … the main
significance of the text as a whole.

In the same way as an artist recreates the essence of lifeworld experiences for humans by transcending

them in novels, plays, paintings or music scores, the researchers’ phenomenological description aims to

capture the essence of the experience in the written text. In Van Manen’s view, the difference is that

literature, poetry and art can leave the themes implicit, while in a phenomenological study a systematic

narrative is developed that explicates the theme and tries to render true the universal quality of the

experience (p.97). It represents one reader’s response to that story and attempts to make meaning that

will ignite responses in others. Van Manen states “the demanding work within the phenomenological

approach remains in the shaping of a text for others to read, for the phenomenological inquiry is not

unlike an artistic endeavour, a creative attempt to somehow capture a certain phenomenon of life in a

linguistic description that is both holistic and analytical…unique and universal” (p.39).

331
After I wrote this summary interpretation as a composite of what the group of boys said, I was intrigued

to read an article by Frymer (2005) discussing Freire's philosophy of education and I was reminded of

Freire’s writings in Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970). Frymer quotes Freire writing that individuals in

schools are turned “into an object…they do not desire freedom, but live in constant fear of it. They do not

reflect on their lives and their social conditions but are told what to think and whom to be” (Frymer,

2005, p.5). Freire used the metaphor of the ‘banking’ approach to education in which students are like

empty bank accounts where teachers make deposits and he rejects avidly this method of educating

children. He claims it results in the dehumanisation of both the students and the teachers. Moreover, it

stimulates the oppressive attitudes and practices in society. Freire argues for an approach to education that

frees the ‘colonised’ using cooperation, unity, organisation, and cultural synthesis. In my interpretation of

what the boys in this study said as a composite whole, I find unintended, but sadly similar echoes of

Freire’s philosophical position, the boys say they are told what to do, what to think and whom to be.

Summary of chapter six

This chapter opened with a quote from a Pink Floyd song, in which he makes the plea, “hey teacher leave

those kids alone”, before they end up as “just another brick in the wall.” As I explored the data, adding

stroke after stroke of form, texture and colour from the boys’ talk, to the canvas of the study, I was

conscious of the impelling need to maintain my position in Gadamer’s philosophic intent. I sought to

identify a fusion of horizons, where the multiple thoughts and the realities of these children, intersected

with my traditions and experience, came together and drew apart. I was looking always to meet head-on

with new insights. The outcome was the prose passage entitled the ‘Composite Boy – a warrior in

waiting.’ This grew from the themes that came from my consideration and interpretation of the boys’

views as they expressed them to me, and I was reminded of the Twila Paris song, “The warrior is a child”

as this concept of ironically opposing features illustrates well, how I interpreted the data the boys

presented. Throughout I was aware of a tension in which the individuality (each brick) was being

subsumed in the whole (the wall). Gadamer described this physics as Erlebnis, “every experience is taken

out of the continuity of life and at the same time related to the whole of one’s life” (Gadamer, 2004,

p.60).

332
In this chapter, I use van Manen’s sixth research activity, balancing the research context by

considering parts and whole. I have analysed each of the fourteen boys’ individual responses and then

brought them together to look for common connections. I wrote an interpretation of this conglomerate of

expression and found an uncomfortable congruence with the theories of Freire.

The next chapter is the concluding chapter of this study. It provides an overview of the research

processes, it discusses the strengths and limitations of the study, and it provides the outcomes of an

evaluation of the processes used to generate the data on which the outcomes are based. Goals for future

research projects are predicted. In conclusion, a poetic text is presented as a summary of all the outcomes

of the study.

333
CHAPTER SEVEN

CONCLUSION
We shall not cease from exploration
And the end of all our exploring
Will be to arrive where we started
And to know the place for the first time

TS Eliot “Little Gidding” (the last of the Four Quartets in the Waste Land, 1970).

Introduction

In this, the final chapter of this investigation report, I provide an overview of the research process. This

includes a discussion of the strengths and limitations of the study. I summarise the outcomes of the study

for the primary research question, and the three supplementary questions. I outline the potential of the

outcomes of the study to provide information for future action in research and pedagogical spheres.

I provide a summary of the development of the study and refer to the analogy I have pursued from the

outset of this document, related to the creation of a painting. In keeping with the aesthetic aspect that I

have followed throughout this text, I recognise the power of poetry from a phenomenological perspective

to both “distil human experience” but also to make “familiar things strange so that they can be seen

anew” (Willis, 2002, p.6). I end with a final interpretation presented as poetic text to complete the

dissertation.

Overview of the research process

I explained to readers at the beginning of this study that my intention was to listen to young boys in

kindergarten talk about school. As part of that endeavour, I used several scaffolds to encourage and

support their talking and I planned to evaluate which of these processes worked best for the outcomes of

this investigation. I looked for elements in what the boys said that were engaging or alienating in relation

to school life and I planned to consider what is helpful from this information to assist teachers in their

practice in classrooms. A further goal involved looking at what the boys said that might provide data for

direction in relation to the development of curriculum and for guidance to policy makers. To fulfil these

goals of the study, I developed a comprehensive plan for a systematic, rigorous, and analytical process.

My intentions and goals are clearly stated from the commencement of the study. The reader is

encouraged to recognise my prejudices through frequent engagement with excerpts from my

334
retrospective reflective journal, a document that records some of the experiences and thoughts about

pedagogical matters that have been important to me, over a long career in teaching.

Van Manen (1990) advised that phenomenologists can utilise a variety of data sources to conduct an

investigation including accessing their own personal experience (my reflective retrospective journal),

obtaining experiential descriptions from others through interview and observation (my work with the

participants), and utilising experiential descriptions in literature (for example, poetry, song lyrics and art).

All these sources can yield data (Ehrich, 2005, p.5). While I used all these sources, the generation of data

in this study relied primarily on my conversations with the young male participants. In this chapter, I

revisit the four scaffolds that I used to support the implementation of the interviews. The second research

question (introduced in chapter one) requires that each scaffold be evaluated in relation to its

effectiveness as a support to facilitating talking with young children and I present the outcomes of that

evaluation. I show recorded numerical and tabulated estimations of the relative effectiveness of the

scaffolds, along with my interpretation of the outcomes.

The research questions

The picture that developed from my study depicted the lived experience of the fourteen students who

were in their first year of schooling. My research was guided by this focus question:

What do Kindergarten boys say about school?

The focus question of the study, what do kindergarten boys say about school, has been explored in

detail in chapters five and six. In those chapters, the outcomes are presented in two parts. Firstly, each

boy’s view is documented, explored, and then interpreted individually, and the eventual meanings of

their views, as I see them, are revealed. Secondly, these individual parts are incorporated into a whole,

composite view and this is interpreted. I wrote a prose summary of this interpretation in the style

suggested by van Manen. This author states “a human science researcher is a scholar: a sensitive

observer of the subtleties of everyday life…in (this) case…the practical and theoretical demands of

pedagogy, of living with children” (van Manen, 1990, p.29). Van Manen (1990, p.26) refers to Gadamer

(1986) who described

the distinction between two senses of interpretation: in its original meaning he says,
interpretation is a pointing to something; and interpretation is pointing out the meaning of
something, the first kind of interpreting ‘is not a reading in of some meaning, but clearly a

335
 revealing of what the thing itself already points to… We attempt to interpret that which at the
same time conceals itself (p.68).

In this study, I was able to point to the statements made by the boys, and then point out what the data

suggests to me. In my interpretation, I see a situation is present, in which the seeds of alienation to the

processes of schooling can grow. The significant reliance on rules and routines to shape the educational

experience of boys in kindergarten, the reduction in opportunities to play in imaginative and

unconstrained ways and the provision of low level learning opportunities bereft of intellectually

challenging activities in a technological world, are all practices that need careful examination by teachers

and administrators.

Continuing along a path in which increased formal instruction, in the initial stages of school, is viewed as

the solution to poor academic results, as is currently proposed by government decisions in Australia and

overseas, will not improve the educational and social outcomes for a significant group of our male

students. This direction is merely a consolidation and expansion, of the practices of a century of

education and does not engage different, new, or radical approaches that an era of technological advance

demands.

What techniques are effective in eliciting what young children say?

The second question, what techniques are effective in eliciting what young children say explores the

processes I used to generate the data. I interviewed the children and asked a series of questions. The

method used and the way in which the data was analysed is described in chapters three and four. The

actual interview guide can be read in the appendices.

My conclusions about the effectiveness of each strategy used in conducting the interview-conversations

are consolidated by totalling the numbers of significant data units for each activity. I quantified the

outcome by considering the numbers of distilled units of significance that were recorded on the data

matrix. This process is described in detail in chapter four. This quantification is not subject to the formal

constraints usually related to measurement outcomes in quantitative studies. For example, there were no

time constraints imposed on the use of each of the scaffolded activities. I halted the activity when I

thought the participant was tired, bored or had contributed significantly to the data. I avoided the use of

336
some activities when I decided they were not likely to yield any useful comments and in some cases, I

made a decision not to use the strategy at all. Therefore, comparison across participants is valuable only

in providing limited support to the general picture of how the scaffolds worked. The recording of the

quantitative data is used simply to provide another confirmatory insight into my estimation of the value

and effectiveness of the activity. This process provided a picture of the most substantial amounts of

valuable data. In keeping with the philosophical position on which this study is based I was more

interested in what I interpret as the qualitative outcome of the data generated by the activities.

Using the scaffolds

I next discuss the details of the outcomes of the four scaffold techniques that I used for interviewing

children. The following table summarises the outcomes from the use of each of the scaffolds. The

numbers of units of significance in relation to the phenomenon have been recorded under the headings of

each scaffold. These were derived from the transcript data related to each participant, as described in

chapter six.

337
 Table 37: Relative effectiveness of scaffolds for deriving units of significance

Participant Scaffold one Scaffold two Scaffold three Scaffold four

Views Conversation one- Drawing a Looking at Playing Lego
to-one picture pictures
1 AIMON 70 6 16 15
2 ELLIS 16 10 nil 11
3 BEN 24 3 5 3
4 OMAR 9 4 9 11
5 JADEN 32 14 6 11
6 NIGEL 60 14 5 19
7 ANDREW 55 2 21 22
8 TYSON 37 1 8 9
9 WARRICK 23 2 16 22
10 DYLAN 12 3 nil 23
11 CONNOR 35 12 nil 17
12 NIAM 37 15 32 15
13 CADE 53 23 25 20
14 DARRIUS 36 7 20 16
TOTALS 499 116 163 214

Four strategies are used to shape the conversations with the children. The first part of the interview

process had no additional scaffold beyond the extent of my skills based in my long experience as a

teacher, my knowledge of the literature regarding the interviewing of young children, and my intense,

personal interest in what the boys said.

• I asked open ended questions in a conversational way

I reviewed the quality and quantity of talk in the transcript from this part of the interviews. The decisions

about what constitutes the essence of each comment made by the participants has been derived using the

three strategies described by van Manen, detailed previously. Someone else could interpret these essences

differently (Turner, 2003). As stated earlier, my decisions concerning the intent of the participants’

comments are made based on my long experience in professional educational settings, my significant

studies in the area of education over a considerable period, and my current familiarity with the relevant

scholarly literature related to the topic.

General comments about the conversation

This outcome from the study confirmed views expressed by Smith et al., (2005 p.484) who found that

“talking to children directly was the most important ingredient in our attempts to access their views…

warmth, respect, and a genuine desire to know on the part of adults, facilitated a natural flow of

338
conversation. The adults conveyed interest, extended and probed the children’s meanings, responded to

the children’s comments and questions and suggested new ideas.” Carney et al. (2003) and Docherty and

Sandelowski (1999) found that direct and structured questioning was the most useful way of acquiring

information from children and questions should be directed towards specific events and feelings (Carney

et al., (2003). This study confirms these earlier outcomes. My genuine desire to know what the boys said

did facilitate the flow of conversation. I conveyed interest, extended, and probed their meanings and I

responded to their comments in a positive way.

Significantly, our interactions, based on conversing with each other, drew the most useful comments

related to the phenomenon. The amount of time spent in this activity varied with each participant. I

judged when I thought the conversation had reached an end point, based on my estimation of the student’s

fatigue level and a falling away in the quality of the response to my prompts and comments and

responses.

The second scaffold was

• the students drew a picture relating to school and talked about it with me

The growing literature promoting the strengths of using various kinds of drawing activities was discussed

earlier in this study. The use of student drawings as a research activity involves subtle and complex

understandings. Issues related to interpretation require that drawings are used with caution. I reviewed the

quality and quantity of talk from this part of the interviews. I considered the numbers of distilled units of

significance recorded on the data matrix for this section of the transcript.

General comments about the drawing activity

A strong element of this activity was that it provided relief for the boys from the expectations of talking.

Several boys demonstrated that they had had enough talking and the offer of drawing a picture came as a

relief. As stated earlier, one boy stated he wanted to stop talking altogether, but he was easily diverted to

the drawing activity.

There was considerable variation demonstrated by the drawings themselves and I commented briefly on

these features in each boys’ profile. All boys were quite keen to draw and most happily accepted that I

339
was confining their choice to something about the topic of school. The act of drawing, and then talking

about the outcome, led to interesting and valuable comments about life in kindergarten, well beyond the

scope of the drawing itself. Insights were gained into how the boys perceived various activities within

their classroom setting, and often demonstrated a gap between the teachers’ intended goals and the boys’

responses. This scaffold was useful for raising matters of classroom practice and enabled the boys to talk

about their views of school that were not always related to what they depicted in their drawings.

However, it is the strategy that drew the least number of significant comments related to the phenomenon.

In keeping with the philosophical position on which this study is based I was more interested in what I

interpret as the qualitative outcome, emerging from the conversation we had, as a result of the drawing

activity.

For the third scaffold

• The student selected one picture from a set of two pictures (photocopied photographs) and two
line drawings and talked about it. When a line drawing was chosen, the student was asked to
add to it if they wanted. It was suggested that they might like to add speech bubbles or other
objects/items to the line drawings.

I reviewed the quality and quantity of talk in this part of the interviews. I considered the numbers of

distilled units of significance recorded on the data matrix for this section of the transcript for each boy

and added this outcome to a total for the study as a whole. In general, the boys displayed muted interest in

these pictures, however this scaffold generated the third most useful number of comments. They mostly

did not wish to add any drawing to the pictures. I needed to explain ‘speech bubbles’ to several boys who

seemed unfamiliar with the practice. Others understood, and proffered comments for me to write in the

speech bubbles. Mostly these were directive comments from teachers such as “pack up now” and “be

quiet”. An example is recorded in the appendices.

General comments about looking at pictures and line drawings

Sometimes the participants looked at all four pictures. In some cases, I decided not to use this scaffold at

all, as I thought it would not add to our conversation. This rejection of the activity skews the effectiveness

measure discussed elsewhere in this chapter as it meant there was no opportunity for any useful comment

to occur. However, as explained previously, I based my use or not, of each activity, on the level of

interest, enthusiasm, fatigue, or boredom that I thought each participant was displaying at the time. The

boys had some difficulty in relating to the photographs in particular, that are produced by the curriculum

340
directorate of the NSW Department of Education and Training to demonstrate activities for teachers,

which might be used for the teaching of mathematics. In almost all cases, the boys, in this sample,

indicated they thought the activities were for pre-school children and as such, they wanted to distance

themselves completely. This confirms findings relating to children in Kindergarten wanting to appear

‘grown up’. They were adamant that ‘games’ such as those depicted in the pictures were not activities in

which kindergarten classes would engage. This consolidates my view that they are already experiencing a

diminishing play-based curriculum.

The conversation that was generated during the picture activity, frequently did not relate directly to the

pictures or line drawings, so this strategy clearly served effectively as a prompt to relate to their own

classroom activities, and it was an effective device to promote animated and elaborate responses, from

some boys.

The fourth scaffold involved

• the student and me playing a game of ‘schools’ using Lego pieces and any on-going
conversation during the game was recorded

I reviewed the quality and quantity of answers in this part of the interviews. I considered the numbers of

distilled units of significance recorded in the data matrix for this part of the transcript. I separated the

transcript related to the Lego game from the remainder of the text and attached each boys’ responses to

the photograph that I took of the final Lego constructions, to assist my recall of what was happening

during this part of our interactions. This enriched my interpretations of what the boys said. Examples of

the digital photographs of the Lego constructions appear in the appendices.

General comments about playing Lego

When I asked the boys to play a game of Lego with me about ‘schools’ with Lego pieces, I had imagined

an idea based in my knowledge of children playing ‘schools’ with soft toys and dolls. Usually in these

games, in my experience, the children (mostly girls) take on the role of teacher and I thought that if this

happened it would provide an opportunity for further insights into the boys’ school experiences to

emerge. However, none of the boys thought to be the teacher with their Lego pupils. Even when they

obliged my request by making a model of a classroom with the Lego pupils lined up or organised as if in

class, or they created playground scenes with Lego children at play, they did not take on the teachers’

341
roles. They created Lego teachers but rarely pretended to be the teacher in charge of their Lego class.

They preferred roles they considered much more active and ‘exciting’.

It could be presumed that this difference is related to gender, and they did not imagine being the teacher

because they rarely see a male teacher. However, two boys in one school were keen to tell me about

another boy who takes on the role of ‘teacher’ whenever the ‘real’ teacher leaves the room. This seems

well tolerated by all the children in the class as well as the teachers.

Some boys steadfastly refused to play anything that I suggested and persisted with their own games.

Others compromised when they thought their resistance was leading to the end of the session. The Lego

pieces that I used were not sufficiently ‘neutral’ (i.e. in colour or shape) in their presentation and the

boys kept aligning meanings from the suggestion of the plastic pieces that had their origins in fire

fighters and other figures. The red and yellow colours of the figures denoted fire fighters to them and the

black suggested police officers and they preferred to construct scenes partly stimulated by this. The

complexity of the way they were used to using Lego, and the suggestive colours and shapes of the Lego

pieces that I provided led easily into a ‘warrior narrative’ mode of play. Despite these limitations partly

brought on by the appearance of the Lego pieces, I persistently and repetitively returned to my focus, and

further useful insights did emerge about school life.

Researchers using game play as a scaffold to conversation with children must be prepared for longer

periods of engagement and much interesting conversation that is not the focus of the study. It can be

however, a concentrated period of one-to-one attention that each boy clearly desired and was very

pleased to have, displaying an implicit deep need for someone's undivided attention. They frequently did

not want to stop and wanted to return later or ‘tomorrow’, to play Lego with me. Smith (2006) found that

increasing the opportunities for children to experience being listened to by skilled or experienced adults

positively affected their educational progress. The skilled listeners have a significant effect on children’s

learning and on some children’s behaviour. The boys in this study exhibited very strong desires to have

this intense ‘listened-to’ experience. Schools where this emphasis on intense one-to-one attention by

interested adults is made part of the structure will reap improved outcomes in engagement stemming

342
from the intensity of attention. It could be these features ensured this strategy raised the second largest

number of significant comments.

General comments regarding the four scaffolds

An important consideration in relation to these four activities is the sequence in which they are

presented. Future studies contemplating using a game based activity should consider the timing of the

introduction of the game. It may have been useful to introduce the game as the first activity, as it was

highly engaging for the boys and it reduced the adult-child power relationship separation between the

boys and researcher. Alternatively, it may be that attempting to have an in-depth conversation about

school matters following the high level of excitement generated by the game could lead to less effective

or counterproductive outcomes.

This study provides evidence from the use of four methods for scaffolding children’s talk, open-ended

conversation with a semi-structured format, talking about drawings, talking about pictures and line

drawings, and playing a game with the construction toy, Lego. The most successful means for eliciting

useful information is

• listening and talking in a one-to-one interview conducted in a conversational way. This confirms

previous research.

The next most useful way of eliciting significant information related to the study focus was

• playing a game together involving the construction toy Lego and the conversations we had while

we played

Thirdly,

• looking at pictures and drawings.

Finally, the strategy least evocative of comment in this study was

• talking with the participant about his drawing.

How does what they say contribute to our understanding of what is engaging and what is
alienating in school activities?

343
The third question, asked how does what they say contribute to our understanding of what is

engaging and what is alienating in school activities. The literature regarding the theoretical

perspectives reviewed earlier in this study related to characteristics of school life that are either

alienating or engaging indicated that older students are alienated from instruction for almost half the time

and that boring and non-relevant instruction impacts more on at-risk students” (Yair, 2000, p.247). I

examined the data generated from the boys’ conversations and considered my interpretations of this

information.

In order to look carefully at this element I decided to categorise the boys’ data into their particular

schools in case this was an element in what is alienating and what is engaging in school life. This

information was recorded in the table in chapter six. They raised the elements of rules and play most

frequently in this analysis, and they confirmed that rules bring boredom and play is essential, to maintain

any connection with life at school.

The young boys in this study talked about the ordinariness of school life. They concentrated on rules and

routines, they exhibited some nostalgia for active and imaginative play and most expressed a need for the

support of friends, although not all did this. Throughout the experience, their general demeanour was one

of seriousness, compliance and sometimes a sense of acceptance that bordered on resignation. There

were occasional bursts of excitement, but this was usually in relation to matters other than everyday

school life. This overall outcome echoes work done by Wallace and Wildy (2004). Their research was

conducted in a high school where the teachers held as a major goal the development of students who

were responsible, independent learners (p.637). The researchers held very positive views of the efforts

the school staff had made over several years to change, improve and to be innovative. However then one

researcher decided to spend several periods shadowing an academically successful, personally reflective

and highly recommended male student, and experienced school from the point of a view of that student.

In spite of sincere attempts by the student’s teachers to engage him in interesting and challenging work,

the researcher found that the moments of genuine engagement during the typical school day were few

(p.641). From this experience Wallace and Wildy (2004, p.646) distilled four attributes described as

basic to the art of ‘studenting’ that schools need to comprehend in relation to increasing engagement.

These attributes are pacing, attending, conforming, and selecting. ‘Pacing’ is the ability to get the job

344
done in the time available, and often the time provided is in excess of what is needed. ‘Attending’ is

obeying the formal and informal rules and conventions of the school, and often this behaviour

“encourages comfortable and predicable patterns of student behaviour rather than exciting new learning”.

‘Conforming’, is a practice that evens out the behaviours of students so that school experiences are

unexceptional, and ‘selecting’, is where the student chooses to learn what they wish to learn, making

their own decisions about what is relevant to them. Frequently they judge much of what is presented as

irrelevant. Supposedly, successful students learn to do ‘studenting’ so that they keep out of trouble.

Those who resist doing ‘studenting’ end up in trouble and alienated from the whole school scene. The

young boys who I interviewed for this study generally demonstrated that they already had acquired the

art of ‘studenting’ by the end of their first year in school. I prefer to describe this element of student

behaviour as compliance and it is often confused with engagement, by school systems.

Earlier in the study, in an excerpt from my reflective retrospective journal, I recalled an experience with

a boy on his first day of school, who was suffering, as he did not know how ‘to do school.’ This idea

parallels the concept of ‘studenting’ as used by Wallace and Wildy (2004, p.646). Fenstermacher (1991;

1994) first used the term to describe the various tasks that students perform in order to ‘do’ school, while

their teachers are selecting the context, constructing the classroom environment, monitoring, and

appraising student progress. This all happens while teachers are professing to have the student as the

focus of the activity. However, teachers still decide, ‘what is best’ for all students. A democratic goal of

student centeredness is actually being pursued in a non-democratic manner and students are “required to

be passive recipients rather than active questioners of the goal” (Wallace and Wildy, 2004, p.648). My

interpretation of the ‘composite boy’ confirms this view.

Wallace & Wildy (2004) argue in order to prevent alienation, and allow for true engagement there is a

need to go beyond simple consultation “to incorporate ongoing opportunities for students to provide

input into changes, work out meanings for changes, adopt new roles and provide feedback on how things

are going”(p.648). This requires “constant attention to process as well as product, to the way in which

students learn as well as what they learn; and understanding and responding to the act of ‘studenting’

from a student perspective, not simply from a teacher’s perspective”(p.648). Consideration of the data

345
coming from the conversations with the boys in this study indicates they would benefit from such an

approach.

Can these views be used to reflect on current school practices and curriculum?

The final question, of the study, was can these views be used to reflect on current school practices

and curriculum. A distillation of the boys’ views of school life is summarised as follows: there is

evidence of significant reliance on rules and routines, in order to control and manage the school student

population. Play and the involvement of friends are important, and these features are being diminished in

the quest for more formal styles of learning, and are not recognised by the students as a form of learning.

Learning is not regarded as an exciting activity with potential, but rather as a necessary and unavoidable

means to an end. Research like this relating to the actions of teachers and schools, has responsibility for

developing implications for classroom practice.

Recommendations for teaching practice

A recommendation for using the knowledge generated by this study to help develop meaningful

curriculum follows. All school practice and curriculum documents can be considered against the criteria

that encapsulate the boys’ summarised and interpreted views. The criteria can be reshaped as questions

that educators can ask of their practice and their curriculum documents. For example, as an educator, I

can ask of my documents or my practice:

• Is this routine, rule or regulation still required or is it based in a long held tradition that has not

been recently questioned by our organisation (for example, school, playgroup, educational system)? Is

the routine, rule, or regulation relevant to our current school needs? Is it necessary for the students of

today? (for example, do the children need to line up, go to assembly, obey a set of bells, play in restricted

areas, stay in the same class, and progress chronologically?)

• Do I provide opportunities for the development of independence, leadership, and autonomous

behaviour for all my students? (or have I introduced so many rules and routines that all opportunities for

independent thinking are lost?)

346
• Have concerns for student and staff safety overridden the provision of opportunities for risk

taking, and developmental activities (for example, have I provided an environment such as bush cubbies,

natural climbing areas, access to water and sand?)

• Do I provide for the wide range of learning capacity found in any group of children? Do I

remember that all children are different; have different backgrounds and different motivations for

learning?

• Do I provide ample opportunities for students to talk, and be engaged in constructive verbal

interactions, or do I shut down most chances for meaningful oral exchange?

• Do I provide learning experiences that are unexpected, unforeseen, and startling in their unique

and innovative presentation? Do I consciously try to challenge the children in my care?

Current school practices, and curriculum documents can be measured against these questions and

educators can seek to make changes in light of the outcomes.

SUMMARY OF GENERAL RESEARCH OUTCOMES

This research presents information that can raise the awareness of teachers and policy makers regarding

the boys’ perceptions of education early in their school careers. From this, implications unfold for

changing practices in teaching and in school organisation designed to improve the academic outcomes

and engagement, and lessen alienation from school for male students. The study shows that children are

competent to comment on their school lives, that school life for some boys is risky, and that the individual

differences of students are paramount in the development of teaching programs.

Children’s competence

Children are competent to provide information and teachers are encouraged to listen to children one to

one and be confident that the children will have useful ideas that will help them construct a more learner-

oriented curriculum and practice. However, it is not sufficient to give children the opportunity to express

their views, perspectives, and opinions about important aspects of their lives, such as school. They will

need to be given “a new language to convey their own perspective. It is not fruitful for children to

explain their reality in a language that conveys unequal power relations between adults and children and

regulates the natural and ‘good’ child from the adult perspective” (Moinian, 2006, p.246). This study

adds evidence to the growing body of literature that suggests children are competent in providing

347
information about issues that are relevant to them (Scott, 2000, p.106). Mayall (2000, p.120) stated that

by “conversing with children we can learn about what they know, and, to some extent, how they learn.”

Garbarino and Stott (1992, p.317) agreed that “children can tell us more than we thought possible, if we

adults are ready and able to play our part.”

Gender

In terms of gender, I can see gaps in practice, a need for further research and confirmation of areas of

differences in the gender scene. The individual differences displayed by this small group of boys,

ranging from confidently independent reflective thinkers, to engaged social leaders, from the excessively

compliant to the still latent resisters, shows that pedagogy based only in Piagetian notions of universal

development, may ultimately crush their growth. Connolly (2004) suggested, “there will be as many

different developmental pathways that children will follow as there are differing social contexts within

which they are located” (p.211). The wider social contexts need attention, in addition to aspects of

gender.

The boys in this study demonstrate grounds for confirming the comments by Abraham (2008) in

discussing work by Smith (2007) regarding

the worrying development that the managerial goals of improving exam results for boys may be
encouraging teachers to adopt ‘hegemonic masculinity’ as a pedagogical strategy. This has
interesting policy implications. For example, it might imply that strengthening the robustness of
teachers’ training in anti-sexist pedagogy should include specific awareness training about the
possible adverse effects of such managerialism for countering ‘hegemonic masculinity’ in the
classroom (p.93).

In addition, this study confirms the work of Skelton based on a study of twenty higher education

institutions across England. Skelton (2002, p.92) argues

(c)urrent educational policy is not moving forward in a direction that will actively challenge
conventional general stereotypes. Rather, the emphasis on testing and assessment, performance
indicators, league tables, stratified and hierarchical management, and administration structures,
have replaced the masculine nature of schools identified in the 1980’s with a post-modern ‘re-
masculinisation’ of primary education.

This “re-masculinisation” does not allow for the unique needs of individuals to be recognised or catered

for in ways that ensure the potential of every child to be reached, capitalised on, or nurtured.

Developmental Considerations

348
La Paro et al. (2006) argue that there is an apparent contradiction in goals for teachers of young children.

One agreed aim is to provide an optimum level of structure and choice to match children’s developmental

level. Another is to provide an academic and social environment that becomes progressively more

challenging and presses for increased academic competency in a chronologically organised group of

children. The challenge is to reconcile both of these goals within the learning environment. This means

that teachers must offer young learners, instruction that requires children to analyse information and make

inferences, use language in the classroom that extends children’s thinking, and offer feedback that is

specific and fosters inquiry, while reaching externally determined measures of student outcome.

In summary, this study has contributed to the growing body of international research, which has

investigated the extent to which children possess knowledge that is of value in classroom teaching and

learning. The evidence in this study is that children do indeed possess knowledge, they can express

themselves and in so doing they can contribute to classroom curriculum construction and curriculum

design. Children hold and express their own views and opinions about almost everything but they live in

a world where decisions are made for them and about them. In the context of school in particular,

policies are formulated and programs implemented without children being consulted. This view is

supported by Mayall (1996, p. 80) who stated, “by and large the curriculum of the school is designed and

implemented without regard for the knowledge the children bring to it”. A regard for individual

differences must be recognised by curriculum and policy makers if we are to expect teachers to adjust

their pedagogic practices to accommodate both the subtle and the obvious differences in one child and

the next. Mayall suggests that the national curriculum introduced in England “explicitly denies children’s

knowledge and experience as a determinant of the agenda. (p.80). As the movement in Australia gains

momentum, for national curriculum, and for national assessments, more information about what the

children think becomes more and more crucial.

There is some urgency to contribute to the understanding of children in the school setting from a

qualitative and interpretive phenomenological sense before current international trends in educational

policy take root here. The idea of a fixed concept of ‘what works’ based in ‘scientific-evidence-based’

quantitative research is increasingly being used to determine policy and therefore the allocation of

government funds in many education systems. This is evident for example in England (Atkinson, 2000),

349
Scotland (Sharp, 2006) and the USA (Novinger & O’Brien, 2003) and this trend is likely to follow here

in Australia. More knowledge of what makes classrooms effective from a range of viewpoints is essential

to ensure a more balanced approach to school practice, to the writing of curriculum and to the

distribution of funds.

I now address some of the characteristics of the process generated by this investigation including its

strengths, key elements and the limitations and constraints.

STRENGTHS OF THE STUDY

Thorne (2000, p.70) suggests that “systematic, rigorous and auditable analytical processes” are significant

factors to look for in high quality, qualitative studies. The issues of rigour, accuracy, and truth in

qualitative studies have been the source of lively discussion for two decades. There are descriptions of the

“new age, where messy, uncertain, multi-voiced texts, cultural criteria, and new experiential works are

more common” (Denzin & Lincoln, 1998, p.30). There is increasing questioning of the “capacity of

science to produce accurate portrayals of its subject matter” (Gergen & Gergen, 2000, p.126) and similar

views are expressed widely (for example Lather, 1986; Lincoln & Guba, 2000; Fine et al., 2000; Spooner,

2002).

In this study, I have consistently described the methods used within the philosophic methodology that

formed the framework for my investigation. Throughout I have been conscious of maintaining a rigorous

approach, while exploring some innovative and perhaps controversial directions.

KEY RESEARCH ELEMENTS

Whitehead (2004) drew on the work of Guba and Lincoln (1989) to describe key elements that constitute

quality in qualitative research including trustworthiness, credibility, dependability, and confirmability.

These features are apparent in this study.

350
Firstly, the trustworthiness of my study can be endorsed because I have described and interpreted my

experience. In hermeneutic phenomenological research, an ability to follow the decision trail relating to

theoretical, methodological, and analytic choices is an important indicator of trustworthiness (Koch,

1992; 1995; 1996). Some authors opt for the use of terms such as ‘trustworthy’ as they emphasise that

rules for good quality research applied to positivist studies do not apply to research under the subjectivist

approach, especially feminist or hermeneutic studies (Sandelowski, 1993; Koch & Harrington, 1998;

Cresswell & Miller, 2000; Harrison et al., 2001). Validity is an aspect of this element which Spooner

(2002) describes as a fluid and dynamic process that evolves and changes according to the idiosyncrasies

of each circumstance.

Secondly, to provide credibility, I have indicated how my readers are able to see how the approach used

in this study is transferable to another context as they are able to follow my decision trail throughout the

investigation. Quantitative research suggests that multiple realities of the social world should be

reproducible by different researchers at different times in different settings, and this is how reliability is

usually defined (Golafshani, 2003). However Sandelowski, (1993, p.3) suggests that “even when

confronted by the same quantitative task, no two researchers will produce the same result; there will

inevitably be differences in their philosophical and theoretical commitments and style”.

Thirdly, I have ensured dependability as I demonstrate there is no ambiguity about the choices I have

made at each step of the process (Clark, 1999). My choices are described clearly, and then consistently

followed.

Next, I have demonstrated how interpretations have been arrived at during my inquiry and this shows

confirmability. My outcomes have been informed by attention to praxis and reflexivity, understanding

how my experiences and background affect what I understand and how I act in the world, including

during an investigation such as this. All these criteria contribute to the overall ‘trustworthiness’ of my

data (Guba & Lincoln 1989, pp. 76-77 in Whitehead, 2004).

The outcomes of this study demonstrate the following strengths

351
 • I generated thought provoking statements from a group of six year old boys in relation to their

perspectives on school;

• I acquired this data directly from the participants rather than channelled through their parents,

teachers or significant others;

• I developed a comprehensive method of recording verbal information from young children that I

named the ‘data matrix’. This matrix enables a comprehensive and reliable analysis of the data.

It provides a foundation for interpretation to occur;

• I developed an innovative technique named ‘the constituted statement’ to compensate for very

young children’s inexperience in the interview situation;

• I practised the use of a reflective retrospective journal and comprehensive field notes and

situational context annotations, to demonstrate to readers my prejudicial (as in Gadamer)

position in the research triangle: researcher, participants and readers; and

• I demonstrated that a hermeneutical and phenomenological approach to investigation in the field

of education is a useful and effective way to determine ideas applicable to classroom practice

and policy development.

Limitations of the study

There is still hesitation from some researchers, especially in the field of education, to engage with

qualitative studies and in particular, hermeneutic and phenomenological studies. This hesitation persists

despite a rapidly growing body of substantial qualitative work, because there is still much scholarly

argument, in some places, devoted to contending the merits of qualitative study in opposition to

quantitative study (Hoepfl, 1997), although these arguments have substantially reached a place of

mutual understanding at this time (Bricher, 1999). I argue that the dichotomy need not exist. Both

methods can co-exist productively side by side, each contributing significantly to our knowledge base.

All studies of human subjects have limitations. The concept of reporting on limitations is in many ways

still enmeshed in this debate of the merits between quantitative and qualitative research. Issues around

generalisability, validity, and reliability could appear to be limitations but the characteristics of an

interpretive study using a hermeneutic phenomenological approach with Gadamerian perspectives has

other goals (Turner, 2003). As van Manen warns (1990, p.37-38) phenomenology “does not offer us the

352
possibility of effective theory with which we can now explain and/or control the world but rather it offers

us the plausible insight which brings us in more direct contact with the world”. The aim of a hermeneutic

phenomenological study is not to produce a representative and unbiased measurement of the views of a

select population but to deepen understanding of a social phenomenon by conducting an in-depth and

sensitive analysis of the ‘articulated consciousness’ of the players in that phenomenon (Wainwright,

1997, para 68/69). “Phenomenology is an approach that is poetical, by using right brained intuitive

processes as well as linear thinking processes it helps the researcher uncover the essence of an

experience in a new way. (It is) a relatively new approach to scientific research which is evolving at a

steady rate and it is subject therefore to limitations and amateur attempts” (Williamson, 2005, p.204). It

is only with on-going attempts at research using these approaches that practices will become more

refined.

All investigations conducted in the human sciences are subject to a range of limitations and constraints

because of the complex world of human interactions. There are moral issues in qualitative research that

need to be considered, and these are perhaps ethical factors rather than limitations (Birbeck &

Drummond, 2007). Seidman (1998) states that the paradigm wars of the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s had a group

espousing qualitative research and adopting a high moral ground, decrying the way quantitative research

“turned human beings into numbers”(p.70). However, in its turn, qualitative research using interviewing

can be seen as exploitive and not equitable. It is important to be aware of the constraints and limitations

of all forms of investigation involving human beings.

In this study, what can be described as limitations or constraints stem from the following factors. All of

these issues are expanded and discussed in detail, and comprehensively redressed, in other parts of this

study. I revisit these issues briefly.

• There are risks in trying to work with very young children: this includes the realities of their

concentration span, their interest in the topic, their degree of language development, the “right-answer”

factor, distractibility, fatigue, their level of comprehension of the questions and their level of operational

thought, the power relationship between adult researcher and child, the expectation of adult help

traditionally held by children; and the physical, social, cognitive and political distance between the adult

and child (Hatch, 1990; Mulder & Vrij, 1996; Graue & Walsh, 1998; Birbeck & Drummond, 2007). As I

353
have demonstrated in this study, it is important that researchers use processes that recognise these

factors and provide scaffolds for them.

• The children will likely lack experience with an ‘interview’ situation and the hidden adult

protocols and expectations of that exercise and the hidden implicit expectations held by each player. For

example, when I was talking to Aimon about his drawing I asked “so was there anybody else here when

all that was happening?” I expected names and perhaps descriptions. The underlying implications and

intent of my question was not understood and Aimon merely answered, “yep”. A minor change to the

question, to “who else was there?” may have elicited a more elaborate response. However, I was aware

of this factor and I tried consistently to provide strategies to compensate for the potential difficulty.

• There is unevenness in the generation of the data given the iterative nature of following the

participants’ directions in the conversations. This inevitably shapes the information gathered and

restricts comparison with the outcomes from other data; however, comparison is not the goal of this

study. Rather, this unevenness is a feature of highlighting individual differences.

• There is only one viewpoint accessed: in this study only the child participants were asked for

their views, and these were not compared with teachers, or parents or other stakeholders in the setting.

This was considered as a positive feature of the study, in relation to the stated goals, but it does focus the

outcomes on these individual views.

• Only one or two interviews per participant were conducted so it could be argued that the data

is not as deep or representative of the phenomena as it might be with more extensive exploration

(Holroyd, 2001). However, the length of time spent with each participant was far in excess of the time

taken by many quantitative approaches, the in-depth and lengthy engagement enabled comments, and

opinions to emerge that could be missed otherwise. The realities of the single researcher working alone,

the volume of data generated, and the time constraints of a single study shape this feature. In addition,

there is evidence that young children tend to change their story if they think they are being asked about

the same topic too many times, so limiting the numbers of interviews may be providing data that are

more consistent.

• Some features of the sample: the study is about the perspectives and lived experiences of

fourteen young boys. The sample size in hermeneutic phenomenology provides a way of exploring the

richness and complexity of human experience. The volume of material provided by more individuals

could be unwieldy and beyond the capacity of a single researcher working alone to process within a

354
reasonable period. In addition, this sample is generated from volunteers, so these students and their

families who consented to be involved may have had either more positive views of school or conversely

more negative views of their school, than a sample generated in another way. This element was

uncontrolled. Rural schools and semi-metropolitan schools were chosen as the source of participants,

and one school is officially classified as disadvantaged and two are not. I did not specifically seek

particular ethnic or cultural representation in the sample, nor were particular groups eliminated from the

sample.

• There are specific ethical challenges. In the first chapter of this study, the significant ethically

based challenges of research with young children are considered in detail. Throughout the process of the

study several matters emerged that require comment. Firstly, the process of requiring informed

consent raised for me, numerous issues given the young age of the participants. These include their

apparent inability to understand the research process and its purpose, the unquestioning compliance with

the gatekeepers (parents, school executive, teachers), or with adult persons generally, and their obedience

to authority. The boys in this sample exhibited no indication that they would not agree once their parents

and teachers had indicated that they should participate. The balance between all players and the

autonomy of all players is complex as demonstrated when I described the generation of the sample

group. Not only were the students vulnerable to the power relationships, but their parents were also, as I

think in this study, some parents gave consent based on their trust of the school executive, and respect for

these executives’ apparent positions of authority and knowledge.

In this study, participants (the children) and their parents were advised of the voluntary nature of their

participation and they were informed that they could withdraw from the study at any time. Written

consent to tape the interviews was received from the participants and their parent or carer as part of the

consent form, and a space for the boys to sign was available for them to complete. In some cases, they

wrote their names, in others their parents had written for them and in another case, a drawing was

completed by the child around the signature line. I think these were all adult based decisions and I did

not think that true assent or consent, in its deep sense, was received. This does not mean that the boys

had not agreed to participate or that they were unhappy to do so. It means that it was not possible to

ascertain whether they really understood what they were doing, in terms of a university-based

355
investigation into their views. The concept of research as understood by university staff is not generally

well understood by the community as a whole, so it is unlikely children understand it.

Secondly, the concept of gaining appropriate consent was problematical. The boys in this study

understood that a visitor to the school (the researcher) was going to talk with them about their views of

kindergarten. I am not convinced that they understood the subtleties of the possible use of that

information perhaps to shape curriculum decisions, influence teaching practices or to guide policy

development. Thirdly, the ethical requirement that a participant can end the research activity when they

wish was also problematical. A dilemma that I confronted several times throughout this study involved

children seeking to end the talk (for whatever reason). Anyone who has experience with young children

will be skilled in using diversionary tactics that takes a child’s focus away from something they find

uncomfortable to a new focus. As the researcher, as an aspect of ethical behaviour, I told the children they

could stop whenever they wanted to. However, I knew that a diversion would lead them away from that

position easily and the process of generating data could continue. For example, the following excerpt

from an interview transcript demonstrates the difficulty. I had been talking with Dylan for a relatively

short time, mostly in a “warming up” kind of conversational way and I was just ready to get into more

directed questioning and conversation about what happens in school. The following interchange ensued.

RC Oh, OK. And she said this is where you put your bag?
D Yeah.
RC All right, that’s good.
D And I’m finished talking.
RC What?
D I’m finished talking now.
RC You’re not going to talk to me anymore?
D Nah.
RC Truly?
D Yeah.
RC Why? I want you to draw some pictures and play some Lego. I’ve got some Lego for you to
play.
D I want to draw some pictures.
RC OK. Let’s do that then. Is that all right?
D Yeah.

In this example I was challenged when Dylan suddenly stated he wanted to stop, so abruptly, and I was

not able immediately, to conceal my surprise. I went on to confirm that this was his intention and that I

had actually heard him correctly. Then I had to start thinking quickly about what I was to do. Some

authors suggest that he could and should leave at this point. As the researcher, I knew that I had

indicated on the consent form that he had ‘signed’ that he was entitled to stop when he wanted to.

356
However, as an experienced teacher and mother I knew that I could probably divert him. As a

researcher, I am conscious of and anxious about, the importance of getting my data. As shown in the

example, I indicate we could do other things, and he agreed. It is necessary to consider whether he

agreed because he is happy for the stress of talking to be gone and he can do something with his hands,

or he capitulated, giving into the unequal power relationship, thinking that he has to do what the adult

says. We continued together for some considerable time after this moment, he provided valuable

insights to the data and he seemed perfectly happy. However, I was left with the dilemma of the ethics

of the event, so I considered the level of possible anxiety and watched carefully to judge his response to

the diversion, and his apparent resumed comfort. I had to decide whether to cease the conversation or

continue, and I opted for the latter course, but I experienced a dilemma of ethical consideration.

Another similar ethical moment occurred with Ben at the conclusion of our talking about his drawing. I

had commended him on his effort at drawing a scene depicting school life and I asked:

RC Would you mind if I kept your picture?

B Yes
RC You don’t want me to have it? You don’t mind if I do have it? Can I keep it?
B No
RC I can’t keep it? I have to give it back to you?
B Yes
RC Oh. Okay. Can I make a photocopy of it before I give it back to you?
B Yes

Two problems emerged in this exchange for me. In the first instance, I was not sure Ben understood the

language of what I was saying, and secondly my desire to keep his picture for my research purposes,

resulted in my surprise at his response. I felt I had to compromise on the concept of a photocopy, but I

still felt I had somehow betrayed some of his trust, and then, ironically, circumstances arose where I was

able to retain his original version.

A further ethical dilemma emerges in relation to child protection matters. The temporary nature of the

researcher’s position on the school site raises questions. There was one occasion in this study when I

thought one boy wanted to tell me things about a situation in which, my long experience as a teacher

would suggest to me, he could possibly be at risk. I left the questioning open and left a space in our

conversation but he decided suddenly to shift direction and to change the subject and I let the moment

pass, but I remain uneasy that his needs may have not been met, and I trust that his teachers will be alert

to his circumstances.

357
Another ethical concern relates to the impact of the research activity on school organisation. I was

most sensitive to the change of routine I was causing and in particular, conscious that whatever time the

boys were out of the classroom was school time for them, lost, even if they were engaged in an

experience that could have been interesting and even enriching for them. Over many years I have

observed researchers in schools, who, caught up in the requirements of their study, are unaware of what

‘behind-the-scenes’ organisation was needed to facilitate their visits to the school sites, and how much

extra work ‘visitors’ entail. As a small gesture towards recognising the staff efforts entailed, I sent a

book voucher for use in the school library to each of the schools after my last visit.

FUTURE RESEARCH

Further research of a similar kind to this study would allow for consolidation of some of the directions I

have raised, and generate further differences and unique outcomes. The following areas may provide

fruitful areas for further research.

Gender Focus

Similar research with girls may provide opportunities for comparison and contrast and introduce a wider

gender-based perspective. In two schools that I visited, girls expressed considerable interest in why I was

there. No boys approached me independently, anywhere. In one school, a group of three girls, giggling

and grasping at each other, and skipping alongside me, followed me around for a while asking “why are

you here, are you going to talk to us?” They would have been keen to participate in any activity I

suggested. In another school, a girl fell into step beside me, looked up and made significant eye contact,

and said, quite wistfully, I thought, “You’re only doing boys aren’t you?” Conversations with girls would

illuminate further, what the boys have said, as well as provide interesting and useful data for their own

advancement.

The boys in this study agreed (with their parents or carers) to participate. However, consideration must be

given into how to tap into the families who might have not agreed to participate initially, but whose views

are crucial to providing data to improve learning outcomes.

358
Theme Focus

The outcomes also indicated that more research in the three thematic areas that were raised would be

useful. These are the place of rules and routines in young children’s school lives, the place of play and

friends, and the learning and work connection. Each of these themes could be investigated further to

determine actual school practice, the relationship of curriculum policy, and the perception of teachers.

Hermeneutic phenomenological approach

There are numerous subtle areas of research yet to be investigated in classrooms and at schools and many

of these may be well served by hermeneutic and phenomenological study using a Gadamerian

philosophical framework. It may be useful, for example, not only to look at girls, as suggested above, but

also to look at girls in the same families as boys (Dumais, 2002). Different age groups may be well

served by this approach also. Studies of adolescents have rarely used this approach.

Social class inequalities

This study confirms the view of Connolly (2004, p.221) that social class inequalities need further

investigation, and the complexity of the impact of ‘social class’ on academic outcomes needs

investigation using subtle tools. The boys in this study all attended working to middle class schools, but

individually represented the whole gamut of backgrounds from professional to unemployed.

TO AND FRO: THE HERMENEUTIC CIRCLE

I opened this chapter with a frequently used quote from T. S. Eliot, “…the end of all our exploring/will be

to arrive where we started…” The words appear in numerous documents for a range of reasons but for me

they do have useful and personal significance. They consolidate the cyclical process of learning, the

hermeneutic circle, as I studied Eliot in my first degree, and first encountered his writings, when starting

out as a teacher and here, much later, I am intrigued to return to his writings. Used here I am referring to

the concept that the more we learn the more there is to learn and the more we realise what we do not

know. This also links to the quote from Gadamer that appeared in chapter one, where Gadamer expresses

the idea that the skill of asking, depends on the understanding and realisation of knowing that “one does

not know” (2004, p.357). Eliot’s quote can be interpreted as saying that “life is an organic process of

development, flux, change, uncertainty, but there are values that we can come back to again and again to

359
help us strengthen our insights in a changing world” (Laidlaw, 2006, p.11). Voyages of discovery are

often uncertain but they lead to deeper levels of complexity and new levels of understanding, and

emphasise that the more we know the more we know there is more to find out.

A FINAL SUMMATION

In this study, I collected data from the transcripts of open-ended interviews with young boys in

kindergarten at three schools. I analysed the data using a combination of processes promoted by van

Manen (1999) and supplemented by the ideas of Moustakas (1994); O’Donoghue & Punch (2003); Cohen

et al. (2000) and others. This qualitative study has aimed not to be “loose and sketchy” as in Leroy’s

criticism of the artists of the Impressionist era, (Leroy, 1874) but has sought to describe the views of

small boys in kindergarten regarding their perspectives on schooling with similar techniques to the ways

in which a painting can be constructed. I did this by layering primary observations of the boys’ talk in my

study, as if applying small dabs of brushwork and paint to my canvas. I aimed to illuminate effectively

the fleeting moments in a boys’ world, that can have a momentous impact on future school life and

success or otherwise. Each student provided an individual portrait in the landscape, which I developed in

detail, with careful attention to his unique responses, and then these were brought together into an

interpretive whole. The whole canvas depicts life in kindergarten as told to me by the participants who

experience it.

The methodology in this study is mixed method, making use of perception, narrative method, conceptual

inquiry, case study, interpretive and phenomenological methods. The study cites from many sources that

are methodologically diverse and to some, not necessarily compatible. Hermeneutics proved to be a

worthwhile approach to demonstrate the important aspects of the lived experiences of the students in

kindergarten in their first year of schooling. By studying something up close and part by part, a composite

picture of the whole can emerge. Chenail (1995, p.7) wrote, “qualitative research is the practice of asking

simple questions and getting complex answers. The art of managing both the simplicity and the

complexity is the real secret of being successful at conducting qualitative inquiries.” In this study, while

the questions were perhaps deceptively simple, the answers were exceedingly complex. The pathway was

simple but complex too. As I contemplate the pathway, I am struck by the complexity of the environment

in which the researcher reflects and operates.

360
Throughout the long process of producing this research report, I have
worked from time to time in a study where I also paint. It has been cathartic
to leave the computer and the intense cognitive focus of explicating a
thesis of ideas and data, to take a brush and re-visit the landscape sitting
behind me, on the easel. The painting resting there was started on my last
holiday into South Australia along the Murray River.

Ironically, the changes to the landscape canvas seem to have responded to

my emotional state emanating from the cognitive path, in which I have
been embroiled, rather than my experiences and memories of the holiday
journey.

On the canvas, from time to time, the sky has been storm laden, with black
heavy clouds pressing down on stark trees, black water sluggish over ugly
stones in an almost dry riverbed. Obstructed then, I have had to leave it be.

Then occasionally, I’ve felt moved to add a flurry of green bushes or some
odd rays of light or I have re-shaped and sharpened visually the trunk of a
river gum. I added slivers of white and silver to the red and orange of the
bark. Occasionally I have altered the angle of light reflecting from that large
brownish rock in the foreground. Then clouds have lightened and colours
have changed. Strokes have varied. Textures have refined. I’ve become
refreshed.

Thinking capacity returns and physically I can start again – either pursuit,
painting or thesis report. I realise in passing that just as the brush must use
different muscles in my hands to the demands of the keyboard, the brain is
using different pathways and the emotions are running freely, travelling
across the aesthetic and cognitive plains, and linking the two.

I can return to the text and a moment of obstruction there - a seemingly

immoveable barrier to progress has gone. I ‘can see clearly now, the rain’
(of indecision, doubt, perplexity) has gone, and with my mind singing, I can
proceed with the writing and thinking. I am reminded again, of Voltaire
(1752) “l’ecriture est le peinture de la voix”, writing is the painting of the
voice.

361
 Excerpt from Retrospective Reflective

Journal

In the introduction to this study, I draw a parallel of the phenomenological interpretive research process

with the creation of a painting, particularly in the style of the Impressionists. Now that I have reached the

conclusion of the work, I think the comparison is still valid. For the artists of the era of Impressionism, it

was the novelty of their technique, rather than their subject matter, that set them apart from their

contemporaries (Encarta, 1993-2007 Microsoft Corporation). They rejected sombre tones and painstaking

degrees of finish that removed all traces of the artist’s hand. These had been the qualities demanded by

the Academie des Beaux Artes in the 1860’s. Instead of creating smoothly blended colours, the

Impressionists placed separate touches of vibrantly contrasting colours directly onto the canvas,

sometimes without prior mixing on the palette, and allowed their brushstrokes to retain the liveliness and

seeming spontaneity of a sketch (Samu, 2004). This is what I have endeavoured to do as I explore what

each boy said to me. They stand as individuals, with unique insights, each one fresh and distinct from the

other. In addition, each comment is uttered with an unexpected, and spontaneous and unique quality, each

like a brushstroke layered into the canvas of talk. As with the Impressionist artists, there can be no finite

or end point. Leroy, the famous French art critic in 1874 criticised Monet for his “modest and sketchy

harbour scene” called Impression, Sunrise 1873 for what he saw as a loose and inexact manner of

rendering the landscape. In the intervening years, painters of the Impressionist period have gained great

repute. Rather than being loose and sketchy, the Impressionists have given countless observers extremes

of experience.

Likewise, this hermeneutic phenomenological study stands to be judged against the traditional schools of

research into educational practice that promote scientific absolutism. Impressionism “became a

movement of enduring consequence” (Samu, 2004). It is hoped that studies such as this investigation into

the views of young boys about school enjoy similar recognition.

A FINAL INTERPRETATION

The boy within…

Over time, artists have expressed the experience of being a boy in school in song, verse, and art. For

example, Pink Floyd and Harry Chapin, as quoted in this study, and others, have expressed a sociology of

362
childhood over the years, that is congruent with the goals of this study. Paintings have recorded and

interpreted boys and their childhood lives too. As early as 1150 AD a silk painting by Chinese artist Su

Hanchen of the Song Dynasty depicted two boys engaged in playing. Poets too, have explored the

experiences of boys in school in many different ways, and excerpts from some of these works have

illustrated important concepts throughout this study. They have included William Blake and others. Since

early history, the activities of children have intrigued artists alongside educators,

My long-time connection with males has traversed the roles of daughter, sister, wife, and then mother of

two sons. After years of immersing myself in teaching young boys and then more recently researching

young boys, it was inevitable that I would feel compelled to express some of the ‘ineffable’ moments

(van Manen 1990, p.142-149; Neilson, 2000) in an expressive way. The research process raised in me

many emotions and required persistent, consistent thinking about maleness in what I have experienced

and observed in different settings. What the boys in the study said inspired me. My searching for the deep

meanings and the essence of their views in this period of research was very intense and involved a

concentrated time of thinking about boys and men. It was almost predictable that eventually I would

express some of those emotions and observations in a poetic way. The poetic expression that follows

developed substantially over the period of the research, but much of the pain, the pleasure and the

knowledge, have been a lifetime coming.

363
 “The schooling of a boy”

It is a-fearsome thing School is a shifting Bravery

This manhood field A partner in a dance
This being male Of life Of sparring contests
And strong. The colander Seeks deep to find
That sifts and sorts The goal
Even the tiny baby And raises up the Of resolution.
Felt few There is no crevice
He had to hold control And blankets there
To call the shots All the rest No opening up
And take the lead. In mediocrity. To let the softer
elements
Some deep primeval Yet there beneath Betray the manly
urge That cloud stance
Sends you Of others
A secret life Can hide
Where you must win The truly special Shielded all
And lead guy In armour
And be the best The knight Of ancient warrior’s
Of all. Of all the rest. kind
Your breath in gasps
Softness How many lost Your heart in beats
Could not blossom In circumstances You measure out
there bleak The challenge
For fear of ridicule Direction
A fleeting frost of doubt Changed forever The aim to win
Flickers Then passenger To be the best
Across a handsome For life To front the tape of life
face Regret takes hold.
To fall
Hidden by a veil of It’s always there
strength The school ground For all the long long
To bring resolve. Beckons path
A battlefield of sorts A gender seed
When softness comes Lithe lanky limbs That struggles
Unbidden Commit For attention
But unremitting in its The pushing, The look at me,
goal shoving acts demand
You hide it Of camaraderie
Deep within While hurtful There was a boy
And panic In their way Here comes a man.
Lest observed They hone and
You seem prime
A lesser man. And find the man-
ness
Insecure Lurking there
But cover that
Let no-one know
The pain bravado brings

364
 Ros Coleborne 2008

APPENDICES CONTENTS

APPENDICES CONTENTS.....................................................................Error: Reference source not found

APPENDIX 1: The interview questions guide...........................Error: Reference source not found
APPENDIX 2a: The interview pictures, photos, and line drawings-Children sitting on the floor
looking at a “big book” (line drawing).......................................Error: Reference source not found
APPENDIX 2b: The interview pictures, photos, and line drawings-Children sitting at their desks
in small groups, writing and talking (line drawing)...................Error: Reference source not found
APPENDIX 2c: The interview pictures, photos, and line drawings-Children in a whole group
mathematics activity on the floor (photocopied picture from departmental curriculum support
documents for teachers)..............................................................Error: Reference source not found
APPENDIX 2d: The interview pictures, photos, and line drawings- Children in a partnered
mathematics activity at their desks (photocopied picture from departmental curriculum support
documents for teachers)..............................................................Error: Reference source not found
APPENDIX 2e: Sample line drawing with participants suggested additions, drawing and speech
bubbles........................................................................................Error: Reference source not found
APPENDIX 3: Sample photograph of participant’s LEGO model of classroom life.............Error:
Reference source not found
APPENDIX 4: Parent/caregiver/principal/teacher information sheet. .Error: Reference source not
found
APPENDIX 5: Sample consent form.........................................Error: Reference source not found
APPENDIX 6: Sample letter to principals.................................Error: Reference source not found
REFERENCES........................................................................................Error: Reference source not found

365
APPENDIX 1: The interview questions guide

INTERVIEW GUIDE

Introductory comments – set scene, explain purpose and task: I will affirm that the student’s parent or
carer and their teacher has explained what I am going to do. I will say: I am going to ask you some
questions about being in school. Do you want talk to me? If you want to stop at any time, just tell me, and
I’ll take you back to your teacher.

AMENDMENT Introduce picture of 1949 infants class. Pre-activity: ask boys to nominate which chid they
think might be me as I describe some activities that I recall from that time.

ACTIVITY ONE: Students are engaged in a one-to-one conversation/interview with the researcher. The
questions will be elaborated or simplified, rephrased and re-asked to meet the individual and emerging
needs of each student.

CORE QUESTION –PART ONE (CQ1)

CQ1 Tell me about what you usually do in school each day. I’d like to know what boys your age do in
school these days. How does being in school seem to you? Take as much time as you want to tell me all
about school.
Possible prompt questions if required. Further unplanned prompts may occur with each core question as a
result of the student’s responses coded as UPCQ1.1 etc.
• PCQ1. 1 What do you do when you first arrive at school?
• PCQ1. 2 Where do you go?
• PCQ1. 3 What happens next? (to be repeated as often as appropriate)
• PCQ1. 4 Tell me more about that
• PCQ1. 5 How do you do that?
• PCQ1. 6 What do you think about that?
• PCQ1. 7 Did you do anything else?
• PCQ1. 8 Can you tell me more about that?
• PCQ1. 9 What would you rather have happen?
• PCQ1.10 How did that make you feel?
• PCQ1.11 What happened next?
ACTIVITY TWO: Students are invited to draw a picture depicting an aspect of school life.
• Would you like to draw now?
• Here are some paper and crayons.
• I want you to think about (your) teacher(s) and the kinds of things you do in your classroom. Draw
a picture of your teacher teaching and yourself learning.

CORE QUESTION – PART TWO (CQ2)

CQ2 Tell me about your drawing. What were you thinking about when you were drawing?
Prompt questions if required
• PCQ2.1 Where does this happen?
• PCQ2.2 Who else is there?
• PCQ2.3 What happens next?
• PCQ2.4 Do you know why?
• PCQ2.5 What do you think about that?

ACTIVITY THREE: Students are offered four pictures, two photocopies and two line drawings of scenes
typical in most classrooms.

CORE QUESTION- PART THREE – (CQP3)

366
CQ3 Tell me about this picture
Prompt questions if required
• PCQ3.1 What do you think is happening here?
• PCQ3.2 How do you feel about that?
• PCQ3.3 How would this happen in your school
• PCQ3.4 Who would be there?
• PCQ3.5 When would it happen?
• PCQ3.6 What do you think about it?

Sub-core question 3.1 (SVQ3.1)

• What does your teacher do that helps you?
Sub- core question 3.2 (SCQ3.2)
• Does your teacher ever do anything that doesn’t help you?
Sub-core question 3.3 (SCQ 3.3)
• Are children allowed to choose what they want to do in your classroom?
Sub-core question 3.4 (SCQ3.4)
• If you were the boss, what rules would you like to make for your teacher?
Sub-core question 3.5 (SCQ3.5)
• If you were the principal of this school, what would you change? or if you had a magic wand that
could change anything in your school, what would you choose to change?
Sub-core question 3.6 (SCQ3.6)
• Do you have any relatives (explain if necessary) who live far away? What do you tell them about
your school? Would they want to come to this school?
Sub-core question 3.7 (SCQ3.7)
• I suppose your parents might come to the school sometimes. What do they do here?
Sub-core question 3.8 (SCQ3.8)
• What happens to boys at this school that does not happen to girls?
ACTIVITY FOUR : Students are invited to participate in a game of “schools” using Lego pieces.

CORE QUESTION- PART 4 (CQ4)

CQ4 Here is some Lego. Have you played with Lego before? How could we play “schools” with these?
What do you think? How can we do this? Can we make a classroom? What is happening here?
Prompt questions if required
• PCQ4.1 Who/what is this?
• PCQ4.2 What are they doing?
• PCQ4.4 What is happening here?
• PCQ4.6 What do you think about that?

Question to conclude (Other Question OQ5)

OQ5 Is there anything else you would like to tell me about school?
Students may be asked some demographic questions. Parents may opt to have these questions
withdrawn from the schedule.

Students may be asked some demographic questions

• OQ5.1 Do you have brothers and sisters? Tell me about them.
• OQ5.2 Where do they go to school?
• OQ5.3 How do you get to school?
• OQ5.4 Do you live far away?
• OQ5.5 Tell me about your Mum and Dad. Do Mum and Dad live at home?
• OQ5.6 Do they go to work?
• OQ5.7 What do they do?

Thank the student for his participation and offer him a reward sticker of his choice.

367
APPENDIX 2a: The interview pictures, photos, and line drawings-Children sitting on the floor
looking at a “big book” (line drawing)

Line drawing not included please see print copy

368
APPENDIX 2b: The interview pictures, photos, and line drawings-Children sitting at their desks in
small groups, writing and talking (line drawing)

Line drawing not included please see print copy

369
APPENDIX 2c: The interview pictures, photos, and line drawings-Children in a whole group
mathematics activity on the floor (photocopied picture from departmental curriculum support
documents for teachers)

Figure not included please see print copy

370
APPENDIX 2d: The interview pictures, photos, and line drawings- Children in a partnered
mathematics activity at their desks (photocopied picture from departmental curriculum support
documents for teachers)

Figure not included please see print copy

371
APPENDIX 2e: Sample line drawing with participants suggested additions, drawing and speech
bubbles

Figure not included please see print copy

372
APPENDIX 3: Sample photograph of participant’s LEGO model of classroom life

Figure not included please see print copy

373
APPENDIX 4: Parent/caregiver/principal/teacher information sheet

Figure not included please see print copy

374
APPENDIX 5: Sample consent form

Figure not included please see print copy

375
APPENDIX 6: Sample letter to principals

The Principal
XXXXXXXXXX Public School
XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX

Dear XXXXXXXXX

Re Research study
Kindergarten Boys’ Views about School
“Listening to boys in kindergarten talking about school”

I am writing to seek your cooperation for your school to participate in my doctoral research
study being conducted at the University of Wollongong. For the purpose of my study, I will be
seeking support from four kindergarten classes in four schools in the region.

In this research, I am exploring the views of boys in the terms 3-4 of the kindergarten year. The
perspectives of small boys will provide data about what they find engaging or alienating in their
school day. This study uses a qualitative approach. As the researcher I intend talking to boys
individually from a kindergarten class, playing a game of ‘schools’ using LEGO pieces, drawing
a picture of school life and looking at photographs or line drawings of school scenes. The
conversation will be audio-taped and the transcriptions used as the basis for the data collection.
The interview-conversation time with each student will total approximately sixty minutes held
over several sessions over one week. Only schools, teachers, parents and students who agree
to be involved will be part of the study. It is expected that about three boys from each class will
wish to participate.

I am aware of the impact research activity can have in schools and intend to be as unobtrusive
as possible. If you agree to the research being conducted at your school and you wish to
discuss the proposal further, I am able to meet with you and your staff at a time convenient to
you. I will contact you by e-mail within the next two weeks to enable you to respond at your
convenience. Thank you for your consideration of this request.

376
Yours sincerely

Ros Coleborne
(contact details)

377
REFERENCES

Abraham, J. (2008). Back to the future on gender and anti-school boys: a response to Jeffrey Smith.
Gender and Education, 20 (1), 89-94.

Ailwood, J. (2002). Homogenising play: governing preschool childhoods. Paper presented at the
Australian Association for Research in Education. Annual Conference. Brisbane, Australia,

Akehurst, L. Milne, R. & Kohnken, G. (2003). The effects of children’s age and delay on recall in
cognitive or structured interview. Psychology, Crime and Law, 9, 97-107.

Aldred, P. (1998). Ethnography and discourse analysis: dilemmas in representing the voices of children.
In M. Stamatoglou (2004). Listening to young children’s voices: an ethnographic study on nursery play.
Paper. British Educational Research Association (BERA). Annual Conference, Manchester, UK.

Alerby, E. (2000). A way of visualising children’s and young people’s thoughts about the environment: a
study of drawings. Environmental Education Research, 6 (3), 205-222.

Alerby, E. (2003). During the break we have fun: a study concerning pupil’s experience of school.
Educational Research, 45 (1), 17-28.

Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R. & Dauber, S. l. (1993). First grade classroom behaviour: its short- and
long- term consequences for school performance. Child Development, 64, 801-814.

Alexander, K. L. Entwisle, D. R. & Horsey, C. S. (1997). From first grade forward: early foundations of
high school dropout. Sociology of Education, 70 (2), 87-108.

Almon, J. (2003). The vital role of play in childhood, in A Crisis in Early Childhood: The Rise of
technologies and the demise of Play. Greenwood – Praeger. In J. Ailwood, (2002). Homogenising play:
governing preschool childhoods. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in
Education. Annual Conference. Brisbane, Australia.

Anning, A. (1991). The first years at school. Milton Keynes. Open University Press. In J. Ailwood.
(2002). Homogenising play: governing preschool childhoods. Paper presented at the Australian
Association for Research in Education. Annual Conference. Brisbane, Australia,

378
Aries, P. (1962). A modest contribution to the history of games and pastimes. Centuries of childhood,
p.62-99. New York: Vintage. In F. Moinian. (2006). I can tell it as it is! Exploring how children write
and talk about themselves in school. Ethnography and Education, 1 (2), 231-246.

Armstrong, F. (1998). The curriculum as alchemy: school and the struggle for cultural space. Curriculum
Studies, 6 (2), 145-160.

Ashbury, J. (1995). Overview of focus group research. Qualitative Health Research, 5, 414-420.

Ashworth, P. (1999). ‘Bracketing’ in phenomenology: renouncing assumptions in learning about student

cheating. Qualitative Studies in Education, 12 (6), 707-721.

Atkinson, E. (2000). The promise of uncertainty: education, postmodernism and the politics of
possibility. International Studies in the Sociology of Education, 10 (1), 81- 99.

Backett-Milburn K. & McKie, L. (1999). A critical appraisal of the draw and write technique. Health
Education Research, 14 (3), 387-398.

Baker, B. (1998). Childhood in the emergence and spread of public schools. In L. Fasoli. (2001)
Research with children: ethical mine-fields. Australian Journal of Early Childhood. 26 (4), 7-11.

Barclay, L. & Lie, D. (2006). Characteristics in Kindergarten may predict deviant peer group affiliation
in adolescence. Archives General Psychiatry, 63, 562-568.

Barkway, P. (2001). Michael Crotty and nursing phenomenology: criticism or critique? Nursing Inquiry,
8 (3), 191-195.

Barnacle, R. (2004). Reflection on lived experience in educational research. Educational Philosophy

and Theory, 36 (1), 57-67.

Barrett, G. (1989). (Ed.) Disaffection from School? The Early Years. London. The Falmer Press.

Barthes, R. (1986). The rustle of language. New York: Hill and Wang. In M. van Manen (1990).
Researching Lived Experience. Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy. London, Ontario,
Canada. University of Western Ontario.

Basit, T. N. (2003). Manual or electronic? The role of coding in qualitative data analysis. Educational
Research, 45 (2), 143-154.

379
Bennett, N. Wood, E. & Rogers, S. (1997). Teaching Through Play: Teachers’ Thinking and Classroom
Practice. Buckingham, Open University Press. In E. Wood (2004). A new paradigm war? The impact of
national curriculum policies on early childhood teachers’ thinking and classroom practice. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 20, 361-374.

Beresford, B. (1997). Personal Accounts: involving disabled children in research. Norwich: Social
Policy Research Unit Stationery Office. In A. Lewis (2004). ‘And when did you last see your father?
Exploring the views of children with learning difficulties/disabilities. British Journal of Special
Education. 31 (1), 3-9.

Berg, L., Skott, C. & Danielson, E. (2006). An interpretive phenomenonological method for
illuminating the meaning of caring relationships. Scand. J. Caring Sci. 20, 42-50.

Bergen, D. (2002). The role of pretend play in children’s cognitive development. Early Childhood
Research and Practice, 4 (1), 926-934.

Biddulph, S. (1997). Raising Boys. Sydney. Finch.

Birbeck, D. J. & Drummond, M. J. N. (2007). Research with young children: contemplating methods
and ethics. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 7 (2), 21-31.

Bishop, P. A. & Pflaum, S. W. (2005). Student perceptions of action, relevance and pace. Middle School
Journal, 36 (4), 4-12.

Blake, W. (1977). The Complete Poems. (Ed) Alicia Ostriker. Penguin Classics.

Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative Research in Education. An introduction to Theory and
Methods (3rd Ed.) Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Bjorkland, D. F., Bjorkland, B. R., Brown, R. B. & Cassel, W. S. (1998). Children’s susceptibility to
repeated questions: how misinformation changes children’s answers and their minds. Applied
Developmental Science, 2, 99-111.

Braine, L. G., Pomerantz, E. Lorber, D. & Krantz, D. H. (1991). Conflicts with authority, children’s
feelings, actions and justifications. Developmental Psychology, 27 (5), 829-840.

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Quality Research in Psychology,
3, 77-101.

380
Bricher, G. R. (1999). Children and qualitative research methods: a review of the literature related to
interview and interpretive processes. Nurse Researcher, 6 (4), 65-77.

Bricher, G. R. (2000). Children in hospital: issues of power and vulnerability. Pediatric Nursing. 26, 3
(May 2000):277. Health Reference Center Academic. Thomson Gale. University of Wollongong Library.
27 August 2006.
http://find.galegroup.com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au:2048/itx/infomark.do?&contentSet=IAC-
Documents&type=retrieve&tabID=T002&prodId=HRC&docId=A62802765&source=gale&srcprod=HR
CA&userGroupName=uow&version=1.0

Brown, G. (1999). Child’s play. Differences. A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies. 11 (3), 76-96. In J.
Ailwood. (2002). Homogenising play: governing preschool childhoods. Paper presented at the
Australian Association for Research in Education. Annual Conference. Brisbane, Australia,

Bruner, J. (1983). Play, thought and language. Peabody Journal of Education, 60 (3), 60-69.

Bruns, G. L. (1992). Hermeneutics Ancient and Modern. New Haven. Yale University Press. In
Kerdeman, D. (1998). Hermeneutics and education. Understanding, control and agency. Educational
Theory, 48 (2), 241-166.

Burchinal, M. R., Peisner-Feinberg, E., Pianta, R. & Howes, C. (2002). Development of academic skills
from preschool through second grade: family and classroom predictors of developmental trajectories.
Journal of School Psychology, 40 (5), 415-436.

Burnard, P. (1991). A method of analysing interview transcripts in qualitative research. Nurse

Education Today, 11, 461-466.

Burman, E. (1994). Deconstructing Developmental Psychology, London: Routledge. In P. Connolly.

(2004). Boys and Schooling in the Early Years. Routledge Falmer. London.

Burman, E. (1997). Minding the gap: positivism, psychology, and the politics of qualitative methods.
Journal of Social Issues, 53 (4), 785-801.

Burts, D. C., Harts, C. H., Charlesworth, R., Fleege, P.O., Mosley, J. & Tysonson, R. H. (1992).
Observed activities and stress behaviours of children in developmentally appropriate and inappropriate
Kindergarten classrooms. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7, 297-318.

Byrne, M. M. (1998). Hermeneutics 101 Information Analyses (070) Georgia State University.

381
Caelli, K. (2001). Engaging with phenomenology: is it more of a challenge than it needs to be?
Qualitative Health Research, 11, 273. Retrieved 10 February 2008.
http://qhr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/11/2/273

Campbell, R., Pound, P., Pope, C., Pill, R. & Morgan, R. (2003). Evaluating meta-ethnography: a
synthesis of qualitative research on lay experiences of diabetes and diabetes care. Social Science and
Medicine, 56, 671-684. In D. R. Tyson. A general inductive approach for qualitative data analysis,
School of Population Health, University of Auckland, August.

Cameron, H. (2005). Asking the tough questions: a guide to ethical practices in interviewing young
children. Early Child Development and Care, 175 (6), 597-610.

Carey, M.A. (1995). Comment: concerns in the analysis of focus group data. Qualitative Health
Research, 5, 487-495.

Carey, M.A. & Smith, M. W. (1994). Capturing the group effect in focus groups: a special concern in
analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 4, 123-1227.

Carney, T. Murphy, S. McClure, J., Bishop, E. Kerr, C., Parker, J. Scott, F. Shields, C. & Wilson, L.
(2003). Children’s views of hospitalization: an exploratory study of data collection. J. Child Health
Care, 7 (27), 27-40.

Catapano, S. (2005). Early literacy standards: what new teachers should know. Journal of Early
Childhood Teacher Education, 25, 223-229.

Ceci, S. J. & Bruck, M. (1993). The suggestibility of the child witness: a historical review and
synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 403-439. In S. Garven, J. M. Wood, R. S. Malpass, & J. S. Shaw.
(1998). More than a suggestion. The effect of interviewing techniques from the McMartin preschool
case. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83 (3), 347-359.

Chapin, H. (1979). flowers Are Red. Album: Legends of the Lost and Found. GNU Free
Documentation License. 29. 12. 08. Wikepedia.

Chapparo, C. J. & Hooper, E. (2002). When is it work? perceptions of six year old children. Work, 19,
291-302.

Chenail, R.J. (1995). Presenting qualitative data. The Qualitative Report. 2, 3.

http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR2-3/presenting.html. Retrieved 2 March 2008.

382
Cherney, I. D., Seiwert, C., S., Dickey, T. M. & Flichtbeil, J.D. (2006). Children’s drawings: A mirror
to their minds. Educational Psychology, 26 (1), 127-142.

Chesla, C. A. (1995). Hermeneutic phenomenonology: an approach to understanding families. Journal

of Family Nursing, 1(1), 63-78.

Clandinin, D. J. & Connelly, F. M. (2000). Narrative Inquiry, Experience and Story in Qualitative
Research. San Francisco. Jossey-Bass.

Clark, A. (2005). Listening to and involving young children: a review of research and practice. Early
Child Development and Care, 175 (6), 489-505.

Clark, A. & Moss, P. (2001). Listening to young children: the mosaic approach. London. National
Children’s Bureau & Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Clarke, J. B. (1999). Hermeneutic analysis: a qualitative decision trail. International Journal of Nursing
Studies, 36, 363-369.

Clyde, M. (2001). Children’s response to starting school: some Victorian studies. Journal of Australian
Research in Early Childhood, 8 (1), 23-32.

Coffey, A. & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making sense of qualitative data. California. Thousand Oaks: Sage
Publications. In T. Groenewald. (2004). A phenomenonological research design illustrated. International
Journal of Qualitative Methods. 3 (1). Article 4. Retrieved 6 Dec 2006.
http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_1html/groenewald.html

Cohen, L. & Manion, L. (1994). Research Methods in Education. London. Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Cohen, M. Z., Kahn, D. L. & Steeves, R. H. (2000). Hermeneutical Phenomenonological Research: A

Practical Guide for Nurse Researchers. California. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Colaizzi, P. (1973). Reflection and research in psychology. A Phenomenonological study in learning.

Dubuque IA. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company. In A. Nelson, A. (2008) Addressing the threat of
evidence-based practice to qualitative inquiry through increasing attention to quality: a discussion paper.
International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45 (2), 361-322.

Connolly, P. (2004). Boys and Schooling in the Early Years. London. Routledge Falmer.

Cook-Sather, A. (2002). Authorizing students’ perspectives: towards trust, dialogue and change in
education. Educational Researcher, 31 (4), 3-15.

383
Cook-Sather, A. (2006). Sound, presence and power: student voice in educational research and reform.
Curriculum Inquiry, 36 (4), 360-390.

Cook-Sather, A. & Shultz, J. (2001). Starting where the learner is: listening to students. In Cook-Sather,
A. (2002). Authorizing students’ perspectives: towards trust, dialogue and change in education.
Educational Researcher, 31(4), 3-15.

Corsaro, W. (1996). Transitions in early childhood: the promise of comparative, longitudinal

ethnography. In J. Nespor (1998). The meanings of research: kids as subjects and kids as inquirers.
Qualitative Inquiry, 4 (3), 369-389.

Coulter, R. P. (2003). Boys doing good - young men and gender equity. Educational Review, 55 (2), 135
- 145.

Coyne, I. (1997). Sampling in qualitative research. Purposeful and theoretical sampling: merging or
clear boundaries? Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26 (3), 632-630.

Coyne, I. (1998). Researching children: some methodological and ethical considerations. J. Clin. Nurs., 7
(5), 409-416.

Cresswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design, choosing among five traditions.
Thousand Oaks, C.A. Sage Publications.

Cresswell, J. W. & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into
Practice, 39, 124-130.

Cresswell, J. W. (2003). Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method Approaches.
(2nd Ed.) Thousand Oaks. California. Sage Publications.

Crist, J. D. & Tanner, C.A. (2003). Interpretation/analysis methods in hermeneutic interpretive

phenomenology. Nursing Research, 52 (3), 202-205.

Crotty, M. (1996). Phenomenology and Nursing Research. Melbourne, Australia. Churchill Livingstone.
In P. Darbyshire, J. Diekelman & N. Diekelman. (1999). Reading Heidegger and interpretive
phenomenonology: a response to the work of Michael Crotty, Nursing Inquiry, 6, 17-25.

Crotty, M. (1997). Tradition and culture in Heidegger’s being and time. Nursing Inquiry, 4, 88-89.

384
Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research. Sydney, Australia. Allen & Unwin. In C.
Edwards & A. Titchen. (2003). Research into patients’ perspectives: relevance and usefulness of
phenomenological sociology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 44 (5), 450-460.

Curtin, C. (2001). Eliciting children’s voices in qualitative research. Am. J. Occup. Ther., 55 (3), 295-
302.

Curtis, K., Liabo, K., Roberts, H. & Barker, M. (2004). Consulted but not heard: a qualitative study of
young people’s views of their local health service. Health Expectations, 7, 149-156.

Cybulski, J. & Sarkar, P. (2004). Phenomenological research in IS: where do you feel the pain? S. A.
brown bag meeting on research methods in IS. www.deakin.edu.au/infosys/research/seminars/index.php

daCunha Rego.L. (2003). ‘Beyond conventions: a psycho-educational perspective on children’s right to

participation. PhD Thesis. University of Warwick. In P. Jones. (2005). Inclusion: lessons from the
children. British Journal of Special Education, 32 (2), 60-66.

Dalley-Trim, L. (2007). The boys’ present…hegemonic masculinity: a performance of multiple acts.

Gender and Education, 19 (2), 199-217.

Danaher, T. & Briod, M. (2005). Phenomenonological approaches to research with children. (pp. 217-
235) London: Sage Publications.

Danby, S. (2002). The communicative competence of young children, Australian Journal of Early
Childhood, 27 (3), 25-30.

Danby, S. & Farrell, A. (2004). Accounting for young children’s competence in educational research:
new perspectives on research ethics. The Australian Educational Researcher, 31 (3), 35-49.

Daniels, D. H. & Perry, K. E. (2003). “Learner centred” according to children. Theory Into Practice, 42
(2), 102-108.

Darbyshire, P., Diekelmann, J. & Diekelmann, N. (1999). Reading Heidegger and interpretive
phenomenology: a response to the work of Michael Crotty. Nursing Inquiry, 6 (1), 17-25.

Davey, N. (2006). Unquiet Understanding. Gadamer’s Philosophical Hermeneutics. Albany. State

University of New York Press.

385
 David, T. (1999). Changing minds: teaching young children. In T. David. (Ed.) Teaching Young
Children. London. Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd. In J. Harrett (2002). Young children talking: an
investigation into the personal stories of key stage one infants. Early Years, 22 (1), 20-29.

Davis, J. M. (1998). Understanding the meanings of children: a reflexive process. Children and Society,
12, 325-335.

Davison, L. E. & Tyson, G. V. (2001). Effects of drawing on children’s item recall. Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 78, 155-177.

Deatrick, J. (1984). It’s their decision now: perspectives of chronically disabled adolescents concerning
surgery. Issues in Comprehensive Pediatric Nursing, 7, 17-31. In S.A. Faux, M. Walsh & J. A. Deatrick.
(1988). Intensive Interviewing with adolescents. Western Journal of Nursing Research. 10 (2), 180-194.

Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1998). Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research. In N. K.
Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research: Vol 2. Strategies of qualitative
inquiry (pp. 1-34). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.) (2002). The Qualitative Inquiry Reader. Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.

Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST). (2003). Meeting the challenge: guiding
principles for success from the Boys’ Lighthouse Programme Stage One, 2003 Canberra, DEST.

Department of Education, Science and Training (DEST). (2005). Success for Boys. Available online at
www.ssuccessforboys.edu.au.background.asp (accessed 4 April 2006).

Devine, N. & Irwin, R. (2005). Autonomy, agency and education: he tangata, he tangata, he tangata.
Educational Philosophy and Theory, 37 (3), 317-331.

De Vos, A. S. & Fouche, C. B. (1998). General introduction to research design, data collection
methods and analysis in researching at grass roots. A primer for the caring professions. Pretoria: Van
Shaik. In T. Groenewald (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated. International Journal
of Qualitative Methods. 3 (1). Article 4. Retrieved 6 Dec 2006.
http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_1html/groenewald.html

DeWitt, L. & Ploeg, J. (2006). Critical appraisal of rigour in interpretive phenomenological nursing
research. Methodological Issues in Nursing Research, 55 (2), 215-229.

DfES. (2003). Every Child matters. Green paper. London: DFES.

386
 DfES. (2004). Every Child matters: The next steps. March. London. DFES

DiCicco-Bloom, B. & Crabtree, B.F. (2006). The qualitative research interview. Medical Education, 40
(4), 314-321.

Di Leo, J. H. (1970). Young Children and Their Drawings. New York. Brunner/Mazel.

Di Leo, J. H. (1983). Interpreting Children’s Drawings. New York and London. Brunner-Routledge.

Dilley, P. (2000). Conducting successful interviews: tips for intrepid research. Theory Into Practice, 39
(3), 132-137.

Docherty, S. & Sandelowski, M. (1999). Focus on qualitative methods. Interviewing children.

Research in Nursing and Health, 22 (2), 177-185.

Dockett, S. & Perry, B. (1999). Starting school: what do the children say? Early Childhood
Development and Care, 159, 107-119.

Dockett, S. & Perry, B. (2001). Starting school: effective transitions. Early Childhood Research and
Practice, 6, 1-18.

Dockett, S. & Perry, R. (2003). Children’s views and children’s voices in starting school. Australian
Journal of Early Childhood, 28 (1), 12-20.

Dockett, S. & Perry, B. (2004). Starting School: perspectives of Australian children, parents and
educators. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 2 (2), 171-189.

Dockett, S. & Perry, B. (2005). Children’s drawings: experiences and expectations of school.
International Journal of Innovation and Equity in Early Childhood, 3 (2), 77-89

Dostal, R.J. (Ed.) (2002). The Cambridge Companion to Gadamer. New York. Cambridge University
Press.

Dowling, M. (2004). Hermeneutics: an exploration. Nurse Researcher, 11 (4), 30-40.

Drever, E. (1995). Using semi-structured interviews in small scale research, Edinburgh, The Scottish
Council for Educational Research.

387
Driessnak, M. (2005). Children’s drawings as facilitators of communication: a meta-analysis. Journal of
Pediatric Nursing, 20 (6), 415-423.

Dumais, S. (2002). Cultural capital, gender and school success: the role of habitus. Sociology of
Education, 75 (1), 44-68.

Easton, K. L. McComish, J.F. & Greenberg, R. (2000). Avoiding common pitfalls in qualitative data
collection and transcription. Qualitative Health Research, 10 (5), 703-707.

Edwards, C. & Tichen, A. (2003). Research into patients’ perspectives: relevance and usefulness of
phenomenological sociology. Methodological Issues in Nursing Research, 44 (5), 450-460.

Education Queensland (2000). 2010 Queensland State Education. Queensland.

Ehrich, L.C. (1999). Untangling the threads and coils of the web of phenomenology. Education
Research and Perspectives, 26 (2), 19-44.

Ehrich, L. (2005). Revisiting phenomenonology; its potential for management research. In Proceedings
Challenges or organisations in global markets, British Academy of Management Conference, pp. 1-13,
Said Business School, Oxford University.

Einarsdottir, J. (2005a). Playschool in pictures: children’s photographs as a research method. Early

Child Development and Care, 175 (6), 523-541.

Einarsdottir, J. (2005b). We can decide what to play! Children’s perception of quality in an Icelandic
playschool. Early Education and Development, 16 (4), 469-488.

Elbers, E. (1991). The development of competence and its social context. Educational Psychology
Review, 3, 73-94.

Ells, H. (2001). Talking pictures in working school lunches. Investigating food choice with children and
adolescents. British Food Journal, 103 (6), 374-382, in Kirova, A. & Emme, and M. Using photography
as a means of phenomenological seeing: Doing phenomenology with immigrant children, Photography
and Phenomenology

Eliot, T.S. (1888-1965). The Wasteland (First published 1922). Parker, R. A. Retrieved 6 Dec 2008.
http:/world.std.com/~raparker/exploring/thewasteland/explore.html.

388
 Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R.I. & Shaw, L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic field notes. Chicago,
University of Chicago Press. In S. Kouritzin (2002). The ‘half-baked’ concept of ‘raw’ data in
ethnographic observation. Canadian Journal of Education, 27 (1), 119-138.

Entwisle, D. R. & Alexander, K. L. (1993). Entry into school: the beginning school transition and
educational stratification in the United States. Annual Review Sociology, 19, 401-423.

Epstein, D., Elwood, J., Hey, V. & Maw, J. (1998). Failing Boys? Issues in Gender and Achievement.
Open University Press, Buckingham. In A. Keddie (2002). It’s more than a game: little boys,
masculinities and football culture. Paper, Australian Association for Research in Education.

Ettinger, R. H., Crooks, R. L. & Stein, J. (1994). Psychology: Science, Behaviour and Life. Fort Worth,
TX: Harcourt Brace. In S. Garven, J. M. Wood, R. S. Malpass & J. S. Shaw (1998). More than
suggestion: the effect of interviewing techniques from the McMartin preschool case. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 83, 347-359.

Evans, J. (2007). Whatever happened to playtime? Education Research and Perspectives, 34 (1), 198-
211.

Fabian, H. (1996). Phototalk: Interviewing Young Children. Paper. European Early Childhood
Education Research Conference. 6th Lisbon. Portugal, Sept 1-4, 1996.

Fasoli, L. (2001). Research with children: ethical mine-fields. Australian Journal of Early Childhood,
26 (4), 7-11.

Faux, S. A., Walsh, M. & Deatrick, J. A. (1988). Intensive interviewing with children and adolescents.
Western Journal of Nursing Research, 10 (2), 180-194.

Fenstermacher, G. D. (1990). Some moral considerations on teaching as a profession. In J. I. Goodlad,

R. Soder, & K. A. Sirotnik. (Eds.) (1990). The moral dimensions of teaching. San Francisco. Jossey-
Bass Publishers (pp. 130-151).

Fenstermacher, G. D. (1994). “The knower and the known: the nature of knowledge and research on
teaching, in L. Darling-Hammond, (Ed) Review of Research in Education, 20, 3-56, Washington, DC.
American Educational Research Association. In E. Wood (2003). The power of pupil perspectives in
evidence-based practice: the case of gender and achievement. Research Papers in Education, 18 (4),
365-383.

Fernie, D. E. (2001). Becoming a student: messages from first settings. Theory Into Practice, XXV11
(1), 3-10.

389
Finch, L. P. (2004). Understanding patients’ lived experiences: the interrelationships of rhetoric &
hermeneutics. Nursing Philosophy, 5, 251-257.

Fine, G. A. (1987). With the boys: littler league baseball and the preadolescent culture. Chicago.
University of Chicago Press. In C. Curtin (2001). Eliciting children’s voices in qualitative research. Am.
J.Occup Ther., 55 (3), 295-302.

Fine, G. A. & Sandstrom, K. L. (1988). Knowing children: participant observation with minors. Beverly
Hills, CA. Sage Publications. In C. Curtin (2001). Eliciting children’s voices in qualitative research.
Am. J.Occup Ther., 55 (3), 295-302.

Fine, M., Weis, L., Weseen., S. & Wong, M. (2000). For whom? Qualitative research, representations
and social responsibilities. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.) The Handbook of Qualitative Research.
(pp. 107-132), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fink, A & Kosecoff, J. (1977). Girls and boys changing attitudes toward school. Psychology of Women
Quarterly, 2 (1), 44-49.

Finn, J. D. (1989). Withdrawing from school. Review of Educational Research, 59 (2), 117-142.

Finn, J.D. & Gerber, S. B. (2005). Small classes in the early grades, academic achievement and
graduating from high school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97 (2), 214-223.

Flaxman, S.G. (2000). What happened to play? Teacher Magazine. www.teachermagazine

org/ee/ewstory.cfm?slug=23flaxman.h 19 keywords = physical%20education

Fontane, A. & Frey, J. (1994). Interviewing: The art and science. In J. Tollefson, K. Usher, D. Francis,
& J Owens. (2001). What you ask is what you get: learning from interviewing in qualitative research.
Contemporary Nurse, 10 (3-4), 258-264.

Ford, K. & Turner, de S. (2001). Stories seldom told: paediatric nurses’ experiences of caring for
hospitalised children with special needs and their families. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 33 (3), 288-
295.

Ford, K., Sankey, J. & Crisp, J. (2007). Development of children’s assent document using a child-
centred approach. Journal of Child Health Care, 11 (19), 19-28.

Frank, B., Kehler, M., Lovel, T. & Davison, K. (2003). A tangle of trouble: boys, masculinity and
schooling – future directions. Educational Review, 55 (2), 119-133.

390
 Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C. & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: potential of the concept,
state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74 (1), 59-110.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York. Continuum.

Frymer, B. (2005). Freire, alienation, and contemporary youth: toward pedagogy of everyday life.
InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies, 1 (2), Article 3.
http://repositories.cdlib.org/gseis/interactions/vol1/iss2/art3

Gadamer, H-G. (1975). Hermeneutics and social science. Cultural Hermeneutics, 2, 307-330.

Gadamer, H-G. (1981). Reason in the Age of Science. (Trans F. G. Lawrence) Cambridge Mass. MIT
Press.

Gadamer, H-G. (1986). The relevance of the beautiful and other essays. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. In M. van Manen (1990). Researching Lived Experience. Human science for an action
sensitive pedagogy. London, Ontario, Canada: University of Western Ontario.

Gadamer, H.G. (2004). Truth and Method (3rd rev. English edn.). (J. Weinsheimer & D. Marshall, trans.)
(original work published 1960) London, Sheed & Ward.

Gallacher, L. & Gallagher, M. (2005). Participatory methods in research with children: a critique. Paper.
Emerging issues in the geography of children and youths. Brunel University, Uxbridge. West London.
UK.

Gallagher, S. (1992). Hermeneutics and Education. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Game, A. & Metcalf, A. (1996). Passionate Sociology. London. Sage.

Garbarino, J. & Stott, F. M. (1992). What Children Can Tell Us. California. Jossey-Bass Inc.

Gardiner, M. (1999). Bakhtin and the metaphonics of perception. In E. A. Kinsella. (2006).

Hermeneutics and critical hermeneutics: exploring possibilities within the art of interpretation. Forum:
Qualitative Social research, 7(3). Retrieved 8 March 2008.
http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-06/06-3-19-e_p.html

Garven, S., Wood, J. M., Malpass, R. S. & Shaw, J. S. (1998). More than suggestion: the effect of
interviewing techniques from the McMartin preschool case. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 347-
359.

391
Geanellos, R. (1998a). Hermeneutic philosophy. Part 1: implications of its use as methodology in
interpretive nursing research. Nursing Inquiry, 5, 154-163.

Geanellos, R. (1998b). Hermeneutic philosophy. Part 11: a nursing research example of the hermeneutic
imperative to address forestructures/pre-understandings. Nursing Inquiry, 5 (4), 238-247.

Genovese, E. E. (1972). Roll Jordan, roll. The world the slaves made. New York. Pantheon. In E.
Jordan, & A. Cowan, (1995). Warrior narratives in the kindergarten classroom: renegotiating the social
contract. Gender and Society, 9 (6), 727-743.

Gergen, M. M. & Gergen, K. J. (2000). Qualitative inquiry: tensions and transformations. In N. K.

Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research: (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Giacomini, M. K. (2001). The rocky road: qualitative research as evidence. ACP Journal Club, 134 (1),
A11-A13.

Gilbert, P. & Gilbert, R. (2001). Masculinity, inequality and post-school opportunities: disrupting
oppositional politics about boys’ education. Int. J. Inclusive Education, 5 (1), 1-13.

Giorgi, A. (1989). Some theoretical and practical issues regarding the psychological phenomenological
method. Saybrook Review, 7, 71-85.

Giorgi, A. (1997). The theory, practice and evaluation of the phenomenological methods as a qualitative
research procedure. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 28, 235-260.

Giorgi, A. (2002). The question of validity in qualitative research. Journal of Phenomenonological

Psychology, 33 (1), 1-18.

Glaser, B. G. & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative
research. London: Weidenfield & Nicholson.

Glesne, C. (1997). That rare feeling: re-presenting research through poetic transcription. Qualitative
Inquiry, 3 (2), 202-221.

Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative
Report, 8 (4), 597-606. Retrieved 20 December 2008.
http://www.nova.edu/sss/QR/QR8-4/golafshani.pdf

392
Good, B. J. (1994). Medicine, rationality and experience. An anthropological perspective. Cambridge.
University Press.

Goncu, A. & Perone, A. (2005). Pretend play as a life-span activity. Topoi, 24, 137-147.

Gorard, S. (2000). One of us cannot be wrong: the paradox of achievement gaps. The British Journal of
Sociology of Education, 21 (3), 391-401.

Graneheim, U. H. & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts,
procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today, 24, 105-112.

Graue, E. & Walsh, D. J. (1998). Studying Children in Context. Theories, Methods, and Ethics.
Thousand Oaks. London. Sage Publications.

Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative Data Analysis. An Introduction. London. Sage Publications.

Greene, S. & Hogan, D. (Eds). (2005). Researching Children’s Experience. Methods and Approaches.
London. Sage Publications.

Greenfield, C. (2004). Can run, play on bikes, jump the zoom slide, and play on the swings: exploring
the value of outdoor play. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 29 (2), 1-5.

Greig, A. & Taylor, J. (1999). Doing Research with Children. London. Sage Publications,

Grondin, J. (1994). Introduction to philosophical hermeneutics. (Trans. Weinsheimer, J.) New Haven,
Connecticut. Yale University Press, In T. Koch. (1996). Implementation of a hermeneutic inquiry in
nursing: philosophy, rigour and representation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 24, 174-184.

Gross, J. & Hayne, H. (1999). Drawing facilitates children’s verbal reports after long delays. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Applied, 5 (3), 265-283.

Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y.
S. Lincoln (1994). (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research: Vol.1. The Landscape of Qualitative
Research. (pp. 195-220). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Guglietti-Kelly, I. & Westcott, M.R. (1990). She’s just shy: a phenomenonological study of shyness.
Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 21, 150-164.

Gurian, M. (1999). A fine young man: what parents, mentors and educators can do to shape adolescent
boys into exceptional young men. New York: Jeremy P. Taucher /Putnam. In M. Weaver-Hightower

393
 (2003). The ‘boy turn’ in research on gender and education. Review of Educational Research, 73 (4),
471-498.

Hadley, P.A., Wilcox, K. A. & Rice, M. L. (1994). Talking at school: teacher expectations in preschool
and kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 9, 111-129.

Haith-Cooper, M. (2003). An exploration of tutors’ experiences of facilitating problem-based learning.

Part 1, 2003; an educational research methodology combining innovation and philosophical tradition.
Nurse Education Today, 23, 58-64.

Halcomb, E. J. & Davidson, P.M. (2006). Is verbatim transcription of interview data always necessary?
Applied Nursing Research, 19, 38-42.

Hammersley, M. & Woods, P. (1984). Life in School: The Sociology of Pupil Culture. Milton Keyes,
UK. Open University Press.

Haney, W., Russell, M. & Bebell, D. (2004). Drawing on education: using drawings to document
schooling and support change. Harvard Educational Review, 74 (3), 241-271.

Hanke, V. (2000). Learning about literacy: Children’s versions of the literacy hour. Journal of
Research in Reading, 23 (3), 287-297.

Harrett, J. (2002). Young children talking: an investigation into the personal stories of key stage one
infants. Early Years, 22 (1), 20-29.

Harrison, J., MacGibbon, L. & Morton, M. (2001). Regimes of trustworthiness in qualitative research:
the rigours of reciprocity. Qualitative Inquiry, 7, 323-345.

Hatch, J. A. (1990). Young children as informants in classroom studies. Early Childhood Research
Quarterly, 5 (2), 251-264.

Hatch, J.A. (1995). Qualitative research in early childhood settings. Westport. CT. Praeger Publishers.

Hatch, J.A. (2002). A special section on personalized instruction – accountability shovedown: resisting
the standards movement in early childhood education. Phi Delta Kappan, 83.6(Feb 2002): 457-500
Academic OneFile. Gale. University of Wollongong Library. 18 May 2008.
http://find.galegroup.com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au:2048/itx/start.do?prodId =AONE

Hedges, H. (2000). Teaching in early childhood: time to merge constructivist views so learning through
play equals teaching through play. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 25 (4), 16-21.

394
 Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. (J. Macquarie & E. Robinson, trans.). Bloomington, IN: Indiana
University Press (original work published 1927) in T. Koch, (1996). Implementation of hermeneutic
inquiry in nursing: philosophy, rigour and representation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 24, 174-184.

Hein, S. F. & Austin, W. (2001). Empirical and hermeneutic approaches to phenomenological research
in psychology: a comparison. Psychological Methods, 6, 3-17.

Heshusius, L. (1995). Listening to children: what could we possibly have in common? From concerns
with self to participatory consciousness. Theory Into Practice, 43 (2), 117-123.

Higginbottom, G. M. A. (2004). Sampling issues in qualitative research. Nurse Researcher, 12 (1), 7-

20.

Hodkinson, P. (1998). The origins of a theory of career decision-making: a case study of hermeneutical
research. British Educational Research Journal, 24 (5), 557-572.

Hoepfl, M. C. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: a primer for technology education researchers.
Journal of Technology Education, 9 (1) 1-16. http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v9n1/Hoepfl.html

Hogan, P. (2000). Gadamer and the philosophy of education. Encyclopaedia of Philosophy of Education.
At <http://www.vusst.hr/ENCYCLOPAEDIA/gadamer.htmn>

Holden, C. (2002). Contributing to the debate: the perspectives of children on gender, achievement and
literacy. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 3 (1), 97-110.

Holloway, I. (1997). Basic Concepts for Qualitative Research. Oxford. Blackwell Science.

Holroyd, C. (2001). Phenomenological research method, design and procedure: a phenomenological

investigation of the phenomenon of being-in-community as experienced by two individuals who have
participated in a community-building workshop. The Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenonology, 1 (1), 1-
12.

Holstein, J. & Gubrium, J. (1998). Active Interviewing. In D. Silverman (Ed) Qualitative Research
Theory, method and practice. London: Sage Publications. (pp. 113-129).

Hopper, R. (1988). Speech, for instance. The exemplar studies of conversation. Journal of Language
and Social Psychology, 7 (1), 47-63 in R. J. Chenail, (1995). Presenting qualitative data. The Qualitative
Report. 2, 3.
http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR2-3/presenting.html. Retrieved 2 March 2008.

395
House of Representatives Standing Committee of Education and Training. (2002). Boys: getting it right:
Report of the Inquiry into the Education of Boys. Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia,
Canberra.

Howe, K.R. & Dougherty, K.C. (1993). Ethics, institutional review boards, and the changing face of
educational research. Educational Review. 22 (9), 16-21. In A. M. Kleinsasser (2000). Researchers,
reflexivity and good data: writing to unlearn. Theory Into Practice, 39 (3), 155-161.

Hsiung, P-C. (2008). Treading a different path? Thoughts on childhood studies in Chinese history. The
Journal of the History of Childhood and Youth. 1 (1), 77-85.

Hudson-Ross, S., Cleary, L. & Casey, M. (1993). Children’s voices: children talk about literacy.
Portsmouth, N. H. Heinemann. In A. Cook-Sather. (2002). Authorizing students’ perspectives: toward
trust, dialogue and change in education. Educational Researcher, 31 (4), 3-14.

Husserl, E. (1931). Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenonology (Gibson W.R. & Boyce,
trans.) London. Allen and Unwin. In K. Walsh (1996). Philosophical hermeneutics and the project of
Hans Georg Gadamer: implications for nursing research. Nursing Inquiry. 3, 231-237.

Hycner, R. H. (1999). Some guidelines for the phenomenonological analysis of interview data. In A.
Bryman & R.G. Burgess (Eds) Qualitative Research (Vol 3, pp. 143—164), London, Sage. In T.
Groenewald. (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods. 3 (1). Article 4. Retrieved 6 Dec 2006.
http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_1html/groenewald.html

Hyde, B. (2005). Beyond logic – entering the realm of mystery: hermeneutic phenomenology as a tool
for reflecting on children’s spirituality. International Journal of Children’s Spirituality, 10 (1), 31-44.

Hymel, S. & Ford, L. (2003). School completion and academic success; the impact of early social-
emotional competence. In Tremblay, R. E., Barr, R.G., Peters, RDeV. (Eds) Encyclopedia on Early
Childhood Development. [online]. Montreal, Quebec: Centre of Excellence for early Childhood
development; 2003:1-7. Available at http://www/excellence-earlychildhood.ca/documents/Hymel-
FordANGxp.pdf. Retrieved 26 August 2006.

Hyndman, R. M. (2007). Connecting school culture to boys’ learning: an investigation into how school
culture affects boys’ learning in one New Zealand primary school. Unpublished PhD. The University of
Waikato.

396
 Hytten, K. (2006). Education for social justice: provocations and challenges. Educational Theory, 56
(2), 221 – 236.

Innes, M., Moss, T. & Smigiel, H. (2001). What do the children say? The importance of student voice.
Research in Drama Education, 6 (2), 207-221.

Imms, W.D. (2000). Multiple masculinities and the schooling of boys. Canadian Journal of Education,
25 (2), 152-165.

Ironside, P.M. (2006). Using narrative pedagogy: learning and practising interpretive thinking. Journal
of Advanced Nursing, 55 (4), 478-486.

Jain, A. & Ogden, J. (1999). General practitioners’ experience of patients’ complaints: qualitative
study. British Medical Journal, 318, 1596-1599.

James, A. (1998). Play in childhood: an anthropological perspective. Child Psychology & Psychiatry
Review, 3 (3), 104-109.

James, A., Jenks, C. & Prout, A. (1998). Theorising Childhood. Cambridge. Polity Press.

Jardine, D. W., Graham, T., LaGrange, A. & Kisling-Saunders, H. (2000). ‘Staying within the lines’. Re-
imagining what is ‘elementary’ in the art of schooling. Language and Literacy: A Canadian OnLine E-
Journal, 2(1). Available at http://www.langandlit.ualberta.ca/archives/vol21papers/stayingwithin.htm

Jimerson, S. R. Ferguson, P., Whipple, A. P., Anderson, G. E. & Dalton, M. J. (2002). Exploring the
association between grade retention and dropout: a longitudinal study examining socio-emotional,
behavioural and achievement characteristics of retained students. The California School Psychologist, 7,
51-62.

Johnson, M. E. (2000). Heidegger and meaning: implications for phenomenonological research.

Nursing Philosophy, 1, 134-146.

Johnson, P.H. & Nicholls, J.G. (1995). Voices we don’t want to hear and voices we don’t. Theory Into
Practice, 34 (2), 95-100.

Jones, A. (2001). Some experiences of professional practice and beneficial changes from clinical
supervision by community Macmillan nurses. European Journal of Cancer Care, 10(1), 21-31. In T.
Groenewald, (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods. 3 (1). Article 4. Retrieved 6 Dec 2006.
http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_1html/groenewald.html

397
Jones, C. & Tannock, J. (2000). A matter of life and death. A reflective account of two examples of
practitioner research into children’s understanding and experience of death and bereavement (pp. 86-97).
In A. Lewis & G. Lindsay (Eds) Researching Children’s Perspectives. Buckingham. Open University
Press.

Jordan, E. (1995). Fighting boys and fantasy play: the construction of masculinity in the early years of
school. Gender and Education, 7 (1), 69-86.

Jordan, E. & Cowan, A. (1995). Warrior narratives in the kindergarten classroom: renegotiating the
social contract. Gender and Society, 9 (6), 727-743.

Keddie, A. (2000). Research with young children: some ethical considerations. Journal of Educational
Enquiry, 1 (2), 72-81.

Keddie, A. (2002). It’s more than a game: little boys, masculinities and football culture. Paper,
Australian Association for Research in Education, Brisbane.

Keddie, A. (2006). Pedagogies and critical reflection key understandings for transformative gender
justice. Gender and Education, 18 (1), 99-114.

Kerdeman, D. (1998). Hermeneutics and education. Understanding, control and agency. Educational
Theory, 48 (2), 241-266.

Kessler, S. (1989). Boys’ and girls’ effect on the kindergarten curriculum. Early Childhood Research
Quarterly, 4, 479-503.

Kinchin, I. M. (2004). Investigating students’ beliefs about their preferred role as learners. Educational
Research, 46 (3), 302-312.

King, N. (1992).The impact of context on the play of young children. In J. Ailwood (2002).
Homogenising play: governing preschool childhoods. Paper presented at the Australian Association for
Research in Education. Annual Conference. Brisbane, Australia,

Kinsella, E. A. (2006). Hermeneutics and Critical Hermeneutics. Exploring possibilities within the art of
interpretation. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7 (3), Art 19 http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/

Klein, H. K. & Myers. (1999). A set of principles for conducting and evaluating interpretive field
studies in information systems. MIS Quarterly, Special Issue on Intensive Research, 23 (1), 67-93.

398
 Kleinsasser, A. M. (2000). Researchers, reflexivity and good data: writing to unlearn. Theory Into
Practice, 39 (3), 155-161.

Koch, T. (1992). Establishing rigour in qualitative research: the decision trail. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 19, 976-986.

Koch, T. (1995). Interpretive approaches to nursing research: the influence of Husserl and Heidegger.
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 21, 827-836.

Koch, T. (1996). Implementation of hermeneutic inquiry in nursing: philosophy, rigour and

representation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 24, 174-184.

Koch, T. & Harrington, A. (1998). Reconceptualising rigour: the case for reflexivity, Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 28 (5), 883-891.

Kogler, H. H. (1999). The power of dialogue. Critical hermeneutics after Gadamer and Foucault.
London. MIT Press.

Koocher, G.P. & Keith-Spiegel, P. (1994). Scientific issues in psychosocial and educational research
with children. In C. Curtin, (2001). Eliciting children’s voices in qualitative research. Am. J. Occup.
Ther., 55 (3), 295-302.

Kortesluoma, R. L. & Nikkonnen, M. (2004). I had this horrible pain: the sources and causes of pain
experiences in 4-to-11-year-old hospitalized children. Journal of Child Health Care, 8, 210.
http://chc.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/8/3/210 Retrieved 8 December 2007.

Kortesluoma, R. Hentinen, M. & Nikkonen, M. (2003). Conducting a qualitative child interview:

methodological considerations. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 42 (4), 434-441.

Kouritzin, S. K (2002). The half-baked concept of raw data in ethnographic observation. Canadian
Journal of Education, 27 (1), 119-138.

Krahenbuhl, S. & Blades, M. (2006). The effect of interviewing techniques on young children’s
response to questions. Child Care Health and Development, 32 (3), 321-331.

Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews: an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA.
Sage.

Kvale, S. (2006). Dominance through interviews and dialogues. Qualitative Inquiry, 12 (3), 480-500.

399
 Ladd, G. W. Birch, S. H. & Buhs, E. S. (1999). Children’s social and scholastic lives in kindergarten:
Related spheres of influence? Child Development, 70 (6), 1373-1400.

Ladd, G.W., Buhs, E. S. & Seid, M. (2000). Children’s initial sentiments about kindergarten: is school
liking an antecedent of early classroom participation and achievement? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 46,
255-279.

Laidlaw, L. (2004). On learning to write her name: an example of research informed by literacy
anthropology. Journal for the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 2 (1), 197-210.

Laidlaw, L. (2006). On the importance of little details: complexity, emergence and pedagogy.
Educational Insights, 9 (1), 1-13.
http://www.ccfi.educ.ubc.ca/publication/insights.vo9n01/articles/laidlaw.html

Laidlaw, M. (2006). How might we enhance the educational value of our research-base at the new
University of Guyan. Researching stories for the social good. Inaugural Professorial Lecture. Ningxia
Teachers University 13 June 2006, pp.1-13.
http://www.jackwhitehead.com-/china/mlinaugural.htm

Lapadat, J. C. & Lindsay, A. C. (1999). Transcription in research and practice: from standardization of
technique to interpretive positioning. Qualitative Inquiry (March 1999): 64 (2). Academic OneFile. Gale.
University of Wollongong Library. 17 Feb. 2008
<http://find.galegroup.com.ezproxy.uow.edu.au:2048/itx/start.do?prodId=AONE>

LaParo, K.M. Rimm-Kaufmann, S.E. & Pianta, R. C. (2006). Kindergarten to 1st grade: classroom
characteristics and the stability and change of children’s classroom experiences. Journal of Research in
Childhood Education, 21 (2), 189-202.

Lather, P. (1986). Issues in validity in openly ideological research: between a rock and a soft place.
Interchange, 17, 63-84.

Laupa, M. & Turiel, E. (1986). Children’s conceptions of adult and peer authority. Child Development,
57, 405-412.

Laverty, S. M. (2003). Hermeneutic phenomenology and phenomenology: a comparison of historical and

methodological considerations. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2 (3) Article 3. Retrieved
12.09.06 from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/2_3final/pdf/laverty.pdf

Lawn, C. (2006). Gadamer. A Guide for the Perplexed. London. Continuum.

400
 Leroy, L. (1874). “Les Impressionnistes.” Le Charivari. April 25, 187. Online posting.
artchive.com/galleries/1874/74critic.htm.freei.net

Leseman, P. P. M., Rollenberg, L. & Rispens, J. (2001). Playing and working in kindergarten: cognitive
co-construction in two educational situations. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 16, 363-384.

Lewis, A. (1992). Group child interviews as a research tool. British Educational Research Journal, 18
(4), 413-421

Lewis, A. (2002). Accessing, through research interviews, the views of children with difficulties in
learning. Support for Learning, 17 (3), 110-116.

Lewis, A. (2004). ‘And when did you last see your father?’ Exploring the viewpoints of children with
learning difficulties/disabilities. British Journal of Special Education, 31 (1), 3-9.

Lewis, A. & Lindsay, G. (Eds) (2000). Researching Children’s Perspectives. Buckingham.

Philadelphia. PA: Open University Press.

Levine, J. S. & Zimmerman, J.D. (1996). Using qualitative data to inform public policy. Evaluating
Choose to de-Fuse. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 66 (3), 363-377. In C. M. Heary & E.
Hennessey, E. (2002). The use of focus group interviews in pediatric health care research. Journal of
Pediatric Psychology, 27 (1), 47-57.

Lincoln, Y. S. (1995). Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research. Qualitative
Inquiry, 1 (3), 275-289.

Lincoln, Y. S. (2001). Reconsidering rapport: interviewing as postmodern inquiry practice. Paper,

Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.

Lincoln, Y.S. & Denzin, N.K. (1994). The fifth moment. In N. K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds) The
Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd Edn). (pp. 563-574) Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage.

Lincoln, Y. S. & Guba, E.G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging
confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.) The Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd Ed.)
(pp.163-188). Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage.

Lincoln, Y. S. & Tierney, W. G. (2002). “What we have here is failure to communicate…” Qualitative
Research and Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) Paper. Annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association (New Orleans, LA, April 1-5, 2002).

401
 Lindsay, G. (2000). Researching children’s perspectives: ethical issues. In G. L. A. Lewis & G. Lindsay
(Eds). Researching Children’s Perspectives, pp. 33-19. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.

Lindseth, A. & Norberg, A. (2004). A phenomenological hermeneutical method for researching lived
experience. Scand J Caring Sci., 18, 145-153.

Lingard, B., Martino, W., Mills, M. & Bahr, M. (2002). Addressing the educational needs of boys.
Research Report. Department of Education, Science and Training, Canberra.

MacDonald, D., Kirk, D., Metzler, M., Nilges, L. M., Schempp, P. & Wright, J. (2002). ‘It’s all very
well, in theory: theoretical perspectives and their applications in contemporary pedagogical research’,
Quest, 54 (2), 133-156.

Malchiodi, C. A. (1998). Understanding Children’s Drawings. New York. The Guilford Press.

Mandell, N. (1988). The least adult role in studying children. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography,
16, 433-467.

Manderson, L., Bennett, E. & Andajani-Sutjahjo, S. (2006). The social dynamics of the interview, age,
class and gender. Qualitative Health Research, 16, 1317-1334.
http://qhr.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/16/10/1317

Martin, A.J. (2003). Boys and motivation. The Australian Educational Researcher, 30 (3), 43-65.

Martino, W. (1995). Gendered learning practices: exploring the costs of hegemonic masculinity for boys
and girls in school. Proceedings of the Promoting Gender Equity Conference, 22-24 February 1995.
ACT Department of Education: Canberra.

Martino, W. (1999). Cool boys, party animals, squids and poofters: interrogating the dynamics and
politics of adolescent masculinities in school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20 (2), 239-
262.

Martino, W. & Berill, D. (2003). Boys, schooling and masculinities: interrogating the ‘right’ way to
educate boys. Educational Review, 55 (2), 99-117.

Martino, W. & Pallotta-Chiarolli, M. (2003). So What’s A Boy? Addressing Issues of Masculinity and
Schooling. Philadelphia. Open University Press.

Martino, W., Lingard, B., & Mills, M. (2004). Issues in boys’ education: a question of teacher threshold
knowledges? Gender and Education, 16(4), 435-454.

402
 Mauthner, M. (1997). Methodological aspects of collecting data from children: lessons from three
research projects. Children and Society, 11, 16-28.

Mayall, B. (1996). Children, health and social order. Buckingham, England. Open University Press. In
C. Greenfield (2004). Can run, play on bikes, jump the zoom slide, and play on the swings: exploring
the value of outdoor play. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 29 (2), 1-5.

Mayall, B. (2000). Conversations with children: working with generational issues. In P. Christenson &
A. James (Eds.) (2008). Research with Children. Perspectives and Practices (pp. 120-135). London.
Falmer.

Maykut, P. & Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning Qualitative research: a Philosophical practical guide.
London. The Falmer Press.

Mays, N. & Pope, C. (2000). Assessing quality in qualitative research. British Medical Journal, 320
(7226), 50-52.

McIntyre, D., Pedder, D. & Ruddock, J. (2005). Pupil voice: comfortable and uncomfortable learnings
for teachers. Research Papers in Education, 20 (2), 149-168.

Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962) Phenomenology of perception (C. Smith. Trans.) New York: Routledge
(original work published 1945). In M. van Manen (1990). Researching Lived Experience. Human
science for an action sensitive pedagogy. London, Canada. University of Western Ontario,

Messiou, K. (2002). Marginalisation in primary schools. Listening to children’s voices. Support for
Learning, 17 (3), 117-121.

Miles, M. B. (1979). Qualitative data as an attractive nuisance: the problem of analysis. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 24, 590-601.

Miles B. M. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An Expanded Source Book. Qualitative Data Analysis.
(Second edition) California. Sage Publications,

Mills, M. (2000). Issues in implementing boys’ programmes in schools, male teachers and
empowerment. Gender and Education, 12 (2), 221-238.

Mills, M. (2003). Shaping the boys’ agenda: the backlash blockbusters. International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 7 (1), 57-73.

403
Mills, M. & Keddie, A. (2007). Teaching boys and gender justice. International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 11 (3), 335-354.

Mishna, F., Antle, B. J. & Regehr, C. (2008). Tapping the perspectives of children. Emerging issues in
qualitative research. Qualitative Social Work, 3 (4), 449-468.

Mitchell, G. J. & Cody, W. K. (1993). The role of theory in qualitative research. Nursing Science
Quarterly, 6 (4), 170-178.

Moinian, F. (2006). I can tell it as it is! Exploring how children write and talk about themselves in
school. Ethnography and Education, 1 (2), 231-246.

Montandon, C. & Osiek, F. (1998). Children’s perspectives on their education. Childhood: A Global
Journal of Child Research, 5 (3), 247-263.

Morgan-Fleming, B. & Doyle, W. (1997). Children’s interpretations of curriculum events. Teaching

and Teacher Education, 13 (5), 499-511.

Morrow, V. (1999). ‘We are people too’: Children’s and young people’s perspectives on children’s
rights and decision- making in England. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 7, 149-170.

Morrow, M. & Richards, M. (1996). The ethics of social research with children: an overview. Children
& Society, 10 (2), 90-105.

Morse, J. (1991). Negotiating commitment and involvement in nurse-patient relationships. Journal of

Advanced Nursing, 16, 455-468.

Moules, N.J. (2002). Hermeneutic inquiry: paying heed to history and Hermes – an ancestral,
substantive, and methodological tale. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1 (3). Article 1.
Retrieved (unknown) from http://www.ualberta.ca/~ijqm/

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenonological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks. California. Sage

Publications.

Mulder, M. R. & Vrij, A. (1996). Explaining conversation rules to children: an intervention study to
facilitate children’s accurate responses. Child Abuse and Neglect, 20 (7), 632-631.

Muijis, D., Harris, A. & Chapman, C. (2004). Improving schools in socioeconomically disadvantaged
areas - a review of research evidence. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 15 (2), 149-175.

404
Myhill, D. (2002). Bad boys and good girls? Patterns of interaction and response in whole class teaching.
British Educational Research Journal, 28 (3), 339-352.

Myhill, D. & Jones, S. (2006). ‘She doesn’t shout at no girls’: pupils’ perceptions of gender equity in the
classroom. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36 (1), 99-113.

Neilson, T. W. (2000). Hermeneutic phenomenonological data representation: portraying the ineffable.

[online] Australian Art Education, 23 (1), 9-14.
http://search.informat.com.au.exproxy.ouw.edu.au:2048/fullTextedn=103859; res=AEIPT ISSN: 1032-
1942 Retrieved 27 Feb 08.

Nespor, J. (1998). The meanings of research: kids as subjects and kids as inquirers. Qualitative Inquiry, 4
(3), 369-389.

New South Wales Department of Education and Training (2000-2008). Illawarra and South East
Region office records, Wollongong/Queanbeyan. NSW, Australia.

New South Wales Government Advisory Committee on Education, Training and Tourism (Chair: S.
O’Doherty) (1994). A Report to the Minister for Education, Training and Youth affairs on the Inquiry
into Boys’ Education, Challenges and Opportunities: A Discussion Paper (Sydney: Ministry of
Education and Youth Affairs) in P. Gilbert & R. Gilbert (2001). Masculinity, inequality and post-school
opportunities: disrupting oppositional politics about boys’ education. Int. J. Inclusive Education, 5 (1),
1-13.

Nicolopoulou, A. (2005). Play and narrative in the process of development: commonalities, differences
and interrelations. Cognitive Development, 20 (4), 495-502.

Nigro, G. N. & Wolpow, S. I. (2004). Interviewing young children with props: prior experience
matters. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 18, 549-565.

Nilan, P. (2000). You’re hopeless I swear to God: shifting masculinities in classroom talk. Gender and
Education, 12 (1), 530-568.

Noel, J. (1999). On the varieties of phronesis. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 3 (3), 273-289.

Novinger, S. & O’Brien, L. (2003). Beyond ‘boring, meaningless shit’ in the academy: early childhood
teacher educators under the regulatory gaze. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 4 (1), 3-31.

O’Donoghue, T. & Punch, K. (Eds). (2003). Qualitative educational research in action: doing and
reflection. London & N.Y. Routledge-Falmer.

405
Olafsdottir, M. P. (1996). Kids are both girls and boys in Iceland. Women’s Studies International
Forum, 19 (4), 357-369.

Olaussen, B., Utbult, Y. Y., Hansson, S., Krantz, M., Brydolf, M., Lindstrom, B. & Holmgren, D.
(2006). Transplanted children’s experiences of daily living: Children’s narratives about their lives
following transplantation. Pediatric Transplantation, 10, 575 -585.

Ondrusek, N., Abramovich, R., Pencharz, P. & Koren, G. (1998). Empirical examination of the ability
of children to give consent to clinical research. Journal of Medical Ethics, 24 (3), 158-165. In K. Ford,
J. Sankey & J. Crisp. (2007). Development of children’s assent documents using a child-centred
approach. J. Child Health Care, 11, 19-38.

Orlikowski, W. J. T. & Baroudi, J. J. (1991). Studying information technology in organisations: research

approaches and assumptions. Information Systems Research, 2, 1-28.

Osman, N. (2005). Children’s Perceptions of School, Chapter 14, pp. 182-192. In J. Mason & T. Fattore.
(2005). Children Taken Seriously. Theory, Policy and Practice. London. Jessica Kingsley Publishers,

Pallas, A.M., Entwisle, D. R. Alexander, K. L. & Cadigan, D. (1987). Children who do exceptionally
well in first grade. Sociology of Education, 60 (4), 257-271.

Paley, V. G. (1984). Boys and girls: superheroes in the doll corner. Chicago, IL. University of Chicago
Press. In E. Jordan (1995) Fighting, boys and fantasy play: the construction of masculinity in the early
years of school. Gender and Education, 7 (1), 69-86.

Parker, W. C. (1984) Interviewing children: problems and promise. The Journal of Negro Education, 53
(1), 18-28.

Parkinson, D. D. (2001). Securing trustworthy data from an interview situation with young children: Six
integrated responses. Child Study Journal, 31 (3), 137-156.

Partington, G. (2001). Qualitative research interviews: Identifying problems in technique. Issues in

Educational Research, 11(2), 32-44.
http://education.curtin.edu.au/iier/iier11/partington.html

Pascoe, E. (1996). The value of nursing research of Gadamer’s hermeneutic philosophy. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 24, 1309-1314.

406
Patton, M. Q. (1998). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. 2nd Edn. Newbury Park, CA. Sage
Publications.

Pellegrini, A. D. & Smith, K. (1998). The development of play during childhood: forms and possible
functions. Child Psychology & Psychiatry Review, 3 (2), 51-57.

Pellegrini, A. D. & Bohn, C. (2005). The role of recess in children’s cognitive performance and school
adjustment. Educational Researcher, 34 (1), 13-20.

Perry, B., Dockett, S. & Howard, L. (2000). Starting school: issues for children, parents and teachers.
Journal of Australian Research in Early Childhood, 7 (1), 41-53.

Perry, B., Dockett, S. & Tracey, D. (1998). At preschool they read to you, at school you learn to read.
Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 23 (4), 6-11.

Piaget, J. (1973). The Child’s Conception of the World. (Trans J & A Tomlinson). London. Paladin.

Pifer, D. A. (2000). Getting in trouble: the meaning of school for “problem” students. The Qualitative
Report. [On line serial] 5 (1&2) Retrieved 13 Sept. 06 (http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR5-1/pifer.html)

Pioch, N. (2006). WebMuseum, Paris.

http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/

Pipe, M., Gee, S. & Wilson, C. (1993) Cues, props and context. Do they facilitate children’s event
reports? In C. Curtin (2001). Eliciting children’s voices in qualitative research. Am. J. Occup. Ther.
55(3), 295-302.

Poe, E.A. (2000). Complete Poems. (Ed.) T.A. Mabbott. University of Illinois, Champaign, IL. (original
published 1849).

Poland, B. D. (1995). Transcription quality as an aspect of rigor in qualitative research. Qualitative

Inquiry, 1 (3), 290-310.

Poland, B. & Pederson, A. (1998). Reading between the lines: interpreting silences in qualitative
research. Qualitative Inquiry, 4 (2), 293-313.

Pollack, W. (1999). Real Boys. Rescuing Our Sons from the Myths of Boyhood. New York. NY. Henry
Holt.

407
 Polkinghorne, D. (1988). Narrative Knowing and Human Science. Albany, New York. State University
of New York Press. In M. E. Johnson (2000). Heidegger and meaning: implications for
phenomenonological research. Nursing Philosophy, 1, 134-146.

Pope, C. & Ziebland, S. (2000). Analysing qualitative data. British Medical Journal, 320, 114-116.

Potter, G. & Briggs, F. (2003). Children talk about their early experiences at school. Australian Journal
of Early Childhood, 28 (3), 44-49.

Potter, J. & Hepburn, A. (2005). Qualitative interviews in psychology: problems and possibilities.
Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2, 281-307.

Price, B. (2001). Laddered questions and qualitative data research interviews. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 37 (3), 273-281.

Priest, H. Roberts, P. & Woods, L. (2002). An overview of three different approaches to the
interpretation of qualitative data. Part J: theoretical issues. Nurse Researcher, 10 (1), 30-37.

Priestley, G. & Pipe, M. (1997). Using toys and models in interviews with young children. Applied
Cognitive Psychology, 11, 69-87.

Proverbs (2004). The Oxford Dictionary of Proverbs. Oxford University Press.

Prout. A. & James, A. (1997). A new paradigm for the sociology of childhood? Provenance, promise and
problems. In P. Darbyshire, W. Schiller, & C. MacDougall. (2005). Extending new paradigm childhood
research: meeting the challenges of including young children. Early Child Development and Care, 175
(6), 467-472.

Punch, S. (2002). Research with Children: The same or different from research with adults. Childhood, 9
(3), 321-341.

Pynoos, R. S. & Nader, K. (1989). Children’s memory and proximity to violence. Journal of American
Academy of Child and adolescent Psychiatry, 28, 236-241. In S. Garven, J. M. Wood, R. S. Malpass, &
Shaw, J. S. (1998). More than suggestion: the effect of interviewing techniques from the McMartin
preschool case. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 347-359.

Qvortrup, J. (1997). A voice for children in statistical and social accounting; a plea for children’s right to
be heard. In A. James & A. Prout (Eds) (1997). Constructing and reconstructing childhood:
Contemporary Issues in the Sociological Study of Childhood (pp. 85-106). London. Falmer Press.

408
Qvortrup, J. (2000). Macro-analysis of childhood. In Farrell, A., Tayler, C., & Tennent, L. & Gahan, D.
(2002). Listening to children: a study of child and family services. Early Years. 22 (1), 27-38.

Ranz-Smith, D. J. (2007). Teacher perception of play: in leaving no child behind are teachers leaving
childhood behind? Early Education and Development, 18 (2), 271-303.

Ravet, J. (2007). Making sense of disengagement in the primary classroom: a study of pupil, teacher
and parent perceptions. Research Papers in Education, 22 (3), 333-362.

Ready, D. D., LoGerfo, L.F., Burkham, D. T. & Lee, V. E. (2005). Explaining girls’ advantage in
Kindergarten Literacy learning: do classroom behaviours make a difference? The Elementary School
Journal, 106 (1), 21-40.

Reed, L. R. (1999). Troubling boys and disturbing discourses on masculinity and schooling: a feminist
exploration of current debates and interventions concerning boys in school. Gender and Education, 11
(1), 93-110.

Rees, D.K. (2003). Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutics: the vantage points and the horizons in
readers’ responses to an American literature text. The Reading Matrix, 3 (1), 2-16.

Reichert, M.C. & Kuriloff, P. (2004). Boys’ selves: identity and anxiety in the looking glass of school
life. Teachers College Record, 106 (3), 544-573.

Renold, E. (1997). All they’ve got on their minds is football: sport, masculinity and the gendered
practices of playground relations. Sport, Education and Society, 2 (1), 5-23.

Reifel, S. (1986). Children’s thinking about their early education experiences. Theory Into Practice, 27
(1), 62-66.

Rich, J. (1968). Interviewing children and adolescents. London. Macmillan Press. In R-L.
Kortesluoma, M. Hentinen & M. Nikkonen (2003). Conducting a qualitative child interview:
methodological considerations. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 42 (5), 434-441.

Richardson, L. (1994). ‘Writing: a method of inquiry.’ In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (2000). (Eds)
The Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp 923-948. London, Sage.

Richardson, L. (1997). ‘Poetic representation’ in Handbook of Research on Teaching Literacy through

the Communicative and Visual Arts. S.B. Heath (Ed) Macmillan: London. In G. Noone (2002).
Pedagogical relationships: unfolding possibilities. Paper Annual Conference Australian Association for
Research in Education, Brisbane.

409
Richardson, M. (1998). Poetics in the field and on the page. Qualitative Inquiry, 1, 451.

Rimm-Kaufman, S.E. & Pianta, R.C. (2000). An ecological perspective on the transition to
kindergarten: a theoretical framework to guide empirical research. Journal of Applied Developmental
Psychology, 21 (5), 491-511.

Ring, K. (2000). Young children talking about their drawings: methodological dilemmas. Paper. The
British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Cardiff University.

Robertson-Malt, S. (1999). Listening to them and reading me: a hermeneutic approach to understanding
the experience of illness. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29 (2), 290-297.

Rohrkemper, M. (1985). Individual differences in students’ perceptions of routine classroom events.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 29-44.

Rosen, H. (1991). The irrepressible genre. In M. Maclure, T. Phillips & A. Wilkinson (Eds) Oracy
Matters. Milton Keynes, Open University Press. In J. Harrett (2002). Young children talking: an
investigation into the personal stories of key stage one infants. Early Years, 22 (1), 20-26.

Rubin, J. (1984b). The art of art therapy. New York: Brunner/Mazel. In C.A. Malchiodi (1998).
Understanding Children’s Drawings. New York. The Guilford Press.

Rubin, H. J. & Rubin, I. S. (1995). Qualitative Interviewing: the art of hearing data. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage. In R. G. Sands & M. Krumer-Nevo (2006). Interview shock and shockwaves. Qualitative
Inquiry, 12 (5), 950-971.

Ruddock, J. & Flutter, J. (2000). Pupil participation and pupil perspective: ‘carving a new order of
experience’. Cambridge Journal of Education, 30 (1), 76-89.

Sadalo, M. L. A. & Adorno, R de C. F. (2001). Phenomenonology as a method to investigate the

experience lived: a perspective from Husserl and Merleau Ponty’s thought. Journal of Advanced
Nursing, 37 (3), 282-293.

Sandbaek, M. (1999). Adult images of childhood and research on client children. Int.J.Social Research
Methodology, 2 (3), 191-202.

Sandberg, A. (2002). Children’s concepts of teachers: ways of relating to play. Australian Journal of
Early Childhood, 27 (4), 18-22.

410
Sandberg, J. (2005). How do we justify knowledge produced with interpretive approaches?
Organizational Research Methods, 8 (1), 41-68.

Sandelowski, M. (1993). Rigor or rigor mortis: the research revisited. Advance in Nursing Science, 16,
1-8.

Sands, R. G. & Krumer-Nevo, M. (2006). Interview Shocks and Shockwaves. Qualitative Inquiry, 12
(5), 950-971.

Santoro, N. (2000). Cultural diversity in the teaching profession: a case study. Paper presented at the
Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.

Samdal, O., Wold, B. & Bronis, M. (1999). Relationship between students’ perceptions of school
environment, their satisfaction with school and perceived academic achievement: an international study.
School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10 (3), 296-320.

Samu, M. (2004). Impressionism: Art and Modernity. In Timeline of Art History. New York: The
Metropolitan Museum http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/_imml.htm (October 2004).

Saywitz, K. J. & Snyder, L. (1996). Narrative elaboration: test of a new procedure for interviewing
children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63 (6), 1347-1357.

Savin-Baden, M. (2004). Achieving reflexivity: moving researchers from analysis to interpretation in

collaborative inquiry. Journal of Social Work Practice, 18 (3), 365-378.

Sax, L. (2001). Reclaiming kindergarten: making kindergarten less harmful to boys. Psychology of Men
and Masculinity, 2 (1), 3-12.

Scheurich, J. J. (1995). A postmodern critique of research in interviewing. International Journal of

Qualitative Studies in Education, 8 (3), 239-252.

Scheurich, J. J. (1997). A postmodern critique of research interviewing. Research Method in the

Postmodern. London. Falmer Press.

Schleiermacher, F.E.D. (1964). Ausgewahlte padagogische Schriften Paderborn: Ferdinand Schoningh.

In M. van Manen (1990). Researching Lived Experience. Human Science for an action sensitive
pedagogy. London, Ontario, Canada. University of Western Ontario.

Schwandt, T. A. (1998). The interpretive view of educational matters: is there any other kind? Review of
Educational Research, 68 (4), 409-412.

411
Scott, J. (2000). Children as respondents: the challenge for qualitative researchers. London. Falmer
Press. In P. Darbyshire, W. Schiller, & C. MacDougall. (2005). Extending new paradigm childhood
research: meeting the challenges of including young children. Early Child Development and Care, 175
(6), 467-472.

Sendak, M. (1963). Where the Wild Things Are. New York. Harper & Rowe.

Seidman, I. (1998). Interviewing as Qualitative Research. A guide for researchers in Education and the
Social Sciences. New York. Teachers College Press.

Seigal, M. Waters, L., & Dinwiddy, L. (1988). Causal attributions for inconsistency under repeated
questioning. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 45, 438-456. In D. F. Bjorkland, B.R.Bjorkland,
R. B. Brown & W.S. Cassel, (1998). Children’s susceptibility to repeated questions: how misinformation
changes children’s answers and their minds. Applied Developmental Science, 2, 99-111.

Sharkey, P. (2001). Hermeneutic Phenomenology. In R. Barnacle (Ed.) Phenomenonology: qualitative

research methods. Melbourne. RMIT University Press,
http://search.informit.com.au

Sharp, S. (2006). Assessing value-added in the first year of schooling: some results and methodological
considerations. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17 (3), 329-346.

Sherman, A. (1997). Five- year- olds’ perception of why we go to school. Children and Society, 11,
117-127.

Siegler, R. (1992). Developmental psychology: Ovid. The other Alfred Binet. APA Centennial Series.
28 (2), 179-190.

Silverman, D. (2000). Doing Qualitative Research. A Practical Handbook. London: Sage.

Skattebol, J. (2006). Playing boys: the body, identity and belonging in the early years. Gender and
Education, 18 (5), 507-522.

Skelton, C. (1996). Learning to be tough: the fostering of maleness in one primary school. Gender and
Education, 8 (2), 185-197.

Skelton, C. (1997). Primary boys and hegemonic masculinities. British Journal of Sociology of
Education, 18 (3), 349-369.

412
Skelton, C. (2000). A passion for football dominant masculinities and primary schooling. Sport,
Education, and Society, 5 (1), 5-18.

Skelton, C. (2001). Schooling the boys: masculinities and primary education. Buckingham. Open
University Press.

Skelton, C. (2002). The ‘feminisation of schooling or ‘re-masculising’ primary education. International

Studies in Sociology of Education, 12 (1), 77-96.

Skelton, C. (2003). Male teachers and perceptions of masculinity. Educational Review, 55 (2), 195-209.

Skelton, C. & Read, B. (2006). Male and female teachers’ evaluative responses to gender and the
implications of these for the learning environment of primary aged pupils. International Studies in
Sociology of Education, 16 (2), 105-120.

Skinner, B.F. (1969). Contingencies of reinforcements: a theoretical analysis. New York. Appleton-
Century-Crofts. In A. Cook-Sather, (2002). Authorizing students’ perspectives: towards trust, dialogue
and change in education. Educational Researcher, 31 (4), 3-15.

Smilansky, S. (1990). Sociodramatic play: its relevance to behaviour and achievement in school. In E.
Klugman and S. Smilansky (Eds). Children’s Play and Learning. New York: Teachers College.

Smith, J. (2007). ‘Ye’ve got to ‘ave balls to play this game sir!’ Boys, peers and fears: the negative
influence of school-based ‘cultural accomplices’ in constructing hegemonic masculinities. Gender and
Education, 19 (2), 179-198.

Smith, L. (2006). What effect does listening to individual children have on their learning? Pastoral
Care in Education, 24 (4), 31-38.

Smith, A., Duncan, J. & Marshall, K. (2005). Children’s perspectives on their learning: exploring
methods. Early Child Development and Care, 175 (6), 473-487.

Sokolowski, R. (1997). Gadamer’s theory of hermeneutics. In The Philosophy of Hans-Georg Gadamer

(Ed Hahn, L. E.) Chicago. The Library of Living Philosophers, p.223-234.

Spooner, M. T. (2002). Without value, without validity. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association. New Orleans.

Stafford, A., Laybourn, A. & Hill, M. (2003). ‘Having a say’: children and young people talk about
consultation. Children and Society, 17, 361-373.

413
Stamberg, S. (1993) Talk. NPR’s Susan Stamberg considers all things. New York: Turtle Bay
Books/Random House. In P. Dilley (2000). Conducting successful interviews: tips for intrepid research.
Theory Into Practice, 39 (3), 131-137.

Stewart, D. & Mikunas, A. (1990). Exploring phenomenology. A guide to the field and its literature. (2nd
Edn) Athens: Ohio. University Press.

Stipek, D. (2004). Teaching practices in kindergarten and first grade: different strokes for different
folks. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 548-568.

Strein, W. Simonson, T. & Vail, L. (1999). Convergence of views: self-perceptions of African American
and white kindergarteners. Psychology in the Schools, 36 (2), 125 -134.

Sutterby, J. A. (2005). I wish we could do whatever we want! : children subverting scaffolding in the
preschool classroom. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 25, 349-357.

Svavarsdottir, E. K. & Orlygsdottir, B. (2006). Health-related quality of life in Icelandic school children.
Scandinavian Journal Caring Science, 20, 209-215.

Swain, J. (2000). ‘The money’s good, the fame’s good, the girls are good’: the role of playground
football in the construction of young boys’ masculinity in a junior school. British Journal of Sociology
of Education, 21 (1), 95-109.

Swain, J. (2004). The resources and strategies that 10-11-year-old boys use to construct masculinities in
the school setting. British Educational Research Journal, 30 (1), 167-184.

Tammivaara, J. & Enright, D. S. (1986). On eliciting information: dialogues with child informants.
Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 17 (4), 218-238.

Tavakol, M., Murphy, R. & Torabi, S. (2006). Medical education in Iran: an exploration of some
curriculum issues. Medic Educ OnLine [serial online] 11 (5). Available from http://www.med-ed-
online.org

Tedlock, B. (1983). The spoken word and the work of interpretation. Philadelphia. University of
Pennsylvania Press. In S. Kvale (1996). InterViews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research
Interviewing. Thousand Oaks. CA. Sage.

Thomas, N. & O’Kane, C. (1998). The ethics of participatory research with children. Children and
Society, 12 (5), 336-348.

414
Thomson, P. (1998). Narrative inquiry – a personal exploration. Changing Education. 4 (4) and 5 (1 and
2), pp. 8-12. In B. Kamler, N. Santoro, & J. A. Reid. (1998) Cultural difference in the teaching
profession: how much does it count? In Paper presented to the Australian Association for Research in
Education Conference, Adelaide.

Thornberg, R. (2008). Schoolchildren’s reasoning about school rules. Research Papers in Education, 23
(1), 37-52.

Thorne, B. (1993). Gender Play: Girls and Boys in School. New Brunswick, N J: Rutgers University
Press. In S. Punch (2002). Research with Children: The same or different from research with adults.
Childhood, 9 (3), 321-341.

Thorne, S. (2000). Data analysis in qualitative research. Evidence Based Nursing, 3, 68-70.

Tilley, S. A. (2003). ‘Challenging’ research practices: turning a critical lens on the work of transcription.
Qualitative Inquiry, 9, 750-773.

Tisak, M.S. & Tisak, J. (1990). Children’s concepts of parental authority, friendship and sibling
relations. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 36, 347-67.

Tisak, M.S. (2000). Mothers’ and teachers’ home and school rules: young children’s conceptions of
authority in context. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. January.

Tollefson, J. Usher, K., Francis, D. & Owens, J. (2001). What you ask is what you get: learning from
interviewing in qualitative research. Contemporary Nurse, 10 (3-4), 258-264.

Trent, F. & Slade, M. (2001). Declining rates of achievement and retention: the perceptions of
adolescent males. Report. Evaluations and Investigations Programme, Department of Education,
Training and Youth Affairs. Commonwealth of Australia.

Trotman, D. (2006). Interpreting imaginative lifeworlds: phenomenonological approaches in

imagination and the evaluation of educational practice. Qualitative Research, 69 (2), 245-265.

Tuckett, A. (2004). Qualitative research sampling: the very real complexities. Nurse Researcher, 12 (1),
47.

Tudge, J. R. H., Odero, D., Hogan, D. M. & Etz, K. E. (2003). Relations between the everyday activities
of preschoolers and their teachers’ perceptions of their competence in the first years of school. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 18 (1), 42-64.

415
Turner, de S. (2003). Horizons revealed from methodology to method. International Journal of
Qualitative Methods, 2 (1), Article 1. Retrieved 12.06.09 from
(http://www/ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/2_1html/turner.html)

Tymms, P. (2001). A test of the big fish in a little pond hypothesis: an investigation into the feelings of
seven-year-old pupils in school. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 12 (2), 161-181.

United Nations (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child. New York. In S. Dockett & B. Perry,
(2007) trusting children’s accounts in research, Journal of Early Childhood Research, 5, 47-63.

Valeski, T.N. & Stipek, D.J. (2001). Young children’s feelings about school. Child Development, 72
(4), 1198-1213.

Van der Zalm, J. E. & Bergum, V. (2000). Hermeneutic-phenomenology: providing living knowledge
for nursing practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 31 (1), 211-218.

Van Houtte, M. (2004). Gender context of the school and study culture or how the presence of girls
affects the achievement of boys. Educational Studies, 30 (4), 410-423.

Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching Lived Experience. Human Science for an Action Sensitive
Pedagogy. University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.

Van Manen, M. (1994). Pedagogy, virtue and narrative identity in teaching. Curriculum Inquiry, 4 (2),
135-170.

Vartuli, S. & Everett, N. (1998). Classroom rules in the primary grades. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Diego. In S. Dockett & B. Perry.
(1999). Starting school: what do the children say? Early Childhood Development and Care, 159, 107-
119.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society. The development of higher psychological processes.

Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wainwright, D. (1997). Can sociological research be qualitative, critical, and valid? The Qualitative
Report, [On-line serial] 3 (2) Retrieved 27.08.06. (http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-2/wain-html)

Waksler, F. C. (1991). Studying the social worlds of children: Sociological readings. Basingstoke:
Falmer. In F. C. Waksler (2006). Analogues of ourselves: who counts as Other? Human Studies, 28,
417-429.

416
Walker, W. (2007). Ethical consideration in phenomenonological research. Nurse Researcher, 14 (3),
36.

Wallace, J. & Wildy, H. (2004). Old Questions for new schools: What are the students doing? Teachers
College Record, 106 (4), 635-650.

Walsh, K. (1996). Philosophical hermeneutics and the project of Hans Georg Gadamer: implications for
nursing research. Nursing Inquiry, 3, 231-237.

Walsh, G. & Gardner, J. (2005). Assessing the quality of early years learning environments. Early
Childhood Research and Practice, 7 (1).

Walsham, G. (1995). Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method: European Journal of
Information Systems. 4, 74-81.

Weaver-Hightower, M. (2003). The ‘boy turn’ in research on gender and education. Review of
Educational Research, 73 (4), 471-498.

Webb, C. & Kevern, J. (2000). Focus groups as a research method: a critique of some aspects of their use
in nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 36 (6), 798-805.

Weberman, D. (2000). A new defence of Gadamer’s hermeneutics. Philosophy and Phenomenological

Research, 60 (1), 45-65.

Weinsheimer, J. C. (1985). Gadamer’s Hermeneutics: A reading of truth and method. Yale University
Press. New Haven. CT. In de S., Turner. (2003). Horizons revealed from methodology to method.
International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2 (1), Article 1. Retrieved 12.06.09 from
(http://www/ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/2_1html/turner.html)

Weinstein, C. S. (1991). The classroom as a social context for learning. Annual Review Psychology. 42,
493-525.

Weis, L. & Fine, M. (Eds.). (1993). Beyond silenced voices: class, race and gender in United States
Schools. Albany, State University of New York Press. In A. Cook-Sather (2006). Sound presence and
power: student voice in educational research and reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36 (4), 360-390.

Wengraf, T. (2001). Qualitative Research Interviewing: Biographic, Narrative and Semi-Structured

Methods. London, Sage Publications. In Halcomb, E. & P. Davidson. (2006). Is verbatim transcription of
interview data always necessary? Applied Nursing Research, 19 (1), 38-42.

417
Wesson, M. & Salmon, K. (2001). Drawing and showing: helping children to report emotionally laden
events. Appl. Cognit. Psychol., 15 (3), 301-320.

West, P. (1999). Boys’ underachievement in school: some persistent problems and some current
research. Issues in Educational Research, 9 (1), 33-54.

Whitehead, L. (2004). Enhancing the quality of hermeneutical research: decision trail. Journal of
Advanced Nursing, 45 (5), 512-518.

Whitelaw, S., Milosevic, L., &Daniels, S. (2000). Gender, behaviour and achievement: a preliminary
study of pupil perceptions and attitudes. Gender and Education, 12 (1), 87-113.

Wilding, C. & Whiteford, G. (2005). Phenomenological research: An exploration of conceptual,

theoretical and practical issues. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health. 25 (3), 98-104.

Wiles, J. L., Rosenberg, M. W. & Kearns, R. A. (2005). Narrative analysis as a strategy for
understanding interview talk in geographic research. Area. 37 (1), 89-99.

Wiley, D.C. & Hendricks, C. M. (1998). Using picture identification for research with preschool
children. Journal of School Health, 68 (6), 227-230.

Williamson, V. H. (2005). A hermeneutic phenomenological study of women’s experiences of postnatal

depression and health professional interventions. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Adelaide.
Adelaide, South Australia.

Willis, P. (2002). Don’t call it poetry. The Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, 2 (10), 1-14.

Willis, P. (2004). From ‘the things themselves’ to a ‘feeling of understanding’: finding different voices in
phenomenonological research. The Indo-Pacific Journal pf Phenomenology, 4 (1), 1-13.

Wiltz, N. W. & Klein, E.L. (2001). What do you do in childcare? Children’s perceptions of high and
low quality classrooms. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 16, 209-236.

Wing, L.A. (1995). Play is not the work of the child: Young children’s perceptions of work and play.
Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 10 (2), 223-47.

Wood, E. (2004). A new paradigm war? The impact of national curriculum policies on early childhood
teachers’ thinking and classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 361-374.

418
Wood, E. & Bennett, N. (1998). Teachers’ theories of play: constructivist or social constructivist?
Early Child Development and Care, 140, 17-30.

Wright, S. (2007). Young children’s meaning-making through drawing and ‘telling’. Australian
Journal of Early Childhood, 32 (4), 37-48.

Yair, G. (2000). Education battlefields in America: the tug-of-war over students’ engagement with
instruction. Sociology of Education, 73 (4), 247-269.

Yates, S. (2001). Gender, language and CMC for education. Learning and Instruction, 11 (1), 21-34.

Yeboah, D. A. (2002). Enhancing transition from early childhood phase to primary education: evidence
from research literature. Early Years, 22 (1), 51-68.

Zigler, E. F., Singer, D. G. & Bishop-Joseph, S. J. (Eds.) (2004). Children’s play: The Roots of
Reading. Washington, DC: ZERO to THREE Press.

Zwiers, M. L. & Morrissette, P. J. (1999). Effective interviewing of Children: a comprehensive guide

for counselors and human service workers. Philadelphia. Taylor & Francis. In C. Curtin. (2001).
Eliciting children’s voices in qualitative research. Am.J.Occup Ther., 55 (3), 295-302.

419