Enhanced Studies - Inclusion of pupil with ADHD
Introduction
This research project examines methods for building an inclusive community in education classrooms to support students diagnosed with characteristics of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in the learning environment and the classroom community. The primary question this research study answers is: How can I include a child with ADHD using the Behaviour 4 Learning (B4L) framework? Strategies could be used to organize a learning environment that results in building an inclusive environment required to support students with ADHD characteristics in the general education classroom.
Research Paradigm
The research paradigm adopted for this research is interpretive/qualitative. Trauth (2001) observed that “interpretivism is the lens most frequently influencing the choice of qualitative methods” (p. 7). Qualitative research is based on three possible epistemologies critical, and interpretive, positivist. Interpretivists oppose the positivist approach and they believe that the social sciences are excessively scientific. The foundational argument for interpretivism is laid in two primary ideas: (i) “the idea that empiricism or ‘the experience of the senses’ (objectivism) is not always the best way to know something,” so the way to “come to reality is through thinking and reflecting about it” (rationalism); and (ii) “what we perceive is always conditioned by our experiences and our culture” (relativism) (Willis, 2007, pp. 48–49). Thus, the interpretive paradigm focuses on the concern of individuals and understanding the subjective world of human experience. Interpretivism has been adopted to work with these subjective meanings that already exist there in the social world (Major & Savin-Baden, 2010). For instance, there is a wide range of research on ADHD inclusion in mainstream, and this study would use interpretivism to acknowledge their existence, to understand them, t to reconstruct them, to avoid distorting them, and to apply them in the research as building blocks in theorizing.
Orlikowski and Baroudi (1999) have contended that interpretive research aims to have an understanding of how members of a given social group, via their “participation in social processes, enact their particular realities and endow them with meaning, and to show how these meanings, beliefs, and intentions of the members help to constitute their actions” (p. 13). Therefore, interpretive research is adopted because it would allow the researcher to understand how students with ADHD could be incorporated into the mainstream. In this case, observations and interviews were the favored research approaches used to collect data from the participants. As noted by McQueen (2002), interpretivists observe the world via a set of individual eyes and often select participants with the ability to “have their interpretations of reality to provide a worldview.
Interpretive research incorporates a qualitative research approach. As pointed out by Creswell (2009) “Qualitative research is a means for exploring and understanding the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or human problem” (p.4). Thus, in educational research, the primary aim of the researcher is to experience and understand the behavior of an individual or a group, for this reason, the qualitative method provides the best-suited methods (Creswell, 2009). In the interpretive paradigm, the qualitative aspect is required to have ‘insight’ and ‘in-depth’ information on a phenomenon. The other reason why qualitative data is useful in the paper is because it is rich and in-depth, and the researcher could capture data via the process of ‘deep attentiveness (Punch, 2009).
Research Methods
In this research, the researcher selected an interpretive approach that relies on the methods of interviews, observations, and interpretation of existing research. The researcher chose to observe and interview the selected child in a classroom setting. The most suitable research methods for this research are semi-structured interviews and observations. Both research methods are qualitative and are used to have an understanding of a phenomenon. The instruments that are to be used to collect data are standardized open-ended interviews and observations with a consenting participant. Turner (2007) pointed out that interviews offer in-depth information relating to participants’ viewpoints and experiences on a specific topic. Therefore, for this research, qualitative research is suitable because it helps the researcher understand the experiences and viewpoints of the interviewees on the inclusion of ADHD in the classroom community. Also, “Semi-structured interviews consist of several key questions that help to define the areas to be explored but also allows the interviewer or interviewee to diverge to pursue an idea or response in more detail” (Gill, Stewart, Treasure, & Chadwick, 2008, p. 292). Therefore, semi-structured interviews are suitable because they are composed of open conversation conducted between the interviewer and interviewees whereby a conversation is guided by pre-determined questions.
On the other hand, observations allow the researcher to collect data from the participant without possible knowledge of being watched. This is necessary because it provides data based on findings from a natural setting. Observation is to be used to observe the learning and behavior of the child about attention deficit. Also, selecting to observe the child with attention disorder allowed the researcher to pick up on the actions and record them and reduce the chance of the child acting differently from how he would behave when not being observed.
The Research Approach In Terms of Its Limitations
To complete this research an interpretivist approach was selected that depends on the methods of interviews, observations, and existing research interpretation. The main disadvantages linked with interpretivism relate to the subjective nature of the approach and the possibility of bias on the researcher’s behalf (Major & Savin-Baden, 2010). The other limitation is related to the use of a single participant, and therefore, primary data gathered in interpretive studies does not create room for generalization because data is heavily affected by personal viewpoints and values (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2012). Thus, both the reliability and representativeness of data are undermined to some extent.
Ethical considerations
Ethical issues arise because the study focuses on observing a child who has been struggling with routines and rules in the classroom. Given that the participant in the research is a child, the researcher is to ensure well-being by ensuring that anonymity, confidentiality, and safeguarding are maintained at all times. For this reason, the pupil concerned is known as pupil A throughout the research project. The researcher also understands that singling out an individual child might affect the class and a single child. Nonetheless, during a normal school day, children in need of additional support are taken out of the classroom. This research aims to improve the working environment in the classroom, so it remains beneficial to both the child with attention disorder and the rest of the class.
In regards to the issue of access and consent, the research is conducted in a school setting; this is considered usual/normal practice by the school. Thus, no additional consent from parents is required. Nonetheless, the permission of the pupil is to be sought before any research interview, observations, or intervention is conducted. Another ethical consideration relates to harm prevention (Robinson & Lai, 2006). Harm to participants could result from participation in the research process and dissemination of research results. The researcher would therefore balance the potential harm resulting from classroom observations and interviews to ensure the trustworthiness and reliability of the research results (Robinson & Lai, 2006).
Data Analysis
The findings will be analyzed qualitatively through the use of thematic and content analyses (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2007) have proposed content analysis and thematic analysis as the most appropriate in qualitative research. The content analysis entails analysis of primary contents recorded from an interview and it is applied in terms of quotes. The interviews audio recorded are to first be listened to and later transcribed. The emerging outcomes will be stored in a safe and secure place that is accessible by the researcher only (Cohen et al., 20007). Additionally, the researcher will store them under lock and key to safeguard the privacy and to promote the confidentiality of the participants as they involve a minor. The content analysis will be applied to describe written, spoken, and visual communication between the interviewer and the subject, especially under observations. The data will be analyzed and the consistent ideas, phrases, or expressions that are common among the participants highlighted to identify the emerging themes in the data. The coding phase will comprise a matrix of common concepts, words, and phrases that are repeated often (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Links between the themes will be established to make validity and reliability of the findings (Cohen et al., 2007). After the themes have been identified via data analysis, they will be consolidated into categories and then results will be reported. The primary challenge associated with thematic analysis is time consumption, hence the use of one participant.
Conclusion
The primary question this research study answers is: How can I include a child with ADHD using the Behaviour 4 Learning (B4L) framework? Qualitative and interpretative research approaches are to be used in the study because they allow data collection via observation and interviews. All ethical issues to be considered focus on harm, privacy, and consent. Data will be analyzed via content and thematic analyses.
References List
Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, vol. 3, no. 2. pp. 77-101.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007) Research methods in education. Routledge, New York.
Cresswell, J. W. (Ed.). (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. (2nd ed. ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Gill, P., Stewart, K., Treasure, E., & Chadwick, B. (2008) ‘Methods of data collection in qualitative research: interviews and focus groups’, British Dental Journal vol. 204, pp. 291 – 295.
Major, C. H. & Savin-Baden, M. (2010) An Introduction to Qualitative Research Synthesis: Managing the information explosion in social science research, London: Routledge.
McQueen, M. (2002). Language and power in profit/nonprofit relationships: A grounded theory of inter-sectoral collaboration.
Orlikowski, W. J., & Baroudi, J. J. (1991) ‘Studying information technology in organizations: research approaches and assumptions’, Information Systems Research, vol. 2 , no.1, p 1-28
Punch, F. K. (2009). Introduction to research methods in education. London: Sage.
Robinson, V., & Lai, M. K. (2006). Practitioner research for educators: A guide to improving classrooms and schools. Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2012) “Research Methods for Business Students” 6th edition, Pearson Education Limited
Trauth E M (2001) ‘The choice of qualitative research methods; in IS, in Trauth E M (ed, 2001) Qualitative research in IS: Issues and trends, Idea Group, Hershey
Turner, D.W., (2010). ‘Qualitative interview design: A practical guide for novice investigators.’ The Qualitative Report, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 754-760.
Willis, J. (2007). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ratings
