Teaching and Innovation

Camberwell Grammar English Language, Latin and EAL teacher, Mr James Victor, explains ‘Q-methodology’ which he investigated as part of his Master of Philosophy (Education) thesis completed at the University of Melbourne this year. His study Investigating First and Second Language English Teachers’ Attitudes to ‘Grammar’ and ‘Grammar Teaching’ in Secondary Schools Using Q-methodology intends to aid teachers’ understandings of grammar and grammar teaching, and to be of value to curriculum writers for future curricula design, and for professional development providers.

When I set out to do some further study a few years ago, the experience made me reflect on how rewarding, revelatory and how much fun research can be. Who would have thought? Of course, we know research can also be a powerful catalyst for influencing positive social change. Despite this, so many worthwhile research courses are underfunded – aspiring philanthropists, please take note! Nevertheless, what follows is a short reflection on a research journey recently undertaken, which I hope students and our teaching community will find relatable and, more importantly, which I hope will encourage them to aim, act and achieve a goal they may have been delaying.

A few years ago, after enquiring about doing further study at University of Melbourne, Professor Joseph lo Bianco invited me to his lecture on ‘Q and Wicked Problems’ (‘wicked’ here means ‘not tame or easily analysed’). It was both fascinating and insightful because it opened up refreshing windows of possibility: he introduced a methodology, entirely new to me, which I thought was a great innovation (though developed in 1935 by physicist and psychologist, William Stephenson). When I heard about it, Q-methodology, or simply ‘Q’, seemed such a great fit for my research topic: Exploring English and EAL teachers’ attitudes to grammar and its teaching. This fascinating subject usually gives rise to worthwhile and important discussions and various thought-provoking opinions, samples of which were gathered from English and EAL teachers surveyed across Melbourne using Q-sorts. In this case, Q was useful for exploring and establishing a range of viewpoints English and EAL teachers held about grammar and its teaching: opinions teachers surveyed felt very strongly about, including areas of mutual agreement and unexpected spaces of consensus. Essentially, Q as a tool for studying subjectivity systematically was ideally suited to this project. I aim to publish these results fairly soon, and hope that the variety and richness of surveyed teachers’ opinions will make a meaningful contribution to related debates in the domains of English and EAL teaching.

So what is Q-methodology? In a nutshell, it involves collecting a wide range of opinions (in the form of statements) about a particular topic which are culled to form a representative sample of views. These opinions are sorted and ranked by participants in terms of strength of agreement, thereby providing a holistic configuration of their point of view. Participants are invited to elaborate further on items they feel very strongly about. Software-aided factor analysis of sort data yields a few representative opinions and consensus viewpoints. Finally, these extracted factors are interpreted.

As it turned out, I also discovered that Q was not only useful for educational research, but could be applied to a great variety of ‘wicked problems’, or any subject about which people hold differing opinions. It is adaptable and can be used in combination with other research instruments. Moreover, it also has the potential to assist with social innovation and social change in domains like language planning and policy, health and environmental policy, or as another device for facilitating peace-building and conflict resolution. It has useful applications in the classroom, including as a tool for critical reflection, for evaluating a specific aspect of learning, as a formative feedback instrument or simply for stimulating classroom dialogue.

Other things learned on this research journey? The process of reading and reviewing relevant research literature related to English and EAL grammar teaching was tremendously energising, insightful and rewarding. Related topics of interest ranged from competing approaches to literacy, ideas about different pedagogical grammars, episodes from the history of English and EAL grammar teaching in Australia and the UK, and teacher perceptions about grammar’s usefulness for writing. From all of this, it was fascinating to reflect on how influential some educational ideas were and continue to be, to trace their beginnings and societal consequences. Being part of a Melbourne University-affiliated international research group which meets via video-conferencing has provided excellent learning opportunities through collaborating, sharing ideas and resources.

More recently, I had the privilege of working closely with Camberwell Grammar teachers, Mr Shaun Burke, Ms Kathryn Smith and Ms Aneta Renieris, as part of a School Professional Learning Group. We applied this methodology to explore student attitudes to essay writing in English, English Language and History classes. A broad range of differing but interesting (and mostly not unexpected) opinions emerged across the group of students surveyed in relation to particular aspects of their writing, such as the crafting of conclusions, time spent on proofreading and editing, and opinions about handwriting.

All in all, these have been very worthwhile experiences. I thoroughly recommend pursuing a research degree and strongly encourage anyone, who would like to challenge themselves to learn more about a particular topic and refresh or refine their research skills, to have a go at it. I am always happy to share ideas with anyone in our Camberwell Grammar community who is interested in this topic.

Mr James Victor

English, English as Additional Language, and Latin Teacher