The initial observation schedule and a recording sheet were trialled by all three researchers observing the same lesson and recording their own sets of data for this lesson. These three sets of data were then reviewed and compared for consistency of data recording. The main difficulties were initially centred on devising analytic labels to differentiate between the different levels of analysis possible for a specific activity; for example, learners reading aloud could be related to a range of skills such as analysing and decoding words or scanning and skimming, which then in turn could be related to the broad elements of reading such as alphabetics or fluency, all of which come under the classification of reading. In addition, some activities (e.g. organising a future field trip) were not directly related to any literacy, numeracy and language components and some teaching activities (e.g. pre-teaching) are generic and could be used in any form of LNL or teaching generally.
Further alterations were made to the observation schedule and recording sheet and a second pilot session was observed by the two researchers (Benseman and Lander) who were to do the field work using the revised tools. A final set of recording tools was then devised for use with all subsequent observations. The teacher and learner interview forms were also trialled as part of the piloting process. The key coding sheet for recording is included as an appendix in this report (Appendix A).
The main ethical issues relating to this project have been those of voluntary participation, data confidentiality and anonymity. Appropriate procedures to address these issues were proposed and accepted by The University of Auckland Human Participants Ethics Committee (Reference 2004/243).
While we endeavoured to record specific data on some aspects of teaching (e.g. direct teaching of LNL, group versus individual teaching, the LNL components being taught), we did not record the specifics of all components (e.g. numbers or categories of questions, or the nature of the interactions as had been done by Scogins & Knell (2001). Rather, we endeavoured to record the nature of the main activities; for example, we noted the types of questions that were being asked, how they were used in the instructional process and who posed the questions. With teaching skills and learner activities, we only recorded the number of times we observed they were used (but not their duration) in order to provide an overview of the range of teaching activities in use.