This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
This study was utilized a convenience sample composed of volunteers. Participants were informed through announcement and phone contacted then randomly selected to instructional conditions. They were included PTTC director, teacher trainers and student teachers. The PTTC director who responsible for staffing was first contacting by phone call, consent letter and information sheet. Before providing the related information, a face to face meeting with PTTC director was made to talk about the purpose of the study. After meeting with PTTC director, the researcher asked him to contribute and post the information sheet of group discussion on the information board.
As result, eight teacher trainers who teaching Maths, Physique and social study, that included content on the sample video-ed case studies, were selected through calling in then inviting to participate. It is interesting to note that there were total of 15 teacher trainers among 25 at PTTC called in before 5:00 p.m. Nevertheless, only eight teacher trainers were considered to be in the group discussion. The same procedure for selecting student teachers that there were 28 student teachers among 2561 student teachers who were interested in participating had called in and asked for involving in the discussion before 5:00 p.m. As result, only 8 students were considered and selected to take part in the discussion. The final 8 participants per group that were finally selected were made through the consideration of who have called in first from number one to number eight before 5:00 p.m.
After the recruitment process, participants were asked to sing on the consent letter and then were invited to participate in a small discussion group that watched a short video that has been developed for teacher training. There was a separated discussion between teacher trainers and student teachers about using videos for teacher training. Each focus group consisted of 8 people. The focus group discussion was taken approximately 45 - 60 minutes and was conducted in Khmer. The focus group was used a semi-structured question approach allowing opportunity for participants to explore ideas of interest to them without overt researcher control or direction. The language of the interview and the language of the written manual which provided before the focus group meet were both in Khmer. Prior to the discussion, the manual about the short video were distributed to allow time for participants to read and think about the ideas.
To achieve the objectives of the study, the researcher have carefully considered the following ethical values and principles.
Seeked informed consent from participants
The consent letter is a useful tool for participants in participating in research specifically, in current Cambodia context. The PTTC director, teacher trainers and student teachers were received consent for participating in the study. In addition, participants have obtained information about the purpose of the study so that they were able to understand and enabled them to make a decision whether or not to allow the research to take place at their workplace. Moreover, participants were given opportunities to ask questions about the study in order to help them decide if they want to take part in the study. The major aspect of gaining the consent letter from the PTTC director and staff for participating in the research was voluntary, so the researcher did not put either any pressure on the participants or make them vulnerable. The advantage is that seeking informed consent is to protect the rights and dignity of PTTC director and staff. Seeking consent form will generate the confidence for both researcher and participants and it will lead to collaboration, which succeeds in the research.
Respected for the views of the student teachers
Student teachers seemed to be nervous of talking, especially when they answered questions during the discussion. They always had difficulty in using words and ideas to discuss and shared experience. However, their responses were not totally met the needs of the study. With this regard, I encouraged and helped them become more confident about answering and discussing. Their thoughts and understanding were accepted and valued in logical ways because the ideas they came up with represent their participations. And it is unethical if their views were kept behind, because they have rights to say and present their ideas. They would feel happy and satisfied with the discussion if their views were respected and encouraged. In doing so, it represents the respect for the views of the student teachers and it is an ethical value, which is needed for the study.
Build trust and relationship with PTTC director, teacher trainers and student teachers.
The study was faced some difficulties to be accepted the informed consent from the PTTC director. It was very challenging to lobby him. To solve these problems, the researcher was friendly, calm, relaxed and respectful. It's important to chat with participants or PTTC director by asking simple and informal questions such asÂ how they are or how long they have started their work or the work goes well. And For the teacher trainers and student teachers, the questions were how they were or how long they have worked and studied at PTTC or they were busy at the moment. It is a great idea to listen to them and have some fun and then friendships was made. And it was also an enjoyable way that I offered them some fruit and drinks. The ideas mentioned have helped to build trust and relationship between the researcher and participants and so they will be happy to involve in the next study.
Respect for privacy and confidentiality to participants
People have different values and the needs of respect are not really the same as others. Some persons are willing to share things they have with others, but some refuse to do so. The understanding of other feelings is the key element of moving towards success in building good relationships. It is also the main idea to improve the motivation of participations. When people know how to respect others, they can share their own values with others or they can accept the values from each other for the common goal and then they would satisfy what they participate. However, the satisfactions of one's feelings links to the respect of privacy and confidentiality to someone you involve and work with. In connection to the respect for privacy and confidentiality for this study, I did not use or write participants' names on the questioned papers as well as in the research report. And so the report and the findings will keep confidential to the participants and to respect for their privacy. The idea of doing this is to avoid causing harm and vulnerability of the participants.
Did not overstress the facts in research report
Truthfulness is a personal quality of person and it plays as an important role in respecting and valuing each other in the society. It is also an ethical value, which everyone needs to happen to them. The honesty brings us love, friends, relationships, trust, peace, participation, success, etc. When someone tries to hide things, they may generate obstacles to living and working. And then they become isolated and they could make troubles for themselves or for others. Being dishonesty is unethical and insensitive to people's feelings. To avoid getting harm to participants, I have not exaggerated the facts in research report. All the findings and analysis are based on the ideas and experiences coming up at the discussion, which participants raise. Exaggerating in report is telling a lie and data is invalid and unreliable. In doing this, it represents the lack of disrespects for participants and makes them vulnerable.
Did not make promises or raise expectations that cannot be fulfilled
Making promises or raising expectations to participants in research must not be made because they might not be fulfilled. In this case, the participants would be disappointed and unhappy for researcher. Playing lip service made by researcher leads to lose trust and relationship, and lack of motivation of participations, especially it represents disrespect for respondents. The research becomes meaningless and it is dishonest. To get rid of these problems, I did not make any promises or raise expectations, which I cannot fulfil. The study aims to find out what the views of educators/participants in the Cambodian teacher training sphere are regarding the use of video-ed case studies as part of teacher training programs only. However, it does not mean that the study is to find ways to provide things, which I cannot deal with those needs. Anyway, this study aims to collect and analyze data in order to define that video is an effective tool for improving teacher training and this resource will be used to apply in term of reducing and eliminating the worst forms of teaching strategy in the future.
Maximized benefits in research
Sensitivity to the participants means to provide the benefits of their participations. Designing a research is to try to produce as many benefits as possible rather than creating harm. However, avoiding harm is impossible, but the researcher should consider the logical ways to minimize harm and maximize benefits. In connection to maximizing benefits, the study was focused on some ethical principles involved in respect and applications in research such as vulnerable persons, human dignity, privacy and confidentiality, free and informed consent and justice. These ethical principles are the key elements of maximizing benefits for participants. This means that the research must be fairly spread between the burdens and benefits. And the principles have relevance for researcher in profession such as social work, education and community development. One advantage is that the producing benefits for participants, individuals, community and society.
Data Collection Method and limitation
There are many approaches to reach this study objective, but one of the most appropriate ones that I considered is to use case study to find out the ideas and interests from participants regarding video usage as a tool for improving teacher training. As I understand case studies help students or learner to improve their ability and capacity to think critically and analytically like Killen said that "Case engaged participants in a collective analysis of a "slice of reality" with a common purpose of gaining a deeper understanding of the issues involved (2003)". Students or learners will have chance to improve their critical thinking skills if they have watched a real situation or practice when they are trained. The educational basis of case method is very much a constructivist one. It describes the idea that learners need to engage in active learning experiences in order to face and recreate their ideas and understanding. With this regard, the study aims to have teacher trainers and student teachers thinking critically while and after they have watched the video-ed case. However, there are some of particular limitations of case studies that Killen has mentioned. "Appropriate case studies may not be available "off the shelf". We need to spend a plenty of time to develop case studies that address issues relevant to the outcomes we want students to achieve. Killen also raised that "Students sometimes become frustrated because (as in real situation) the information in the case may be incomplete or misleading"( Foran 2001). It is true if reflect to my study. The sample video-ed case study I have chose for my study were not be available or appropriate for some student teachers' capacity because of time required and the too much information in the manual.
The other approach was used for this study is a Focus Group Discussion (FGD). I think it is important to use FGD as, a focus group is, according to Lederman, "a technique involving the use of in-depth group interviews in which participants are selected because they are positive, although not necessarily representative, sampling of a specific population, this group being 'focused' on a given topic" (p.25-30). With this regard, selected participants will have chance to express their ideas specifically regarding to the video-cased study that will be further used at their work place. According to Parker and Tritter (2006), in focus groups the researcher plays the role of facilitator' or 'moderator'; that is, facilitator/moderator of group discussion between participants, not between her/himself and the participants. Hence, where focus groups are concerned, the researcher takes a peripheral, rather then a centre-stage role for the simple reason that it is the inter-relational dynamics of the participants that are important, not the relationship between researcher and researched. Whilst discussing the kinds of questioning strategies, facilitators might deploy during focus group research (Bloor,2001, pp.42-43) provide a clear explanation of how this arrangement works: In focus group, the objective is not primarily to elicit the group's answers, but rather to stimulate discussion and thereby understand (through subsequent analysis) the meaning and norms which underlie those group answers. In group interviews the interviewer seeks answers in focus groups the facilitator seeks group interaction.
The most important reason for conducting a focus group discussion with this study is that, firstly, it could easily reach sources of information from various perspectives of participants; secondly, it is a good way to get information from participants and finally it is a quite easy and quick method to run. On other hand, there are also some limitations that need to be considered regarding this method that include the resources that may be needed to be organized, the potential for a minority of voices to dominate preventing other voices being heard. Although this research project does not explore issues that are of a confidential nature focus group discussions cannot guarantee the confidentiality of ideas or opinions shared amongst participants because of the very nature of a group. This may inhibit some from expressing views that could be considered alternative or contrary to the prevailing opinions or views.
The use of semi structured questions in the focus group interview allows the researcher to explore the views and opinions of participants whilst giving some shape or form to the interview. It will provide scope for individuals to expand their views and take the interview into areas possibly not previously considered by the researcher. It permits for richness in responses when compared to a structured interview process or a pen and paper survey method. A potential limitation of such an approach is the possibility that the focus group will go over the time limit especially if conducted by a researcher will limit skills in group management.
The data from this focus group discussion were collected through digital voice recording, and note taking. Analysis was initially involved transcribing the interviews. Similar phrases from each transcript were put together under descriptive labels. In this way, data were pooled and a pattern emerges.
Findings from the study were analysed in two ways: through playing tape recorder and through organizing the information in a way that would answer the focus group discussion questions.
Playing tape recorder: As a researcher, I took the role of both an analysis expert and media expert to review the answers. Ideally, such review should be done by a third person, my supervisor, to avoid bias, but this was impossible due to limited time.
Organizing the information: Findings were organized to answer the designed questions that the researcher had. Findings from this analysis helped fulfil the PTTC's goal of improving quality education and teachers' capacity.