Teacher fg write up notes

The data collected in this phase of the study consists of three focus groups and one semi structured interview. Focus groups were conducted across three schools and were attended by 11 participants made up in each school of a combination of Upper Key Stage 2 teachers, teaching assistants and in one school a deputy head teacher. Chosen schools were from one multi academy trust (MAT) and were representative of an inner city school, urban school and a school in a rural location.

An additional semi structured interview was conducted with the learning and development director of the MAT to explore teacher responses in more depth regarding the wider school context and environment in relation to teachers’ professional development and centralised curriculum planning needs. During focus group conversations teachers repeatedly referred to school curriculum and information related to supporting their needs being centrally planned and controlled and therefore did not always feel they could make any in-depth commentary about that aspect of school life.

Prior to the focus groups the teachers were asked to complete e-learning course to ensure they had a baseline understanding of the key learning components relating to digital accessibility awareness, as identified in the literature review and referred to as the ENABLED curriculum components framework. The learning and development manager was also required to do the same.

All focus groups were run in a face to face capacity using an A3 CoRe matrix handout as mechanism to support, lead and structure conversations and to take notes as ideas were shared. The semi structured interview was conducted online, with the participant also required to complete the e-learning and was given the core matrix to offer context for the discussions.

The focus groups were started with an overview of the purpose of the research, an introduction to the CoRe matrix table handout and a recap on the five ENABLED learning components from the e-learning which formed column headings on the CoRe matrix table.

Following the 4 components model of PCKg, the first questions on the CoRe matrix asked participants to explore their subject matter knowledge, followed by existing teaching practices and opportunities, predicted learner responses and then finally the wider contextual considerations for the teaching of digital accessibility awareness components. The findings are described and analysed in this order. Findings are then further synthesised with findings previously obtained from the wider UK based questionnaire.

Rewrite:

The data presented in this phase of the study were generated through three focus groups and one semi-structured interview. The focus groups were conducted across three schools within a single Multi-Academy Trust (MAT), involving a total of 11 participants. Participants comprised a combination of Upper Key Stage 2 teachers and teaching assistants, alongside a deputy headteacher at one of the participating schools. The schools were purposively selected to reflect a range of geographical and contextual settings, comprising an inner-city school, an urban school and a rural school. This approach provided an opportunity to explore perspectives across contrasting educational contexts within the same organisational structure.

An additional semi-structured interview was conducted with the MAT's Director of Learning and Development. The purpose of this interview was to explore the perspectives emerging from the teacher focus groups in greater depth, particularly in relation to the wider organisational context and the influence of centralised approaches to curriculum planning and teachers' professional development. This additional data collection was considered important because, during the focus group discussions, participants frequently highlighted that aspects of the school curriculum and the provision of information and resources to support their professional needs were centrally planned and controlled by the MAT. Consequently, participants did not always feel able to offer detailed reflections on these areas from the perspective of their individual school contexts. The interview therefore provided an opportunity to examine these organisational dimensions further and to contextualise the perspectives shared by teachers.

Prior to participating in the focus groups, teachers were asked to complete an e-learning course designed to establish a baseline understanding of the key learning components associated with digital accessibility awareness. These components had been identified through the literature review and subsequently operationalised within the ENABLED curriculum components framework. The Director of Learning and Development was also asked to complete the same e-learning course to ensure a shared understanding of the framework and its constituent learning components prior to data collection.

All three focus groups were conducted face-to-face, with an A3 CoRe matrix provided as a supporting instrument to facilitate and structure the discussions. The matrix served as a framework through which participants could explore the different dimensions of teaching digital accessibility awareness, while also providing a means of recording and organising ideas as they emerged during the conversations. The semi-structured interview was conducted online. As with the focus group participants, the Director of Learning and Development was asked to complete the e-learning course in advance and was provided with a copy of the CoRe matrix to establish a shared frame of reference and provide context for the interview discussions.

Each focus group commenced with an overview of the research purpose, an introduction to the CoRe matrix and a recap of the five ENABLED learning components explored through the preparatory e-learning course. These five components formed the column headings of the CoRe matrix and provided a consistent structure through which participants could consider the teaching and learning implications of digital accessibility awareness.

The structure of the focus group discussions was informed by the four-component model of pedagogical content knowledge (PCKg). Accordingly, the CoRe matrix guided participants through four interconnected dimensions: their existing subject matter knowledge; current teaching practices and perceived opportunities for teaching the identified content; anticipated learner responses; and wider contextual considerations influencing the teaching of digital accessibility awareness. This structure provided a consistent analytical framework across the three focus groups and informed the subsequent organisation and presentation of the findings.

The findings from this phase of data collection are therefore presented and analysed in accordance with these four dimensions of PCKg. The chapter concludes by synthesising these findings with those previously generated through the wider UK-based questionnaire. This synthesis enables consideration of the extent to which the qualitative findings corroborate, extend or provide further contextual understanding of the patterns identified in the questionnaire data.

————————

Condensed rewrite:

Phase 2: Exploring curriculum opportunities and implementation support needs 

Introduction

The data presented in this chapter was generated through three focus groups and one semi-structured interview. The focus groups involved 11 participants across three schools within a single Multi-Academy Trust (MAT), comprising of Upper Key Stage 2 teachers, along with teaching assistants and, in one school, a deputy headteacher. In addition, the three schools from the MAT were purposively selected to represent the contexts an inner city school, urban school and a school in a rural location. 

An additional semi-structured interview was conducted with the MAT's Director of Learning and Development to explore the wider organisational context influencing teachers' professional development and curriculum planning. This was considered important because focus group participants frequently referred to the centralised planning and control of curriculum provision and professional development within the MAT, limiting their ability to comment in depth on these aspects of school life needed for the next phase of this study.

Prior to the focus groups, all participants were asked to complete the preparatory ENABLED e-learning course designed to establish a shared baseline understanding of the five learning components of digital accessibility awareness (Appendix?). The focus groups were conducted face-to-face, and to structure and facilitate the discussions around the four dimensions of PCKg an A3 CoRe matrix worksheet (Appendix?) was used to capture thoughts and notes. The online semi-structured interview followed the same preparatory approach to provide consistency.

Each discussion began with an overview of the research project, a recap of the e-learning content and an introduction to the dimensions of PCKg and the CoRe matrix worksheet. The four PCKg dimensions subsequently provide the structure for the presentation and analysis of findings in this chapter. The chapter then concludes with a combined synthesis of the findings from this phase of the research with those previously obtained through the wider UK-based questionnaire to provide deeper contextual understanding and interpretation of findings.

Findings

The data generated through the focus groups and the semi-structured interview was analysed using the process of thematic analysis (ref). This involved the systematic coding of the transcripts to identify recurring patterns, concepts and areas of shared meaning for each dimension of PCKg. These codes and patterns were subsequently developed into overarching themes. Table A illustrates the initial codes used and the overarching themes finally identified through this interpretive process.

Table A diagram

This chapter will now examine each dimension of PCKg in turn, exploring the associated themes and using illustrative verbatim extracts from the focus group and interview transcripts. Each PCKg dimension also incorporates a combined CoRe matrix table data to support a more integrated interpretation of participants' perspectives across the three school contexts. Individual school matrixes for each school are provided in Appendices (1-3).??????

Subject matter knowledge 

Disability 

Accessibility 

Anticipatory inclusive design 

Etc