Generating theory in education: rurality , data, and theorization University of Pretoria 2012

1. Generating theory in education: rurality, data, and theorizationUniversity of Pretoria2012 Robert J. Balfour Faculty of Education Sciences North-West University Potchefstroom

2. How, why, and for what? Theory • The rural teacher education project: 2007-2012. Developed a cohort system as a basis for reconceptualising WIL in the BEd/ PGCE. • A cohort of Y4 students mentor Y3 and Y2 students. The cohort is residential and reflexive practice is formalised in daily focus groups. • Data from interviews, observations and visual arts based methods revealed recurring themes: space, time, places, travel, work, labour, action, entropy. • These variables could be grouped, • The variables also seemed to affect one another. • Why rurality? The concept suggests that reality is a social subjective construct but that connection to the land is part of that construction. The concept claims a space for a notion of identity in relation to the land without falling into classification systems (peri-urban, semi-rural, rural; and deep rural). • Why theory? existing theories do not account for a sociology-based account of how identity is formed. Who gets to theorise?

3. Progress so far….(still to go) • Balfour, R. 2012. “Rurality research and rural education: exploratory and explanatory power”in Naydene de Lange, Robert J. Balfour & ‘MathaboKhau (Eds). Special issue: Rural education and rural realities: The politics and possibilities of rural research in Southern Africa in Issue of Perspectives in Education 30(10) pp.9-19 . • Nkambule, T, Balfour, R.J, Pillay, G, and Moletsane, R. 2011. "Rurality and Rural Education: discourses underpinning rurality and rural education research in South African postgraduate education research 1994-2004" in RJ Balfour, R Moletsane and J Karlsson (Eds). in Special Issue of the South African Journal of Higher Education 25(2) pp.341-357. • Balfour, R; Moletsane, R; and Mitchell, M. 2011. "Understanding rurality in the troubling context: Prospects and challenges", , in Faisal Islam, Claudia Mitchell, Naydene de Lange, Robert Balfour, and Martin Combrink (Eds). School-University Partnerships for Educational Change in Rural South Africa. (Edwin and Mellen Ltd, New York). pp. 23-40. • Balfour, R.; Mitchell, C.; and Moletsane, R. 2008. “Troubling Contexts: Toward a Generative Theory of Rurality As Education Research” in Journal of Rural and Community Development 3(3) pp. 100–111.

4. Developmental paths to understanding • We described three elements (forces, agencies, resources) in dynamic interaction. • We contextualised GTR’s scholarly, historical, geo-sociological development, out of which GTR arises and to which it responds. • We applied GTR to a range of visual and textual data (drawings, interviews, and focus groups); • But, we have not applied the theory to a reading of research undertaken by scholars work in rural education.

5. Definitions of theory: Kerlinger (1970), defines theory as a set of interrelated constructs, definitions and propositions that presents a systematic view of phenomena by specifying relations among variables, with the purpose of explaining and predicting the phenomena. Theory itself is a source of new knowledge, insight and discovery and is thus regarded as an explicit platform for the development and advancement of knowledge.

6. Types of theories: • Theories are not consistently derived or informed and serve particular and often limited purposes: • Descriptive: the ability to describe and thus make sense of phenomena (Grounded Theory). • Explanatory: the ability to explain how phenomena work and to account for their existence through observation: Game Theory. • Explorative: the ability to raise new questions about phenomena based on the organisation of observation (Acquisition Theory). • Ideational: the ability to ascribe persuasive power and narrative to observed phenomena in relation to the larger polity (Foucaultian Theory, Critical Theory or post-colonial theory).

7. Features of theories: If a theory provides a rational explanation for an observed phenomena, and enables further reasoned speculation as to the form and nature of phenomena it must: • enable deductions sufficient to allow for plausible and verifiable generalisations; • be compatible with other forms of observation and previously articulated theories; • explain phenomena in clear terms that both enable elegance of articulation without compromising the demand for precision or the simplification of detail; • be generative; in other words, be replicable, predictive and generative of further research. • provide the grounds explicitly for their verification or falsification.

8. Some distinctions between theories and models • Not all theories presuppose input in order for the generation of output. • Models do presuppose input. • Theories explain and understand variables as much they aim to describe phenomena; models aim to describe phenomena. • Data emanating from a model confirms the explanatory veracity of the model. • Data observed by theory may not illuminate the assumptions of a theory, but must illuminate is veracity. • A model depends of the causality of relationships between observed phenomena or data. A theory accounts for the relationship between variables affecting or influencing data.

9. A Generative Theory of Rurality (GTR) • In “Towards a Generative Theory of Rural” (Balfour, Mitchell and Moletsane, 2008) we argued that the purpose of such a theory would be: First, it will enable researchers to analyze data emerging from projects in which, regardless of whether they are employing qualitative and quantitative methodologies, there is a need to take into account the relationship between space, time, and agency in the rural environment. Second, such a theory might also account for the ability of people in space and time to sustain themselves—both as subjects and as agents able to resist or transform the environment, depending on the resources available.

10. The challenge affecting rurality research… Regarding research on rurality, Marsden (2006) in the Handbook of Rural Studies argues: Rurality research needs to consider a revised political economy of rural space… distinctive (to) rural life but … not (in isolation of) …broader social science theoretical and conceptual trends. (p. 4) The problem of rural research…is one of definition and conceptualization. The Generative Theory of Research responds to definition and conceptualisation challenges on the basis of existing social and psychological theories (post-colonialism, social-interactionism) and extends these to take account of rurality as concept in education research.

11. To what might a generative theory of rurality attend? First, it seeks to illuminate the reality, or otherwise, of subjectivities and perceptions among South Africans. Second, it provides alternative possibilities to those subjectivities and perceptions that were constructed as true or normative. Third, it informs a collective imaginary through providing evidence of its existence and nature. Finally, it enables the realisation of imaginaries hitherto excluded, or unknown by the collective, by interrogating the normative, the subjective experience and the anecdote.

12. Key features for a generative theory for rurality research There are three variables that govern the ability of subjects to negotiate, transform and develop rural life. Since these are variables their interaction is dynamic and their dynamism is what qualifies their description as constitutive of a Generative Theory of Rurality: • forces, • agencies, and • resources. Budge (2005): the very isolation of the rural makes for the intensity of lived experience in more or less proportion to the forces, agencies, and resources available for intervening in that experience

13. Variable 1: Forces (space, place, & time) • Forces are centripetal and centrifugal. • Forces are dynamic involving movement of labour ; • Forces change identity and roles. Learner as worker Teacher as parent. Parent as worker Parent as rural-urban. Teacher as urban-rural. • Space and place (locus), home, school, library, field, road; • Space changes or elongates time and our relationship to time. • Time: Gallagher’s (1979) notion of space is an enculturated. • Time is an organizational concept.

14. Variable 2: Agencies (regulation, systems, and will) • Agencies are abilities to regulate time and space • Agenciesdelimit the relationship between forces and accessto resources. • Agencies are dynamic and is thus generative: compliance/ disruption, activism/ entropy, and involves an exercise of will toward both ends. • Agencies may also refer to the ‘agencies’ of the community. Agencies can thus be expressed as systems of regulation. • Agencies involve the exercise of will: towards action or entropy. The latter is a particular type of will that seeks to stratify the relationship between space, time, and agency, such that these three drivers remain in static balance to each other. • Agencies derive from the feminist postcolonial theorization of subjects as gendered orracialised (Ashcroft et al. [1989] and Spivak [1987])

15. Variable 3: Resources (situated, material, psychosocial) • Resources are in dynamic influence of agencies and forces. • Resources are either placed or field-independent. Education is what Blommaert refers to as a “placed resource” (2002:12). • Placed resources require reinvestment. • Field-independent resources once acquired are deployable anywhere and are self-sustaining. • Resources can be material and can be quantified. • Resources can be psychosocial. • Resourcesacquisition depends on availability, accessibility. • The commitment and connection to an area (referring here to Budge [2005]) have the potential not only to extend access to resources but also to transform the relationship between space and time.

16. Categorising phenomena in terms the GTR - or Domain Analysis and Establishing Relationships, according to Cohen et al (2008: 184)

17. Data inferencing(post data collection and description) • Of Forces: • the relationship between space/ place influences the use of time by learners. • Space influences that range and variety of learning activities. • Place influences the relationship between teachers and learners. • Time influences field-independent resources in the learning environment. • Time determines access to placed resources.

18. Data inferencing(post data collection and description) • Of Agencies: • Well regulated learning environments (home or schools) are also well resourced (situated and field-dependent skills) and the presence of will to regulation is strong. • Inadequate learning environments are characterised by the absence of regulation . The absence of regulation elongates time.

19. Data inferencing(post data collection and description) • Of Resources: • The absence of placed resources influences the aquisition of field-independent resources. • Where placed resources are scarce, the influence of agencies may extend or limit access. • Psychosocial behaviours impact on the availability of time to access resources. • Psychosocial behaviours influence space/ place to acquire field-independent resources.

20. Still to do…. • What does GTR offer by way of insight concerning rurality as a component of identity? • What does GTR offer by way of insight concerning education in rural communities? • How does the ‘dynamism’ as a key GTR research concept shape how we understand the interaction of agencies, forces and resources? • What is the contribution GTR makes to rural education research? • What value does GTR add to the development of teacher education curricula in South Africa and globally?

21. Thanks& Acknowledgements • The development of GTR has been made possible by: • the input from a team of researchers and students associated with the Rural Teacher Education Project (RTEP) at UKZN; • the funding of the NRF, Toyota SA, and Nedbank over the duration of RTEP.