5 Generating and presenting data
The methodology enables a number of analyses which are presented here in summary tables.
Firstly, it enables recognition of the movement of events across the duration of the lecture, in
particular the changing patterns in the primary object of acquisition through different subevents.
In Table 2, we see the movement in this case is from M→T→M→T→T→T→M.
The table reflects further, recognition of the pedagogic resources used in the interaction and
the movement in evaluative judgements across time. For example, in the first sub-event,
E1.1 the main pedagogic resource is a student's solution to the word problem, which is
reflected on, with all legitimating appeals to mathematical principles or arguments.
Secondly, the methodology enables an analysis of the movement through different forms
of interaction within the pedagogic context, as summarised in Table 3 below. The video was
analysed with respect to different types of pedagogic interaction that were identified prior to
the analysis. Given the policy context in South Africa, the categories were based on
assumptions of what Cuban (1993) described as hybrid practices in contexts where advocacy
of learner centred practice (in reform policy) meets well-oiled teacher-centred practice. The
categories used are named in the first row of Table 3 from whole class discussion through to
student questioning (see Appendix 1 for a description of each category). Counts of these
types were made if they were identified during a particular sub-event across the IP. So, for
example, of the 12 sub-events, M was the main object of acquisition in six, and in four of
those six sub-events, whole class discussion featured; in two small group work featured; and
in 1 lecturer exposition featured. Across the duration of events, there is a spread of different