Although the unit of assessment has been clearly defined, the individual student does not act in isolation of the surrounding environment. In order to understand and assess the impact of peer learning on the subject, it is necessary to build a abstract representation of the classroom in terms of a dynamic movement of values and meaning. In this context, a researchers perspective operates within the positivist-interpretist paradigm; existence is founded on an objective reality imposed on the individual or existence is a subjective reality defined by individual perception (of which school represents just one of multiple contextual realities).

As education and schools are an intrinic part of society, I have been looking at the models derived from sociology as a means of characterising the African environment. As the dominant framework for analysing society in the 20th century, the functionalist paradigm is rooted in the sociology of regulation (as opposed to radical change paradigm), providing definitions of society in terms of its unity and cohesiveness and approaching its subject matter from an objective viewpoint. Functionalism is characterised by a concern for providing explanations for social order, integration, solidarity and actuality and is itself further delineated by the social-system theory (positivist) and interactionism (interpretist).

Social System theory builds on a biological analogy of holism, relationship between parts, structure, function and needs, treating the external world as a concrete reality, governed by observable functional relations amenable to scientific investigation through nomothetic methods. In this context, Malinowski identified the significance of functionality within social structures (units) whilst Radcliffe-Brown emphasised the significance of the relationship between functional units as the basis for structural continuity i.e the integrity of a society is maintained through the process of social life rather than the movement of individual members (entering or leaving).

Durkhiem suggested that the aim of a coherent society is conservation within the movement from a traditional to an industrial culture. Durkhiem (1938) saw traditional societies as being held together on the basis of a mechanical solidarity derived from the similarity of the associated parts, with the individuals conscience a simple appendage of the collective conscience (based on a system of shared, norms and beliefs) in all its movements. In contrast, Durkeim defined the industrial society with its extensive system of labour division and functional differentiation as a organic form arising from the interdependence of parts. Durkiem recognised that in the process of transition from traditional to industrial, social solidarity could breakdown. However, he saw this as an abnormal state of affairs and a deviation from the natural course of development.

In an extension to social system theory (positivist), von Bertalanffy (1956) promoted the study of systems (over physical events) identifying and exploring the difference between open (organismic analogy) and closed systems. Closed systems are deemed to be isolated from their environment and are characterised by equilibrium. Alternatively, open systems engage in transactions with their environment and change themselves in the process. An open system may achieve steady state but this is not a necessary condition. According to theory an organism represents a good example of an open system since it maintains itself through a (growth) process of exchange with its environment during the course of which there is a continuous build up and break-down of constituent parts.

Whilst it is accepted that an entirely closed (mechanical) system model would be limited in its representative of primary education deliver in the developing world, its is deemed a more suitable model for education in Africa (than the open system) on the basis of the following list of social/educational issues: 1) pan African literature has identified a clear delineation between contemporary schools and their surrounding environment, referred to as the formal and informal education systems. The informal education system is centred on the community and the development of the personal and vocational skills demanded within a traditional setting. In contrast, the state system represents a largely rational (positivist) development of the learning process based on goals of economic growth and national unity with little appreciation or consideration of traditional settings. 2) Progressive systems of education, centred on the child have not been successful in an African context. In contrast, the informal learning structure is based on an objective method of deference, observation, imitation and experience. Tedla even suggests that individual assertion based on personal knowledge, understanding and opinion is percieved as devisive and undisirable within the informal system. 3) At the level of the classroom, order and discipline is maintained by the use/threat of corporal punishment. The symbolic presence of the cane (and the curriculum) suggests that the meaning and values associated with the establishment are (externally) imposed on school children irrespective of individual opinions or the psychological impact.

As the literature indicates a entirely closed social system doesn’t exist, it is therefore appropriate to include an interpretist element as a means of accurately characterising the classroom environment. The subjective aspect to the research will be founded on the difference between the peer group environment and the conventional/formal school and listed as follows: 1) potential differences in Social, Economic status (SES) has been linked to school performance 2) differences in the education level of the parents. 3) many excluded children choose not to attend formal schools due to lack of relevance/interest i.e. a idiosyncratic view of education. 4) children will be taught by trained student-tutors rather than formal teachers. 5) There will be no threat of corporal punishment. 6) the limited curriculum and teaching time customised to the needs of the students.

Mid-way between the idealist view of society as a subjectively constructed entity (interactionist) and the objective mechanistic view, Mead states that the human being evolves through a social process of interaction that involves the development of language and hence the constructs of mind and self. Whilst Meads views are predicated upon the existence of an external reality which influences human thought and action, he rejects the notion of simple behaviourism recognising the role played by human beings in influencing their environment. It would appear that Meads objective relativism represents the pragmatists view of social construction.

In a practical sense, it is suggested that research invite each student and student-teacher to provide an individual opinion/account of needs and satisfaction in relation to the learning process. Though this is subjective element, the data could still be obtained using a survey method based on questionaires and interviews.

The deeper I delve into research methodology, the more intellectually entangled I become; hence the need to accurately define the boundaries of interest. As of now, I believe that my function as a researcher is to characterise the peer learning classroom as a means of delivering an objective and meaningful assessment of the learning environment. Based on this notion, the unit of analysis is deemed to be the individual, adolescent student and how he/she perform within a peer learning classroom environment.

1) On the understanding that the classroom/school is not a value free environment, what is the nature and form of these values. In this context, do the students (individually and collectively) define social reality within the classroom or do the prevalent norms and values of the classroom define individual values. Researcher perceptions in relation to this point determine the preferred operating paradigm. The symbolic presence of corporal punishment (in the form of the cane) suggests that society is determined to impose its will on the students, whether they like it or not i.e. individual assertion is neither welcomed nor tolerated. This perspective complements notions of African thought and learning based on deference and imitation and are seemingly inline with a positivist approach to education.

2) What are the significant values and expectations of education as defined by government policy. Are the aims of the government consistent with those of the students. Contemporary education in Africa has been accused on neo-colonialism of the mind, supporting an elite agenda (political, social and economic) as opposed to that of the majority and particularly the marginalised rural poor.

3) Will a peer learning environment be intrinsical different from the conventional classroom. If so, how and to what aim(s) i.e. political, social, economic (PSE). Currently it would seem that the peer environment has exactly the same PSE agenda as the conventional school (private or public), just a different delivery mechanism.

Further to the last point the following questions arise:

a) How will this meaning structure be affected by direct peer group tutoring as opposed to conventional teaching.

b) Excluded adolescent students (from a particular segment of the marginalised community) will probably arrive with a definitive view and attitude towards school, education and society at large. Many excluded children dont attend school for reasons associated with poverty and a perceived lack of institutional irrelevance.

c) Despite their age, the students will be learning from a primary curriculum. How will this effect their self concept.

In advance of finalising my research proposal based on an agreed set of high level requirements, I have turned my attention to the research strategy and the methods I could potentially employ to characterise and assess the learning environment. The process is initiated in terms of philosophical questions that relate to the understanding of the world, knowledge and the intended research environment i.e ontology, epistomology and axiology. Whilst history has witnessed a evolutionary cycle of deductive and inductive preferences, research is ultimately founded on a personal perception of truth and reality i.e that my subjective set of values will inevitably effect the form of the research and the output.

In terms of diametrically opposing paradigms, the world can be interpreted from the following extreme perspectives: 1) a positivist; the knower and the known are independent, inquiry is value free and based on a single reality. Time and context free generalisations are possible 2) a constructivist/interpretivist; the knower and the known are inseparable, inquiry is value bound and there are multiple, constructed realities. Only time and context bound conclusions are possible.

On the basis that the derivation of truth is deductive in nature, my ontological stance would appear to be positivist i.e I am starting with the hypothesis that student-tutors are able to teach student-learners, a priori to building a supporting case based on definitive evidence. Inductive research on the other hand is based on the detailed exploration of a phenomena and possible relationships between variables, a-priori to advancing a hypothesis or theory.

Whilst scholars defend one world view as opposed to another, in the real world a continua of philosophical orientations rather than dicotomous distinctions seem to reflect more accurately the positions of most investigators (Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009). Definitive paradigms that exist on this notional continuum include: 1) Pragmatism; the search for practical answers that interest the investigator. There may be causal relationships but they are transitory and hard to identify. 2) Transformative; places central importance on the lives and experiences of marginalised groups. Causal relationships should be understood within the social justice framework. Generisation is based on representative statements with links to social justice 3) Post-Positivist; There is a real reality but it can only be understood imperfectly or probabilistically.

Along this paradigm continuum there will inevitably exist a range of approaches related to research methods, categorised as follows: 1) definitively QUAN approach 2)Approachs that emphasise QUAN and use QUAL as a source of supplemental data. 3) Mixed Methods, QUAN and QUAL approaches are used in equal measure. 4) Approaches that emphasise QUAL and use QUAN as a source of supplemental data. 5) definitively QUAL approach.

The Prof has suggested a strictly positivistic approach (what?) to research based on student outcomes (quantitative testing) which could be supplemented by a on-task behavioural analysis (categorising student actions on a periodic basis). Whilst this view of school value would be the easiest to assess, it effectively acknowledges the diploma disease that seems to have infected the African perception of education i.e its only purpose is the attainment of qualifications. This view may reflect the truth but it ignores the fact that school is an intensely value-laden environment with significant explicit and implicit influence over its subjects. A strictly positivist approach would therefore be limited in its ability to characterise the environment and the learning process i.e why (based on subjective student and parental perspectives) a particular outcome was recorded as opposed to simply what was recorded. It is suggested that this qualitative aspect of research has particular significance when considered in relation to the chosen topic as so little is known about the needs, attitudes and perceptions of excluded children despite the fact that a vast UN effort (EFA programme) is being undertaken on their behalf.

From a practical standpoint, the quantitative approach is also dependent on whether a number of variables can be effectively controlled (in the absence of a definitive control group) i.e learning time, age and background differences etc.

This definition of research project would suggest a pragmatic paradigm based on some form of mixed method approach within the overall context of a case study, an indepth analysis of a single case. More research will be required in order to assess the validity of MM and the precise relationship between the QUAN and QUAL components.