Having explained and discussed the history of language policy in South Africa, the languages spoken in the country; International and South African literature on Language in Education Policy, language planning models in South Africa, as well as the plight of isiZulu in KwaZulu-Natal, a description of the research design follows in the next chapter.
CHAPTER THREE 3.0 RESEARCH DESIGN
3.1. Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to explain and discuss the methods used to investigate the research topic. The reasons for using a multimethod approach, including quantitative23 and qualititative24 research methods, will be outlined.
The procedure used for data collection will be discussed followed by a discussion on the procedure used for the analysis of data. Lastly a summary of the chapter will be given.
3.2. Choice of Paradigm
The ways of seeing the world are often known as paradigms25. A paradigm is important in scientific inquiry because it forms a frame of reference for a particular investigation. The term paradigm can mean different things to different people. To clarify any misconceptions, Morgan (1979) suggests that the term can be used at three different levels:
• At the philosophical level, where it is used to reflect basic beliefs about the world.
• At the social level, where it is used to provide guidelines about how the researcher should conduct his or her endeavours.
23 Menlenberge Buskens (1993) provides the following description of quantitative research:
in a quantitative approach, the researcher tries to measure the degree in which certain aspects one assumes the phenomena consists of, are present in reality.
24 The phrase 'qualitative methodology' refers, in the broadest sense, to research that produces descriptive data peoples own written or spoken words and observable behaviour (Taylor et al., 1984:5).
25 Mark, quoting Guba and Lincoln (1994), defines a paradigm as representing a worldview that defines, for its holder, the nature of the world, the individuals place in it, and the range of possible relationships to that world (Mark: 1996:206).
• At the technical level, where it is used to specify the methods and techniques, which ideally should be adopted when conducting research.
According to Taylor et al., (1984:2), two major theoretical perspectives have dominated the social science scene namely-positivism26 and the phenomelogical27 perspective. In positivistic approach, logical reason is applied to the research so that precision and objectivity are critical in investigating research problems. Positivism is founded on the belief that the study of human behavior should be conducted in the same way as studies conducted in the natural sciences. It is based on the assumption that social reality is independent of us, and exists, regardless of whether we are aware of it or not. According to positivists, social and natural worlds are both regarded as being bound by certain fixed laws in sequence of cause and effect.
Proponents of the phenomenological approach argue that the physical sciences deal with objects, which are outside us, while the social sciences deal with action and behavior generated from within the human mind. They argue that the 'inter-relationship' of the investigator and what was being investigated was impossible to separate, and what existed in the social and human world was what we (investigators and lawyers) thought existed (Smith 1983: 7). A phenomenon is a fact or occurrence that appears or is perceived, especially one of which the cause is in question (1990: 893). Considerable regard is paid to the subjective state of an individual.
This paradigm stresses the subjective aspects of human activity by focusing on the meaning, rather than the measurement of social phenomena. The research methods used under this approach are,
26 Positivism seeks the facts or causes of social phenomena, with little regard to the subjective state of the individual. (Research and Enquiry Methods study-pack, Mancosa, 1999:52).
27 The phenomenological paradigm is concerned with the study of human behaviour from the participant's own frame of reference. (Research and Enquiry Methods study-pack, Mancosa, 1999:52).
An array of interpretative techniques which seek to describe, translate and otherwise come to terms with the meaning, not the frequency of certain, more or less naturally occurring phenomena in the social world (Van Maanen, 1983: 9).
The preceding paragraphs discussed the two main paradigms used in this research. The features of the two paradigms are succinctly listed in the Table below.
d"
f h
Table 5: Features 0 t e two mam para Igms
Positivistic paradigm Phenomenological paradigm
Tends to produce quantitative data Tends to produce qualitative data Useslan~esamples Uses small samples
Concerned with hypothesis testing Concerned with generating theories Data is highly specific and precise Data is rich and subjective
The location is artificial The location is natural
Reliability is hiqh Reliability is low
Validity is low Validity is high
Generalises from sample to popUlation Generalises from one setting to another
Source: (Research and enquiry methods study pack-Mancosa, 1999:54) It is important to note that some researchers use alternate terms to refer to positivistic and the phenomenological paradigms. The alternate terms are summarised in the Table below:
d"
f th h f t
Source: (Research and Enquiry Methods study pack Mancosa, 1999:49) T bl 6 Alta e "" erna Ive erms or e mam researc para Igms
Positivistic Paradigm Phenomenological Paradigm
Quantitative Qualitative
Objectivist Subjectivist
Scientific Humanistic
Experimentalist Interpretivist
"
In addition to the choice of paradigm, it is important that the correct research style is chosen. Miller et al., (1992:3,4) distinguishes five styles of inquiry, namely: experimental, survey, documentary-historical, field and philosophical.
Experimental research tests ca use-and-effect relationships in which the researcher randomly assigns subjects to groups. The researcher manipulates one or more independent variables and determines whether these manipulations cause an outcome (Mcmillan and Schumacher 1989). The
survey style provides a numeric description of some fraction of the population- the sample-through the data collection process of asking questions of people (Fowler, 1988). The document-historical design depends on artifacts, which can be archives, literature, art, data tapes from someone else's research, etc.
Field research, on the other hand, has no pre-packaged research designs.
Specific data collection methods, sampling procedures, and analysis styles are used to create unique, question-specific designs that evolve throughout the research process (Calteux 1998,60). Miller et al., (1992:5) describes the philosophical enquirer as one who "uses analytic skills as a thinker, to examine an idea orconcept through the filteroflogic, in order to move toward clarity and the illumination ofbackground conditions".
According to Miller et al., (1992:12), the choice of a research style for a particular project depends on the overall aim of the research, the specific analysis objective and its associated research question, the preferred paradigm, the degree of research control desired, the level of investigator intervention, the available resources, the time frame, and aesthetics. The overall aim of this study is to investigate the sociolinguistic status of isiZulu at former House of Delegates high schools in the greater Durban area. In order to gain an in-depth understanding of the learners' and educators' views on the study of isiZulu, a combination of quantitative and qualitative research styles were used. Proponents of the quantitative approach argue that as long as researchers adhere to scientific procedures, they can avoid bias and their research will be 'free'. Furthermore, quantitative research methods can be used to survey large samples of respondents and make generalisations.
However, there are constraints, especially with regard to the limited choice respondents have. A further constraint is that respondents tend to respond subjectively rather objectively. Qualitative research methods deal with small groups of people but allow for much greater in-depth investigation than quantitative research methods. This will make it difficult to generalise on the basis of small groups of people. Therefore, if quantitative and qualitative research are used hand in hand, it should lead to reliable findings.
Scientific inquiry has, at least five aims: identification, description, explanation-generation, explanation-testing and control. Quantitative methods are used most commonly for explanation testing and control; whereas qualitative research methods are used for explanation generation, identification and description (Milleret al., 1992: 6).
Miller et al., (1992: 6) distinguishes three types of description: quantitative, qualitative and normative. Quantitative description, based on descriptive statistics, refers to the distribution, frequency prevalence, incidence and size of one or more phenomena. Qualitative description, using qualitative methods, explores the meanings, variations and perceptual experiences of phenomena.
Normative description seeks to establish the norms and value of phenomena.
The choice of quantitative or qualitative methods depends on whether the norms of interest are numerical or textual. In this study, the norms of interest were numerical and textual; hence a combination of quantitative and qualitative approaches were used.
The distinction between quantitative and qualitative research methods has divided researchers over such questions as: What counts as evidence? What are the principles, which allow us to connect evidence to our claims?
(Hillocks, 1992). All these deal with the real world and how we perceive and analyse it. We know that within each paradigm, in particular, the qualitative, there is much diversity of views (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994). The quantitative research design is independent of reality because researchers attempt to eliminate biases, values, preconceptions and emotional involvements. Those working in the qualitative tradition maintain that such objectivity is unachievable. They believe that it is not possible to separate the researcher from what is being researched (Hillocks, 1992). According to Hillocks, identifying the commonalities between them is a more generative process than accentuating where and how they diverge .The two research traditions are not mutually exclusive, rather they are closely connected and may serve to complement each other.
There are now many examples in the language education literature advocating the advantages of multiple perspectives on literacy research, which draw on both quantitative and qualitative methodologies (Beach, Greens, Kamil and Shanahan, 1992). The use of both quantitative and qualitative approaches in the one study allows the researcher to achieve different insights into the same problem. The appropriate methodology in this study will be eclectic. Perception that the integration of data derived from a number of different sources and reflecting a range of data collection procedures was likely to produce a more complete view of the reality.
Creswell (1994) includes the views of a number of other authors to show the different assumptions of quantitative and qualitative research approaches.
They are listed in the Table below.
Table 7: Assumptions of the Quantitative and Qualitative research approaches.
QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE
Reality is objective and singular, apart from the Reality is subjective and multiple as seen by
researcher. participants.
Researcher is independent from that being Researcher interacts with that being
researched. researched.
Value-free and unbiased. Value-laden and biased.
Formal. Informal.
Based on set definitions. Evolving definitions.
Impersonal voice. Personal voice.
Use of accepted quantitative words. Use of accepted qualitative words.
Deductive process. Inductive process.
Cause and effect. Mutual simultaneous shaping of factors.
Static design-categories isolated before study. Emerging design-categories identified during research process.
Context-free. Context-bou nd.
Generalisations leading to prediction, explanation Patterns and theories developed for
and understandinQ. understandina.
Accurate and reliable through validity and Accurate and reliable through verification.
reliabilitv.
Source: Adapted from Creswell (1994:5)
According to (Greene, Caracelli, and Graham 1989), as cited in Creswell (1994: 75), there are five purposes for combining methods in a single study:
• It allows for conversion of results.
• Complimentary, in that overlapping and different facets of a phenomenon may emerge (e.g. peeling the layers of an onion).
• Developmentally, wherein the first method is used sequentially to help inform the second method.
• Initiation, wherein contradictions and fresh perspectives emerge.
• Expansion, wherein the mixed methods add scope and breadth to a study.
It is advantageous to combine methods to understand a concept being tested or explored. This is referred to as triangulation28.