CHAPTER 3................................................................................................................................... 74
3.2 Research approach
3.2.1 The Interpretive Paradigm
Paradigms are ways of seeing the world and define how to research what is acceptable for researchers who adopt this view (Christiansen Bertram & Land, 2010). Terre Blanche and Durheim (1999) extend on this definition of paradigms as systems of interrelated assumptions about epistemology, which is the nature of the relationship between what can be known and the knower; ontology, which is the nature and form of reality and methodology, that is, the way the researcher researches what she believes can be known. Within a research paradigm, the purposes and techniques of the framework must fit to ensure that the research design is coherent.
The three major paradigms are post-positivist, interpretivist and the critical paradigm.
In the interpretivist paradigm, the researcher’s focal point is describing how people make meaning of their worlds and their particular actions, rather than aiming to predict what people will do, as in the post-positivist paradigm (Christiansen et al., 2010).
Interpretivists aim to understand, and are interested in observing and understanding people’s behaviour, attitudes, perceptions and beliefs and how they make sense of the contexts in which they live and work (Christiansen et al., 2010, p.23).
The key words relating to this paradigm are engagement, participation and collaboration (Henning, van Rensburg, & Smit, 2004). Thus, in the interpretivist paradigm the researcher is a participant observer, who separates the meanings of actions as they occur within the given social contexts, as opposed to the researcher standing above or outside this context (Carr & Kemmis, 1989, p.88). In conducting this research, I sought to gain insight into my participants’ teaching and learning of writing by observing their behaviour during the writing lessons, determining how they viewed these writing lessons using the process genre approach and noting their positioning during the stages of this writing process. Thus, I believe the interpretivist paradigm was appropriate for this study, as it allowed for a deeper understanding of the participants’ perceptions, beliefs, challenges and experiences of the writing programme.
This paradigm was also deemed suitable in relation to the qualitative research design of this study, because it attempts to understand human and social reality, that is, how the participants experience and view the development of writing using the process genre approach. This study did not aim to change the participants’ behaviour (critical paradigm) or seek to find a truth (post-positivist paradigm) but was instead concerned with exploring and understanding a particular occurrence in a particular classroom setting, so operating within an interpretivist paradigm was most suitable.
Guba and Lincoln (1994), who have taken the lead in the understanding of research paradigms, provide three assumptions about interpretivism. The first is that the purpose of educational research is to understand the meaning, which informs human behaviour. The purpose of this research was to understand how the teachers’
categories of knowledge and the boys’ and teachers’ positioning informed their behaviour in the classroom, thus the first assumption can be said to be pertinent. The second is that there is a set of truths or realities, which are non-generalisable, historical, local and specific. The third assumption is that results are created through the interpretation of data. What may be viewed as a truth for the classrooms in this study may not be found in other schools, even though the contexts may be similar.
The results in this study were drawn from thematic, positioning and document analysis and interpretation, making the second and third assumptions relevant here.
3.2.2 Qualitative research
Qualitative research is concerned with understanding some area of social life, is categorised by its aims, and generates words, rather than numbers, as data that need to be analysed (Brikci & Green, 2007, p.2). The data collected for this study from the questionnaires and during the interviews and observations were textual and sought to understand a social aspect of the participants’ lives in the writing classroom.
In addition to the social aspect and textual data, a qualitative research style best suited this study for a few reasons. Qualitative data are verbal or textual data that are collected when depth is required (Christiansen et al, 2010). To gain a clear picture of the boys, their teachers and the writing programme, in-depth, rich data were required, so the qualitative research design was most suitable for the study, as both textual and verbal data were needed. This research style allowed for the collection of verbal data
in the form of the teachers’ accounts of writing during their interviews and in their teaching of writing, and of textual data in the form of the boys’ written efforts and their teachers’ feedback. The qualitative research design also allowed for an in-depth analysis of data in relation to the research questions, and enabled me to provide descriptions of the participants’ contexts and their experiences, challenges and perceptions during the development of writing skills.
McMillan and Schumacher (2001, p.15) state that qualitative research assumes that multiple realities are socially constructed through individual and collective perceptions of the same situation. This kind of research is also concerned with understanding a social phenomenon from the perspective of the participants. The study provided a detailed description, analysis and interpretation of phenomena and data collected in the form of the participants’ words (verbal descriptions) to portray the richness and complexity of events (the teaching and learning of writing) that occur in a natural setting (the Grade 6 HL English classroom) (McMillan & Schumacher, 2001, p.41). To accomplish this, in-depth interviews with open-ended questions were used, as they allowed the teachers to share their experience and challenges of the writing programme, and of other related aspects of their lives. I designed and used an activity- based questionnaire (evaluated and discussed in the next chapter) to allow the boys to share their experiences and the challenges of the writing programme in a manner that suited their learning preferences. Thus, the data collected in this small-scale study were mostly the words obtained from the interviews, questionnaire, lesson observations and boys’ written submissions with their teachers’ feedback, which took place in the natural setting of the English classroom.
Qualitative research is criticised because of the small sample sizes which do not always represent the larger population, so the extent to which the findings can be generalised is difficult to measure (Brikci & Green, 2007). This critique of qualitative research is not applicable to this study, as it was not the intention to generalise the findings to other contexts, although these findings could be used comparatively with those other contexts. Another criticism of qualitative research is that the findings may lack rigour and may be biased by the researchers’ opinions (Brikci & Green, 2007).
These issues are addressed under ‘3.7 Trustworthiness’ below.
a. Researcher Positionality
The role of the researcher in qualitative research cannot be ignored as it may have an impact on the research process. It is thus essential that I acknowledge my positionality in this study.
I taught English at HL level to both mother tongue and FAL learners for about thirteen years, during which time I continued with my studies, and tutored language modules on the Advanced Certificate in Education. I thoroughly enjoyed the interaction in the tertiary space with those teachers who were looking to upgrade their qualifications. As I grew as a researcher, I realised that I wanted to become more involved in teacher training, so I moved into a full-time position lecturing language modules to student teachers.
There are many similarities between the participating teachers in this study and I as we come from the same racial group, so we attended schools that were designated for Indian learners during the apartheid era. These schools were generally well run but were limited in terms of resources such as sporting equipment and libraries. In these schools we learnt how to read and write but our exposure to different genres was limited as was the development of our critical thinking skills. We mainly read and wrote narrative essays and letters. The teacher usually gave us a topic which we wrote about and submitted. The teacher would then mark the essay by correcting all the errors, assigning a mark and writing a comment such as ‘good’ or ‘poor effort’. Teachers often emulate their teachers or adopt aspects from their schooling when they teach (Mather, 2012). Adding to this, I have many years of experience teaching language to large classes of mixed IP learners, including classes of FAL learners learning English at HL level. Thus, I can better understand the schooling system that the participating teachers experienced. I am also able to identify with some of their challenges and frustrations in the writing classroom. However, there are also differences as I have furthered my studies, developed my role as a researcher and now occupy lecturing position at tertiary level. As such, I need to constantly be aware of how my positions may affect the dynamics in the classroom and, also guard against being judgemental or overly critical of the participating teachers.
In terms of the boys, their learning has become an increasing area of interest for me.
I have always found that the boys in my classes added a fun element to the lessons.
Many boys also proved to be more challenging academically and behaviourally than the girls in my classes. The girls seemed to be more organised, participatory and obliging, whilst the boys made up the majority for incomplete homework and needed more encouragement to complete written activities. It is with these preconceived ideas of boys that I am conducting this research, so I must acknowledge that these might be unique to my classrooms and may not be the case in the classes in this study, so I must take care to report what I see as a researcher and not use my practitioner experience to make assumptions about these boys and teachers.