Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
INTRODUCTION
In chapter 2, literature pertaining to the significance of supporting learners experiencing reading difficulties using ICTs was reviewed. In addition, the theories that form the theoretical framework, which relates to supporting learners experiencing reading difficulties were also discussed and integrated. In this chapter, the research methodology (that comprises the research paradigm, the research approach and the research design) is linked to the theoretical framework. The link is further expanded to the sampling procedures, data collection methods and instruments, data analysis, validity, reliability, trustworthiness and ethical considerations in order to answer the main research and sub-research questions and to reject or accept the hypotheses formulated in chapter 1 (Section 1.5.3).
Research methodology, as described by Welman et al. (2011:2), is the general research strategy that considers and explains the logic behind research methods and techniques. These methods, described in the research methodology, define the means or modes of data collection and eventual analysis strategy (how specific results that inform the research questions are to be calculated). In this study, the research methodology is viewed as a process and procedures used to undertake a research study from a worldview to the answering of research questions. The research methodology for this study is outlined in Figure 3.1 on the next page.
Figure 3.1 illustrates how the various components of the research relate to as well as influence each other. The figure also presents the data collection tools that were used in this study. The research paradigm as the first component of the research process is discussed below.
RESEARCH PARADIGM
Paradigm is a term that received attention in the 20th century after being identified by the American physicist and philosopher, Thomas Kuhn (1922-1966) as a fundamental principles, basic concepts and experimental practices of a scientific discipline. Babbie (2010:33) describes paradigm as a model or a frame of reference through which to observe and understand the research study. Creswell (2009:6) offers a broader perspective by stating that paradigm can be a philosophical worldview. This study shares Creswell’s view, and therefore a paradigm is defined as a framework of beliefs, values and methods within which research takes place.
It was stated in chapter 1 (Section 1.7.1) that, the suitable paradigm for this study is constructivism. As explained in chapter 1, the constructivism paradigm is a broadly perceived concept that has many definitions. Guba and Lincoln (1994:110) define constructivism in terms of the following philosophies, namely: ontology, epistemology and hermeneutics. Defining the constructivism paradigm in terms of ontology, Guba and Lincoln (1994:110) explain that it is the realities that are apprehendable in the form of multiple, intangible mental constructions, socially and experientially. They further posit that the elements of the ontological constructivism paradigm are often shared among individuals and even across cultures. Matuszek (2015:204) asserts that the ontology of the constructivism paradigm is an active construction of reality by a researcher, not a passive reception of what is directly given.
According to Guba and Lincoln (1994:111), it is difficult to distinguish between the ontological and epistemological constructivism paradigm. They define the epistemological constructivism paradigm as a transactional object of investigation, which can be interactively linked so that the findings are literally created as the investigation proceeds. Boghossian (2012:73) asserts that:
As an epistemology, the constructivism paradigm rejects the traditional or classical view of knowledge as ‘Justified True Belief’. This view of knowledge, which can be traced back to Plato’s Theaetetus, states that one can only claim to know something if it is true, if one believes it to be true, and if one has justification for the belief.
Hermeneutically, the constructivist paradigm, according to Domenici (2008:25), can be linked with social constructivism (Section 1.7.1). The link corroborates that the individuals’ constructions can be elicited or refined through interactions with peers or adults and be regarded as social constructions. Peck and Mummery (2017:388) describe the hermeneutic constructivism paradigm as an approach to redress some limitations within many qualitative frameworks and open up an opportunity for a deeper and more nuanced understanding of the human being within a given set of circumstances
The most suitable definition relating to this study is the ontological definition because, with ICTs, learners learn through experiential and social involvement. It links well with the main theory that forms part of the theoretical framework underpinning this study which is Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory. Jaworski (2015:171) also confirms the fact that the constructivism paradigm elements can be shared across the cultures.
Table 1.2 provides a rationale for the selection of the constructivism paradigm as the appropriate paradigm for this study. The table indicates that although constructivism is predominant in qualitative methods, quantitative methods may also be utilised. The data collection methods shown in Table 1.2 also link perfectly with the data collection methods used in this study.
RESEARCH APPROACH
Research approach and research method are concepts that are generally used interchangeably. For the purpose of this study the concept ‘research approach’ was used throughout. Research approach can be defined as a strategy of enquiry, which moves from the underlying assumptions to research design and data collection (Myers, 2013:19-32). It has conclusively been shown by research that, the most important aspect of the research approach is the forms of data collection. However, Durrheim (2010:47) defines the research approach as a decision that is made after considering the purpose of the research and the types of data that will achieve that purpose. He adds that, in that decision, implications for consequences relating to sampling and data analysis should be considered.
Welman et al. (2010:3) and Creswell (2014:3) concur with Durrheim’s definition that the research approach is a plan and the procedures for research that span the steps from paradigm to the detailing of methods of data collection, analysis and interpretation. Guided by the definitions above, the research approach in this study was viewed as the decision that guides how the research will be conducted, considering the topic and the main aim of the study.
It was indicated in chapter 1 (section 1.7.1) that the mixed-methods approach was selected as the most suitable approach for this study. Creswell and Plano Clark (2007:10) emphasise that mixed methods add a certain value to research, which qualitative or quantitative approaches, separately, do not provide. The definition of the mixed-methods approach presented by Creswell (2014:3) is that it resides in the middle of the research continuum because it integrates elements of both qualitative and quantitative approaches.
In addition, Creswell and Plano Clark (2007:12) define mixed methods as a separate methodology in which both qualitative and quantitative approaches, methods and procedures are combined or mixed to come up with a more complete picture of the research problem. Delport and Fouché (2011:434) support the fact that the mixed-methods approach is a separate methodology for conducting research that involves collecting, analysing, and integrating (or mixing) quantitative and qualitative research (and data) in a single study or a longitudinal program of inquiry.
The mixed-methods approach was selected as it allows for a combination of statistics and narratives to provide a better understanding of a research problem, integrating the findings at one or several points within the study (Delport & Fouché, 2011:434). According to Terrel (2012:254), similar to other research approaches, the mixed methods approach has a variety of designs which provide specific direction for procedures in the research approach. The research design for this study is discussed below.
RESEARCH DESIGN
Research design is referred to as an integrated statement of and justification for the technical decision involved in planning a research project (Fouché, Delport & De Vos, 2011:142). Babbie (2007:112) states that a research design involves a set of decisions regarding a specific topic that has to be studied, targeting a specific population, with a specific research approach and a specific purpose.
Nieuwenhuis (2011c:71) posits that a research design is a plan or strategy which moves from the underlying paradigm to specifying the selection of participants, the data collection methods to be used and the data analysis to be done. A similar view is held by Durrheim (2010:34) who defines a research design as a bridge between research questions and the execution or implementation of the study. He adds that it is a plan that guides the arrangement of conditions for collection and analysis of data. Guided by the above definitions, in this study, the research design was viewed as a strategy of inquiry within the research approach that guided the researcher throughout the study.
In chapter 1 (section 1.7.3), it was indicated that the research design for this study is concurrent triangulation mixed-methods design. The reason for the selection of concurrent triangulation mixed methods design is that both quantitative and qualitative methods were used to collect data to bring together the strengths of both research approaches and to corroborate the results.
The concurrent triangulation mixed methods design, according to Ivankova, Creswell, and Plano Clark (2011:268), is most suitable when a researcher wants to collect both types of data at the same time about a single phenomenon in order to compare and contrast the different findings to produce well-validated conclusions. Similarly, Cohen and Manion (2002:19) view the concurrent triangulation mixed-methods design as an attempt to map out or explain more fully, the richness and complexity of human behaviour by studying it from more than one standpoint.
The quantitative data was used to assess the effectiveness of the use of ICTs in supporting learners experiencing reading difficulties while the qualitative data collected from the same participants explored their experiences when supporting the learners.
POPULATION
There is consensus among social scientists that a population may consist of elements, individuals, or units. Welman et al. (2011:52) define population as the study objects, which consist of individuals, groups, organisations, human products and events, or the conditions to which they are exposed. In addition, Strydom (2011:223) defines population as individuals in the universe who possess specific characteristics.
On the other hand, Durrheim and Painter (2010:132) define population as the larger pool from which sampling elements are drawn and to which findings can be generalised. Similarly, Strydom (2011:223) points out that population are a term that sets boundaries on the study. Drawing from these definitions, population, for this study, means a total group of participants that make a unit of analysis from which the researcher wishes to make specific conclusions.
Guided by the definition, the population for this study comprised of teachers who are members of the SBST and LSEs because I aimed to explore, describe and explain their experiences and perceptions from supporting learners experiencing reading difficulties using ICTs. As per the definition of population above, it can be seen that participants needed to be sampled for feasibility purposes.
SAMPLING
Traditionally, it has been argued that it is usually impossible to include the entire population in the study, the two main restrictions being time and cost (Maree & Pietersen, 2011:172). Welman et al. (2011:55) state that it is impractical and uneconomical to involve all the members of the population in a research project.
A sample, according to Strydom (2011:223), comprises elements or a subset of the population considered for actual inclusion in the study. Lindegger (2011:468) describes a sample as any subjects who are available to participate in a study. Brink (1996:133) shares a similar view and defines a sample as a subset of a population selected to participate in the study. While a variety of definitions of the term sample have been suggested, this study used the definition first suggested by Brink (1996) who considers a sample as a selected subset of a population.
Sampling is defined as a selection of research participants from an entire population and involves decisions about people, settings, events, behaviours and/or social behaviours (Durrheim, 2011:49). Mphahlele (2013 50) interprets sampling as a process of selecting a group of participants who represent the target population.
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
1.2 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
1.3 PRELIMINARY LITERATURE REVIEW
1.4 PROBLEM STATEMENT
1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES
1.6 AIM AND OBJECTIVES
1.7 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
1.8 RELIABILITY, VALIDITY AND TRUSTWORTHINESS
1.9 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
1.10 DELIMITATIONS
1.11 DEFINITION OF TERMS
1.12 CHAPTER DIVISION
1.13 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 WHAT IS READING?
2.3.1 Possible contributing causes of reading difficulties
2.4 CHALLENGES, TRENDS AND THE IMPLICATIONS OF READING DIFFICULTIES GLOBALLY, IN SUB-SAHARAN AFRICA AND LOCALLY
2.5 SUPPORTING LEARNERS EXPERIENCING READING DIFFICULTIES
2.6 READING SUPPORT MECHANISMS
2.7 FULL-SERVICE SCHOOLS AS A SUPPORT STRATEGY TO ADDRESS READING DIFFICULTIES
2.8 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.9 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DESIGN
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 RESEARCH PARADIGM
3.3 RESEARCH APPROACH
3.4 RESEARCH DESIGN
3.5 POPULATION
3.6 SAMPLING
3.7 DATA COLLECTION
3.8 DATA COLLECTION TOOLS
3.9 DATA ANALYSIS
3.10 RELIABILITY, VALIDITY AND TRUSTWORTHINESS
3.11 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 DATA PREPARATION
4.3 ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF QUALITATIVE DATA
4.4 ANALYSIS AND PRESENTATION OF QUANTITATIVE DATA
4.5 CONCLUSION: INTEGRATION OF QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS
4.6 CHAPTER SUMMARY
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 SUMMARY OF THE STUDY
5.3 SUMMARY OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
5.4 A RECAP ON RESEARCH FINDINGS TO INFORM ICTs-GUIDELINE DEVELOPMENT
5.5 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
5.6 CONCLUSIONS
5.7 RECOMMENDATIONS
5.8 SUGGESTED GUIDELINES FOR USING ICTs AS A SUPPORT MECHANISM FOR LEARNERS EXPERIENCING READING DIFFICULTIES
5.9 A FRAMEWORK FOR THE DESIGN OF AN ICT GUIDELINE
5.10 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
5.11 CONCLUDING REMARKS
REFERENCES
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT
