chapter iii methodology of research

40

Lisa Khaerunnisa, 2016 AN EFL TEACHER’S CODE SWITCHING IN A YOUNG LEARNERS’ CLASS Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia | repository.upi.edu| perpustakaan.upi.edu

CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY OF RESEARCH

This chapter presents a detailed delineation of the methodology which was

applied in this study. It is divided into six major sections. To begin with, section

3.1 discusses the approach and design which were used in the study. Second,

section 3.2 discusses the site and participants which were involved in the study.

Third, section 3.3 discusses four techniques to collect the data. Fourth, section 3.4

discusses procedures to analyze the data from the data collection techniques. Fifth,

section 3.5 discusses the ways to ensure the data validity. Lastly, section 3.6

presents concluding remarks for this chapter.

3.1 Research Design

Research design in this study is chosen to fulfill the need of the research

purpose. The purpose of this study is to investigate an EFL teacher’s code

switching in a young learners’ class. More specifically, the purpose of this study

is to investigate her types code switching, her reasons to do code switching, and

effects of her code switching toward her students’ competency accomplishment.

Relevant to the aforementioned purpose, this study uses qualitative approach with

descriptive design. The overall purposes of qualitative approach are to achieve an

understanding of how people make sense out of their lives, delineate the process

of meaning-making, and describe how people interpret what they experience

(Merriam, 2009, p. 14). The aforementioned purposes of qualitative approach are

in line with the purpose of this study where it is used to understand the actions and

experiences of an EFL teacher in using code switching.

Furthermore, the rationale to use descriptive design in this study can be

seen from the relevancy between the above-mentioned purpose of this study and

characteristic of descriptive design. Descriptive design is used to picture the

phenomena as it naturally happens (See Fraenkel & Wallen, 1993). In other

words, it is designed to report the way things are (See Gay, 1987). In line with the

characteristic of the descriptive design, this study is designed to report the

41


description of teacher’s natural actions in doing code switching in her way to

teach English for young language learners.

3.2 Site and Participants

This study took place in one of state elementary schools in a county in

Serang, Banten, Indonesia. The participants of this study in the aforementioned

site included an English teacher and her 32 students in the fifth grade. Regarding

the principle of qualitative study, this study used purposive sampling where the

researcher chose the participants that were satisfactory to her specific needs (See

Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2007, pp. 114-115; Creswell, 1994, p. 148). As its

name suggested, purposive sample had been chosen for a specific purpose where

its concern was to acquire in-depth information from those who were in a position

to give it (Cohen et al., 2007, p. 115).

The teacher had been chosen to be a participant in this study because of

two reasons. First, she does an action which is infrequently done by other EFL

teachers who teach young learners. Specifically, she is a multilingual who used

three languages including English, Indonesian, and Javanese to teach English for

the fifth graders. Second, she had willingness to be fully observed and interviewed

by the researcher; so that the data needed in this study could be collected

comprehensively. In addition, the fifth graders had been included as the

participants because of their status as bilinguals who were taught by the English

teacher using code switching in three languages. With respect to confidentiality of

participants’ identities, the anonymity of their names and school was kept.

This study was done when the teacher had a responsibility to teach the

students to respond very simple instructions verbally in accordance to basic

competency in teaching syllabus. Based on the syllabus, there are three indicators

of competency accomplishment for the aforementioned basic competency. First,

students are able to repeat English utterances of their teacher/friends audibly.

Second, they are able to repeat English utterances of their teacher/friends with

correct pronunciations. Third, they are able to give correct oral responses to the

English questions from their teacher/friends (See appendix 1 & 2).

42


3.3 Data Collection Techniques

Data collection technique in descriptive study opens the opportunity to use

different sources of evidence (Fraenkel & Wallen, 1993, p. 23). Different sources

of evidence in this study are expected to gain the conclusion which is likely to be

much more convincing. A rationale to use two or more sources of evidence is

called triangulation (Cohen et al., 2007, pp. 141-142; Fraenkel, Wallen, & Hyun,

2012, p 458; Yin, 2003, p. 97). With data triangulation, the potential problems of

construct validity can be solved because the multiple sources of evidence

essentially provide multiple measures of the same phenomenon (Yin, 2003, p. 99;

See also section 3.5). Accordingly, in order to answer the research questions, four

data collection techniques were used in this study. There were classroom

observation, students’ questionnaire distribution, teacher’s interview, and

students’ interview. Time allocation of those data collection techniques is

presented in table 3.1 below.

Table 3.1

Time Allocation of Data Collection Techniques

No Activities

Dates

4-A

ug-1

5

5-A

ug-1

5

11-A

ug-1

5

12-A

ug-1

5

18-A

ug-1

5

19-A

ug-1

5

25-A

ug-1

5

26-A

ug-1

5

1-S

ept-

15

2-

Sep

t-15

3-S

ept-

15

4-S

ept-

15

1 Classroom

Observation

2

Students'

Questionnaire

Distribution

3 Teacher's

Interview

4 Students'

Interviews

43


All the above-mentioned data collection techniques were done in twelve

days. Further explanations about those four techniques and their instruments are

described in the following sub-sections based on the order of the collection time.

3.3.1 Classroom Observations

Observations are invaluable technique for getting and understanding “live”

data about the actual behavior of participants and condition of environment from

social situations (Cohen et al., 2007, p. 398; Yin, 2003, pp. 92-93). As a result, the

researcher has the potential to yield more valid or authentic data (Cohen et al.,

2007, p. 397). The researcher did ten semi-structured classroom observations to

answers all research questions in August-September 2015. The semi-structured

observations had been chosen due to the flexibility to extend the significance of

observations (See Cohen et al., 2007, pp. 396-397).

The instruments which were used to collect the data in this technique

included video recorder and field notes. To begin with, video recorder was used to

record complete English teaching and learning process in ten meetings. The data

collected from this instrument were used for three purposes. First, it is used to

answer the first research question about teacher’s types of code switching. The

teacher’s types of code switching were analyzed from the transcripts of videos

from this instrument. Second, it was used to support findings from the teacher’s

interview to answer the second research question about the teacher’s reasons to do

code switching. Third, it was used to answer the third research question about

effects of teacher’s code switching toward the students’ competency

accomplishment.

Beside its use to collect the useful data, video recorder also could bring

three advantages for the researchers. More specifically, it could give the

opportunity for the researcher to replay the record for continued study and

analysis, discuss the complete row data in the record with research advisor, and

have a permanent record for comparison with later study (See Fraenkel et al.,

2012, pp. 449-450).

44


The second instrument which had been used in the classroom observations

of this study was field note. The field note could provide logs which helped the

researcher to keep track of the development of the project (See Bogdan & Biklen,

1992, p. 107). The field note in this study was used to support the findings from

video transcripts to answer the first and third research questions and findings from

transcript of teacher’s interview to answer the second research question.

In order to get a complete log, this study adapted the conceptions of field

note which had been proposed by Bogdan and Biklen (1992), where it contained

descriptive and reflective parts. Descriptive part of the field note encompassed

description of physical setting, portraits of the participants, reconstruction of

dialogue, accounts of particular events, and depiction of activities (See Bogdan &

Biklen, 1992, pp. 108-120). In addition, reflection part included reflection on

analysis, reflections on method, reflection on ethical dilemmas and conflicts,

reflections on the observer’s frame of mind, and points of clarification (Bogdan &

Biklen, 1992, pp.121-123). Furthermore, the reflection parts in the field note were

set in parentheses and notation of “OC” which stood for observer’s comment (See

Bogdan & Biklen, 1992, p. 121). With respect to the need of neat field notes, the

handwritten field notes from every observation were typed using a word

processing program.

With regard to the role of the researcher in the process of observation, the

researcher acted as a non-participant observer in all observations. The researcher

did not participate in the activity being observed, but rather “sat on the sidelines”

and observed (Fraenkel et al., 2012, p. 446). The rationale to take this role is that

it could be least likely to affect the actions of the participants being studied (See

Fraenkel et al., 2012, p. 446). Therefore, it was easier to keep the objectivity of

data in this study.

3.3.2 Students’ Questionnaire Distribution

In the process of students’ questionnaire distribution, there were 32

questionnaire sheets which were addressed to all young learners in the classroom

of research participants. Questionnaire is a useful instrument for collecting survey

45


information (Cohen et al., 2007, pp. 318-348). The students’ responses in the

distributed questionnaires were used for two purposes. Firstly, those responses

were used to check the findings from teacher’s interview to answer the second

research question. The responses were used to check the conformity between the

students’ description about their own characteristics and the teacher’s way to

perceive her students’ characteristics which could affect her reasons to do code

switching. Those characteristics included the students’ habit to use languages,

mastery to use languages, and preference to the languages use of their English

teacher.

Second, the students’ responses were used as additional data related to the

effects of the teacher’s code switching toward the students’ understanding which

eventually would be used to answer the third research question. The collection of

the students’ questionnaire responses was conducted on 2 September 2015. It was

conducted on a day before the teacher’s interview for the need of anticipation.

More specifically, if the teacher’s viewpoint of her students’ characteristics had

not been comparable with her students’ responses in the questionnaire, the

researcher would have asked the inconsistency between teacher’s viewpoint and

students’ responses directly to the teacher in the interview session.

Regarding types of the questionnaire, this study used two kinds of

questionnaire including open-ended and multiple choice question. Eleven out of

fifteen questions were asked in open-ended type. This type was used dominantly

due to its appropriateness with the responses needed in this qualitative study. An

open-ended question could catch the authenticity, richness, depth of response,

honesty, and candor which become the hallmarks of qualitative data (Cohen et al.,

2007, p. 330). Further, there were four multiple choice questions which were

asked to the students. In this type of questionnaire, the range of choices was

designed to capture the likely range of responses to given statement (Cohen et al.,

2007, pp. 323-324). In the aforementioned multiple choice questions, there were

seven choices for each question. This typed was used to fill the need of a response

in limited range.

46


The distribution of this questionnaire for 32 target respondents in the

classroom of research participants was preceded by the piloting of questionnaire

distribution to fifth graders from another elementary school. The result showed

that the piloting respondents did not have any difficulties in responding the

questionnaire, so that the same questionnaire could be used to gather the data in

this study.

3.3.3 Teacher’s Interview

Interview is an important way to check, verify, or refute the impressions

that have been gained through observations (See Fraenkel et al., 2012, p. 450). In

the process of the teacher’s interview in this study, the teacher became a key

respondent. The teacher’s responses in the interview could be used to answer the

second research question about her reasons to do code switching and support the

findings from the classroom observations to answer the third research question

about effects of teacher’s code switching toward the students’ competency

accomplishment in the classroom of research participants.

Regarding type of interview, a semi-structured interview with open-ended

questions was conducted in this study because of its appropriateness (See Cohen

et al., 2007, p. 355; Fraenkel et al., 2012, p. 451; Yin, 2003, pp. 89-90). The

interview in this study appeared to be guided conversation rather than structured

query (See Yin, 2003, p. 89). In other words, although the researcher was

pursuing a consistent line of inquiry, her actual stream of questions is likely to be

fluid rather than rigid (See Rubin & Rubin, 1995, as cited in Yin, 2003, p. 89).

Thus, topic and issues to be covered in this semi-structured interview were

specified in advance in the form of flexible guides (See Paton, 1980, as cited in

Cohen et al., 2007, p. 353). The guide for this interview contained possible

questions which were majorly about teacher’s reasons to do code switching and

the effect of her code switching to the students’ competency accomplishment.

47


During the interview process, the teacher preferred using Indonesian

instead of English for her clearer responses delivery and using voice recorder

instead of video recorder in interview recording for possible nervous anticipation.

Nevertheless, the voice recorder still could give the same advantages as the video

recorder which had been used in the classroom observation technique. This

interview was conducted toward the end of a study since its result can shape the

comprehensive perceptions of the researcher (See Fraenkel et al., 2012, p. 451).

More specifically, it was conducted on 3 September 2015. It was a day after

students’ questionnaire distribution.

3.3.4 Students’ Interview

Students’ interview in this study involved five students as the

representative respondents from the fifth graders. As the respondents, those

students could be interviewed about the facts of matter as well as their opinions

about events (See Fraenkel et al., 2012, p. 451; Yin, 2003; p. 90). In this study,

those students were interviewed individually through semi-structured interview

for two purposes. First, the students’ interviews were conducted to double-check

the findings from students’ questionnaires and teacher’s interview for answering

the second research question. More specifically, it was used to verify the

conformity between students’ characteristics description and the teacher’s

viewpoint about her students’ characteristics which could affect the way she used

code switching. Second, the students’ interviews were conducted to support the

findings from students’ questionnaires and classroom observation to answer the

third research question about effects of the teacher’s code switching toward the

students’ competency accomplishment.

The aforementioned five respondents were chosen purposively since their

responses in the questionnaire were more consistent than the responses from other

students. Besides, based on the assessment of the researcher and the English

teacher, those five students were superior in oral communication than the other

students in the fifth grade. Their superiority could make the process of students’

48


interview smooth and fruitful. The interviews were conducted on 4 September

2015. It was a day after the teacher’s interview.

The guide of students’ interview contained possible questions related to

languages that they master, languages that they usually use, and effect of teacher’s

languages use toward their learning effectiveness in the classroom. The question

guide used in this study had been used to gather the data of similar research

concern in two previous studies which had been conducted by the researcher. The

results showed that the questions were well understood by the respondents and

effective to gather the data. Accordingly, there was credibility where the questions

guide also could be effectively used in this study.

3.4 Qualitative Data Analysis

Qualitative data analysis involves working with data, organizing them,

breaking them into manageable units, synthesizing them, searching for patterns,

discovering what is important and what is to be learned, and deciding what the

researcher will present to readers (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992, p. 153). The data

analysis in this study involves working with the data which have been gained

from classroom observations, students’ questionnaire distribution, teacher’s

interview, and students’ interviews. Each stage of analysis of the data gained from

those aforementioned data collection techniques is presented in following sub-

sections.

3.4.1 Steps To Analyze the Data from Classroom Observation

There are two data which have been gained from the classroom

observations. Those include video recordings of English teaching and learning

process and field notes in ten classroom observations. Those data were analyzed

in five major steps including data transcription, familiarization, categorization,

comparison, and interpretation.

3.4.1.1 Data Transcription

49


The process of data transcription comprises two steps of action. Firstly, the

data from videos of teaching and learning process in ten meetings were

transcribed after the researcher watched the videos. Secondly, with respect to the

need of neat observation field notes, ten handwritten notes were typed using a

word processing program.

3.4.1.2 Data Familiarization

The process of data familiarization involves the process of reading the data

from video transcripts and field notes carefully. It was done to gain an overview

of data coverage from those two aforementioned sources of data (See Ritchie

Spencer, & O’Connor, 2003, pp- 221-222).

3.4.1.3 Data Categorization

The process of data categorization involves three specific steps including

data coding, data sorting, and data reduction. To begin with, the data was labeled

or tagged. In common with some experts (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992; Cohen et al.,

2007; Creswell, 1994; Franekel et al., 2012; Lodico, Splauding, & Voegtle, 2006),

the researcher referred to this process as coding. Codes are tags or labels for

assigning meaning to chunk of data (Franekel et al., 2012, p. 436). In this step, the

researcher searched through the data for regularities and patterns as well as for

topics which the data covered (See Bogdan & Biklen, 1992, p. 166; Lodico et al.,

2006, p. 305). Then, the data were tagged.

After that, the data were categorized by using thematic data analysis. In

this step, the coded data were sorted into themes which had become the focus of

the study including types of teacher’s code switching, teacher’s reasons to do code

switching in English, Indonesian, and Javanese, and effects of the teacher’s code

switching toward the students’ competency accomplishment. In the process of

coding categorization, the data which did not fulfill the need of research questions

were eliminated from the analysis process. This process is called data reduction.

50


3.4.1.4 Data Comparison

Data comparison was conducted by comparing the data with the findings

of previous studies (See Creswell, 1994, pp. 156-157; Lodico et al., 2006, p. 313;

Yin, 2003, pp. 116-120) and other data collection techniques in this study (See

Creswell, 1994, pp. 157-158; Yin, 2003, pp. 97-98). To begin with, the process of

data comparison was started with three comparisons between the sorted data in the

thematic categories with the predicted patterns from previous studies presented in

chapter two. Firstly, the sorted data were compared with the previous studies

about the definition of code switching from Grosjean (1982), Hoffmann (1991),

Lanza (1992), and Mayers-Scotton (1992 & 1993) and the types of code switching

from Blom & Gumperz (1971), Gumperz (1982) and Poplack (1980) for

answering the first research question.

Secondly, the sorted data were compared with the previous studies about

the multilinguals’ reasons to do code switching from Cheng & Butler (2007),

Chung (2006), Clara (2007), Eldridge (1996), Ferguson (2003), Grosjean (1982),

Gulzar (2014), Gumperz (1982), Gwee (2006), Hoffmann (1991), Holmes (2001),

Jeff (1995), Liebscher, & Dailey–O'cain (2005), Modupeola (2013), Qian et al.

(2009), Sert (2005), Rezvani & Rasekh (2011), Rinda & Lestira (2014), Saville-

Troike (2003), Suchana (2014), and Yataganbaba & Yildirim (2015), the

sociolinguistic perspective of code switching from Holmes (2001), the

characteristics of young language learners from Brown (2001), Cameron (2001),

Lightbow & Spade (2006), Musthafa (2010), Pinter (2006), and Tomar (2014), the

teacher’s social constructivism approach in young learners classes from Cohen et

al. (2004), Martin (2011), Pinter (2006), and the criticism of teacher’s code

switching in English classes from Cook (2001), Grosjean (1982), Gumperz

(1982), Gwee (2006), Hammond & Gibbons (2001), Hoffmann (1991), Holmes

(2001), Li (1998 as cited in Turnbull & Dailey-O’Cain, 2009), Lin (2001),

Macaro (2006 & 2009), Qian et al (2009), Rezvani & Rasekh (2011), Rinda &

Lestira (2014), Savile-Troike (2003), Sert (2005), Weber (2014), Yamat et al.

(2011), and Yataganbaba & Yildirim (2015) for answering the second research

51


question. Thirdly, the sorted data were compared with the previous studies about

the criticism of teacher’s code switching in English classes from Canh (2014),

Holmes (2001), Qian et al. (2009), Rezvani & Rasekh (2011), Rinda & Lestira

(2014), Saville-Troike (2003), and Yataganbaba & Yildirim (2015) for answering

the third research question.

Next, after the sorted data were compared with the previous studies

presented in chapter two, the data were compared with the findings from other

data collection techniques. In this step, they were compared with the findings

from the teacher’s interview, the students’ questionnaire, and the students’

interviews to answer the second and the third research questions.

3.4.1.5 Data Interpretation

Data interpretation was conducted in the end of data analysis process right

before the data in the form of findings and discussion were presented in chapter

four. In this step, the researcher made sense of the “lessons learned” by looking

for larger meaning of those lessons (See Lincoln & Guba, 1985, as cited in Lodico

et al., 2006, p. 313).

3.4.2 Steps To Analyze the Data from Students’ Questionnaire

The data collected from the students’ questionnaire came in the in the form

of students’ written responses. Those responses were analyzed through six major

steps. First, the data from students’ questionnaire sheets were read carefully to get

the data familiarization. Second, the data were categorized into four thematic

categories. Those categories included students’ languages mastery, students’

languages preferences, students’ understanding, and students’ activeness. Third, a

simple percentage calculation was conducted. Percentages of questionnaire

responses from 32 students were calculated to see domination of students’

characteristics and preferences in dealing with the teacher’s code switching.

52


Fourth, the data were compared with the data found from previous studies

discussed in chapter two. The process includes the comparisons between the

questionnaire data and previous studies about the characteristics of young

language learners from Brown (2001), Cameron (2001), Lightbow & Spade

(2006), Musthafa (2010), Pinter (2006), and Tomar (2014) for supporting the

findings needed for the second research question and the criticism of teacher’s

code switching in English class from Canh (2014), Holmes (2001), Qian et al.

(2009), Rezvani & Rasekh (2011), Rinda & Lestira (2014), Saville-Troike (2003),

and Yataganbaba & Yildirim (2015)for adding the findings needed for third

research question. Fifth, the questionnaire data were compared with the findings

from the students’ interview, the teacher’s interview, and classroom observation

to answer the second and the third research questions. Lastly, the compared data

were interpreted.

3.4.3 Steps To Analyze the Data from Teacher’s Interview

The data collected from teacher’s interview came in the form of teacher’s

oral responses in an audio recording. Those responses were analyzed through six

major steps. Firstly, the audio of interview was transcribed. Secondly, the

transcripts were read carefully in the process of data familiarization. Thirdly, the

data were coded and categorized into thematic categories. Those categories

included the teacher’s reasons to do code switching and effects of the teacher’s

code switching toward the students’ competency accomplishment in the classroom

of research subjects. The data which did not meet the need of those

aforementioned categories were disregarded.

Fourthly, the data were compared with the theories from previous studies

presented in chapter two. Those theories encompassed the types of code switching

from Blom & Gumperz (1971), Gumperz (1982) and Poplack (1980), the

multilinguals’ reasons to do code switching from Cheng & Butler (2007), Chung

(2006), Clara (2007), Eldridge (1996), Ferguson (2003), Grosjean (1982), Gulzar

(2014), Gumperz (1982), Gwee (2006), Hoffmann (1991), Holmes (2001), Jeff

53


(1995), Liebscher, & Dailey–O'cain (2005), Modupeola (2013), Qian et al. (2009),

Sert (2005), Rezvani & Rasekh (2011), Rinda & Lestira (2014), Saville- Troike

(2003), Suchana (2014), and Yataganbaba & Yildirim (2015), the sociolinguistic

perspective of code switching from Holmes (2001), the characteristics of young

language learners from Brown (2001), Cameron (2001), Lightbow & Spade

(2006), Musthafa (2010), Pinter (2006), and Tomar (2014), the teacher’s social

constructivism approach in young learners classes from Cohen et al. (2004),

Martin (2011), Pinter (2006), and the criticism of teacher’s code switching in

English classes from Canh (2014), Cook (2001), Grosjean (1982), Gumperz

(1982), Gwee (2006), Hammond & Gibbons (2001), Hoffmann (1991), Holmes

(2001), Li (1998 as cited in Turnbull & Dailey-O’Cain, 2009), Lin (2001),

Macaro (2006 & 2009), Qian et al (2009), Rezvani & Rasekh (2011), Rinda &

Lestira (2014), Savile-Troike (2003), Sert (2005), Weber (2014), Yamat et al.

(2011), and Yataganbaba & Yildirim (2015).

Fifthly, the data were compared with the findings from classroom

observations, the students’ questionnaire, and the students’ interviews to answer

the second and the third research questions. Lastly, the data were interpreted.

3.4.4 Steps To Analyze the Data from Students’ Interview

The analysis steps in this sub-section were used to analyze raw data from

students’ interviews in the form of five interview audio recordings. The steps

consisted of six major steps. The first and second analysis steps of students’

interviews were just the same with the ones done in teachers’ interview analysis.

After the researcher got the overview of data set in the students’ interview

transcripts, the research coded and categorized the data. The categories were the

same with the ones used in the analysis step of students’ questionnaire sheets.

Further, the data were compared with the previous studies elaborated in

chapter two. This step includes the comparisons between the data of the students’

interviews and previous studies about the characteristics of young language

learners from Brown (2001), Cameron (2001), Lightbow & Spade (2006),

Musthafa (2010), Pinter (2006), and Tomar (2014) for the need of the second

54


research question and the criticism of teacher’s code switching in English classes

from Canh (2014), Holmes (2001), Qian et al. (2009), Rezvani & Rasekh (2011),

Rinda & Lestira (2014), Saville-Troike (2003), and Yataganbaba & Yildirim

(2015) for the need of the third research question. Then, the data were compared

with the ones collected from students’ questionnaire sheets, teacher’s interview,

and classroom observations to answer the second and the third research questions.

Finally, the data were interpreted.

3.5 Validity

In order to ensure the validity of data, two actions were undertaken by the

researcher including triangulation of data collection technique and member-

checking. First, validity of data was ensured through triangulation of data

collection technique (See Fraenkel et al., 2012, p. 458). In this process, the data

gained from four different collection techniques with five instruments were cross-

checked to enhance the validity of conclusion made (See section 3.4). Second, the

validity of data was kept through member-checking. In the process of member-

checking, the English teacher as the key respondent was asked to check the

interpreted data for getting the consistency and truth value (See Creswell, 1994,

pp. 157-158).

3.6 Concluding Remarks

This chapter has focused on a detail description of the methodology of the

study. The description has been begun with the research design employed, the

research site and participants chosen, the data collection techniques used, and the

procedures taken to analyze the data and ensure the data validity. Based on the

detailed methodological description in this chapter, it can be concluded that this

present study is characterized as a qualitative descriptive research with classroom

observations, students’ questionnaire distribution, teacher’s interview, and

students’ interviews as the data collection techniques. Further, regarding

qualitative data analysis and validity, justifications for the steps in the whole

procedure to analyze the data from four data collection techniques and the validity

55


have been provided in this chapter. The following chapter IV will present the

findings and discussions based on the order of the research questions proposed in

chapter I.

chapter iii methodology of research

Documents