Researching Second Language Classrooms

Sandra Lee Mckay

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2006
• ISBN:
  9781135604394
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Pedagogía
• Subtopic: Educación general

This text introduces teachers to research methods they can use to examine their own classrooms in order to become more effective teachers. Becoming familiar with classroom-based research methods not only enables teachers to do research in their own classrooms, it also provides a basis for assessing the findings of existing research. McKay emphasizes throughout that what a teacher chooses to examine will dictate which method is most effective. Each chapter includes activities to help readers apply the methods described in the chapter, often by analyzing research data.*Chapter I, Classroom Research, introduces the reader to major research purposes and research types as they relate to classroom research, the distinction between quantitative and qualitative research, the formulation of research questions and research designs, and ethical issues in research.
*Chapter II, Researching Teachers and Learners, presents research methods that can be used to examine teachers' and learners' attitudes and behaviors: action research, survey research, interviews, verbal reports, diary studies, case studies, and ethnographies.
*Chapter III, Researching Classroom Discourse, deals with methods that can be used to study the oral and written discourse of classrooms: interaction analysis, discourse analysis, text analysis, and ways to examine the social and political assumptions underlying the choice and presentation of content in second language teaching materials.
*Chapter IV, Writing Research Reports, provides guidelines for both thesis writing and journal articles. Researching Second Language Classrooms is an ideal text for TESOL research methods courses and an essential resource for inservice teachers who wish to undertake classroom research.

Chapter 1

Classroom Research

This chapter explores the following questions:

• What are major types of research and how do they differ?
• What are the characteristics of sound research questions and designs?
• What ethical standards should researchers adhere to?

Before turning to these questions, let us consider the benefits of doing research. For teachers, a primary reason for doing research is to become more effective teachers. Research contributes to more effective teaching, not by offering definitive answers to pedagogical questions, but rather by providing new insights into the teaching and learning process. As Johnson (1992) puts it,

The importance of research is not so much that it supplies definitive answers to questions such as “What is the best way to learn a language?” or “Which is the most effective method of L2 teaching?” It does not. Rather, research can help us gain a richer understanding of the many interrelated factors involved in learning. It can help us see how the ways we organize learning environments can promote or inhibit growth. (p. 5)

For some, action research is viewed as one of the most effective research methods for producing sound L2 teaching practices. This is because action research, by definition, involves a systematic inquiry into the issues and problems that teachers face with the goal of improving pedagogical practices. We examine the assumptions and approaches used in action research in chapter 2. However, this is not the only method that can be used to produce more effective L2 teaching and learning. All of the methods introduced in the book can be used to answer questions that directly involve decisions about pedagogical practices, thus contributing to the improvement of L2 teaching and learning.

A second reason for teachers to undertake classroom research is to better evaluate existing research. Once individuals become involved in the research process, they gain experience in forming research questions and selecting the methods that best answer these questions. They understand the challenges of analyzing data and drawing conclusions. They also become sensitive to the many practical problems that exist in doing research such as gaining access to classrooms, getting permission from participants, and having participants drop out of research projects. With this background, teachers can become more critical readers of existing research, carefully examining the conclusions of a study in light of the context and methods used.

In spite of these benefits, there are a variety of reasons why teachers may be hesitant or unable to undertake research. For one thing many teachers have not been trained to undertake research. Often teacher education programs focus primarily on how to teach, examining how to specify learning objectives, design lessons, and assess learning. Little or no attention is given to training teachers to rigorously investigate L2 classrooms. Hopefully reading this text will help alleviate this problem. Another factor that often discourages teachers from doing research are very practical issues such as heavy teaching loads or lack of support from administrators. Many of the methods suggested in this text can be used by teachers in their own classes, thereby reducing the additional time and administrative support needed to undertake research in other contexts. As a way of illustrating the various research designs that are possible, we turn now to an examination of the various meanings and purposes that research can have.

Exploring the Ideas, 1.1

In order to address some of the obstacles you face in doing research, begin by identifying a specific area of research you are interested in researching. Describe in as much detail as possible what you would like to investigate and in what context you would undertake this study. Then list the personal and professional obstacles you face in undertaking this research. Finally, consider how you might overcome these obstacles. If you can, share your findings with other teachers or classmates.

Exploring the Ideas, 1.2

In a journal entry, list your responses to the following questions. Then share your ideas with other teachers or classmates.

• In your view, what constitutes research? Is an L2 teacher who reflects on his or her teaching behavior in the classroom in order to solve a classroom problem involved in research? Why or why not?
• In general what do you see as the purpose of research in the area of L2 teaching and learning? Should research in this field have specific classroom applications?
• Do you think research is valuable in helping teachers teach more effectively? If so, list specific studies that have influenced your approach to teaching? If not, why do you think research is not relevant to the classroom?
• What are some issues you believe cannot be “researched” yet are clearly central to the teaching of English?

TYPES OF RESEARCH

Problems of Defining Research

There are several reasons why it is difficult to define research. The most significant reason is because research is multifaceted, differing in theoretical frameworks, goals, methods, and data sources. Another factor that contributes to the lack of a comprehensive definition of research is that the term often has unpleasant connotations, which lead some to avoid using the term altogether. Often in the field of L2 teaching and learning there are discussions of being a reflective teacher rather than arguments for teachers becoming researchers. Many graduate students share this negative attitude toward research. Brown and Rodgers (2002), for example, found that their graduate students listed words like endless, painful, boring, and time consuming when asked to free associate with the term.

In considering specifically what is meant by classroom research, Allwright and Bailey (1991) maintain that classroom research is a cover term for “a whole range of research studies on classroom language learning and teaching. The obvious unifying factor is that the emphasis is solidly on trying to understand what goes on in the classroom setting” (p. 2). For Nunan (1992) research must contain three essential elements: “(1) a question, problem or hypothesis, (2) data, (3) analysis and interpretation of data” (p.3). Although these definitions provide a starting point for defining classroom research, what is needed to supplement these definitions is a more robust view of the types of inquiry that can be undertaken, the kinds of questions that can be asked, and the methods of data collection and analysis that can be used.

To provide a more comprehensive view of research we examine research from the perspective of what Richards (2003) terms

• a paradigm or “a set of basic beliefs” regarding research;
• a tradition or an “approach to research covering generally recognized territory and employing a generally accepted set of research methods;” and
• a method or “a means of gathering, analyzing and interpreting data using generally recognized procedures” (p. 12).

In what follows, we discuss the paradigm of basic and applied research, the major research traditions of qualitative and quantitative research, and end by describing some typical methods employed in L2 classroom research.

Research Paradigms: Basic Versus Applied Research

One of the most central distinctions made in discussing research is the difference between basic and applied research. The purpose of basic research is to acquire knowledge for the sake of knowledge. Its main goal is to contribute to a fuller understanding of the world. Often basic research is undertaken in disciplines like biology, physics, astronomy, and geology and is used by researchers who want to verify theories of their discipline. Cosmologists, for example, may be concerned about testing theories about the origin of the universe. Physicists may be concerned about verifying the qualities of molecules. But basic research is also a tradition in SLA. Research that seeks to verify such things as the order that learners acquire grammatical rules or the importance of input in language learning are examples of basic research in the field of SLA.

Applied research deals with human and societal problems in the hopes of finding solutions to real-world problems. A great deal of research in the field of TESOL is, of course, applied research. Second language educators, for example, have investigated why some students are reluctant to contribute to class discussions, what is the most effective type of feedback on student essays, and what is the most productive number of vocabulary items to introduce at one time. Applied research is more limited in its questions and conclusions. It does not attempt to define a theory of language learning that accounts for all language learners; rather it sets forth findings that apply to a particular time, place, and context.

There are two major sources of data that both basic and applied researchers can gather while conducting research. These are known as secondary and primary data. In using secondary data, researchers examine what others have discovered about a particular topic. For example, if teachers want to know about the advantages and disadvantages of using peer review in a writing class, they can investigate what others have written on the topic. As McDonough and McDonough (1997) point out, when secondary data is used, “the outcome of the research is the establishment, publicizing, or utilization of something that somebody—not the researcher or the person commissioning it—already knows” (p. 37).

One example of a study using secondary data is Silva (1993). In this study Silva summarized the findings of 72 empirical research studies that compared L1 and L2 writers with regard to their composing processes and the features of their written texts. He then discussed what these findings suggest in general for designing an effective L2 writing program. Studies such as these are termed literature reviews.

Typically, the reporting of all research projects begins with a literature review. One may well ask what the benefits are of beginning a research project by reviewing and summarizing the existing literature on a topic. By starting this way, researchers gain insight into what is already known about a particular topic and what still needs to be discovered. In other words, researchers avoid the problem of reinventing the wheel by examining issues that have already been investigated. Rather the researcher can contribute to knowledge in a field by exploring something that has not been adequately examined. In this way the research findings contribute to a real gap in knowledge about L2 teaching and learning.

In using primary data, researchers gather original data to answer a particular research question. As McDonough and McDonough (1997) note, when researchers gather first-hand data, “the outcome is knowledge nobody had before” (p. 37). Shortly we discuss various types of primary data that researchers can use to answer a research question. First, we distinguish two central research traditions and discuss the types of primary data that are typically used in each.

Research Traditions: Qualitative Versus Quantitative Research

One of the major distinctions made in discussing primary research is the difference between quantitative and qualitative research. In order to distinguish these two traditions, it is helpful to examine the differences in the types of research questions that are posed in these two traditions, as well the typical data that are used and how they are analyzed.

In quantitative research, a researcher typically begins with a research question or hypothesis that is quite specific. Chen and Graves (1995), for example, wanted to find out which type of reading preparation was most effective in increasing reading comprehension. In order to do this, they provided 243 non-English majors at a Taiwan university with different types of reading preparation. One group was introduced to a reading text by receiving background information about some of the content in the reading text. A second group was given a preview of what the text was about. Another group received both types of introduction and a fourth group received no preparation for the reading. Among their research questions were the following:

1. Did students who received the background knowledge or the previewing treatment comprehend better than those who did not receive these treatments?
2. Did students who received a combined treatment that included both background knowledge and previewing comprehend better than those who received only one treatment?
3. Were any of the treatments superior to the other? (p. 667)

Several aspects of this study make it a quantitative research project. First, the researchers assumed that reality could be broken down and investigated. In the study, Chen and Graves assumed that reading text preparation and reading comprehension could be isolated so that the relationship between them could be studied. In addition, attempts were made to minimize other variables such as the difficulty of the reading passage and the students’ level of language proficiency, which might also affect reading comprehension. Chen and Graves also described their methodology before they undertook the study, specifying what would be done in each type of introductory session for the reading t...