La gestión por procesos como innovación

A recent survey reports that the number of qualitative research studies in the language teaching and learning area published in fifteen journals has been increasing since 2000 (Richards, 2009). With regard to LLS studies in Taiwan, Yang, N. D. (2006: 94) urges that research should go beyond strategy-counting questionnaire results. In fact, a shift in research from generalization (e.g., SILL-based research), which implies that LLS and strategy use are universally effective, to specificity and authenticity (e.g., case studies), which recognises LLS and strategy use as context-dependent, has been gaining ground (Chamot, 2004; Gao, 2007; Hsiao and Oxford, 2002; Oxford et al., 2004; Rubin et al.,

2007; White et al., 2007).

This research is best viewed through the framework of phenomenography for four reasons. Firstly, phenomenography not only is developed from studies of learning in higher education (Marton, 1981) but is also ‘a method which so vividly portrays differing conceptualizations [that it] must have direct relevance to teaching and learning’ (Entwistle, 1997: 129). In other words, by revealing the complexity of the perceptions of the same phenomena, university students might be encouraged to reflect on how they learn. Marton (1994) defines phenomenography as:

various phenomena in, and aspects of, the world around us are experienced, conceptualized, understood, perceived, and apprehended. (p. 4424)

That is, it is a relational, experiential, contextual and qualitative approach (Marton, 1988a). Svensson (1997: 162) stresses that the most important features of this approach include: the aim to generate categories of description (see Chapter 4), the open explorative form of data collection (see 3.4) and the interpretative character of the analysis of data (see also 3.6). Since its primary focus is on mapping the relations between human beings and the world around them, this fits with the research questions posed in this study considering the relationship between the strategy use of non-English major first-year cadets and the EFL environment they are in.

Secondly, it is worth mentioning that phenomenographers (e.g., Orenk, 2008) and LLS researchers (see 2.3) both have the pedagogical goal of facilitating teaching and learning in mind. For instance, Marton (1988a: 146) states that:

A careful account of the different ways people think about phenomena may help uncover conditions that facilitate the transition from one way of thinking to a qualitatively ‘better’ perception of reality.

Specifically, phenomenography seeks to answer the following questions (Marton, 1994: 4424): (1) What does it mean to say that some people are better at learning than others? (2) Why are some people better at learning than others? That is, researchers map the ways of understanding and conceptualizing people’s lived world in order to look for better ways to facilitate learning in specific environments. This research shares the same goal of

finding ‘better’ ways to facilitate individual students’ learning to speak English in their

local environments.

Thirdly, phenomenography is interested in depicting second-order perspectives (i.e., individual learners’ conceptions of the world) (ibid: 145). What is more, phenomenography started with dissatisfaction with an information-processing model of learning (Säljö, 1997) and this dissatisfaction is shared by the current research (see Chapter 2). This will be further discussed later on.

Fourthly, phenomenography assumes that ‘thinking is described in terms of what is perceived and thought about; the research is never separated from the object of perception or the content of thought’ (Marton, 1988a: 145). This non-dualistic stance is compatible with the ecological view which suggests that ‘knowings …must stand in some sort of adaptive relation to the environment’ (Michaels and Carello, 1981:112). Moreover, Richardson (1999) pinpoints that prominent phenomenographers such as Marton and Booth (1997) advocate a realist interpretation. Svensson (1997: 165) puts his view of knowledge as follows:

Conceptions are dependent both on human activity and the world or reality external to any individual. … the view of knowledge is that it is relational, not only empirical or rational, but created through thinking about external reality. Indeed, realists believe that there is an objective environment out there (being) which each individual can perceive only in part (knowing) (Carter and New, 2004; Sealey and

Carter, 2004). In effect, phenomenagraphers are interested not only in seemingly right conceptions of reality but also ‘mistaken’ ones.

In the process of mapping people’s hidden constructions of reality, the relationship between the researcher, the group of the researcher’s interest, the phenomena in question, and the object of study can be illustrated as follows.

Figure 3.1 Object of Study (adapted from Stamouli and Huggard, 2007, p. 182)

Relation between Relation between

Researcher and the group Object of study researcher and phenomena (variation and similarity)

Relation between the group of interest and the phenomena in question

To describe these second-order perspectives, there needs to be a process of ‘bracketing’ the researcher’s presumptions in order to ‘learn’ from research participants in the

Researcher- Group of the study relation (Booth, 1997; Marton and Booth, 1997; Ornek, 2008). This bracketing also requires the researcher to make her experiences and assumptions clear (see 1.3) in the Researcher and Phenomena in question relation (Webb, 1997). In respect of the object of study, the researcher’s role is to raise ‘aspects of the

Group of the study Phenomena in

question Researcher

subjects’ awareness from being un-reflected to reflected’ (Marton, 1994: 4427). This process will be discussed in more detail in the following subsections.

The qualitative multiple case study method allows the researcher to report multiple perspectives on learners’ everyday situated learning practices, which is also the aim of phenomenography (Lucas, 2001) and appears too complex for the survey. Nevertheless, the case study method is often criticised for its lack of capacity of generalizing the research findings. In respect of this criticism, Yin (2009:15) explains:

In doing a case study, your goal will be to expand and generalize theories (analytic generalization) and not to enumerate frequencies (statistical generalization).

Furthermore, Yin (ibid) makes clear that in a multiple case design, the number of cases is not following a ‘sampling’ logic, but a ‘replication’ logic, i.e., the research findings of different cases can work together to enhance the trustworthiness of the research study. This means every case is considered in its own right. Each case needs to be carefully selected according to the focus and research questions of the study. The actual process will be discussed below.

3.3 The research site