4.1.5.1 Ethical procedures for data collection
Prior to the collection of data, I had to comply with the ethical review procedures, as required by the University of Birmingham, including formal request for approval to conduct a survey. Once the approval was granted (see Appendix 3), then I could proceed to the actual data collection process. However, as I needed to conduct the survey in my home country Malaysia, several local procedures had to be followed before I could conduct the survey (see 4.1.5.2).
4.1.5.2 Procedures in conducting the phrasal verbs test
The data collection started on 19th January 2010, and took approximately one month, ending on 21st February 2010. The first zone surveyed was the North (Kedah and Perak), followed by the Middle (Selangor and Kuala Lumpur), South (Negeri Sembilan and Melaka) and East (Pahang and Terengganu) zones.
Two months prior to the data collection, an application form was submitted to the Economics Planning Unit (EPU) in Malaysia to conduct research in the country (refer Appendix 4). This is a protocol for overseas researchers to conduct research in Malaysia, including Malaysian students studying abroad. The EPU then forward a copy of the application form to the MoE for their approval. After an approval was granted from the MoE (refer Appendix 5), a research pass to conduct research in the relevant organizations
104
was released by the EPU. The actual survey was only conducted after all these requirements were fulfilled.
As my data collection involved secondary schools in eight different states in the country (see 4.1.1), approval also had to be obtained from the State Education Office (SEO) of each state. An application letter was then sent to the eight SEOs for their approval to conduct research in the selected schools of each state; it took me about two weeks to gain the necessary approvals from the SEOs (refer Appendix 6). All the approval letters received from the EPU, MoE and SEOs were then faxed to the Principals of each school involved in the study, to inform them beforehand that a survey would be conducted in the selected schools on a specified date. Follow up calls were then made with the Head of the English Unit (HEU) in each school to reconfirm the dates of the survey. The necessary arrangements were also made beforehand including a convenient time to conduct the survey, suitable venue, with the student and teacher respondents involved.
Initially, I planned to divide the survey into two separate sessions, one for students and another for teachers, and both to be carried out after school hours, preferably in the evening in order not to interrupt school lessons. Unfortunately, I was informed by the HEU that I might not be able to get all the English teachers to participate in the survey if it was conducted after school hours, so the initial plan was changed (see 4.1.5.3). As for student respondents, they would take the PVs test in two separate sessions (F2 and F4) in the evening, after school hours.
105
With the help of the HEU, the PVs test was conducted in a room that could comfortably accommodate 30 students at one time. The student respondents had already been identified beforehand by the HEU based on the required criteria. As students were already grouped according to their level of language proficiency, the HEU did not have any problem to randomly select them from the group name list. All the students involved in the test had already been informed by the HEU. The F2 students took the test in the first session, followed by the F4 students in the second session. Once the respondents had settled down in the room, I introduced myself, and informed them of the purpose of conducting the test. The test papers were then distributed and instructions were given orally, even though written instructions were already provided in the test papers. This was to ensure that respondents had really understood the instructions and I could also clarify any questions raised by them. The test papers were only collected after one hour. Before the respondents left the room, I thanked them for their willingness to take part in the test. Following this, the next group (F4) took the PVs test and the same procedures were followed.
4.1.5.3 Procedures in conducting the teacher survey
As for the teacher respondents, instead of having them answer questionnaires in the evening, after school hours, they had to do it during school hours, in their non-teaching hours. This is because the teachers were not willing to stay back after school hours to complete the questionnaires as they had other commitments. It was also impossible to get all the English language teachers to answer the questionnaires at the same time during school hours as they had different teaching schedules, and were not all free at the same time. Thus, the best option was to let teachers respond to the questionnaires at any time when they were free during school hours.
106
On the day of my visit to the school, I was introduced to all the English language teachers in the staffroom. I informed them about the purpose of my visit and the objectives of the survey, and thanked them for their cooperation and willingness to take part. Immediately afterwards, I distributed the questionnaires and gave a brief instruction and explanation regarding the survey. I informed the teachers that they could respond to the questionnaires when they were free and return them to the HEU before leaving school in the afternoon. Before the teachers were dismissed, I thanked them again for their help and support. All returned questionnaires were collected from the HEU on the afternoon of the same day.
4.1.6 Data analysis