Defining the reference population

One of the first steps of the research process was to identify a population for the study.

According to Gorard (2003) it is important that the population of a research project is defined early on, because it can sometimes be of consequence for the type of study one decides to conduct.

Because the main goal of the present thesis is to investigate choice of programme subjects in upper secondary school, the target group would naturally consist of students

attending just that level of school. However, I had to choose between surveying Vg1, Vg2 or Vg3 students – or perhaps a combination of the three. It would naturally be an advantage if the target group had the subject choice process fairly fresh in mind, as that would reduce the chance of misrecollections and poor quality data. To achieve this, the survey would have to target Vg1 and/or Vg2 students immediately after they had elected programme subjects for the following year. However, most schools schedule the subject election process for spring, while I had to collect my data in autumn in order to finish my thesis within the allotted time limit. I found it pointless to study Vg1 students in October or November as their first subject election would be months away, and if I chose Vg2 students I would not be able to benefit from proximity in time to the subject choice. After some deliberation, I concluded that the best alternative was actually to let Vg3 students form the population.

Having to survey students during the autumn semester was not unproblematic. As mentioned, students generally choose subjects in March or April, while the survey had to be conducted in October and November. This essentially meant that I would be asking students to recount things that had happened approximately 0.5 and 1.5 years earlier. As there are limits to human memory, this delay could mean that respondents would not actually be recalling what it was that guided their choice of subjects at the time of election. Instead, it was possible that they would report the sentiments they had towards English at the time of the study. If so, the survey would not be measuring reasons why English was/was not chosen initially, but rather the view of English which students develop during upper secondary school. However, according to Olsen (2001), the relationship between time and recollection is not necessarily a negative one. What is often more important than the time that has passed is whether or not the incidents to be recalled were in anyway special or important to the respondent. Personally I remember subject election in upper secondary school as very significant, and I believe I can recall the reasons why I made my particular choices quite clearly. Naturally, there are huge individual differences among students with regards to the importance they assign subject election, but as it is one of the few fully self-determined choices an upper secondary student is allowed to make in school, it is not unlikely that it has a certain significance to a great deal of them.

4.3.1 Sample details

As stated in Ch. 2 Statistics, my sample comprises of students from state run schools only.

The reason for this is first and foremost that the majority of upper secondary students in Norway attend state run schools. In addition, one particular problem with private schools, which furthered the decision of excluding them from the population, is that some of the more common private schools in Norway, such as the Rudolf Steiner Schools, do not offer programme subjects in the same way as state run schools. I concluded that the best way to ensure that all schools in the population were equal with regards to choice of programme subjects, would be to leave private schools alone and address state run school only.

Ultimately the population of the study was defined as “all students in Norway who fulfil the following three requirements”:

• attends Vg3 at a state run Norwegian upper secondary school

• attends the Educational programme for General Studies, specialising in General Studies

• attends a school which offers one or more of the English programme subjects

4.4 Procedure

It was clear from the way the research question is formulated that the study had to be conducted using a method which would allow contact with students, and which would allow these students to voice their personal opinions. It seemed to me that I had the choice of using interviews, which is a qualitative method, or conducting a survey study, which is a quantitative method. The two approaches have different strength and weaknesses, and settling on using a quantitative method was not a straightforward choice.

4.4.1 Strengths and weaknesses of quantitative research

When I decided on conducting a survey study, it was mainly due to what is often considered the major advantage of this type of research: that it is possible to collect substantial amounts of data using a minimum of time and effort. In addition, I decided to randomly select my respondents, which meant that – if done properly - it would be possible to generalise results from the sample to the population. I considered that being able to generalise results would be an advantage, and it would not be possible if I chose a quantitative method.

However, qualitative survey studies have several weaknesses, and there are two problems in particular which research method literature repeatedly warn against:

1) Using questionnaires can produce data of very poor quality if not conducted properly (Dörnyei 2007). Respondents are left to their own device when answering, and even if they are not consciously trying to deceive the researcher, respondents may not be able to recall accurately things that have happened in the past, or they may not take sufficient time to reflect upon their answers before providing them. The result will be that incorrect data is included in the material.

2) In order to minimise the chance of misunderstandings and misinterpretations, survey questions need to be simple and straightforward, which in essence means that they will lack “depth”. They are therefore best suited to collect relatively simple information (Gorard 2003).

Compared to questionnaires, interviews are better suited for capturing details and nuances, as they allow the researcher to ask for elaborations or explanations if something is unclear. It is also possible to change, add or omit questions during an interview, while questionnaires are uniform and may not easily be adjusted to suit the individual. Therefore, Gorard (2003) claims that the ideal study uses a mixed-method, where the survey is one part of a larger whole. Unfortunately, due to time constraints, it was not possible to follow his advice and supplement the questionnaires with for example interviews or observation. Since an important element of thesis work is to be able to plan and structure within a set timeframe, I decided to settled on using questionnaires only.

The section below accounts for how the questionnaire used for collecting data for the present thesis was constructed. Included is a discussion of some measures taken in order to ensure the quality of the study.