Methodological considerations

This chapter discusses the methodological considerations that are of relevance to this project.

First, the reliability and validity will be discussed and thereafter the ethical considerations will be elaborated.

3.9.1 Reliability and validity

Reliability and validity, two central concepts within research, are connected to each other, and are used to measure the qualitative standards and criteria in a research study (Dörnyei 2007: 49).

Reliability refers to how reliable a research study is, or as Dörnyei (2007: 50) explains, reliability tells us the extent to which our instrument and procedures actually produce consistent results in

“given different circumstances”. In qualitative studies, it is, however, impossible to get the same results twice. It is therefore difficult to prove the reliability in qualitative studies, compared to

quantitative studies. In the Cambridge Dictionary (2019) reliability is defined as “how accurate or able to be trusted someone or something is considered to be”.²

In order to strengthen the reliability, all the interviews were conducted and structured in the same way. In addition, all the interviews were conducted in Norwegian. This was to avoid

complications, and give the interviews a natural flow, because most participants had Norwegian as their first language. Semi-structured one-to-one interviews was applied for all participants, and the interview guide had a structure that was similar in both participant-groups. The three interview guides were constructed with the same style but had in-dept questions related to each participant group, rather than general questions, which would result in poorer results, due to the interview being general rather than in-dept interview. For this study, one-to-one interviews was considered as the most suitable method due to the personal and sensitive topic this study are researching. In order to stay consisted, the interviewer tried to give the exact same information to every participant orally before the interview and tried to create the same relaxing environment in all interviews. As for the parent interview that was conducted at a café, the interview was

structured in the same way as the parent interviews that was conducted in private. Also, the teacher interview that was conducted through the phone was structured in the same way as the other face-to-face interviews, as elaborated in section 3.6.

In relation to validity, Dörnyei (2007: 49) explains that validity can be referred to as

“authenticity”, “credibility” and “trustworthiness”, meaning that validity concerns how trustworthy the quality of the research study is. The Cambridge Dictionary (2019) defines validity as “the quality of being based on truth or reason, or of being able to be accepted”³. Analyzing reliability and validity is as mentioned difficult to do in qualitative studies. The same results are difficult or near impossible to produce again, due to the small participant group. It is therefore important to emphasize that the results from this study cannot be generalized. The results in this study do not represent the experiences of all pupils with HLP or represent the EFL practices of all teacher in the subject of English. This thesis does, however, represent the

experiences and opinions of a small group of pupils, parents and teacher. It is a possibility that other people share similar experiences in relation to adapted education and high achieving pupils.

2 https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/reliability

3 https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/validity

Another factor that needs to be addressed in relation to validity concerns political correctness in relation to the use of terms when describing the researched pupil group. During the interviews, the pupils were always referred to as “stronger pupils”, rather than “pupils with higher learning potential” or “high achieving pupils”. In addition, the pupils were referred to as “stronger pupils”

in both letters of consent. Because there are so many terms which can be used to describe this pupil group it was decided to refer to the pupils as “stronger pupils”, on order to avoid confusion amongst the participants. “Stronger pupils” is also a term that describe “pupils with higher learning potential” and “high “achieving pupils”, there should therefore, not be any problems related to the validity of the interviews. All teachers that collected pupils for this project were instructed to pick out three to four is the strongest pupils in their class, which achieved grades 5-6 in the subject of English. It is therefore reason to believe that there was no confusion during the interviews, when discussing the pupil group, and that the intended pupil group was interviewed and discussed.

3.9.2 Ethical consideration

When conducting a research study such as this project, the researcher needs to be aware of the ethical challenges that might occur whilst conducting a research study. One of the main ethical aspects that the researcher needs to be aware of, is that qualitative studies involve the voices of other people. Dorney (2007: 63-64) argues that social research, such as this study, involves people’s lives in the social world, which makes it unavoidable to involve ethical issues. He further emphasizes that because qualitative studies usually portray personal views, they often target sensitive and intimate matters. In order to make sure that the research study does not violate any ethical aspects, there are several things that the researcher needs to consider. For instance, the participants need to be given a full overview of what they are participating in, so that they know what they are signing up for. Therefore, the researcher needs to be able to communicate with the participants and give clear instructions about what their participation involves. and give the participants all the information they need about the project.

As for this thesis study, the researcher communicated clearly with each participant, and provided the precise information that the participants needed to know. Two letters of consent were given to the participants, one was given to the EFL teacher (see Appendix E) and the second letter of

consent was given to the HLP pupils and their parents (see Appendix D). The letters of consent provided an overview of this project and explained what their participation would involve. Both letters also explained that this project involved interview with three different groups, and it explained what would be asked to the teachers, parents and pupils. It was also explained that the interviews would be one-to-one interviews and completely anonymous.

All the pupils, which all were under the age of 18, had to get the letter of consent signed by their parents, in order to join this project. In addition, all the participants were explained, both orally and written, that their participation was totally voluntary, and that they could chose to withdraw their statement at any time before May 2019. The letter of consent also had the researcher’s e-mail, so that the participants could contact her if they had any questions or wanted to withdraw their statement. It was also emphasized, in both letters of consent, that there had been done very little research about this thesis topic, and that therefore, their participation would mean a great deal to further research about adapted education for pupils with higher learning potential. All participants were given code-names to ensure their anonymity, such as S1, T2 and P3. The transcripts have been handled confidentially and have only been under the researcher’s eyes. It is therefore the researcher’s belief that all the participants were provided with the necessary

information within this study, and thus no ethical violation was made. The project has also been registered and approved by the Data Protection Official for Research⁴ and the full approval is included in the appendices (Appendix F).

4 Project approved by NSD, project reference: 597459. Received at 17.01.2019