P REPARATION

If we start by looking at the first stage of the research process we see that there are a lot of decisions that have to be made at this point. First of all, I had to decide whether to use a quantitative or a qualitative method when conducting the research. The difference between these two methods will be discussed further below. After that I had to decide on which research design to use. Both of these decisions are based on the purpose of the study, in other words: what is it that I want to accomplish with the survey I am conducting.

4.3.1 A quantitative or qualitative approach?

When giving a general overview of the research process I referred to quantitative and qualitative methods. These terms are not something that is entirely agreed upon. According to Grønmo (2007) we should talk about quantitative and qualitative data rather than

methods, as, according to him, it is the data that set these two apart. He says that data presented as numbers are quantitative and data presented with words are qualitative data (Grønmo, 2007, p. 74). Ragin (1994) differentiates a little differently. He says that data collected from few cases where many aspects of each case is presented are qualitative whereas data collected from many cases where only a few aspects of each case are presented are quantitative (Ragin, 1994, p. 49). In other words, qualitative research looks more

thoroughly at each case and has as its goal to highlight many aspects of the phenomenon that is being researched whereas quantitative research is focused on a limited number of aspects of one phenomenon and how many respondents that answered this way or that way.

Despite of this disagreement with regards to the terms I will continue using the term quantitative and qualitative methods, as in my opinion there is more than the data that set these two approaches apart. They are also, as Ragin points out, separated by the purpose of the research. Do we want a large number of respondents so that we can generalize the findings or do we want to describe a phenomenon in the way that it is perceived by individuals? Do we want to develop new theories and hypothesises or do we want to test already developed theories and hypothesises? If our goal is to develop new theories a qualitative method is better suited, however, if we want to test already existing theories a quantitative approach would be a better choice (Grønmo, 2007, p. 92).

In this way the purpose behind the research then determines how we collect the data. If we look to Ragin’s definition we find that when choosing to take a quantitative approach we need many respondents whereas when choosing a qualitative approach we need only a few informants. For the latter method we, for example, can use in-depth interviews or

observation as methods for collecting data. In a quantitative approach this would not only be impractical, due to the sheer number of respondents, the chances are it would not suit the purpose of the survey in the best way possible either. A better and more suitable approach for a quantitative study would perhaps be to distribute a questionnaire.

As we can see the most prominent difference between these two methods is the purpose of the survey. As for my own survey I was interested in finding out more about reading in upper secondary school, with regards to what is read, how it is taught and what the teachers’

attitudes towards the teaching of reading is. In my opinion, both a qualitative and a quantitative method would be well suited for this However, I chose to use a qualitative method of research. This choice was mainly based on an interest in giving an in depth description of how reading is worked upon and what the teachers’ thoughts on the subject are. I was also sceptical to whether or not it would be possible to represent all the alternative answers to this into one questionnaire and I wanted to present as many aspects of the

phenomenon of reading in upper secondary school as possible. In addition to this I had also been warned by fellow master students and my thesis supervisor that the response rate on other quantitative studies had been low. In other words it was a choice based both on the intended purpose of the survey and on practical considerations.

4.3.2 Choice of qualitative research design

Having decided on a qualitative approach to my survey, the next step was to decide on which qualitative research design to use. The first thing that needs to be addressed here is the definition of the term research design. Ragin defines the term this way: “Research design is a plan for collecting and analyzing evidence that will make it possible for the investigator to answer whatever questions he or she has posed.” (Ragin, 1994, p. 191). His definition focuses on collecting and analyzing data in order to answer the research questions.

Johannessen has a somewhat wider definition of the term. He defines it as: “How a survey is organised and conducted in order to answer the research question: from idea, arriving at a research question, collecting data, data analysis and interpretation to final result” (My translation Johannessen et.al, 2006, p. 347). This definition also brings in the stages of the

research that occur before and after the collection and analysis of the data, and is therefore the definition I have chosen to use in this thesis.

That being said, there are a number of different research designs within the field of

qualitative research. When choosing which qualitative research design to use it is important to keep the purpose of the research in mind. Do we want to explain, predict, evaluate or understand the phenomenon we are researching? My goal was to understand and describe the situation in upper secondary with regards to reading. This left me with four possible qualitative research designs: Grounded theory, Case design, Ethnographic design and Phenomenology (Johannessen et. al, 2006, p. 88).

As the goal for Ethnographic design is to describe a group of people or a culture and through analysis discover patterns, typologies and categories, this was never an option (Johannessen et. al, 2006, p. 83). I did not want to describe English teachers as a group, I wanted to find out what their practice and opinions with regards to reading were. The goal for research with a Grounded Theory design is to develop new theories, and because of this it was not a suitable design for this survey either (Johannessen et. al, 2006, p. 82). Although I speculate in how the situation with regards to reading can be improved my goal is not to develop new theories, it is rather to describe the situation today as presented by my informants. This left me with only two research designs to choose between: Phenomenology and Case design.

These two will be further described below.

Phenomenology:

“As a qualitative research design a phenomenological approach has as its’ goal to research and describe people and their experience with and understanding of a phenomenon” (My translation Johannessen et. al, 2006, p. 80). In my case the phenomenon I wanted to study was reading in upper secondary school. I wanted to describe the informants’ experiences with teaching reading and how they understand reading. In order to accomplish this I had go into the field to collect data. According to Johannessen a suitable method for collecting data

when using a phenomenological research design is to conduct interviews (Johannessen 2006, p. 88).

Case study:

The other option I was left with was a Case Study Design. Case Studies are best suited to answer how and why questions (Johannessen et. al, 2006, p. 84). If we look at my research question, “Reading in upper secondary; what is read, how is it taught and what are the teachers’ attitudes towards it?”, one part is a how question. This would suit a Case Design well, however, I interviewed a total of 13 informants and presenting each one as a separate case would, in my opinion, not the best way to describe the phenomenon of reading. With 13 informants there would be too much data to present and too many cases to compare

individually. In my opinion the sheer amount of data would make it difficult for a reader to see general patterns and similarities across the entire selection of informants. Based on this I decided to use a phenomenological research design, as this would make it easier for the reader of the thesis to see similarities and differences across the entire group of informants.

However, I have also decided to present two case studies. I will get back to how and why this was done when going through the presentation of the data below.