Research paradigms and methodologies

Methodologies for research are born out of paradigms or world views which can be considered as models or frameworks for observation and understanding, and which shape both what is seen and how it can be understood (Babbie, 2008). When considering macrotheory and microtheory, this study cannot be termed

macrotheory as it does not deal with large entities of society. Rather, it supports Babbie’s (2008) explanation of microtheory in that it “deals with issues of social life at the level of individuals and small groups” (p. 35). Babbie outlines several

paradigms for understanding research which can be applied to this study, for example symbolic interactionism, structural functionalism and rational objectivity.

Symbolic interactionism applies to small societal units where individuals can reach a “common understanding through language and other symbolic systems” (Babbie, 2008, p. 37). According to this explanation, the current study could be thought of as an example of symbolic interactionism because it examines how a particular group of people, in this case, the English language teachers at the centre chosen for this study, reach a common understanding of grammar in order to be able to teach it more effectively. Scarince (2003) defines symbolic interactionism as a way of understanding how the world works and gives the example of viewing the world through lenses in a pair of eyeglasses. In this way, as people interact with the world, they change their behaviour based on the meaning given to those interactions. The current study gives the participants lenses through which to view grammar in association with interactions with the world (the proposed professional

development program and other more knowledgeable teachers). Therefore, they can change from being unsure of their knowledge to gaining confidence as a result of their interactions. It is possible for teachers to shape their world so that they do not have to consign themselves to a position of lack of knowledge. This is a

powerful paradigm, as individuals (in this study, the teachers) can choose to shape their world rather than be at the mercy of the status quo.

Structural functionalism (or social systems theory) could also apply to this investigation, as this paradigm views an organisation as an organism made up of different parts where each part contributes to the functioning of the whole

organism (Babbie, 2008). In this study, the teachers at the selected English language teaching institute are the different parts, and each of them contributes to the functioning of the institute or the organism as a whole. Fisher (2010) explains that structural functionalism began to make its mark at the time when Darwin’s theory of evolution began to influence how human behaviour was viewed. The idea of survival was conceived in functional terms in that each function was crucial to the survival of the whole system. This definition, too, can apply to the current study. The survival, that is the flourishing of the teachers and their confidence, permeates the entire organism, which constitutes the language teaching centre where the teachers work.

Rational objectivity is a philosophical term. Babbie (2008) states that all experiences are subjective, yet humans tend to seek agreement on what is real or objective. He defines objectivity as a conceptual attempt to move beyond individual views. In the final analysis, it is a matter of communication as human beings attempt to find common ground or agreement regarding their subjective experiences. Whenever this search for common ground succeeds, it can be said that objective reality has been reached. Therefore, rational objectivity can also be applied to the current study, since there was an attempt to help respondents reach objective rather than subjective conclusions about how grammar can be understood in order to teach it more effectively.

The current study embodies both qualitative and quantitative data. Babbie (2008) explains various types of research paradigms that apply specifically to qualitative research, namely: naturalism, grounded theory, institutional ethnography, case studies and participatory action research. Naturalism is an early method of field research originating in the 1930s, where observers went to neighbourhoods simply to understand how local communities worked. This study cannot be termed by this description as there was no observation based simply on understanding teachers’ knowledge or lack of knowledge of grammar, but rather there was an attempt to ameliorate the situation where teachers lacked knowledge or were unsure of their knowledge. Grounded theory is an approach that attempts to generate a theory from the “constant comparing of unfolding observations” (Babbie, 2008, p. 327). This differs widely from a system of hypothesis testing, in which “theory is used to generate hypotheses to be tested through observations” (Babbie, 2008, p. 327). As this study was based upon hypothesis testing, it does not comply with grounded theory. Babbie (2008) defines institutional ethnography as a research technique in which the “personal experiences of individuals are used to reveal power

relationships and other characteristics of the institution within which they operate” (p. 331). As power relationships were not examined in this study, it does not comply with this model either.

The description that is given by Babbie (2008) of participatory action research as an approach in which “the people being studied are given control over the purpose

and procedures of the research” (p. 333) supports this current study. Therefore, from the above, this investigation can be termed as action research which embodies aspects of symbolic interactionism, structural functionalism and rational objectivity.