Research Setting

The setting for this study was a public sector university in Pakistan. This setting was chosen with opportunity and convenience in mind as recommended by Bryman (2008) in order to allow the researcher to have access to the learners and to investigate the learners’ transition

Quantitative Data Analysis (SPSS software v.23) Descriptive Statistics (percentages and

means) Mann-Whitney U test Discussion of Quantitative findings

Qualitative Data Analysis (NVivo 10 software) Coding & thematic analysis

Cross-thematic analysis Discussion of Qualitative findings

Integration of the Quantitative and Qualitative Results

Interpretation & explanation Discussion of findings Quantitative Data Collection

Closed-ended questionnaire

Qualitative Data Collection Semi-structured interviews

54

experiences in their natural setting. The researcher did not have any connection to the university selected. The university setting for the study comprised of eight faculties which constituted various colleges and departments. The study programme selected for the research was the undergraduate Bachelor of Studies (BS), a four-year undergraduate study programme which consists of eight semesters, and is open to all who have successfully completed their higher secondary education and who have been accepted into the university. All BS majors are open for enrolment to learners from both public and private sector schools and colleges, and both English and Urdu MOI background. These reasons made this study programme a suitable choice for this study. As the learner participants would be fairly representative of the general undergraduate learner population in Pakistan, it could be expected that learners in similar programmes in other Pakistani universities may share similar transition experiences.

The BS study programme is offered in various majors by three faculties in the selected university: Faculty of Sciences; Faculty of Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences; and Faculty of Islamic & Oriental Learning. The Faculty of Islamic & Oriental Learning does not teach in English medium due to the nature of the subjects which requires them to be taught in relevant languages, such as Arabic, Urdu, Persian, and Punjabi. As a key research interest was related to including some learners who needed to make a shift to the English MOI, this study included learners from the BS study programme majors from the other two faculties only: Sciences (English MOI); and Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences (English MOI).

3.6.2 Participant Selection

The participants for this study were Pakistani university learners, aged 18 to 19 years, who were studying in the first semester in the BS study programme in the selected university. These learners came from a range of schools and colleges (Urdu medium public and private schools; and English medium private, elite and non-elite schools; public and private colleges). After gaining permission from the Deans of the respective faculties (Faculty of Sciences and Faculty of Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences) and the concerned staff members, the participants were invited to participate in the study. The sample was purposively selected to enhance the likelihood of it being fairly representative of new learners who are taking English MOI majors in Pakistani universities.

55

Questionnaire respondents

The quantitative questionnaire respondents were learners in the two selected faculties: Faculty of Sciences and the Faculty of Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences. The learner respondents were spread between following four major subjects (two from each selected faculty): Chemistry, Computer Science, Education and English Literature. The questionnaire was distributed among the 180 learners enrolled in the first semester in the selected BS majors in the two selected faculties. The 180 prospective respondents therefore formed a naturally occurring sample because the enrolment in each of the four BS majors was 45 which made the total number of potential questionnaire respondents 180. Sending a questionnaire to the large sample yielded a good response rate. A total of 154 respondents returned completed questionnaires. This was an 85.6 percent return which according to Robson (2002), is regarded a very good response rate for a survey. The respondents for the survey were effectively spread across the participating faculties. The breakdown of the respondents for the four BS majors (who returned the questionnaire) has been presented in table 3.1 below.

Table 3.1 Questionnaire respondents’ breakdown

No. BS Major No. of respondents No. of potential respondents 1 2 3 4 Chemistry Computer Science Education English Literature 41 39 30 44 45 45 45 45 Total 154 180 Interview participants

Interview participants represented the four selected BS majors, providing a consistent sample across the four disciplines. Interviewing participants from different majors provided information-rich, in-depth and rich multiple perspectives on learners’ transition experiences. Considering that qualitative investigation is based on small information-rich samples (Maxwell, 2013; Patton, 1990; Sandelowski, 1995), the qualitative sample in this study was kept small. Participants invited for interviews were those learners who showed an interest by responding to the ‘invitation for participation in interview’ form attached to the questionnaires. The original plan was to include two sets (based on the two prior MOI and school sectors) of participants

56

from each of the four BS majors (i.e. a total of 16 learners). Initially a total of 37 learners indicated an interest in participating in an interview at the end of the questionnaire. When these learners were contacted, after the semester was underway, a total of 14 learners agreed to participate in the interviews. The breakdown of these interview participants, across the four BS majors, is presented in table 3.2 below.

Table 3.2 Interview participants’ BS majors

No. BS Major No. of participants

1 Chemistry 4

2 Computer Science 4

3 Education 2

4 English Literature 4

3.6.3 Research Schedule

The fieldwork for the study was scheduled taking into consideration the research purpose of exploring the learners’ transition experiences which could be best investigated during their first semester. The semester breakdowns of the BS programme in universities in Pakistan are: Fall semester (September-February); and Spring semester (March-July). There is a summer-break for one and a half month during July and August. Each semester duration is 16 weeks. Data was collected during the months of January to March, 2014, three months after the start of the first semester. It was expected that, by that time, learners would be in a good position to share rich information regarding their transition and adaptation experiences and challenges. The research schedule is presented in Table 3.3 below, including the time frame for the questionnaire and the three sequential interview rounds.

Table 3.3 Research Schedule

Strand Data collection tools Month/Year

1 Questionnaire January 2014 2 Semi-structured interviews

Interview 1 Interview 2 Interview 3

January & March 2014 Week 4 of January 2014 Week 2 of February 2014 Week 1 of March 2014

57

3.6.4 Quantitative Questionnaire

The questionnaire had a twofold purpose. Firstly, it offered a systematic approach to exploring the learners’ adaptation experiences and their relation to the learners’ prior experiences and MOI. Secondly, the statistical data helped to get a general picture of the broad adaptation experiences, as well as the role of prior learning experiences and prior MOI during learners’ transition into university. The questionnaire addressed research questions 1, 2, and 3 and provided some information for research question 4. Questionnaires were a suitable choice because they could be distributed to a relatively large sample offering broader insights into learners’ transition experiences. The internal consistency and reliability of the questionnaire was enhanced by the standardised questions as suggested by Johnson and Christensen (2014).

Questionnaire development and design

The researcher developed and administered a self-reporting questionnaire (see Appendix F) in English comprising a total of 50 items presented in two sections. Section A collected background information and comprised 7 items developed with the aim of collecting information on learners’ current BS majors and the school and college learning background comprising items on their prior school/college type and sector, and MOI during secondary and higher secondary years. The reason for including items on respondents’ learning background was to explore the potential influence of these factors on their adaptation experiences.

Section B comprised 43 items that gauged information on the repondents’ academic, social, linguistic and environmental adaptation experiences during transition into university. The development of the items for the four sub-scales was guided by key points on adaptation experiences in the reviewed literature on the four adaptation categories. The section constituted 12 items for academic adaptation, 9 items for social adaptation, 10 items for linguistic adaptation, and 12 items for environmental adaptation sub-scales. Three tools were also used as guidance for developing the questionnaire items. These were, Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire (SACQ) (Baker and Siryk 1984); the Student Engagement Questionnaire (SEQ) (Australian Survey of Student Engagement [AUSSE], 2013); and First Year Experience Questionnaire ([FYEQ], 2013). The items were worded to suit the four adaptation aspects being measured in the study.

There were 12 items in academic adaptation experiences sub-scale. One item aimed at informing the difference the study respondents felt between university and college academic

58

tasks (I am finding the university academic tasks easier than those in college). The second item was worded to find out whether the respondents were adapting to the university academic culture or not. The remaining seven items were constructed to explore the respondents’ experiences of the university academic work demands in comparison to those at college (e.g. I need to devote more time to my studies in university than I used to do in college) and whether they were succesful in meeting the academic demands or not (e.g. I can manage the university academic workload). The last three items aimed at finding out the respondents’ interaction with

teachers (e.g. I do not hesitate to ask the teacher questions in classroom).

The second sub-scale on social adaptation was comprised of 9 items. These items gauged the respondents’ attitude towards and their success in socialising and interacting with others in the new educational setting (e.g. I feel shy to socialise with others on campus). One item aimed at looking into the difference the study respondents identified between univeristy and college social cultures (It is easier to socialise in university as compared to college).

The third sub-scale was comprised of 10 items constructed to explore the repondents’ success in meeting the demands of the university linguistic culture (e.g. I can do critical reading for comprehending the texts (in English) in my BS study syllabus), and their skill in the English language (e.g. I can speak English fluently).

The final set of 12 sub-scale items was constructed to explore the respondents’ initial reactions to the new learning environment (e.g. I felt welcome during my initial days on campus), and their attitude towards the need to adapt to the new learning environment (e.g. I do not want to learn new ways to adapt to university culture). Two items were aimed to find out whether the repondents found the univeristy environment different from school and college or not (e.g. I feel no difference between university and school culture).

The respondents were asked to report on Section B items using a four-point Likert scale (1=Strongly Disagree; 2=Disagree; 3=Agree; and 4=Strongly Agree) to show their disagreement or agreement with the particular adaptation experiences. In this study, the 4-point Likert scale was specifically adopted to avoid having any neutral midpoint as an option. The reason for not using a neutral option in the questionnaire was to encourage the participants to make a definite choice and express both the direction and strength of their opinion about the questionnaire items instead of giving a neutral response or choosing an intermediate position on the scale. It thus helped minimise the possibility of respondent ambiguity across response categories as suggested by Beamish (2004).

59

Several important factors were considered while developing the questionnaire for this study. Language was kept simple and easy to understand, and questions asked were those that the learners would have the knowledge to respond to and which applied to all the learners as recommended by Robson (2002).

Questionnaire pilot

The questionnaire was piloted in New Zealand in November 2013. Pakistani learners studying at Massey University were sent a formal invitation to participate in the pilot study through the Massey University Pakistani Learners’ Association (MUPSA). The survey questionnaire was sent to all the learners who agreed to participate in the pilot study. Fifteen learners took part in the pilot study.

A meeting was held with the participants to seek their feedback on the questionnaire length, time taken to complete it, language and clarity of items and instructions. There were no issues identified on the questionnaire length, language and clarity of items and instructions. Some discussion arose about prior MOI categories, and at the end it was agreed that just two categories of English MOI and Urdu MOI to be retained as these were the two main MOI categories followed by the Pakistani schools.

A coding scheme was developed to allow the pilot questionnaire data to be entered into SPSS software v23. This was then tested to make it ready to be used for analysing data in the main study, as suggested by Robson (2002). Two Section B items did not meet the reliability level having a Cronbach’s alpha value below 0.7. The items were reworded to establish the internal consistency reliability of the questionnaire.

Questionnaire procedure

The researcher personally visited all the four majors’ classes selected for inclusion in the study and distributed the questionnaires, and invited the learners to complete the questionnaire. They were given seven days to return the filled-in questionnaire to a sealed box provided on their respective department’s reception desk. The researcher personally collected the boxes from the respective departments on the morning of the eighth day.

60

3.6.5 Qualitative Interviews

A semi-structured interview technique was employed to conduct individual interviews with the first year learners in the selected university. Merriam (2009) defines semi-structured interview as a mix of more and less structured questions” (p. 90). Semi-structured interviews were conducted in this study because, as identified by Bryman (2012), and Robson (2002), a semi- structured interview offers flexibility and freedom to the interviewer to change the question wording, omit such questions as seem inappropriate or irrelevant, and include additional questions during the interview. Since the qualitative part of the study aimed at capturing the in- depth information on the research problem based on the learners’ experiences, there was the need to adjust, change, add or omit the interview questions/topics considering the interviewees’ willingness to share information and their responses during the interview. As Merriam (2009) notes about semi-structured interview, “the largest part of the interview is guided by a list of questions or issues to be explored, and neither the exact wording nor the order of the questions is determined ahead of time” (p. 90). A structured interview with a set of prescribed questions would have limited the scope of information to be collected from the participants. However, a semi-structured interview helped to get in-depth information on the research problem. Utilising these guidelines, an interview guide was specifically developed for the current study, based on the research problem and the concepts that emerged on the topic during the literature review (see Appendix I).

Semi-structured interviews are useful for “allowing access to past situations at which the researcher is not able to be present” (Scott & Usher, 1999, p. 112). Similarly, the interviews in this study offered the chance to collect rich data to understand the learners’ transition and prior experiences and the relationship between the two. The questions asked were guided by key issues in this study, such as the learners’ past learning experiences, expectations of university, preparedness for university, first impressions of university, their transition experiences, as well as the difficulties and challenges they faced in adapting to the university, and the steps being taken to overcome any challenges, adapt to the university culture, and form new identities.

The key reason for conducting individual interviews with the participants was to provide them with a chance of sharing the information in a relaxed manner which would not have been possible in group interviews because participants could feel reluctant to share complete information in group interviews in the presence of others. Individual interviews in this study provided the participants with a chance to formulate and verbalise their views and allowed them “the right” to “speak for themselves” (Dufva, 2003, p. 149).

61

Interview pilot

The interview was piloted in New Zealand in November, 2013. Pakistani learners studying at Massey University were sent a formal invitation to participate in the pilot interview through the Massey University Pakistani Learners’ Association (MUPSA). Two individuals consented to participate in the pilot interview. The pilot interviews were conducted, at a time and place decided by the participants. The interview duration was 45 minutes to one hour, in line with the final interview format. Participants’ feedback helped to refine the final interview protocol. For example, both interview participants pointed out the need to include questions regarding the learners’ background (urban/rural) because they felt that it would help in understanding the learners’ belief and value systems. This topic was subsequently included in the final interview schedule.

Interview procedure

Three individual interview rounds were conducted during the months of January, February and March 2014 (see Table 3.3). Interviews were conducted in a university office in the participants’ respective departments at a time and day that suited the individual participants. Interviews were audio-recorded with the participants’ prior permission. Each interview’s duration was between 45 minutes and one hour. The interviews were conducted in the learners’ preferred language: Urdu or English or a mix of both.

As shown in Table 3.3, round one interviews were conducted in the last week of January and focussed on gathering information on the learners’ prior experiences, MOI, perceptions and expectations of university during pre-university years, and first impressions of the university during early days after university entrance. The second round of interviews was conducted during mid-February. This interview aimed to collect information on the participants’ transition experiences, challenges faced by the participants in adapting to the university and how they were adapting to the university culture. The third round of interviews was conducted during the first week of March during the semester break, after the semester one examinations were over, so participants were free to reflect on their overall transition experience and lessons learnt from the first semester experience. The aim of the final interview was to capture the participants’ overall transition experience, lessons learnt from the adaptation experiences during the first semester, and strategies to be adopted for adaptation during the second semester.

62

3.7 DATA ANALYSIS

As mentioned earlier, the data analysis of the quantitative and qualitative strands was undertaken separately. The analysis of questionnaire data was completed first and the results of each strand were kept separate until these were integrated during the final interpretation stage of the study.

3.7.1 Questionnaire Analysis

The questionnaire data was analysed with the help of SPSS software v23. The data was entered into the SPSS and a dataset was created. Each anonymous survey respondent was given an ID number, and data from Section A on participants’ background was coded according to the categories and sub-categories as shown in Table 3.4.

Table 3.4 Section A coding scheme

Categories Sub-categories Codes

BS Major Chemistry Computer Science Education English Literature 1 2 3 4 School/College Sector Private

Public

1 2 School/College Type Single gender

Mixed gender 1 2 MOI English Urdu 1 2

The 4 Likert scale points in Section B data were coded in the similar manner as in the