Study design

This study used a classroom-based, action research design, and employed different methods for data collection to answer the research questions posed above (see 4.2). In addition, the study used a pre-and post-tests design. It used a stand-alone separate ER programme to investigate the ER effectiveness on ten Jordanian EFL students. Choosing the sample for the study was not random. Random sampling is not

necessary for a mixed methods study, especially since many scholars consider action research to be a qualitative research (Burns, 2010; McNiff, 2014). Rather, a

“purposeful selection of participants” (Merriam, 2002, p.12) provides an ample source of rich data. To increase the systematicity and reliability, the current study used a mixed methods research (MMR) design (i.e., both quantitative and qualitative data) (see 4.6). To understand the rationale for using a mixed methods action

research, for this study, action research must be discussed first.

4.3.1. What is action research?

Action research is one of the most popular methods used by teachers in their teaching practice. It is of great value to teachers in enabling them to better understand and observe the educational process and settings in and out of the classroom, and consequently develop them. Action research in education has contributed greatly to the enhancement of the educational process (McNiff, 2014; Cirocki & Farrelly, 2016). Coghlan and Brydon-Miller (2014) stress the difficulty of defining action research due to the multiple labels used to identify action research; however, they state that all these variable definitions agree that action research is an integration of theory and action with the aim of addressing different issues together with those who are involved. More particularly, and in connection with this study, action research was applied for three months to create some useful changes to the problematic situation in the Jordanian EFL classroom. Action research is defined as “a self-reflective systematic and critical approach to enquiry by participant… The aim is to identify problematic situations in order to bring about critically informed changes in practice” (Burns, 1999, p.5).

Action research is not done randomly; it should go through systematic stages. According to Kemmis and McTaggart (1998), action research involves four main stages. The first phase or stage is planning, where the researcher identifies a problem and develops a plan in order to find solutions and improve the problematic area.

91 Having developed a carefully designed plan, action comes next. The action phase involves deliberate interventions into the teaching practice for a specific period of time. Observation is the third phase, where the researcher starts observing the effects of the action and collecting all the data possible using systematic tools. Reflecting and evaluating the action and its effects is the last phase. The researcher, in this phase, describes what has happened to understand the issue thoroughly. These phases were followed as a strategy to conduct the proposed study (see 4.3.2).

Some researchers view action research as using primarily qualitative methods, as there are strong similarities between qualitative and action research. However, it is good to use both qualitative and quantitative methods (i.e., triangulation) in the action research in order to obtain a more valid and reliable research, and that is one of the main reasons for conducting action research using mixed methods for this study.

4.3.2. Rationale for using mixed methods inquiry in action research

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, the overarching goal of this study is to probe the ER effect in improving Jordanian EFL students’ cognitive skills and increasing motivation for and positive attitudes towards FL reading. EFL teachers in Jordan usually follow the IR approach when teaching reading; this, in turn, leads students to become slow readers, bored and demotivated as a result. This problem is the main focus of this research. Facing a problem in the classroom is best approached through an action research to bring about necessary changes in an attempt to solve the problems posed (Burns, 2010). Therefore, the best way to approach problems in the classroom and try to find a solution is through conducting an action research

(McNiff, 2014; Mertler, 2014). Given that the problem for this study is classroom- based, I decided to conduct an action research.

The four systematic phases (stages) for carrying out an action research, proposed by Kemmis and McTaggart (1998), were followed (see 4.3.1). After

identifying the problem, I developed a plan in order to solve the problem at hand and improve the learning process; that is, setting up an ER programme in the Jordanian EFL classroom (i.e., deliberate intervention as a proposed solution to the problem). I put the action into practice using mixed methods tools to collect the data for later evaluation and research analysis. Mertler (2014) mentions some of the beneficial aspects of action research use. Action research is contextualised, localised, and

92 aimed at discovering, monitoring, and leading change to practice. This study is contextualised and aims to discover, monitor and lead change in the Jordanian EFL classroom. This summarises and justifies my choice for applying action research, as it best suits the research inquiry posed.

The data collection and analytical tools used in this study rely on mixed methods techniques. For a study with such goals, the selection of the MMR has ample support in the literature. MMR has been defined as “research in which, the investigator collects and analyses data, integrates the findings, and draws inferences using both qualitative and quantitative approaches or methods in a single study or programme of inquiry” (Tashakkori & Creswell, 2007, p.4). Both qualitative and quantitative methods and different research tools were used to collect data for this research. Quantitative research is referred to as a research involving data collection actions that mainly provide numerical data, and analysing it by statistical based tools (Gries, 2009; Muijs, 2011). Involving objectivity, quantitative researchers do not focus on individual cases; rather, they apply a meaning in the general strategy (Muijs, 2011). Quantitative research usually involves a large amount of data, because a small amount of data might lead to defective and inconsistent results, which would not be valid or significant (Rasinger, 2013).

On the other hand, qualitative research is defined as “a situated activity that locates the observer in the world. It consists of a set of interpretive, material practices that make the world visible” (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005, p.3). Having said that, my research was a “situated activity” in the classroom where I was not only an observer but also a participant taking part in that situated activity by being a teacher- researcher. Qualitative researchers try to investigate issues through an interpretive and naturalistic approach. They attempt to investigate actions and situations in their natural settings and explain them through the meanings that people or participants bring to them (Cirocki, 2013a; Cirocki, 2016). The ultimate purpose of qualitative research is to contextualise and interpret; the researcher observes and generates questions. Unlike the large number of participants in quantitative research,

qualitative research samples usually include a small number of participants who are chosen purposefully not randomly (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010).

MMR is mainly characterised by triangulation. Triangulation means “the combinations and comparisons of multiple data sources, data collection and analysis procedures, research methods, investigators, and inferences that occur at the end of a

93 study” (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009, p.27). Triangulation is a clear feature of this study where multiple tools for collecting data were used, both qualitative (e.g., interviews, book reports, and diaries) and quantitative (e.g., tests and reading strategies checklist) methods (see 4.6).

Applying multiple methods to study a single phenomenon is referred to as methodological triangulation (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010; Riazi & Candlin, 2014). By multiple methods, researchers mean the application of both qualitative and quantitative methods to study the same problem (Hashemi & Babaii, 2013). For example, in this study, both checklists (quantitative) and interviews (qualitative) were used in an attempt to answer the research question regarding the ER effectiveness on reading strategies used by Jordanian students while reading for pleasure. These two tools are triangulated to provide a

comprehensive understanding for that research question.

This study investigates a situated phenomenon; that is, how ER contributes to EFL development for Jordanian students and that is best studied through qualitative research. Qualitative research is interested in the participants’ feelings, experiences and opinions and thus the essential target of research is to discover the participants’ views of the phenomenon being investigated (Holliday, 2004). That is why

qualitative tools were used for studying the ER impact on the individual students’ motivation for and attitudes towards reading in English. Also, their productive skills development was investigated through using interviews and book journals to collect data.

However, another goal of this study, as mentioned above, is to know the effect of ER on Jordanian EFL reading speed, vocabulary knowledge and reading

strategies. These goals are best studied through using quantitative tools, because that would add more systematicity and reliability for the research through the existence of objectivity in collecting and analysing data (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010). Since this study investigated the vocabulary growth and reading speed as well as the reading strategies, it included dealing with increase or decrease in numbers, and it is very established in literature that numerical data are the quantitative research

interest, during the data collection and analysis process (Gries, 2009; Muijs, 2011; Rasinger, 2013). Therefore, quantitative tools (vocabulary tests, reading speed tests, and reading strategies checklists) were used for investigating these questions. Finally, for a study with those goals, the selection of action research using mixed

94 methods approach has ample support in the literature (Burns, 2010; Creswell & Clark, 2011).