Lakhasly

Applied Linguistics
Research Methods for Applied Linguistics

Introduction ‘The Scope of Applied Linguistics Research’

Over the past two decades, books on applied linguistics research have often
failed to define the term research, perhaps because the focus of such books was
so narrow that a definition of research seemed self-evident. Some books (Anshen,
1978; Hatch & Farhady, 1982; Butler, 1985; Woods, Fletcher, & Hughes, 1986;
Brown, 1988; Hatch & Lazaraton, 1991; Rietveld & van Hout, 1993; Scholfield,
1995) focused almost exclusively on statistical research. Other books focused
on the research methodology involved in language teacher research (Freeman,
1998), language classroom research (van Lier, 1988; Allwright & Bailey, 1991),
action research (Wallace, 1998; Burns, 1999), survey research (Brown, 2001),
research methods in text and discourse analysis (Jenner, 2000), or research
methods in pragmatics (Kasper & Dahl, 1991). Recently, collections of articles
have also begun to appear that are focused on a specific type of research, like
teacher research (Griffee & Nunan, 1997; Hornberger & Corson, 1997), or qualitative research (Bailey & Nunan, 1997).
Other research-oriented books in applied linguistics have been more
inclined to grapple with the notion of what research is, perhaps because they
were somewhat more general in nature, usually surveying a variety of different types of research. The earliest of these explored the differences between
qualitative and quantitative research (Seliger & Shohamy, 1989). A few years
later, Johnson (1992) covered correlational approaches, case-study approaches,
survey research, ethnographic research, experimental research, and what she
called multisite/multimethod research, and Nunan (1992) explained experimental method, ethnography, case study, classroom-observation research,
introspection methods, elicitation techniques, interaction analysis, and program
evaluation. Still more recently, McDonough and McDonough (1998) dealt with
observation, introspection, diary studies, experiments, interviews, questionnaires, numerical techniques, and case study research, and Brown and Rodgers
(2002) included chapters on case study research, introspection research,
classroom observation and interaction research, descriptive statistics research,
correlational research, quasi-experimental research, and course or program
evaluation.

1.1. Defining applied linguistics research

In Brown (1992), I reported on a survey of hundreds of members of the
Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) organization
around the world. One of the questions I asked them was how they defined
research. The diversity of answers was staggering, ranging from short, idealistic answers about what research is (e.g., “Careful, thorough study” and “The
search for the truth”) to very cynical answers (e.g., “Something that profs at
universities that grant advanced degrees do because they don’t teach and need
to publish” and “Ignoring the obvious”). The approaches to defining research
differed in fairly systematic ways, falling generally into four categories as
follows:

1. Definitions that listed the types of research (e.g., “An investigation of a particular topic, or problem, through a document search and/or empirical study
   (the conducting of experiments) and analysis” and “Investigation through
   the reading of literature, experimentation and/or any other type of data
   gathering . . .”)
   2.Definitions that listed the topics of research (e.g., “In its widest sense, to
   seek new ways to improve language education and intercultural communication training” and “Searching for information on how students
   process information, internalize data and retain it for communicative
   purposes.”)


2. Definitions that covered the purpose of research (e.g., “The search for information that will help practitioners (in this case, teachers) better carry out their
   jobs . . .” and “Systematic study of language issues and use in order to
   improve delivery of services to our students.”)
   4.Definitions that enumerated the steps in the process of research (e.g., “Working
   toward truth, proving theories, trying out new approaches – and then
   compiling results, analyzing results and sharing with colleagues” and
   “Stating a hypothesis; gathering data; testing the hypothesis; relating the
   conclusions to issues at hand.”)
   Given the scope of applied linguistics research indicated in these responses,
   finding a single definition general enough to include all possibilities, yet clear
   enough to be meaningful seemed to me to be a major challenge. In a conversation with Donald Freeman many years ago, he suggested that research might
   be defined simply as “any principled inquiry.” That definition seemed to me
   to be broad enough to fit the many types of research done in applied linguistics, but also remained meaningful. For the purposes of this chapter, I will
   expand that definition slightly to fit applied linguistics research as I see it today:
   any systematic and principled inquiry in applied linguistics. I have added the
   word systematic because to me research must not only be principled, but also
   orderly, methodical, precise, and well organized, all of which are listed as
   synonyms for systematic in my computer’s dictionary.
   Such a broad definition of research allows the flexibility to include many
   different types of research under one umbrella, but can also cause considerable
   confusion unless the similarities and differences among the many research
   types are clearly understood.

1.2 Options in applied linguistics research

In Brown (1988), I naively categorized the different types of research as shown
in Figure 19.1 into two categories that my librarian mother taught me years
ago: secondary research (derived from the research and writings of others)
and primary research (derived from original data of some sort). I further
subdivided primary research into case studies and statistical research and then
subdivided statistical research into survey and experimental research. In the
mid-eighties, I apparently viewed the types of research going on in applied
linguistics in such simplistic binary terms.
After a decade or so of experiences like the TESOL survey (discussed above
and reported in Brown, 1992), I expanded my view of the types of research in
applied linguistics to include more categories. As shown in Figure 19.2 (from
Brown, 2001), the secondary/primary dichotomy still seemed appropriate, but
those two categories were further subdivided with considerably more detail
provided. In this case, secondary research included library research (research
heavily dependent on secondary sources, often associated term papers in school)
and literature reviews (more sophisticated reviews of some aspect of the
Very broad categories of research literature of the field, which contributed new knowledge to the field). Primary
research included three general sub-categories: qualitative, survey, and statistical research. Qualitative research involved many different traditions (see
Table 19.3 below) and data gathering techniques (including at least case
studies, introspection, discourse analysis, interactional analysis, and classroom
observations). Survey research included interviews and questionnaires.
Statistical research included descriptive studies, exploratory research, quasiexperimental studies, and experimental research. Recognizing the different
types of applied linguistics research is all well and good, but fully identifying
the distinguishing characteristics of those different types of research remained
a challenge.

1.3. Characteristics of Applied Linguistics Research

Applied linguistics research can be described from many different perspectives including at least (1) the contextual factors involved in applied linguistics
research, (2) van Lier’s parameters of educational research design, (3) Grotjahn’s
data collection methods, data types, and data analysis procedures, (4) other
sets of research characteristics, and (5) the qual–quant continuum.

1.3.1. Contextual factors in AL Research

Brown and Rodgers (2002, pp. 14–16) summarized a number of contextual
factors that influence applied linguistics research at international, national,
professional, institutional, local, and personal levels:
Broad categories of research (adapted from Brown, 2001).
1 International and national contexts. International and national organizations
and governmental bodies support a fair amount of applied linguistics
research. Since they control the money, their political priorities tend to
influence who will do such research and how.
2 Professional contexts. Within applied linguistics, the types of research that
are popular at any given time vary; for a few years, interest in one type
of research may increase at the expense of another, then interest may be
rekindled for that latter type. In other words, even research can have its
trends and fads.
3. Institutional contexts. Institutional contexts in applied linguistics research
can refer to everything from entire school districts, to individual language
programs, or even to very specific individual tutoring situations. Within
these institutional contexts a number of factors can influence the type and
quality of research: the size of the institution, availability of resources to
support research, institutional policies and priorities, the institution’s past
experiences with researchers, and even the personalities of the various
administrators and teachers involved.
4. Local contexts. Local contexts refer to the specific circumstances in which
the research will take place. The context may be a classroom, laboratory,
private home, Internet bulletin board, or even a coffee shop. A number of
factors in the local context may turn out to be important to the success or
failure of a research study:
(a). physical context (e.g., class size, layout of the school, etc.),
(b). time context (e.g., minutes per class, classes per day, etc.),
(c). social context (e.g., language backgrounds, ethnic mix of the students,
etc.),
(d) pedagogical context (e.g., teaching methods used, preferred learning
styles of the students and teachers, etc.),
(e) psychological context (e.g., comfort level of participants with regard to
research studies, etc.).
5. Personal contexts. Individual researchers have certain preconceptions about
the aspects of applied linguistics that ought to be researched, the form that
research should take, and their role in the research process. Such preconceptions and preferences arise from individual differences in abilities, personalities, motivations, priorities, training, etc. and may influence the types of
research a particular individual or group will be interested in doing.
Johnson (1992, p. 217) examined a wider variety of the contextual factors
involved in research: (1) the sociopolitical and sociocultural contexts, (2) purposes and goals, (3)initiators/impetus, (4) support and funding, and (5) institutional setting.