Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-23T09:51:33.609Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 13 - Living with inelegance in qualitative research on task-based learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 October 2012

Constant Leung
Affiliation:
King's College London, England
Roxy Harris
Affiliation:
King's College London, England
Ben Rampton
Affiliation:
King's College London, England
Bonny Norton
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia, Vancouver
Kelleen Toohey
Affiliation:
Simon Fraser University, British Columbia
Get access

Summary

Introduction

Within the field of second language acquisition (SLA), there has been some sustained theoretical and methodological discussion on the different research approaches and paradigms. One of the recurring themes of this discussion turns to the differences between, broadly speaking, quantitative and interpretative approaches. The former is often associated with a tendency to work with psychological or psycholinguistic paradigms and statistical data analyses; the latter, the main focus of our attention here, is likely to draw on, inter alia, some form of qualitative methodology or discourse analysis (for a discussion, see Davis, 1995; Kumaravadivelu, 1999). This chapter sets out to discuss some of the issues concerned with the use of interactional discourse data germane to classroom-based SLA research. First, we will provide a brief account of the context of the data gathering that generated the theoretical and research issues that we wish to discuss in this chapter and highlight some of these issues with reference to some classroom data. It is our view that working with naturally occurring data is inevitably a messy enterprise, but one that many researchers find difficult to fully acknowledge or account for in the presentation of their research data. Noteworthy exceptions are, for instance, Bloome (1994); Candela (1999); Gutierrez, Rymes, and Larson (1995); and Kamberelis (2001). After that, we will attempt to relate our concerns and observations to wider debates on the epistemologies and practices of different research traditions and perspectives.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×