2010년 2월 9일 화요일

Ecological point of view: quantitative to qualitative

Blyth's article demonstrated the entire flow reveled in the development of technology research, which ultimately showed the direction towards which ongoing and future research will be oriented--ecological approach. However, what I encountered at the several conferences that I attended runs counter to this transitional movement. I went to the SLRF (Second Language Research Forum), considered one of major conferences in terms of second language acquisition (SLA), and found that the prevalent methods that are commonly used by researchers are quantitative methods involving statistical analysis--trying to give input embedded in a set teaching model which is predicated upon each researcher's own theoretical frameworks (typically, psycholinguistics models), then compared with a control group, and investigating whether the differences found in pre- and post-test scores between those two groups are statistically significant. If so (significant), then the researchers would finally be qualifed to have inflated opinions that the teaching model that they applied to the target class is so beneficial that it should be incorporated soon. However, that quantitative method that plays out with numbers cannot be comprehensive and inclusive since it does not take into account what kinds of input are noticed and internalized in class, and how those input is processed in parellel with the individual attitude and perception that are shaped in phylogenetic, ontogentic, sociocultural, and microgenetic history. In other words, the improved score in the post-test can be attributed to other hidden factors that potentially affect the result, which countervails the ostensible vailidity of the teaching model--the validity based on "numbers." In fact, how could we measure human, the most complex creatures, with numbers?? It is not the case that psycholinguistic methods (here, quantitative methods) are not of value in SLA, but to cogently illustrate what is going on in the tech-world, or the classroom world in general, wouldn't it be wonderful for researchers to move out of their narrow lens and integrate ecological perspective into their own framework? I was one of a few of presenters who took on sociocultural perspective in the research project at the SLRF conference and was a lot shocked to see SLA is still remaining in the realm of the quantitative world. It was an eye-opening moment to me to see where SLA is now and where I should head to.

댓글 3개:

  1. interesting observations. I agree with you. We are dealing here with complex humans who cannot be thought in terms of numbers due to all the other factors that affect our performance in a specific time, right? I think we should consider different perspectives while doing research. Now, I don't know if I got your last message clear, is it that you think that because other are being more quantitative you/we shouldn't go against them? :(

    답글삭제
  2. That was just a sarcastic remark that I wouldn't be yielding to what is considered "mainstream" in SLA.

    답글삭제
  3. Hi, Jasmine. Yes, in our SLA theory class last semester, I often wondered how the quantitative studies came to their conclusions so definitively when you can make statistics say anything you want, and I always inquired about the other possible variables that could account for some outcomes. So, it is good that you are representing qualitative research in SLA, especially in public forums.

    답글삭제