Page 27 - Getting of the fence

strengths and different weaknesses (Plano Clark & Ivankova, 2016). We selected a 1 mixed method approach for this thesis because, according to Creswell and Plano
Clark (2011), mixed methods are appropriate in long-term projects where the
research questions are geared towards understanding initial research findings in
greater detail. Methodological decisions will be accounted for in more detail in each of the subsequent chapters.
1.8 Outline of the thesis
In order to answer the main research questions, the five empirical studies in this thesis are organised in three parts.
1.8.1 Part 1
Central to Part 1 of this thesis was the development of a model of foreign language literature teaching. In the first study (Chapter 2), an initial model was developed based on a literature review, formal curriculum documentation, and the researcher’s professional experience as an EFL teacher and teacher educator. This initial model, the Comprehensive Approach to foreign language teaching and learning, which consists of four different approaches to EFL literature teaching, was validated through several consecutive Thinking Aloud Protocols with foreign language teachers and teacher educators. Because this initial model was part of a survey (n = 106 EFL teachers), we were able to run a confirmatory factor analysis to determine whether, and the extent to which, the four approaches were linked to the underlying latent trait. By using descriptive statistics, t-tests, and correlation analyses, we explored how Dutch EFL teachers approach literature and whether teacher demographics and/or curricular factors are related to this.
1.8.2 Part 2
Part 2 of this thesis consists of three studies which all concentrate on the student perspective. Because it is our understanding that the student voice is essential in curriculum development, the objective of the second study was to empirically validate the Comprehensive Approach through learner oriented discourses. In Chapter 3 we extend the discussion of the inclusion of student voice in research in two ways. We first argue that the leading hierarchical ideas about the inclusion of student voice should be considered dated, because it results in a mono-dimensional
General introduction
25