Theoretical Approach to Research Methodology - Report Example

Research Methodology Introduction This chapter presents information about the methodology that was used in the research. The details contained in the chapter are as follows. First is the theoretical approach that was used, followed by the research strategy, the population, sample of study and sampling procedure. This is followed information about the instruments that were used to collect data (questionnaire survey and interviews), the process of collecting the data, and how the quantitative and qualitative data that were collected were analysed. At the end of the chapter, a brief summary of the chapter’s details is provided. Theoretical Approach The aim of this study was to investigate the perceptions and experiences of teachers in regard to the use of assistive technology in various schools that cater to children with hearing impairment, visual impairment and intellectual disabilities in Saudi Arabia. It is known that assistive technologies are used to augment, maintain or improve the capacity of learners with disabilities (Cohen & Cowen, 2008). It is also understood that assistive technologies serve two purposes; (1) to support individuals’ strengths, thus counterbalancing the impacts of the disability; and (2) to offer an alternative way of performing tasks (Cohen & Cowen, 2008). However, how effective the technologies are depends on how teachers use them to teach learners and how the teachers perceive the technologies and the environment in which they are using the technologies. It is on the basis of this that the research approach aimed at enquiring about teachers’ perceptions and experiences regarding the use of technology. The theoretical approach that was used is a combination of both positivist and interpretive paradigms. Positivism is a research paradigm which asserts that the things that exist be described factually (Denicolo, Long & Bradley-Cole, 2016). It follows natural principles and encompasses a researcher who makes an attempt to take a neutral and disinterested role. According to the positivist or quantitative approach, observations of phenomena must be carried out objectively. Values and biases must be eliminated as much as possible, and there has to be a clear distinction between the subject and the researcher (Marlow, 2011), for instance by having a questionnaire that is to be completed by the research participant away from the researcher. The positivist approach of the current study was therefore meant to collect information on the subject with as little interference on the respondents as possible. On the other hand, interpretive research involves not seeing people as things that can be researched like phenomena, but as individuals with the capacity to think, interpret and attach meanings to various occurrences (Magnusson & Marecek 2015). In particular, interpretive researchers “are interested in people’s ways of making sense of their activities, experiences, and relationships” and how they intend to act in accordance with these ways of making sense (Magnusson & Marecek 2015, p. 2). Therefore, the interpretive paradigm allows the researcher to collect data that reflects how the research participants express themselves in regard to their feelings and experiences about a given phenomenon. The interpretive approach was therefore used as a way of ensuring that ideas that may not have been captured through the use of the positivist research (given the emphasis on perceptions and experiences) are captured more vividly through the participants being allowed to express themselves on various issues. Research Strategy This research adopted a mixed-method approach: qualitative (i.e. open-ended questions and interviews) and quantitative (i.e. survey questionnaire). The adoption of mixed methods as a research approach raises vital complications in regard to how the quantitative and qualitative methods are integrated and how priorities are set between the two methods. To overcome this issue, the sequential exploration strategy was adopted for this research. This allows the researcher to either commence the study with qualitative research, from where he/she obtains data, which is then used as a foundation for the quantitative research, or to start with quantitative research followed by qualitative research (Creswell, 2014). In my study, I started with quantitative research, followed by the qualitative research. The rationale of adopting this strategy was to assist in generating an understanding of the study topic based on the qualitative study and using the same understanding to create more understanding on any gaps that would be identified in knowledge. In this study, I wanted to gain knowledge about teachers’ perceptions regarding the use of technology for students with disabilities (hearing impairment, visual impairments and intellectual disabilities) so that the responses would be helpful during the process of designing questions for the second phase. The study participants were 266 teachers of students with intellectual disabilities, hearing impairment and visual impairment in schools that use various technologies to help these children in their learning process. The decision to study the perceptions of teachers was informed by the point that teachers spend most of their time at school with the children with special needs, and are therefore likely to have a better understanding of the children’s needs as well as where the use of technologies is most beneficial. The same teachers have a role to help and guide children with special needs like those with intellectual disabilities, hearing impairment and visual impairment not only through their school and homework, but also in assisting them to overcome obstacles they might otherwise not be in a position to. According to Miller, Fader and Vincent (2001), the success of any services offered to young children rests with the professionals offering such services. In particular, Miller et al. (2001) indicate that teachers sometimes play a major curriculum development role for children with disabilities, and they assume the role of implementers of the special education curriculum. Sampling of Schools It has been argued that “there is no widely accepted typology of MM (mixed methods) sampling strategies” (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009, p. 185). Since the proposed research aims to investigate educators’ perceptions and experiences of the use of technology to support the learning of children with hearing impairment, visual impairment and intellectual disabilities in Saudi Arabia, the sampling strategy purposefully targeted schools that offer learning for children with the aforementioned disabilities. Purposive sampling involves selecting a sample based on the understanding of a population (Babbie, 2008). It is also premised on the supposition that the researcher aims to discover, comprehend and gain insight; and for that reason, must choose a sample from which the most can be learned (Merriam, 2009). A purposive sample is thus one where individuals from a pre-specified grouping are purposively identified and sampled (Gerrish & Lacey, 2010). Such an approach is not so much concerned with random sampling since it aims at getting a sample of information-rich research participants (Struwig & Stead, 2001). Specifically, the sampling process was deigned to only target those special education schools that offer learning to children with the disabilities that have been discussed. For each of the three identified disability categories, three schools were selected. In total therefore, nine schools were sampled for inclusion in the study. The selection criteria for each sampled school involved was a requirement to have only one separate specialisation in teaching students in each of the three disability categories identified herein. In total, therefore, three schools sampled for inclusion in this research specialised in teaching students with visual impairment. Another three schools specialised in teaching students with hearing impairment, while the third category of schools were those that specialised in teaching students with intellectual disabilities. The schools were identified by the researcher based on information that is publicly available about these schools (i.e. the schools offer education to children with hearing impairment, visual impairment and intellectual disabilities). The nine schools targeted for the research were selected from three regions of Saudi Arabia (Riyadh, Jeddah and Dammam) due to convenience and accessibility. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia provides education to people with special needs (auditory disability), (visual disability) and (intellectual education) through institutes supervised by The Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia such as Al Amal Institute, Al Noor Institute and Institute of Intellectual Education. Al Amal Institute is one of the specialised institutes in auditory disability. Education in Al Amal Institute is based on taking educational directions in teaching. The educational system starts in the primary stage from the age of eight years, and the institution uses a curriculum similar to the one that is used in public education. As for Al Noor Institute, it is the nucleus of private education in Saudi Arabia for visual disability. It provides educational, rehabilitative and cultural programs. Most Al Noor Institutes follow the boarding school system which includes a residential section to stay in. In addition, the Ministry of Education in Saudi Arabia provides all institutes with a version of its teachers’ and students’ textbooks customised and recorded by the Central Talking Library. The third type of targeted schools in this research is Institute of Intellectual Education. Saudi Arabia established these institutes for intellectual education. It starts with the qualifying stage which lasts for two years and is followed by the primary stage which is six years long. During this period, students, according to their abilities, receive reading and writing classes and, besides that, giving them basic skills. There is an integrated approach for the students, and special printed books are available for them. The students are subject to continuous evaluation throughout the year, and based on reports, the growth of the students’ abilities and their collected grades are determined and thus transferred to the next stage (Afeafe, 2000). Population and Sample Teachers in all the selected schools were invited to participate in the study. The sampling frame for the survey fell within the convenience sampling technique. Convenience sampling entails getting subjects wherever they can be found and usually wherever is convenient (Jackson, 2015). Further, participants are selected based on their accessibility as well as willingness to respond. Although convenience sampling is easy to use and less expensive, it has been criticised for being a weak form of sampling since the researcher does not make any attempt to know the population or to utilise a random process in selection (Gravetter & Forzano, 2012). In addition, the researcher has little control over the authenticity of the sample, and as such, there is a high possibility of obtaining a biased sample (Gravetter & Forzano, 2012). However, these weaknesses were eliminated in this study by the fact that the researcher was employing purposive sampling to select the schools (special schools) in which the participants (teachers) were to be studied. The researcher made it clear that only those teachers who were involved teaching children with the aforementioned disabilities should participate in the research. From each of the nine selected schools, the researcher targeted at least 30 teachers. Details about the study and consent forms, together with questionnaires, were distributed to all participating schools. Teachers who consented to participate were asked to complete the questionnaires. The schools’ principals were also targeted (purposefully selected) to provide further information. Response Rate: Each school has about 20–30 teachers; which means that if all the teachers had responded, the questionnaire survey would involve a maximum of 270 participants, calculated as: 30 teachers × 9 schools = 270. That, as the researcher, I was expecting 270 teachers to respond; however, 266 teachers responded to the questionnaire. I also interviewed 60 teachers as a way of administering the open-ended questions in the questionnaire. My research assistant went to schools for male students and distributed the questionnaire and interviewed participants. Data Collection Instruments The research adopted the use of open-ended questions and interviews in order to collect qualitative data, while the survey questionnaire was used for collecting quantitative data. The survey questionnaire focused on the teachers’ background information (such as age, gender, teaching experience) and their perceptions about the use of technology to support the learning of students with hearing impairment, visual impairment and intellectual disability in Saudi Arabian schools. The questionnaire was a Likert-scale type and contained about 15-21 statements to be rated on a 5-point scale from “Strongly disagree” to “Strongly agree”. I translated the survey from English to Arabic to ensure the cultural adaptation of the survey for Arabic- speaking Saudi participants. Examples of statements that were contained in the in the questionnaire are: 1. The use of technology helps children with disabilities to improve in their learning. 2. The use of technology helps children with disabilities (Hearing impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities) improve their learning. There were also open-ended questions at the end, which focused on the following themes: The type of technologies used in schools, teachers’ experiences, how technology affects learning, the challenges involved and how these challenges can be overcome. These questions were also used as interview questions for the school principals. The open-ended /interview questions were as follows: 1. Does the school you teach in use assistive technology for student with (hearing impairment, visual impairments and intellectual disabilities) in Saudi Arabia? 2. What types of technological tools are used in your school for student with (hearing impairment, visual impairments and intellectual disabilities) in Saudi Arabia? 3. What is your experience as a teacher using technology? 4. What difference do you think technology makes when it is used among student with (hearing impairment, visual impairments and intellectual disabilities) Saudi Arabia? 5. Have you ever designed a program for student with (hearing impairment, visual impairments and intellectual disabilities) to improve their use of technology? What was it like? 6. How is technology used towards enhancing learning for student with (hearing impairment, visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities) disability in Saudi Arabia? 7. What is the role of technology and its influences on the learning of student with (hearing impairment, visual impairments and intellectual disabilities) disability in Saudi Arabian schools? 8. What are the challenges faced by your school in the implementation and/or use of technology for the learning of student with the aforementioned disabilities in Saudi Arabia? 9. How do you think the challenges can be overcome? The use of open-ended questions and interviews implies that the respondent is asked to provide his or her own answers to the questions (Rubin & Babbie, 2010). Qualitative questionnaires are often used when the researcher wants to know how the participants feel, think about or experience a phenomenon, or when the researcher wants to know why the respondents think something happens (Johnson & Christensen, 2012). Since the participants give their responses by writing their answers in their own words, the open-ended questions can offer rich information (Johnson & Christensen, 2012). The researcher conducted 60 interviews with participants from all the nine schools involved in the study. The interviews involved the use of open-ended questions and took place in an informal manner during work time. Data Collection Prior to the process of collecting data, the researcher sought ethics approval from the UNE Ethics Committee. The need to seek ethics approval is related to the fact that researchers have documented various ethical dilemmas that can crop up during the process of field work and data collection, many of which are premised on issues of power and privilege, honesty and lying, as well as the overall quality of the association between the researcher and what is being researched (Klenke, 2008). In addition, there are ethical issues relating to the construction of knowledge and matters of advocacy (Klenke, 2008). Once the approval was obtained, the researcher sent a letter to the Ministry of Higher Education in Saudi Arabia detailing the purpose and relevance of the research. The researcher also contacted the Ministry of Higher Education in Saudi Arabia with the purpose of distributing a survey questionnaire to teachers and school principals and conducting face-to-face interviews with them. The questionnaires were then distributed to the nine schools in Saudi Arabia that were targeted from three regions: Riyadh, Jeddah and Dammam. The schools included Al Amal Institute, Al Noor Institute and Institute of Intellectual Education. Over a period of three months, the researcher visited each school to seek the school principals’ for approval for the collection of data in their schools. During each visit, the researcher provided the school principal copies of Information Sheet for Participants, Consent Forms and questionnaires schedules. Upon each school principal approving that the research be conducted, the researcher was given an appointment to have a meeting with the targeted participants from each school. All copies of the consent forms were stored in safe cabinet. A pilot study was first conducted by asking teachers in two schools to complete a draft questionnaire and allowing them an opportunity to participate in interviews along with school principals. This was to help the researcher validate/refine the questionnaire before it was used in the actual data collection process. The essence of conducting a pilot test is to determine whether the data collection tool (in this the questionnaires and interview) can be administered to collect accurate data (Cargan, 2007). More importantly, a pilot study is intended to provide answers to the following questions: whether there are enough directions for the researcher to carry out the research and analyse the collected information; whether the procedures involved are standardised; whether the necessary information is being made available; whether the questions being asked are appropriate for the people that are participating in the research; and whether the information that is being gathered is consistent (i.e. whether the necessary items have been included that can be evaluated for internal consistency) (Cargan, 2007). During the time of piloting the research instruments, the researcher performed the following in order to answer the questions relating to the pilot study. To start with, the researcher anticipated the actual conditions of the survey, such as problems in understanding some questions in the questionnaire. To remedy the situation, the researcher planned to be around when the research participants are answering the questions in the questionnaire so as to offer them assistance should they need any. Secondly, to ensure that the sample that was being used for the pilot study represented the actual sample that was targeted for the research, the researcher used respondents from two schools that were part of the schools targeted for the actual research. The importance of pretesting the survey instrument on people of a similar nature as those to be involved the actual research has been emphasised by Walliman (2006) when he stated that where possible, the researcher should “test a pilot study on people of a similar type to those in the intended sample to anticipate any problems of comprehension or other sources of confusion” (p. 90). As well, the researcher tested for validity by ensuring that all the main topics of the research had been included. Thus, the questions that were used in the pilot study are the same ones that were used in the actual research. In addition, the researcher tested for reliability of the research instrument by checking the formats of the questionnaire and the interview as well as the clarity of the questions that were being asked. During subsequent meetings with the research participants after the pilot study all the teachers and principals invited to the survey and interview. The researcher distributed questionnaires to each of the willing participants. Each participant was required to answer the questions provided to them in the questionnaire relating to the use of technology in their schools. Participants were informed that they did not have to answer any question that might make them feel uncomfortable, especially if it was related to their privacy. . Some of the participants had concerns about some of the questions in the questionnaire since they did not understand some of them. Therefore, the researcher was available at the meeting to address the participants' questions or concerns. This was a means to reduce confusion among the participants in relation to the details of the research questionnaire. The presence of the researcher to assist the participants also enabled the participants to give further explanations regarding their answers to the questions. Data Analysis Qualitative Analysis: The data from the qualitative interview and open-ended questions was analysed using the Leximancer software. Leximancer is a semantic analysis tool that was developed in 2001 at the University of Queensland, Brisbane (Sotiriadou, Brouwers & Le, 2014; Liverpool John Moores University, n.d.). The software is a useful instrument of analysis for researchers who are in need of exploring a large amount of text-based data in cases where manual coding and analysis would take a long time. Examples of data that are suited for analysis using Leximancer include multiple interviews or focus group transcripts, survey data, and long reports or web-based textual data (Liverpool John Moores University, n.d.). The Leximancer software works through a process that is referred to as “unsupervised semantic mapping of natural language” or a kind of text mining (Liverpool John Moores University, n.d., p. 1). Leximancer uses two stages of extracting information: relational and semantic, by employing a unique algothrithm for every stage (Smith & Humphreys, 2006; Liverpool John Moores University, n.d.). The software also calculates the occurrence of every word and then computes the distances between each of the words (a phenomenon known as co-occurrence). The results of calculations are shown in the form of network clouds, concept maps and concept thesauruses that can be looked at on the basis of individual concept levels and also by focusing on family connections that exist been various themes or concepts (Liverpool John Moores University, n.d.; Sotiriadou et al., 2014). Through this, the user of the data is able to quickly identify the concepts in a text and thus understand what the text is saying (Leximancer, n.d.). Leximancer was preferred for data analysis in the research because it offers a fairly balanced method of assessing multifaceted data sets as well as a lucid process of making justifications for decisions about the selection of text. Additionally, Leximancer makes the researcher informed about the wider context of the text and this helps in discovering structures within text that would otherwise be hidden from the obvious view of the researcher. For instance, in the process of using Leximancer, one is able to make out sentiments by highlighting the probability of a concept being mentioned in an unfavourable or a favourable context (Liverpool John Moores University, n.d.). To analyse the interview data that was collected in the present research, the entire data set of the interview results (transcripts) was run into the Leximancer software. To make sense of the concept in the analysis, the most relevant concept (represented by the largest circle) was identified. The largest circle was used as an indicator of the item that was of the most significance to the research participants. Attention was paid to the concepts that were positioned close to the most important concept (items close to the largest circle). Items with direct links or connections were regarded as words that are frequently used together and therefore worthy of exploring further, as indicated by Liverpool John Moores University (n.d.). The researcher then explored other concepts in the concept map. The relevance of these concepts was reflected by their size (the more relevant concepts being noted by their bigger size). The positions of these concepts and other surrounding concepts were noted since the positioning provided an idea about other important themes and how they were connected. Concepts that were regarded to be less important (denoted by very small circles) were excluded from the analysis. After understanding the layout of the map as well as the concepts that were emanating from the data and how they were connected, the researcher then explored the various instances that formed the highlighted concepts. Themes were then explored as concept clusters that represented the most semantically linked groups of concepts. The theme name was the most important concept in the cluster. This step was then followed by sentiment analysis. Quantitative Analysis: In regard to the data that was collected using questionnaires, SPSS software was used as a means of analysing the quantitative data. SPSS provides tools to transfer, organise and analyse raw data. The software also enables the researcher to identify frequencies, descriptive, crosstabs and correlations of data among other helpful analysis from the research. Tests were conducted to ascertain the psychometric properties (reliability) of the scale to ensure that the measurement is accurate and sound and that the constructs captured information required for the study (Hair, 2006; Creswell, 2014). To achieve this, reliability analysis (Cronbach’s alpha test) were carried out for both the pilot and main study data: to ensure consistency, accuracy, precision, stability, equivalence and homogeneity among the survey items. A t-test was performed to analyse the effects of gender on the educators’ perceptions about the use of technology to support learning of students with disabilities. At same time, the research applied A One-Way Analysis of Variance ANOVA to analyse the effects of teaching experience and experience in using technology on the educators’ perceptions about the use of technology to support learning of students with disabilities. So as to explore how technology is used to help children with hearing impairment, visual impairment and intellectual disability in Saudi Arabia, the study employed an independent sample t-test, which is fitting rendering to Steed and Coakes (2001) when different participants have responded in different conditions. The independent sample t-test, and Levene’s Test for homogeneity of variance were also performed in SPSS by using the Levene Test for equality of variances. If the P-value is significant (p-value < .05), which the null hypotheses are rejected and the alternative hypotheses are accepted that the variances are unequal. If P-value is insignificant (p-value > .05), which the null hypotheses are accepted that there are no significant differences between the variances of the groups. The assumption here is P-value = 0.05. Scales Reliability This study applied the Cronbach's alphas of internal consistency scale reliabilities to confirm the reliability of the scales for overall scale and for each of factor. The result of Cronbach’s alphas indicates that the overall reliability of core scale was 0.786, as indicating that all Cronbach’s alpha value exceeded the standard low limitation (0.70), and was considered acceptable. Factor Analysis Table 3.1: Factor loading for 21 items Factors Item loading 1-The Assistive Technologies The assistive technologies currently in use in my school are effective in helping students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities) in their learning. 0.771 All stakeholders support the use of technology to support student learning. 0.713 My school has an adequate /broad wide range of assistive technologies for use by the students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities). 0.708 Parents of students in my school have been of great assistance, giving in-kind assistive technology devices to the school. 0.700 The Saudi Arabian education sector is doing enough to provide assistive technology to students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities). 0.650 My school has trained me adequately (and other teachers) in the use of assistive technologies for the students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities). 0.406 2-The use of Technology Technology should be introduced in all schools that cater for children with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities). 0.862 The use of technology helps children with disabilities (Hearing impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities) improve their learning. 0.799 Learning can be improved considerably if teachers support the use of assistive technologies for the students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities). 0.694 3- IT skills for Teachers As a teacher, I already know what can be done to improve the efficiency of assistive technologies among the students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities) in my class. 0.778 As a teacher, I have identified the skills that students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities) need in order to use assistive technologies more efficiently. 0.688 As a teacher, I’m well-versed in the research on technology tools/aids that can enhance the learning experience among students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities). 0.673 I am adept at using assistive technologies when teaching the students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities). 0.538 4- Principal My school principal is open to improving the use of technology to help students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities). 0.849 My school principal expects me to use technology to support student learning. 0.827 5-Children’ effective to use Technology in their learning Students are more pleased to use assistive technologies when their parents/guardians support the use of such technologies. 0.743 Children with disabilities (Hearing impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities) in my school are able to effectively use assistive technology to support their learning. 0.722 6- Challenges The use of technology in my school faces too many challenges. 0.848 My school has challenges acquiring assistive technologies for the students with disabilities (Hearing Impairment, Visual impairments and Intellectual disabilities). 0.794 7- Technological Infrastructure The lack of technology designed for Arab users is hindering technology use in my school. 0.862 Current assistive technologies need significant improvement (or redesign) if they are to help the hearing impaired students. 0.748 The seven factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 were rotated using Varimax software to generate an orthogonal solution provided above. To provide interpretive value, this study in generally accepted factor loadings more than 0.40. The seven interpretable factors generated from the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) regarding the educator’s perceptions: Factor 1 is The Assistive Technologies, Factor 2 is The use of Technology, Factor 3 is IT skills for Teachers, Factor 4 is Principle, Factor 5 is Children’ effective to use Technology in their learning and factor 6 is Challenges, while the final factor 7 is Technological Infrastructure in Saudi Arabia. Table 3.2 presents the results of Cronbach’s alphas. The table indicate that the subscales the Cronbach’s alpha value were within the range of acceptable levels between (0.484 and 0.844), and the overall reliability of core scale was 0.786. Table 3.2: Reliabilities scale for each factor Factors Items Mean Std. Deviation Cronbach’s Alpha The Assistive Technologies in Saudi Schools 6 3.39 1.08 0.810 The use of Technology in Saudi Schools 3 1.36 0.606 0.760 Teachers' Skills 4 2.36 0.909 0.710 Principle 2 1.75 0.822 0.844 Children’ effective to use Technology 2 2.02 0.896 0.484 Challenges 2 2.49 1.06 0.555 Technological Infrastructure 2 2.24 0.972 0.526 Total 21 0.786 Summary This chapter has presented information about various aspects of the methodology that was used in the research as follows. To start with, the theoretical approach that was used involved both positivist and interpretivist paradigms. The research strategy that was adopted involved a mixed-methods approach combining the use of qualitative techniques (i.e. open-ended questions and interviews) and quantitative techniques (i.e. survey questionnaire). Population and sample size details were as follows. Nine schools that offer education to children with hearing impairment, visual impairment and intellectual disabilities were selected from three cities in Saudi Arabia. Two hundred and seventy teachers from the nine schools were targeted for data collection using a survey questionnaire. Out of the targeted number, 266 teachers participated in the questionnaire survey. Additionally, sixty teachers and the schools’ principals also answered open-ended questions that also acted as the questions for the interview. Data collection was done after ethics approval by the university and upon seeking consent from the Ministry of Education and the respective schools. Piloting of the data collection instruments (the survey questionnaire and the open-ended/interview questions) was also done before the actual data collection. The final section of the methodology chapter is about data analysis. The qualitative data in the research were analysed using SPSS while the quantitative data were analysed using the Leximancer software. References Cohen, V.L., & Cowen, J.E. (2008). Literacy for children in an information age: Teaching reading, writing, and thinking. Belmong, CA: Thomson Higher Education. Denicolo, P., Long, T., & Bradley-Cole, K. (2016). Constructivist approaches and research methods: a practical guide to exploring personal meanings. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Magnusson, E., & Marecek, J. (2015). Doing interview-based qualitative research: A learner's guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Marlow, C.R. (2011). Research methods for generalist social work (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole. Read More