In search of research methodology for Applied Linguistics

There are a few issues that are the concern of this paper. First, when it comes to research paradigms, the novice researcher may be confused as to what kind of research has been undertaken to do in terms of the underling philosophy. Even when known, the same researcher opts for one which is more in fashion or may lead to more tangible results. Second, up to the early1990s, the consensus among language researchers was to follow in the footsteps of scientific research. So a large number of studies on language dealt with issues such as 'research design', 'population and sample selection', 'treatment', etc. The tendency among the new generation of researchers, however and the insurgence of postmodern movement has made it inevitable for the applied linguists to look more at the other end of the continuum which deals with individual cases, small practices, and local events with no tendency for generalization. This approach has not been wholly recognised by some researchers, however. To them any deviation from the procedures of scientific research cannot gain the status of real and useful investigation. The present writer believes that these are just extremes and a solution not the solution lies in adopting procedures that look at all aspects of the phenomenon under investigation. Finally, in spite of the clear advantage of having multiple perspectives over single-method studies, in practice, a majority of studies favour the latter. The Challenge of Paradigms The two paradigms mentioned in the abstract are quantitative and qualitative methodological paradigms (Hammersly, 1992). The present study seeks to draw on these paradigms in a complementary (if not equally balanced) fashion. An essential preliminary point is to note that the choice of paradigm depends fundamentally on the purpose of the research envisaged and on the nature and focus of the research questions. This choice includes, of course, the increasingly common practice of combining methods within and across paradigms in what might be termed paradigm mixes and paradigm blends. The quantitative paradigm is derived from positivism that holds that the world is made up of observable, measurable, and quantifiable facts (Glense and Peshkin, 1992). The essential aim is to explain causal relationships and to have generalised knowledge. In contrast, the qualitative paradigm is rooted in the humanities, which focuses on holistic information and interpretative approaches (Husen, 1994). Both the quantitative and qualitative paradigms consist of sets of different research methods that are founded on separate philosophical assumptions about social life (Hammersley, 1995). There are important epistemological differences between the two approaches in that they use diverse principles and knowledge about the social world (Bryman, 1988). The essential aim in quantitative research is to produce knowledge that is as value-free as