II.3 - SAMPLING
To select the sample, we enquired about the exact number of
first year students at the Anglophone Studies Department. The registry staff
gave us a total number of 1,135 students, who constituted our population. The
research took place in an amphitheatre at a period when the students were
supposed officially to have course. We chose this place and that time because
we wanted to ensure that the students tested were from the English department
and that they were in first year.
Powell and Connaway (2004:90) sustain that the most
straightforward type of survey research is descriptive, and it is designed to
ensure that the sample is reasonably representative of the population to which
the researcher wishes to generalize, and that the relevant characteristics have
been accurately measured. Suggesting that Simple Random Sample (S.R.S.) being
used for survey research, they note that Systematic Sample, which is a Simple
Random Sample is considered by most researchers to be reliable and accurate. We
used a systematic sample, a technique that involves taking every nth
element from a list until the total list has been sampled. It enhances
the likelihood of every element to be selected. We used the S.R.S. technique by
taking every 10th student from one row to the other until the three
rows were sampled and the sample size completed. By taking every
10th student our sample size should be made of 113 students, which
should correspond to 10 per cent of our total population. Unfortunately, we
ultimately got 64 testees.
This piece of research was not done without difficulties on
the ground; nevertheless, some solutions were found.
II.4 - PROBLEMS ENCOUNTERED IN THE
FIELD AND SOLUTIONS PROVIDED
During the administration of the test we encountered some
major problems from the beginning to the end.
One of the problems we encountered is that students were not
very disciplined, and we could see some students working in group. We told them
many times not to work in group and explain to them what could be the
consequences of group work in the results of our study. Some students stopped
working in group but some did not.
Another problem is time limitation. We wanted to administer
the test in two hours, but, as there were not so many students taking the test,
we did not want to discourage the few volunteers who were doing the exercises.
So, instead of two hours, we gave students all the time they needed. They
worked until they rendered their papers without any time constraint.
The third problem is relative to the number of the testees. In
addition to the fact that we did not have the 113 volunteers for the test,
among the 80 papers we dealt, only 62 gave back their papers. We wanted to have
at all cost the sample we needed. So, the following day, we went back to the
class and asked students to bring the copies they had about them. No one
reacted. Whereupon, we gave another opportunity to students to take the test.
We asked if there were volunteers to sit the test. Only two students accepted
to be tested. That is the reason why we had 64 tested instead of 113 as we
wished.
Last but not least, the class was noisy but there was nothing
we could do to stop the noise and enable students to think deeply to do the
test.
At the end of the test some students suggested to write their
names on their papers, which we accepted as they wanted to see their marks
later. Moreover, the students suggested to see the correction of the test, what
we accepted on the spot.
After solving the problems and getting the adjusted data, we
analyzed the data step by step.
| 
