4. Source and Nature of Texts
As stated previously, this research was aimed to describe and interpret the English teachers’ lived experience in developing an Android-based English
language learning application. Therefore, the source of data in this research was two English teachers who received SEAMOLEC scholarship to study in ELS,
Sanata Dharma University. The considerations in choosing the participants were based on Creswell 2012 and Moustakas 1994’s views about the criteria of
participants in phenomenological study. Cresswell 2012: 209-210 and Moustakas 1994: 107 point out that in a phenomenological study, a researcher needs to find
research participants who all have experienced the phenomenon being explored and can articulate their lived experiences. Moreover, the participants in this study were
SEAMOLEC awardees in ELS who were willing to share their lived experience about the event under investigation and to participate in lengthy interviews.
Besides, the other consideration in choosing the participants was based on the illumination aspect. They were selected because they could give rich descriptions
of their lived experience in developing an Android application. Two out of seven SEAMOLEC awardees in ELS met the criteria to participate
in this study. They were willing to voluntary participate in this study, share their lived experience, and involve in lengthy in-depth interviews. The two participants
were all from 2013 academic year in ELS. Besides studying in ELS, the participants are also an English teacher in a private elementary school in Yogyakarta. By
selecting these two illuminating participants, it was expected the lived experience of developing an Android application can be investigated deeper.
As this research was a hermeneutic phenomenology, the nature of data was in the form of texts. Alvesson and Skoldberg 2011: 61 mention that in hermeneutic
phenomenological research, the people’s experiences and reflections of experiences refer to texts or anecdote. The data, which were texts or anecdotes, served as the
primary source in describing and interpreting the essential meaning of English teachers’ lived experience in developing an Android-based English language
learning application.
C. Instrument
In order to achieve the research goal in describing and interpreting the English teachers’ lived experience in developing an Android application for learning
English, an instrument was used to gather the texts. The instrument used in this research was in-depth interview.
The in-depth-interviews were conducted according to some specific purposes. They were used “to explore and gather experiential narrative material that served
as a resource in developing a richer and deeper understanding of human phenomenon and to develop a conversational relation with the interviewees about
the meaning of the experience.” Mannen, 1990: 66. Meanwhile, Taylor Bogdan 1998 as cited in Darlington and Scott 2002: 50 mention that in-depth interviews
are useful when the phenomena under investigation cannot be observed directly. Therefore, in-depth interviews in this study were used to explore the meaning of
the participants’ lived experience in developing an Android-based English language learning application.
In the in-depth interviews, I engaged with the participants by posing questions in a neutral manner, listening to the responses, asking follow-up questions, and
probing questions based on the participants’ responses Mack et al., 2005: 30. During the in-depth interviews, I used snow balling technique in exploring the
participants’ experience of the phenomenon. Furthermore, as the fields of the lived experience in this research were categorized into understanding, belief, feeling,
action, and intention, the in-depth-interviews were conducted to reveal these five fields of lived experience in order to assign the essential meaning of the
phenomenon.
D. Texts Gathering
This research employed in-depth interviews as the activity to gather the texts. This strategy was chosen because it corresponded the research methodology. The
in-depth interviews was conducted within 19 February 2016 until 27 February 2016.
The in-depth interviews were conducted twice for each participant. As suggested by Moustakas 1994: 22, in in-depth interviews, I did bracketing or
epoche to set aside my own judgments and avoid my subjective judgments about the phenomenon. Prior to in-depth interviews, I conducted an initial interview for
each participant. In this research, an initial interview was conducted to establish good rapport
with the research participants. Darlington and Scott 2002: 54 point out that connection and good relationship between the researcher and participants are
important factors in determining the success of the interview. With good connection PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
Kategori