2. The research was linked to the interaction between students/students and teacher
with students. Due to the characteristics of this research object, the most suitable
type of research method was the qualitative. This research was designed with the
aim to identify the effectiveness regarding social interactions through sharing
activities and team work; also to understand the feelings, values, and perceptions
about healthy coexistence taking into account social reality of students. Among the
qualitative research methodologies, the type of research was action research; it
intends merely to improve teaching practices, to strengthen knowledge and to
promote collaborative and cooperative work.
3. Action research according to Garner (1996, p.8) “is more specifically as a systematic, reflective, collaborative
process that examines a situation for the purpose of planning, implementing, and evaluating change”.
In order to collect the required information for achieving the objectives, we used five strategies such as:
interactive technique, focus group, interview and observation.
Interactive techniques
According to García, Gonzales, Quiroz y Velásquez (2002, p. 71) mention that interactive tenchique are
“Dispositivos que activan la expresión de las personas y facilitan el hacer ver, hacer hablar, hacer recuperar,
hacer crear y hacer analizar; son mecanismos que permiten visibilizar sentimientos, vivencias y formas de
hacer, creer, pensar, actuar, sentir y relacionar”. [Mechanism that activate the expression of people and facilitate
the do see, speak, recover, create and do analyze; are mechanisms that allow to visualize feelings, experiences
and ways of doing believe, think, perform, feel and relate]. Translate by researchers.
4. Focus group
Morgan (1998) argues that the focus group is based on 3 element of all qualitative research. The first
one are exploration and discovery; the second context and depth. Finally, interpretation.
Observation
In this study, these observations were evidenced through journals which according to Burns (1999,
p.89) “are extremely useful as a way of capturing significant reflection and events”.
Interview
We used interview because Burns (1999, p.74) argued that interviews “are a conversation with a
purpose in order to explore our focus area”
The following table shows the type of strategies that we implemented in our study.
Table 3
Type of strategies
5. Interactive technique
(patchwork)
This technique was implemented for to know how students felt in English classes with
teaching practitioner.
Focus group Some students were also interviewed through a short focus group with open questions, in
which they expressed their opinions about the English class.
These questions were about the way the teacher taught the English class in terms of the
activities the teacher proposed for them, what did they like the most about the English
classes; work in grouping or alone and finally what they would like to learn about the
English.
Interview
Cooperating teacher
In this case implemented a speaking semi structured interview with open questions for
analyzing what were the perceptions the teacher had about the social interaction
strategies used inside English classroom.
Interview to teaching
practitioner
Co- researcher interviewed the teaching practitioner with a set of questions. Those
questions were about social interaction, feelings and collaborative work; for analyzing
their perceptions about social interaction, academic performance and healthy
coexistence.
Observation Eight observations were conducted to the one teacher involved in this investigation. In
those observation was implemented some social interaction strategies such as: games,
team work and problematic videos.
The interaction and relation among students and the teacher were taken into account; this
observation was evidenced through written journals.
Created by researchers
6. To analyze the data, we used the qualitative analysis that gave us the possibility to use the deductive
and inductive approaches in order to categorize the information we gathered as relevant data. At the
beginning of the process we had three main categories which were "Social interaction", "Academic
performance" and "Healthy coexistence".
These three categories were set as deductive; however, through the analysis new categories emerged
from each instrument we analyzed. We started reading the initial interviews we had of the cooperating
teacher and the teaching practitioner.
We started highlighting those aspects that were related with our three categories. Then, we started
reading the eight journals we had, and started to highlight, again, the aspects that were related with the
main categories. The same process was realized by reading the transcription of patchwork quilt.
Through the all instruments five inductive categories emerged: "Student’s responses", "Teaching
strategies”, “Collaborative work”, “Respectful coexistence" and "Linguistic aspect".
7. As we said before, in the data analysis process other categories emerged and we decided to
organize them as final categories the first final category is social interaction, according to Vygotsky
(1997, p.87) argue that Students learn through interaction with others. Students internalize the
knowledge and skills first experienced during these interactions and eventually use this knowledge
and these skills to guide and direct own behavior. In this knowledge we included the subcategories
students’responses, through teaching strategies and finally collaborative work.
The second final category is academic performance Para Martínez-Otero (2007, p 34) desde un
enfoque humanista, el rendimiento académico es “el producto que da el alumnado en los centros
de enseñanza y que habitualmente se expresa a través de las calificaciones escolares”. [From a
humanist approach, academic performance is "the product that students give in schools and that is
usually expressed through school grades"]. Translate by researchers.
8. Taking into account this, we think is relevant include in this category some aspects linguistic,
related with collaborative work and students responses.
The third final category is healthy coexistenceunderstood as:
"La construcción de un modo de relación entre las personas de una comunidad,
sustentada en el respeto mutuo y en la solidaridad recíproca, expresada en la
interrelación armoniosa y sin violencia entre los diferentes actores y estamentos de la
Comunidad Educativa". (MINEDUC, 2005; Maldonado, 2004).
[The construction of a way of relation among the people from a community, based on
the mutual respect and solidarity, is expressed in the harmony interrelationship without
violence between different agents and statements of the educational community].
Translate by researcher.
9. The last category was Collaborative learning, according to Paz Dennen (2000, p. 205) "is
a learning method that use social interaction as means of knowledge building" This category
included student’s responses, collaborative work and respectful coexistence.
During this research procedure, eight categories of the social interaction strategies
emerged, which are shown in the following table that which is divided in three parts,
categories inductive, deductive and final categories.
Table 4
Types of categories
10. CATEGORIES
DEDUCTIVE INDUCTIVE
Social interaction.
Academic performance.
Healthy coexistence.
Student’s responses.
Teaching strategies.
Collaborative work.
Respectful coexistence.
Linguistic aspect.
FINAL CATEGORIES
Social interaction.
Academic performance.
Healthy coexistence.
Collaborative learning.
Created by researchers
11. This approach allowed us the opportunity to observe, interact, and be part of the
educational context we were interested in as a way of accomplishing our research
objectives.
Denzin (1970) proposes five types of triangulation, and we decided to implement
three of them. Data, methodological and investigator or providing validity.
The following tables shows validity process.
Table 5
Validity process.
12. Data Used multiple data sources.
Cooperating teacher and Students.
Different times of data collection.
Fourth week, two hours per week.
Methodological Used more than one strategy of gathering data.
Interactive techniques (patchwork), focus group, interview to CT, interview to
teaching practitioner and observation (journal).
Investigator More than one researcher.
Teaching practitioner and co-researcher.
Created by researchers
13. According to Burns (1999), the use of triangulation for data analysis provides validity;
therefore, we decided to implement another way for analysis provides validity such as.
Table 6
Validity process.
Dialogic validity
It was dialogic because through social interaction strategies it was
established a constant reflective dialogues between participants and
teaching practitioners.
Catalytic validity We were always looking for a change and an improvement based on
the reflection and empowerment of the whole social interaction
strategies.
Democratic validity It was democratic because it was a collaborative work that included
the teaching practitioners and researcher in every aspect of the
process.
Created by researchers
