Chapter 5: Implications, Recommendations, and Conclusions
The problem addressed in this e-Delphi study was the lack of knowledge of instructional strategies by educators that will improve vocabulary learning for the second language learners in the educational setting. The importance of diversifying learning practices and situations that help second language learners regulate their learning with a broader understanding which would improve the learning outcomes have been underrated by educators (Felix, 2018; Tahiri, et al., 2017). When educators are given a beginning point that would offer the most strategic practices that improves second language learners’ acquisitions of the English language, the success in the classroom would be phenomenal. School districts have been working to bridge the gap in learning to help the second language learners be more successful, educators need to be utilizing proven strategies to help and not antiquated teaching techniques in the academic classroom (Ahour & Abdi, 2015; Felix, 2018)
The key purpose of this non-experimental, qualitative method, e-Delphi study was to extract professional consensus (Bale, et al., 2020; Dreesens, et al., 2020) for the extremely successful means and strategies that would empower all students within the general classroom, a reasonable and justifiable access to the educational curriculum (Felix, 2018). This study incorporated the use of methodology which solicited samplings from educators who have worked with second language learners in the public-school setting. In the case of an e-Delphi study, the qualifications pertain to experts, individuals who are considered knowledgeable about the subject being investigated (Akar, 2020). The identification of appropriate participants for this study was acquired through permission of the district’s superintendents.
Checklist:
☐ Begin with a brief review of the problem statement, purpose statement, methodology, design, results, and limitations.
☐ Conclude with a brief overview of the chapter.
Implications
Begin writing here…
Checklist:
☐ Organize the discussion around each research question and (when appropriate) hypothesis individually. Support all the conclusions with one or more findings from the study.
☐ Discuss any factors that might have influenced the interpretation of the results.
☐ Present the results in the context of the study by describing the extent to which they address the study problem and purpose and contribute to the existing literature and framework described in Chapter 2.
☐ Describe the extent to which the results are consistent with existing research and theory and provide potential explanations for unexpected or divergent results.
Recommendations for Practice
Begin writing here…
Checklist:
☐ Discuss recommendations for how the findings of the study can be applied to practice and/or theory. Support all the recommendations with at least one finding from the study and frame them in the literature from Chapter 2.
☐ Do not overstate the applicability of the findings.
Recommendations for Future Research
Begin writing here…
Checklist:
☐ Based on the framework, findings, and implications, explain what future researchers might do to learn from and build upon this study. Justify these explanations.
☐ Discuss how future researchers can improve upon this study, given its limitations.
☐ Explain what the next logical step is in this line of research.
Conclusions
Begin writing here…
Checklist:
☐ Provide a strong, concise conclusion to include a summary of the study, the problem that it addressed, and the importance of the study.
☐ Present the “take-home message” of the entire study.
☐ Emphasize what the results of the study mean with respect to previous research and either theory (PhD studies) or practice (applied studies).
Ahour, T., & Abdi, M. (2015). The relationship between EFL learners’ multiple intelligences and
vocabulary learning strategies use with a focus on gender. Theory and Practice in
Language Studies, 4, 800. https://doi-org.proxy1.ncu.edu/10.17507/tpls.0504.16
Akar, İ. (2020). Consensus on the Competencies for a Classroom Teacher to Support Gifted
Students in the Regular Classroom: A Delphi Study. International Journal of Progressive
Education, 16(1), 67–83. https://doi-org.proxy1.ncu.edu/10.29329/ijpe.2020.228.6
Bale, J., Grové, C., & Costello, S. (2020). Building a mental health literacy model and verbal
scale for children: Results of a Delphi study. Children and Youth Services Review, 109.
https://doi-org.proxy1.ncu.edu/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104667
Dreesens, D., Kremer, L., Burgers, J., & van der Weijden, T. (2020). Lost in definitions:
Reducing duplication and clarifying definitions of knowledge and decision support tools.
A RAND-modified Delphi consensus study. Health Policy. https://doi-org.proxy1.ncu.edu/10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.02.005
Felix, S. (2018). An e-delphi proactive approach to meeting the needs of struggling students in
the general education classroom [ProQuest Information & Learning]. In Dissertation
Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences (Vol. 79, Issue 9–A(E)).
Tahiri, J. S., Bennani, S., & Idrissi, M. K. (2017). diffMOOC: Differentiated Learning Paths
Through the Use of Differentiated Instruction within MOOC. International Journal of
Emerging Technologies in Learning, 12(3), 197–218. https://doi-
org.proxy1.ncu.edu/10.3991/ijet.v12i03.6527
