CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY
The purpose of the study focuses on the understanding of seminary leadership in Catholic Major Seminaries in China. Qualitative methodology is used for this study.
This chapter includes research design, participants, instruments, data gathering procedure, data analysis procedure, role of the researcher, research ethical consideration, and validity and reliability.
Research Design
This study research design is a qualitative method specifically multiple case study followed Yin’s procedures (see Figure 3). According to Yin (2014), doing case study research would be the preferred method, compared to others, in situations when (1) the main research questions are “how” or “why” questions; (2) a researcher has little or no control over behavioral events; and (3) the focus of study is a contemporary phenomenon. Yin emphasizes that the more that research questions seek to explain some present circumstance (for example, “how” or “why”
some social phenomenon works), the more that case study research will be relevant. The method also is relevant the more that the questions require and extensive and “in-depth” description of some social phenomenon. This addresses the research problem of the current study which is to implore the understanding of seminary leadership by the Rectors in Chinese Catholic Major Seminaries in China.
Moreover, this research is to investigate how Rectors understand and practice leadership in major seminaries in China, therefore, this main question of the study can be met what Yin mentioned, that is, the case study method is most likely to be appropriate for “how” and “why”
questions.
According to Herriott and Firestomne (1983) the evidence from multiple cases is often
considered more compelling, and the overall study is, therefore, regarded as being more robust (cited by Yin, 2014). Hence, a multiple case design is used to come up with convincing findings by exploring differences and similarities within and across cases.
Figure 3.Procedural Framework of this Multiple-Case Study (Yin, 2014) Participants
This study involved seven rectors of the Catholic Major Seminaries throughout China. As mentioned earlier, this study was supposed to get all the ten seminaries rectors involved.
However, through the visitation to conduct research in the seminaries, the researcher found that out of the 10 major seminaries only 7 are full functional, other three are in the process of
reorienting their mission to train lay people and nuns. Therefore, in this study the participants are the 7 major seminary rectors who are acting in the leadership of Major seminaries in Mainland China for interview as the maid data to be analyzed for emerging codes, categories and themes.
These seven major seminaries are located in the different part of China and covered the whole of China. Such as three major seminaries in the North Region of China; one in the Northwest Region of China; one in the Northeast Region of China; one in the Eastern Region of China; and one in the Southwest Region of China (see Figure 4). Moreover, 72 participants got involved in Focus Group Discussion, and the other two rectors, who are the vice rector of the case 3 and the rector of the case 6, were also interviewed. Therefore, a total of 81 participants from the seven major seminaries have participated in this dissertation research.
Figure 4.The Map of China with Different Regions
Specifically, the researcher interviewed the Executive Vice Rector in the seminary 1, and The Northeast
Region of China:
Liaoning, Jilin and Heilongjiang provinces
The Eastern Region of
China:
Shandong, Jiangsu, Anhui, Zhejiang, Jiangxi, Fujian and Taiwai provinces;
Shanghai City (Municipality) The Central-South of China:
Henan, Hubei, Hunan, Guangdong and Hainan provinces;
Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region;
Hongkong and Macao Special Administrative Regions
The Southwest Region of China:
Sichuan, Guizhou, and Yunnan Provinces;
Tibet/Xizang Autonomous Region;
Chongqing City (Municipality)
The North Region of China:
Hebei and Shanxi provinces;
Inner Mongolia/Neimenggu Autonomous Region
Beijing and Tianjin Cities (Municipalities)
The Northwest Region of China:
Shaanxi, Gansu and Qinghai Provinces;
Ningxia Hui and Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Regions
12 participants joined the three focus group discussions (3 managers of the leadership team in the group discussion for the leadership team; 5 students/seminarians in the group discussion for students; and 4 employees joined the group discussion for the employees). In seminary 2, the researcher interviewed the Executive Vice Rector of the seminary, and 8 participants joined the focus group discussion (2 managers of the leadership team and 1 teacher joined for the
leadership team group discussion; and 5 students/seminarians participated in the group
discussion for students). In seminary 3, the researcher interviewed the Executive Vice Rector for the main data, and 13 participants participated in the three focus group discussions (3 managers joined the group discussion for the leadership team; 7 students/seminarians were in the group discussion for students; and 3 employees joined in the employees’ group discussion), and in addition, the researcher also interviewed the Vice Rector of the seminary, this data together with the data of the focus group discussion were incorporated to the main interviewed data from the Executive Vice Rector. In seminary 4, the rector was interviewed by the researcher as the main data of the case, and 12 participants joined the three group discussions (4 managers in the
leadership team group discussion; 6 students/seminarians in the students group discussion; and 2 employees in the group discussion for the employees). In seminary 5, the researcher interviewed the Acting Rector of the seminary, and 5 participants joined the two group discussions (2
students/seminarians in the group discussion for students; 2 employees in the group discussion for employees; 1 manager were interviewed with the same questions for the group discussion). In seminary 6, the researcher interviewed the Executive Vice Rector as the main data, and 13 participants involved in the group discussions (1 manager and 2 teachers joined the leadership team group discussion; 8 students/seminarians participated in the students group discussion; and 2 employees were in the group discussion of the employees), and in addition, the researcher also
interviewed the Seminary Rector who is a Bishop, this data is also incorporated to the main data too. In seminary 7, the Executive Vice Rector was interviewed by the researcher, and 9
participants joined the group discussion (4 managers in the leadership team group discussion and 5 students/seminarians in the students group discussion). The total numbers of the participants for this dissertation were 81. (see Table 1)
Table 1
The Participants for the Dissertation Numbers of Case Interview
Participants FGD
Participants Remarks
Case 1 1 12
(3 Managers/Teachers + 5 Students + 4 Employees
Case 2 1 8
(3 Managers/Teacher + 5 Students)
Case 3 1 13
(3 Managers/Teachers + 7 Students + 3 Employees)
The Vice Rector was interviewed
Case 4 1 12 too.
(4 Managers/Teachers + 6 Students + 2 Employees)
Case 5 1 5
(1 Manager/Teachers + 2 Students + 2 Employees)
Case 6 1 13
(3 Managers/Teachers + 8 Students + 2 Employees)
The Bishop was interviewed too.
Case 7 1 9
(4 Managers/Teachers + 5 Students)
Total 7 72 2
(81)
Instruments
Yin (2014) said that it is needed to use many different sources of evidence for
triangulation when case study is conducted. Hence, in this study, the data collection methods
includes in-depth interviews, focus group discussion, and documentation. (see Table 2) Interviews
According to Yin (2014), case study evidence may come from six sources: documents, archival records, interviews, direct observation, participant-observation, and physical artifacts. In this study, due to the limited conditions the researcher used interviews as the main source to collect the data. Documents analysis and focus group discussion triangulated the data gathered from the interviews.
Yin (2014) indicated that the interview is one of the most important and essential sources of case study. Therefore, a face-to-face interview was used to collect the main data by using structure questions (see Appendix C) but open-ended (Yin, 2014). The researcher recorded information from the interviews by making handwritten and by audio-taping.
To consider the background of the Rectors who are poor in English, the research interview questions were translated from English to Chinese, and the researcher conducted the interviews in Chinese; and the interviewed data were translated from Chinese into English by different experts who are good at English and Chinese. It is called “backward translation” for the validity of the study.
Document Analysis
Yin (2014) indicates that “...documentary information is likely to be relevant to every case study topic” (p. 105). There are variety of documents for the researcher to consider in data collection according to Yin (2014) and they are as follow:
1. Letters, memoranda, e-mails, and other personal documents, such as dairies, calendars, and notes;
2. Agendas, announcements and minutes of meetings, and other written reports of
events;
3. Administrative documents, such as proposals, progress reports, and other internal records;
4. Formal studies or evaluations related to the case that one is studying;
5. News clippings and other articles appearing in the mass media or in community newspapers (p. 106).
These types of documents can be used to “corroborate and augment evidence from other sources (Yin, 2014, p. 107). Therefore, the researcher took into consideration all the documents related to the study, such as inaugural address, time table, their reports and speech, magazine of the seminary, and other resources from the website of the seminary if they have. The selected documents were used to corroborate and augment evidence from other sources.
Focus Group Discussion
Focus group discussion is frequently used as qualitative approach to gain an in-depth understanding of social issues (Nyumba et al., 2017). Focus group discussion is a flexible technique which offers an opportunity to explore issues that are not well understood or where there is a little prior research on the topic (Nyumba et al., 2017). It is a good technique for this research topic since the purpose of the study is to explore the understanding seminary leadership in major seminaries in China and seminary leadership is not well understood in China, therefore, the researcher conducted group discussions with 72 participants in total into two or three groups per seminary based on their availability and the conditions of the seminary. Each group
consisting of tow to eight members: Group 1: (priests and faculty); Group 2:
(seminarians/students); Group 3: (staff/employees). The data collected from the focus group discussion are the additional data for triangulation (Yin, 2014). The researcher used open-ended
questions to encourage the start of an open discussion with the focus group members. the
researcher also prepared follow-up questions in order to ensure that needed information could be extracted due to the participants may easily get off topic (Creswell, 2007).
Table 2
Data Collection Instruments
Statement of Problems Instruments
1. How do Rectors understand leadership in Catholic Major Seminaries in China?
Interview Documentation Focus group discussion 2. How do Rectors practice Leadership in the
Catholic Major Seminaries in China?
3. What is the role of the Rectors in the Catholic Major Seminaries in China?
4. What is the Style of Leadership in the Catholic Major Seminaries in China?
Role of the Researcher
There are four roles for the researcher to act in the whole process of writing this dissertation:
First, the researcher was a designer. The researcher designed this multiple-case study to explore the understanding of seminary leadership in the Catholic Major Seminaries in China with four research questions.
Second, the researcher was a data collector. The researcher personally went to the seminaries across the country to collect the data by interviewing the rectors, organizing focus group discussion, and documentation according to the case study protocol and methods that the researcher designed, and then it is also the responsibility for the researcher to transfer the data into his own place as database.
Third, the researcher was an observer. Although observation is not included as an
instrument for data collection, the researcher has stayed in each seminary for two to five days and participated in all the activities of the seminaries to see and experience the life of the students/seminarians, and how the rectors and the leadership worked in their daily leading and managing the seminary.
The last role is to be a protector. During the whole process of this study especially at the time of data collection in each seminaries, the researcher took his responsibilities to protect all the rights of the participants, and told the participants about the purpose of the study and assure them for data privacy. Therefore, the data provided by the participants were recorded without bias as followed the rules of the De La Salle Univery for doing a research study. (see Appendix E)
Research Ethical Considerations
For ethical considerations, Yin (2014) said “as part of protection, you are responsible for conducting your case study with special care and sensitivity--going beyond the research design and other technical considerations” (p. 78). And, Yin also suggested to protect human subjects, the researcher should follow the following guidelines:
(1) Gaining informed consent from all persons who may be part of your case study, by alerting them to the nature of your case study and formally soliciting their volunteerism in participating in the study;
(2) Protecting those who participate in your study from any barm, including avoiding the use of any deception in your study;
(3) Protecting the privacy and confidentiality of those who participate so that, as a result of their participation, they will not be unwittingly put in any undesirable position, even such as being on a roster to receive requests to participate in some future study, whether conducted by
you or anyone else;
(4) Taking special precautions that might be needed to protect especially vulnerable group; and
(5) Selecting participants equitably, sot that no groups of people are unfairly included or excluded from the researcher (National Research Council, 2003, pp. 23-28 cited in Yin, 2014, p.
78).
All the rules for ethical considerations recommended by Yin together with the guidelines for conducting research study from the Research Ethics Committee of De La Salle University were followed, identified, and addressed in this research (see Appendix E, F & G). The
researcher fully considered and paid more attention to the Ethics rules during the whole process of conducting this research study to protect all the participants’ human rights as Yin (2014) and De Salle University mentioned about. (see Appendix E)
Data Gathering Procedure
First, a letter of request, prepared by the researcher, with the approval of the Adviser, explaining the purpose of the study and requesting permission from the Rectors to conduct this study, was sent to seminary rectors of the major seminaries in China.
Second, the researcher made an appointment with the Rectors for interview. While meeting with the Rectors, the researcher explained to them the purpose of the study and assured them of the confidentiality of the given information. The time for each interview was about an hour to two hours. The interviews were recorded with the participants’ agreement, and it would help the researcher to capture the exact terminology or labels used by the interviewees (Yin, 2014). A copy of transcribed interview was shown to the Rectors. For the validation of the data, the transcription and translation of collected data were done with the help of some experts in the
field. The researcher also asked help from a linguist and two educators to check the alignment of meaning of text in the whole coding process. The translation process as follows:
1) Translated interview questions from English to Mandarin;
2) Conducted interviews using Mandarin language;
3) Applied open coding on Mandarin interview transcripts;
4) Translated Mandarin open codes, categories and themes to English.
Third, after the interview with the rector, the researcher conducted focus group discussion consisting of: Group 1: priests and faculty; Group 2: seminarians/students; and Group 3: Staff.
Moreover, the researcher spent two to five days in each seminary for documentation.
Nevertheless, a letter to participants was sent to the rectors in order to ask for the demographic information of the participants for their personal profiles (see Appendix B) Data Analysis Procedure
Data analysis procedure followed Yin’s case study analysis procedure.
Yin (2014) said that relying on theoretical propositions is the first and most preferred strategy of case study analysis because the theoretical propositions can help the researcher in forming a data gathering plan and give a theoretical orientation to provide the strategy for the analyzing the data (p. 38). Therefore, the researcher used theoretical propositions as the strategy for data analysis process. The design of this research questions for the interview were guided and oriented by the conceptual framework. It includes three core features of seminary leadership namely the styles of the seminary rectors, the roles of seminary rectors, and leadership practice of the seminary rectors. The research followed three of the five-step data analysis provided and recommended by Yin (2011, 2014) that are (1) compiling data: retrieving and tallying specific words and terms from your notes; (2) disassembling data: moving methodically to a higher
conceptual level by assigning codes like words and term; (3) reassembling data: interpreting the relationships among codes, their combinations, and conceptually higher patterns in order to identify emerging themes in single case analysis during the coding process (see Figure 5 and Table 3). The whole data analysis for this study followed Yin’s five-step data analysis procedures (see Figure 5).
Figure 5.Yin’s Five Phases of Analysis and Their Interactions (Yin, 2011) Within-case Analysis
Compiling data.
First, the researcher transcribed the interview data so that the data would be in useable form and made them easily visible and available to the researcher. The researcher would read and reread the data many a times to be intimately familiar with the data. In this phase the
researcher would transcribe interviews and other textual data which were included in the analysis.
Before dissecting the data to discover important components it is necessary that the researcher organize the data in a consistent and organized format and translated them into English with the some experts who are good in English and Chinese. The compilation output is considered as a
database (Yin, 2011).
Disassembling data.
Second, once the researcher arranged the data in consistent and organized format, it has to be segregated, it involves taking the data apart and creating meaningful groupings. This process is achieved through coding. Coding is a process of identifying themes, concepts and ideas which have some relation with each other. In other words, it is a way of unearthing
similarities and dissimilarities in the data. Unlike the quantitative research, in qualitative research the researcher brings out the meanings from the data inductively.
The activity of coding is to unravel interesting facts and features systematically from across the whole data set and it occurs at different levels. Codes are taken from phrase or sentence or paragraph. The only condition is that it should involve a complete thought. The researcher intended to make the coding a descriptive label that directly describes or taken from the text. During the coding process the researcher would ask constantly about what happens in the text, who are the key players and their roles, the time of its happening, its relation to previous events, present events, reactions, the place of its occurrence, the implicit and explicit reason for this happening and the process and strategy used by the case to make these things happen. The researcher broke down the compiled data into small pieces with labels and used open coding during the whole process of coding (Yin, 2011). As the coding was going on the researcher would also make definitions of codes so that codes are applied reliably throughout the data. And then, the researcher brought some of the open or emerging codes that are related to each other to a higher level which is called as category codes or emerging categories.
Reassembling data.
Once the concept was mapped using codes and categories, they were put into context
with each other to create theme. The researcher reassembled and brought these categories together in order to identify emerging themes. When the coding process was done, all the emerged codes, categories, and themes were translated from Chinese to English by some of experts who know very well both in Chinese and English.
The whole coding process was done with the help of an auditor Dr. Sujing Wu who is a professor in Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, China and has earned her PhD in Counseling Psychology in De La Salle University-Manila, Philippines (see Appendix H & I).
Sister. Madeleine Capistrano, F. I., as second auditor, who graduated at De La Salle University, Manila with a doctorate degree in Educational Management in 2002 and has been English Teacher in several schools (High School, Colleges, and University), and became a full time Associate Professor at Fu Jen Catholic University, Taipei and the Coordinator of English Course in the College of Law and Management in the same University, helped the researcher to check all the original notes, open/emerging codes, categories and themes both in Chinese and English after the coding process done by the researcher (see Appendix J & L). This is to avoid bias in data coding.
Table 3
An Example of Coding Process
Original Data Disassembling Re-
assembling Transcript in
Chinese English
Translation Emerging Open Code
Chinese English
categorySub Chinese English
Emerging Category
Chinese English
Emerging Theme Chinese English 天主激励我
担任院长这 份职务。
God inspired me to assume the position as rector.
被天主鼓舞 做院长 Having been inspired by God to be the Rector
天主鼓舞 God’s inspiration
以天主为中 心
God centered
以信仰去领 导
Leading with faith
相信天主总 是第一的。
Believing in God is the first thing to do.
相信天主 Believing in God as his priority
天主第一 God first
得要自己去 努力完成天 主的工作。
I have to work hard to
complete the work of God.
努力为天主 做工
Working hard for God
为主做工 Working for God
这些人就是 一直让我感 觉到去做天 主的工作不 能怕吃苦的。
These people have always made me feel that I am not afraid of any hardship when I do God’s work.
准备受苦去 做天主的工 作
Being ready to suffer to do the work of God
准备受苦 Readiness to suffer
如果天主说，
时候到了，那 关门也得关；
如果说让它 开着，天主一 定有办法。
If God says it is time to end, then we have no way to continue it, but if God wants it to be opened, He will surely show us the way.
相信天主带 领
Trusting in God’s guidance
天主带领 God's leading
依靠天主 Relying on God
我有一个非 常核心的点 就是这个修 道院是天主 的，不是我 的，天主说叫 它存在，它就 存在，也一定 会发展。
My core belief is that this seminary belongs to God, not to me. If God wants it to remain existing, it will exist and it will
definitely develop.
相信天主的 带领
Believing in God’s plan
我们的暖气 改造的时候，
一百三十多 万，手里根本 没有多少钱，
When we renovated the heating system, the cost was 1.3 million Yuan,
问题发生先 祈祷
Praying first when the problem arises
专注祈祷 Focus on prayer
祈祷之人 A man of prayer
怎么做呢？
那只能是一 边我祈祷...
but we did not have enough money for it.
The only way I could do was to pray...
第一，让自己
祈祷... First, I pray
for it... 祈祷优先
Giving his priority to pray
Cross-case Analysis
When within-case analysis is finished, cross-case analysis was conducted in order to find out similarities and differences among cases (Yin, 2014). The common themes identified through cross-case analysis as the core features of the understanding of seminary leadership. The
emerged themes were formed by the researcher into a Framework that describes the understanding of seminary leadership in China.
Validity and Reliability
For reliability and validity of doing multiple-case study, the researcher followed Yin’s recommendations to ensure the quality of this research study. First, the researcher used multiple sources of evidence (Construct validity) to collect data through face-to-face interviews, focus group discussion (FGD), and documentation for triangulation (Yin, 2014). The data from
interviews are the main data for the researcher to draw out the codes, categories and themes, and the data from FGD and documentation are incorporated to the main data. Second, the researcher followed the same procedures to conduct the seven cases and analyze the data by using case study protocol and developing case study database for reliability (Yin, 2014).
In addition, two auditors who are good in Chinese and English checked the coding process including original data, emerging codes, categories, and themes of the seven cases for
validity and reliability (Yin, 2014). Specifically, Dr. Sujing Wu from Guangxi University of Chinese Medicine, China helped the researcher as the Auditor during the entire coding process of the research study (see Appendix H), and Sister. Madeleine Capistrano, F. I., Ph.D helped the researcher as the second auditor to check the original data, emerging codes, categories and themes after she reviewed the whole dissertation and the outputs of the the coding for validity and reliability (see Appendix J).
