I generated data through utilizing four research methods, that is, unstructured oral interviews, art-based methods (collage inquiry), artefact retrieval and photo-voice. The data sources were the principals’ personal stories, their artefacts of personal value, collages that they put together as well as photos taken by them during the course of the study. I chose the above- mentioned data generation methods and sources as I felt that these methods would be relevant for a qualitative study and give an accurate reflection of the principals’ lived experiences of their direct involvement in the different categorized schools.
Trustworthiness and credibility are very essential aspects of any research study (Brantlinger et al., 2005). Brantlinger et al. (2005) further maintain that these two aspects ensure that the research is valid. Vithal and Jansen (2010) argue that one of the ways of ensuring trustworthiness of a study is to compare “findings of one instrument with findings from other instruments” (p. 33). This employment of “varied data sources and multiple methods”
(Brantlinger et al., 2005, p. 201) in a study is termed triangulation. This implies that multiple methods of enquiry ensure dependability of the data generated, hence the reason for using unstructured oral interviews, collage inquiry, artefact retrieval and photo-voice. Utilization of such a wide variety of research methods has ensured rigour and generation of massive data.
14
For example: the use of the principals’ personal artefacts and collages ensured illustrative data and it is said that a picture paints a thousand words (Chang, 2008) and I may have missed such information if I relied solely on interviews and the principals’ personal narratives. I was able to ask the principals questions on their artefacts and collages and so I was able to ascertain that whatever was presented through their narratives was validated through meanings attached to their visual research practices (collages and artefacts).
Stories, as narrated in Chapter Three, are not just about sharing the principals’ lived experiences third hand, but are reflecting their personal views of how they perceive their everyday working life. Such direct communication further ensured trustworthiness of the study. Their narratives can be trusted because they are directly involved in the management of schools categorized in terms of a variety of ways cited above. All participants had served as principals for not less than three years. This meant it was more likely they each had a story to tell.
The moment I started engaging in the data generation process, the trouble began, as indicated in the following journal entry:
The trouble begins.
The very first day I phone participants to plan the first meeting, I discover that one of them has had an accident. Granted leave till May (a month in which I am supposed to be done with my fieldwork). However she said she does not mind even if I visit her at home for my study.
She lives in Durban. I live at Esikhawini (close to 200km away). Have to make a plan.
Damn frustrated.
(My journal entry - 13 April 2015)
During the initial meeting which I organised for all the participants, I advised them of the research title and purpose of the study. I then explained the four research methods that I
15
wanted to employ and the anticipated time that I would be interviewing each person. The following table portrays the data generation plan as anticipated initially before I engaged in fieldwork:
Table 2.1: Time line indicating the time required for the various interviews
During my initial meeting with the three principals, I advised them about ethical issues as these are viewed as “an important part of conducting research [thus] cannot be ignored”
(Murray & Beglar, 2009, p. 32). I apprised my participants about their rights, ranging from Data Generation Activities Data sources Time line
1. Participants will tell stories of their experiences (audio-recording)
Audio-recorded conversations
Two 1-hour individual interviews.
2. Each participant will create a collage illustrating an extra-ordinary event in his/her life as principal, and then explain the meaning attached to it.
Collage 1-hour group session for collage-making (once).
3. Each participant will select three artefacts and explain the significance that they attached to each.
Artefacts 1-hour individual session for
‘unpacking’ the meaning behind each artefact.
4. Each participant will be supplied with a disposable camera to capture important moments during the course of the study. They will then choose the best five pictures and explain the significance thereof.
Photos 1-hour individual session to discuss selected photos.
1-hour group session for explaining methods (once).
16
voluntary participation and withdrawal from the study; non-subjection to stress; ways in which I will respect their confidentiality, for example, through the use of pseudonyms instead of their actual names; as well as allowing participants access to the results of the study (Murray & Beglar, 2009). As far as Cohen, Manion, and Morrison (2011, p. 77) are concerned, the participants have a “right to freedom and self-determination.” I therefore ensured that participants gave consent before conducting my research (Appendix 2).
Having explained ethical issues, I requested for the principals to choose their own pseudonyms to replace their own names as well as for their respective schools. I also requested from the participants to furnish me with tentative dates in which they were available for their respective interviews. By affording participants an opportunity to choose their own dates for our meetings in respect of each research activity, I was guarding against subjecting them to undue stress and pressure as well as giving them autonomy to choose a date that was more suitable to them. According to Munhall (1988, p. 152), such thoughtfulness on my part, is offering “a profound reverence for human beings.” The notion of respecting human beings in research is also emphasised by Fontana and Frey (1994) who state that in employing methods like interviews, a researcher should be mindful of the fact that since the “objects of inquiry … are human beings, extreme care must be taken to avoid any harm to them” (p. 372).
The first meeting with participants had its own challenges as indicated by the following journal entry:
Minor distractions not unexpected. One participant with 3 calls in a row. To pause now and then, yet be calm and continue to wear a happy face, to keep the person in question comfortable.
(My journal entry - 16 April 2015)
Our first meeting was held on 16 April 2015. However, this was only with three of the four principals as the fourth one was on sick-leave. I was only able to meet with this principal on 11 May 2015 as per journal entry below:
17
At last! A meeting with my fourth participant
Thanks to the SADTU Industrial action in the area.
My fourth participant is on leave due to an injury she sustained. I continue to cross my fingers that she will soon be declared fit for a meeting.
Couldn’t believe it when I received her Whatsapp message saying she would be sorting school governance issues and I could meet her.
Luckily there was no teaching and learning in Stanger schools. Got something really constructive to do.
I drove straight to Ballito and had to wait for close to 2 hours while she was changing bank signatories with SGB members.
For her to be on par with other participants, I shared with her what was covered in the initial meeting with the other 3 participants on 16 April 2015.
Luckily I recorded my initial meeting with the other three participants.
I listened to the recording with her, and later took her through the documents I shared with other participants in her absence.
Hard luck. I had to buy another disposable camera as I only learnt about our meeting while already at work. Unanticipated expenditure.
(My journal entry - 11 May 2015)
In the next section, I will briefly describe each of the four mentioned research methods (that is, unstructured oral interviews, collage inquiry, artefact retrieval and photo-voice) that were employed in this study.
18