Chapter 2: Literature Review
3.8 Rigour
3.8.3 Rigour in mixed methods
3.8.3.1 Design quality
Design quality refers to the inputs to the process:
1. Design suitability
2. Design fidelity (adequacy) 3. Within design consistency
4. Analytic adequacy (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009).
a. Design suitability
The exploratory sequential mixed methods design was an appropriate design for the current study. The research questions required the researcher to explore, describe and analyse the factors related to access to health sciences education in universities in South Africa and the implications of existing practice on student demographics and throughput rates. The researcher needed to use the qualitative data to develop an instrument to collect data from a larger sample of participants. The quantitative phase of the study was
necessary to clarify the categories which emerged out of the qualitative data. Both the first phase and the second phase of the current study addressed the same research questions.
The reason for this was because the first phase was used to identify and describe the factors related to access to health sciences education in universities in South Africa so that a questionnaire could be developed for the second phase which was to explore the factors in a larger sample and analyse the implications of the identified factors on the student demographic in South Africa and the throughput rates.
b. Design Fidelity
Both the qualitative and quantitative phases of the study paid homage to the methods appropriate for those designs and were implemented with rigor. All aspects of the study for
101
example qualitative traditions of sampling, data collection and analysis were used for the qualitative phase. The data analysis procedures were appropriate and adequate for the types of data collected – qualitative content analysis for the qualitative data and descriptive statistics for the quantitative data. The data was displayed in tables.
c. Within-design consistency
Within design consistency was observed across all aspects of this exploratory sequential study. Phase 1 moved seamlessly into the second phase. Qualitative data was collected and analysed and once the categories had been identified the second phase began with
developing a Policy Delphi questionnaire which was tested for content and construct validity. Once the first round of that was done the quantitative data collection was started.
Each phase of the study followed each other in a logical manner.
d. Analytic adequacy
The researcher believes that the analysis procedures chosen for the current study were appropriate and adequate. Content analysis was chosen for the qualitative phase and the Policy Delphi was analysed using descriptive statistics and content analysis for the qualitative data on the Delphi questionnaires. The qualitative data was quantitized and all the data was integrated in the final outputs.
3.8.3.2 Interpretive Rigour
Interpretive rigour is the extent to which reliable explanations have been made based on the data obtained (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003). There are five criteria or standards which need to be met in order that rigour can be assessed and the quality of the inferences
improved (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2008).
102 a. Interpretive consistency
In this study the findings and inferences are consistent with the data – inferences from the qualitative data have been illustrated with examples of actual participant words from the transcripts. The quantitative analysis has used appropriate descriptive statistics. The small sample size meant inferential statistics could not be computed.
b. Theoretical consistency
This refers to the consistency between inferences from the data and current theories in the academic or empirical literature (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2008). The discussion chapter of this research report links what is known in the field to the findings of this current research.
c. Interpretive agreement
Interpretive agreement suggests that others would reach the same conclusions as the researcher making those conclusions (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2008). The qualitative data which was used to develop the Policy Delphi questionnaire was distributed amongst participants who were judged to be experts in the area of access to health sciences education in universities. A consensus level was decided on and has been reported in the final research report, indicating interpretive agreement.
d. Interpretive distinctiveness
This criterion is based on making the most acceptable conclusions from the results of the study (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2008). Testing the emergent categories through the Policy Delphi questionnaire ensured that the conclusions drawn by the researcher were subjected to verification in a larger sample.
e. Integrative efficacy
Integrative efficacy relates to the meta-inferences drawn from the integration of the findings, conclusions and policy guidelines gleaned from both the qualitative and quantitative phases (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2008). All the findings from the current
103
research were integrated into one. The final report, guidelines and policy briefs are testament to the achievement of integrative efficacy.
3.9 Ethical Considerations.
The ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice were observed throughout this study. The research proposal was submitted to the Human and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee, University of KwaZulu Natal for review. Permission was sought and approval was obtained from relevant University office(r)s to interview Deans of Health Science Faculties, Deans of students, Admissions Officers, Recruitment/Schools Liaison Officers, Heads`
of Departments/Schools within Health Science Faculties, Financial Aid Officers, and any other participants who were identified in the course of the research.
Potential participants were given a study information sheet which explained the purpose of the study and detailed the terms of the participants consent. Participants on agreement to be
interviewed were asked to sign the study consent form. Consent was also obtained for all voice recording of interviews. Consent for the questionnaires varied according to whether the
questionnaire was delivered face to face or not. For the face to face questionnaires participants signed a consent form. For those who returned the questionnaire via the postal service and those who completed the questionnaire online their consent was deemed to have been given by virtue of the fact that they returned the questionnaire.
Confidentiality of all data collected was assured. Interview transcripts and questionnaires did not identify individuals by name. No names were used in the research reports and identifying details were not linked in any way to data in the report.
104
Participants in the study did not derive any direct benefits from participation but it is hoped that the guidelines for access to health science education in universities in South Africa will be useful to them in facilitating access to marginalised people and assist in the transformation of health science faculties. Participants did not receive any financial reward for participation.
Data collected through the interviews was voice recorded with the permission of participants, transferred from the voice recorder to the personal computer of the researcher after which the voice recording was deleted. The audio file on the researcher`s personal computer is password protected. This file will be kept for five (5) years on the researcher`s personal computer, after which it will be deleted by the researcher. The completed Policy Delphi paper based
questionnaires will be kept by the researcher under lock and key for a period of five (5) years before being personally destroyed by her and those electronic will be kept in a password protected file for 5 years before being destroyed.
Confidentiality was maintained and no names were used in the interviews or on the
questionnaires, and it was not able to trace the data back to any participants. Every effort was made to ensure anonymity however this cannot be guaranteed in view of the small numbers of specific occupation categories that were interviewed. Interview transcripts do not identify the University.
Consent to participation in the study was voluntary. The decision not to participate in the study or to withdraw at any time did not result in any adverse effects for the individual. Every effort was taken to ensure that no harm was caused to their employment relationship with their employing university through confidentiality and the right to refuse to answer any question which they felt placed them at a disadvantage.
105