CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
3.2 DESIGN OF THE STUDY
Research defines as the search for and the generation of new knowledge through scholarly work (Bless & Higson-Smith, 1995:43). The overall plan followed is a non-experimental design. In a non-experimental design there is no manipulation of the independent variable, nor is the setting strictly controlled (SANDF COLET, 2003a:9).
Based on the four-dimensional framework, it becomes possible to categorise the study as one of an empirical nature using primary and secondary sources, as well as numerical and textual data type with medium control (Mouton, 2001:146).
The design report and curriculum are classified as applied research, as they form part of an original investigation undertaken with the primary aim to expand on fundamental knowledge and to apply it after completion (Lategan, Vermeulen &
Truscott, and 2003:1). The research is generally descriptive by nature and its main advantage is immediate application after having obtained results. The instructional design (ISD) is “applying scientific knowledge about human learning to the practical tasks of teaching and learning.” ISD technology translates and applies basic research (Newby et al., 2000:10).
Learning theory forms part of the descriptive sciences which describe the way in which things function in the natural world, while the ISD forms part of the design sciences which offer means in which to perform certain human-defined tasks.
Descriptive sciences are the law, while design sciences are roadmaps and there is always more than one way to get from point A to point B (Clark, 2000:15).
In order to evaluate the programme content, the researcher will make use of a reputability study. This involves the researcher identifying experts from academic institutions. The comments and criticisms of these experts form the basis of the formative evaluation (Bless & Higson-Smith, 1995:50). The structure of this research design is a framework of clearly formulated decision steps as depicted in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Research Design Framework
DESIGN OF THE STUDY
SAMPLING
Source: Own 3.3 SAMPLING
The researcher has the responsibility of defining the population to be studied (Bless & Higson-Smith, 1995:85). The study included all officers in the SANDF (population), irrespective of rank, age or gender. However, in the light of the size and complexity of the SANDF, the respondents (target population) have been selected from the South African Army (SA Army).
RESEARCH DESRIPTION OF MEASURING INSTRUMENT DESIGN
DATA COLLECTION
DATA ANALYSIS
The proposed units (sample frame) from which the respondents were drawn used probability cluster sampling, which included units in the SA Army. These units are representative of the mainstream of SANDF units and selected because they form part of the full time component, their members are utilised for force employment operations internally or externally and they are used for peace support operations under the auspices of the United Nations (UN) or African Union (AU).
The abovementioned reasons make the sample representative of the total population (SANDF). The results are generalised to the total population. A sample randomly drawn from the units of the SA Army reflects as closely as possible the characteristics of the entire population, although the selected sample can rarely, if ever, be a mirror image of the population. Representivity implies that the sample has the same properties as the population from which it was drawn, but in smaller numbers (Welman & Kruger, 1999:45).
All organisational levels were identified and included individual officers, irrespective of rank, age, gender, race or former force in order to ensure a representative sample. Criteria for inclusion in the sample required that participants had to be members of the armed forces, play an active role in the activities of their units, must have had at least two years of experience (in the case of officers) and the literacy level of respondents needed to include the ability to read, write and follow instructions. Subsequently, the population sample frame that completed the questionnaire consisted of 90 officers. According to Welman and Kruger (1999:50), no sample should be fewer than 15 units of analysis, but preferably more than 25.
In order to ensure that each member at a specific unit had an equal chance of selection, the researcher used simple random probability sampling (Corbett and Le Rog, 2003:104). Firstly, a name list of all the officers at the respective units identified all the units of analysis in the sampling frame. A numerical number was allocated to each participant. Secondly, the mechanism selected a table of random numbers that showed no order, irrespective of whether one proceeded along its columns or rows to choose the unit of analysis that ensured that each number had an equal chance of being selected. In other words, if one started at any given number, there was no way in predicting the value of the next number.
Next, the numbers of the units of analysis (in the sampling frame) encountered on the table of random numbers were written down. The advantage of a simple random sample is that it was representative of the population in the sense that it did not favour one unit of analysis (individual) over another (Welman and Kruger, 1999:51). The questionnaires were numbered and distributed according to the selected units of analysis.