CHAPTER 4: DESIGNING THE CASE STUDY: REACHING THE VOICES OF
4.3 Section 1: Qualitative case study design
4.3.5 Participants
The decision for the selection of the participants and the process of selection that I used was in line with what Durrheim (2010), Kelly (2006) and Lindegger (2006) have written on the selection of participants. Durrheim (2010, p. 49) defines sampling as the selection of participants from a population, which encompasses choices about which individual, settings, and behaviours. As indicated in Table 1, there were 25 female engineering students in Year 1, Year 2 and Year 4. My sample frame comprised all the 25 female students. However, when I approached them, only a few of the female students volunteered and accepted to participate in this study. I used a variety of data production methods, which had a wide-ranging number of participants from 3 to 12. From a sample frame of 25 female engineering students, 12 students agreed to participate in the study, and they participated in the qualitative questionnaires. Based on the analysis on their response, a sample selection of 9 participants was chosen for the focus group discussions. There were three focus groups and each focus group discussion comprised 3 participants. The 3 participants from Year 1 were in the first focus group, the 3 participants from Year 2 were in the second focus group and the 3 students from Year 4 were in the third focus group.
The analysis of the focus group discussions enabled me to select 6 participants for the first stage of critical individual conversations. Based on the analysis of the first stage of critical individual conversations, 3 participants for the second stage of critical individual conversations were then selected. The process of the selection of participants is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Details of sample for the three methods of data production
The selection of participants occurred over three distinct phases, namely Phases 2, 4 and 6. As noted above, the sampling approach used in this study was “purposive sampling which explores actions and circumstances happening in the actual world”
(Robson, 2002). Denzin and Lincoln (2000), Silverman (2010, p. 141) and Robson (2002), stated, “purposive sampling allows the researcher to choose a case in which she/he is interested”. The criterion that was used for purposive sampling, was the year of study of the students who had a variation of experiences as follows:
(i) 9 participants (three each from Year 1, Year 2 and Year 4) were selected from Phase 2 for the focus group discussions;
(ii) 6 participants (two each from Year 1 and Year 2 and one from Year 4) were selected from Phase 4 for the first stage of critical individual conversations;
(iii) 3 participants (two from Year 1 and one from Year 2) from Phase 6 were selected for the second stage of critical individual conversation that is Phase 7.
Table 2 shows a summary of the different phases of the selection of participants.
Phase Purpose Number of Participants 1 Distribution of qualitative questionnaire Year 1: 4
Year 2: 4 Year 4: 4 2 Analysis of qualitative questionnaire by reading and re-reading
each questionnaire to identify and label recurrent words, themes and concepts, to select participants for the focus group discussions
3 Purposive sampling of participants for 3 focus group discussions
Year 1: 3 Year 2: 3 Year 4: 3 4 Analysis of focus group discussions
5 Purposive sampling of participants for first stage of critical individual conversation
Year 1: 2 Year 2: 2 Year 4: 2 6 Analysis of critical individual conversation
7 Purposive sampling of participants for second stage of critical individual conversation
Year 1: 2 Year 2: 1
Table 2: Summary of the phases of sample selection
Taking into consideration what Robson, Denzin, Lincoln and Silverman have outlined above, the participants for the study were selected from Year 1, Year 2 and Year 4 in 2017. At the very outset, when I first met the female students in their respective classes, I explained to them how the data production process would be.
However, some female students were hesitant and were not interested in participating in the research. After discussion with identified potential participants, 12 female students voluntarily participated in the qualitative questionnaires, 4 participants from each group.
From each group of participants, 3 participants who volunteered to participate in the focus group discussion were selected. They were chosen on the basis on how they responded to the qualitative questionnaires, namely on the diversity of perspectives
they bring in terms of their experiences. 9 female students participated in the focus group discussions.
For the first stage of critical individual conversation, 6 chosen female students on whom the research focused were intentionally chosen from an engineering programme within the research site because the programme is one of the engineering fields in which fewer female students are enrolled. Purposive sampling was thus used to select the 6 participants for the critical individual conversations. The 6 main participants were chosen based on how they responded during the focus group discussion and their willingness to talk about their experiences, compared to the others. I had to do follow up conversations with 3 participants, as I still wanted to pursue some themes with them. For the second stage of critical individual conversation, 2 participants from Year 1 were promoted to Year 2 and one of the 2 participants from Year 2 was promoted to Year 3. The participants who were in Year 4 during the first stage of critical individual conversation had already graduated when the second stage of critical individual conversation was conducted after one year.
4.3.5.3 Designating the participants
The distribution and designation of engineering female students who were involved in the study for each method of data production are shown in Table 3.
Data production method
Number of participants
Codes Pseudonym
Qualitative questionnaire
12 Participant 1 Year 1
Participant 2 Year 1 Participant 3 Year 1 Participant 4 Year 1 Participant 5 Year 2 Participant 6 Year 2 Participant 7 Year 2 Participant 8 Year 2 Participant 9 Year 4
Lina Emma Nisha Feroza Annie Isha Salima Olivia Christine
Participant 10 Year 4 Participant 11 Year 4 Participant 12 Year 4
Riya Mia Emily
Focus group
discussion
9 Participant 2 Year 1
Participant 3 Year 1 Participant 4 Year 1 Participant 5 Year 2 Participant 7 Year 2 Participant 8 Year 2 Participant 10 Year 4 Participant 11 Year 4 Participant 12 Year 4
Emma Nisha Feroza Annie Salima Olivia Riya Mia Emily First stage of critical
individual conversation
6 Participant 2 Year 1
Participant 3 Year 1 Participant 7 Year 2 Participant 8 Year 2 Participant 11 Year 4 Participant 12 Year 4
Emma Nisha Salima Olivia Mia Emily Second stage of
critical individual conversation
3 Participant 2 Year 1
Participant 3 Year 1 Participant 7 Year 2
Emma Nisha Salima
Table 3: Distribution and designation of participants
The participants brought a variety of biographical experiences that enhanced the richness of the data.
4.4 Section 2: Data production