Chapter 2: Literature Review
3.8 Rigour
3.8.1 Qualitative rigour
95
96
enable self-rectification. Ryan-Nicholls and Will (2009) and Miyata and Kai (2009) suggest that many writers have endorsed the notion that validity and reliability criteria can be applied to both qualitative and quantitative research but that some of the criticism levelled at the notion of assigning validity and reliability to qualitative research has been that not enough attention is paid to the epistemological (Rolfe, 2006) differences between qualitative and quantitative research. Rolfe (2006) does not support the notion of using quantitative terminology such as validity and reliability in qualitative research. A number of writers have suggested that the two research traditions need to have their own criteria for validation. However the researcher does not think that those who advocate for the use of the terminology validity and reliability as applied to qualitative research are suggesting that the criteria for verification are the same for both traditions. They are using common terminology but within the various traditions there are different approaches for assessing validity and reliability.
In this study verification occurred incrementally, throughout the qualitative phase of the study to ensure validity and reliability. The process of verification included checking, confirming, making sure and being certain that no errors had crept into the research process and this checking was integrated throughout the study by identifying and correcting any methodological errors before they became part of the conclusions. The qualitative research was iterative and therefore the researcher moved back and forth between design and implementation in order to ensure that congruence between research questions, chosen methods, sampling, data collection and analysis and relevant literature was achieved. This process of the researcher constantly checking congruence between the research question, the design, recruiting participants, and the review of the literature, data collection and analysis and confirming adequacy between these stages allowed the
97
researcher to make decisions about continuing, stopping or modifying the research process in order that validity and reliability could be shown.
This process of verification required the researcher to be responsive to the developing study, to be responsive to the analysis of data and use the emerging codes to inform further data collection. The researcher was able to explore some of the emerging codes with participants following the analysis of the initial interviews. The findings which emerged from the on-going analysis guided further sampling, further data collection and so on. This process of checking and confirming that there was methodological congruence allowed the researcher to ascertain that the qualitative phase of this study was valid and reliable – the tenets of qualitative research were observed at all times. The sample size was small and the data was collected and analysed concurrently Morse, et al., (2002) believe that the greatest threat to validity in qualitative studies is the lack of responsiveness on the part of the researcher.
This research utilized Morse et al. (2002) verification in qualitative research strategies.
3.8.1.1 Verification strategies.
Verification strategies used in this study included:
ensuring methodological congruence
sampling sufficiency
showing a dynamic relationship between sampling, data collection and analysis and
Thinking theoretically (Morse et al., 2002).
Methodological congruence was observed through one-on-one interviews with key
informants who had expert knowledge and experience of issues in access to health sciences
98
education in universities in South Africa, who could answer the research questions and supplemented with the analysis of various documents dealing with access to higher education and access to health sciences in the universities sampled. The data analysis procedures were congruent with qualitative content analysis.
In this study, purposive sampling occurred amongst those university employees perceived to be at the rock face of access to health sciences education in the identified universities, coupled with the use of snowball sampling, to sample participants who were identified as having knowledge and experience in the area of access to health sciences education. The sampling continued while new ideas were forthcoming and these were explored in the interviews which followed to elicit differing opinions. Further purposive sampling of participants across eight universities offering health sciences was conducted in the second phase of the study (quantitative phase). This was to ensure that a broad range of opinions of those who play a role in access to higher education were captured.
A dynamic relationship between sampling, data collection and analysis was reached through the mixed methods design of this study. Sampling was determined by the research questions but as analysis of the data occurred other participants were identified and
approached to participate in the study. Data was collected and analysed, documents studied and literature reviewed concurrently. This process enabled the researcher to explore new codes, which emerged from the data analysis, in subsequent interviews. This iteration allowed for a deeper understanding of the emergent codes which were then coded into sub- categories and categories. Phase 2 of the study allowed for the development of a
questionnaire and the verification of the importance of the eight categories to access to
99
health sciences in universities in South Africa, which had emerged in the first phase of the study.
As new ideas emerged in the analysis these were explored in subsequent interviews by posing questions regarding the new idea to the participant and by reviewing the idea in the literature. Morse et al. (2002) refers to this as thinking theoretically (p. 13). This allowed for the construction of categories describing access to health sciences education in
universities in South Africa