RESEARCH PARADIGM, APPROACH, DESIGN, AND METHODOLOGY
3.2 RESEARCH PARADIGM
This sub-section describes the paradigm that underpinned this study. A research paradigm describes a researcher's beliefs about what constitutes knowledge and truth (Creswell, 2014;
Ghiara, 2019). Lincoln and Guba (2013) identify three interconnected elements of a research paradigm: ontology, epistemology, and methodology,which encompass the fundamental beliefs, assumptions, values, and norms that each paradigm embraces. Researchers’ ontological notions inform their epistemological beliefs, which in turn influence their methodological decisions in selecting specific data collection methods (Kivunja & Kuyini, 2017). Ontological and epistemological assumptions are briefly explained in the next paragraph.
3.2.1 Ontological and epistemological assumptions
Ontology is a paradigm that deals with reality, in other words, the way the researcher defines the truth and reality or the nature of existence (Antwi & Hamza, 2015; Gray, 2014; Lincoln & Guba 2013). Epistemology, conversely, explains how researchers understand reality or what constitutes sufficient and valid knowledge within the world (Gray, 2014). It deals with questions such as “Is knowledge something that can be learned, or is it something that has to be personally
67
experienced?” or “How do we know what we know?” It assesses the association between the knower and what is to be known (Kivunja & Kuyini, 2017).
3.2.2 Analysis of various research paradigms 3.2.2.1 Constructivist paradigm
The constructivist paradigm is connected with the qualitative research approach, which aims at understanding the participants’ personal experiences in their natural settings. A qualitative study’s findings are usually generated through interviews, documents, and observations, and the researcher’s interpretations of these are usually used to develop contextual models or theories (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Lincoln & Guba, 2013).
3.2.2.2 Positivist paradigm
On the contrary, proponents of positivism believe that truth is not constructed but can be discovered, while reality is objective, quantifiable, external, and directed to the truth. Truth is static, fixed, and relies on general laws (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Lincoln & Guba, 2013).
Positivism is usually aligned with a quantitative research approach, which aims at testing theories, establishing causal relations and predictions, and controlling and generalising the results of the study obtained through surveys, questionnaires, or experiments (Antwi & Hamza, 2015).
3.2.2.3 Interpretivist paradigm
The interpretivist paradigm attempts to comprehend the subjective world of people’s experiences (Lincoln & Guba, 2013; Ponelis, 2015). This paradigm tries to understand the experiences of individuals being researched and interpret how those individuals understand their environment.
The primary assumption of this paradigm is that knowledge is co-constructed by the researcher and participant through their social interactions in conversations and interviews, and the researcher’s focus is on understanding the experiences of the research participants and their interpretation of their world (Antwi & Hamza, 2015; Lincoln & Guba, 2013). Typically, a researcher who intends to conduct studies under the interpretivist paradigm admits the importance of the participant’s contextual factors rather than laws, causes, and effects for understanding their social world (Lincoln & Guba, 2013). The mode of enquiry in this paradigm
68
is interpretive, which aims at understanding specific situations, processes, and events instead of generalising the results to a population (Tuli, 2010).
The study's epistemological, ontological and methodological underpinnings are discussed in the subsequent subsection.
3.2.3 Ontological and epistemological foundations of the study
This study is based on the ontological notion that ECCD centres are not considered restrictive organisations because management practice is the product of their objective realities. With this ontological notion, ECCD centres could be considered objective social institutions with external social actors.
The aim of this study was to explore the management practices of directors at ECCD centres in Ghana. The researcher believes that the reality of director’s management practices is predicated on the social interactions of key ECCD stakeholders such as parents’ associations, ECCD personnel, board members, parents, and community members, as well as certain contextual factors in the social and political environment. Accordingly, the researcher contends that there is a complex system of group actions in ECCD centres, and that stakeholders continually co-create the realities of ECCD centre management practices as a result of social processes. Finally, the researcher holds the notion that the reality of ECCD directors’ management practices could emerge through the researcher’s interaction with several directors in their natural settings, which are ECCD centres. Therefore, in this study, the reality of ECCD directors’ application of basic management principles could emerge through the researcher’s interactions with these directors and interpretation of their multiple viewpoints.
This study adopted the epistemological notion that the reality of the management practices of ECCD centre directors would be jointly created by the researcher and the interview participants through data collection and the interpretation of the participants’ views in a specific context.
Thus, the researcher’s interaction with ECCD directors on their perspectives on applying management principles in specific socio-political contexts in collaboration with key stakeholders
69
and the researcher’s interpretation of these experiences is the social constructivist viewpoint in this study.
The researcher is convinced that insight into ECCD directors’ management experiences and perceptions could be gained through analysing ECCD centres’ contextual documents and interpreting views and experiences expressed through interviews with ECCD directors and board members, as these participants perform management roles and responsibilities in early childhood education settings. Based on the above notions, this study is therefore grounded on the social constructivist-interpretivist philosophy in data gathering, processing, analysis, and interpretation of findings (Lincoln & Guba, 2013).
3.3 RESEARCH APPROACH