A paradigm is set of assumptions about the world and is what constitutes proper topic and technique for inquiry into that world (Punch & Oancea, 2014). According to de Vos, Strydom, Fouche and Delport (2011), a paradigm is a pattern or model encompassing a set of legitimated assumptions and a design for generating and interpreting data. Therefore paradigm represents what we think about the world (but cannot prove) and also serves as a lens or organising principles by which reality is interpreted (Nieuwenhius, 2007). Drawing from the above definitions, paradigm can be defined as ideologies or views of the nature of the world, and these guide the research methods. Babbie (2013) suggests that a paradigm shapes both what we see and how we understand it. Cresswell (2014); Nieuwenhuis (2007);
Denzin and Lincoln (2005) suggest that there are four research paradigms. These research paradigms are positivism/ post-positivism, interpretivism/ social constructivism, emancipatory/critical and pragmatism/ postmodernism. Considering the four paradigms mentioned, this study is positioned within the interpretivism paradigm. The reason for positioning this study within this paradigm is discussed in detail in the next section.
According to de Vos, et al., (2011), interpretivism paradigm is idiographic and thus holistic in nature, mainly it aims to understand social life and meaning that people attach to everyday life. Interpretivism is related to hermeneutics, it suggests a way of understanding textual data
49
by foregrounding the meaning that communities or individuals assign to their experiences.
Interpretivism paradigm focuses on how people construct the social world by sharing meanings and how they interact with or relate to each other (Nieuwenhuis, 2007). This suggests that the researcher working within the interpretivism paradigm attempts to discover meanings within the text through a detailed study, as opposed to positivism and furthermore, the interpretive researcher is concerned with the participant’s interpretations of the situation and experiences. Instead of the ultimate truth or single reality as advocated by the positivist, the researcher within an interpretive paradigm is confronted with multiple realities and multiple interpretations of human experience. This simply means it is of vital important for the researcher working within interpretivism paradigm to understand the world from the participants’ point of view. Therefore, the whole emphasis is on an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon.
Following the same line of thought are Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011) who state that within the context of the interpretive paradigm the fundamental aim is to understand the subjective world of human experience. Interpretive researchers argue for the uniqueness of human inquiry, and to understand human action or behaviour through interpretation Nieuwenhuis, (2007). As a result researchers working within the interpretive paradigm believe that the world is socially constructed and therefore the aim is to discover how people construct meaning in natural settings. The researcher who foregrounds his or her study within this paradigm often uses participants’ observation and field work where many hours and days are spent in direct contact with participants. Given this broad overview of the interpretivism paradigm I believed that the lenses of this paradigm were suitable for this study to interact with the research schools to explore how school ethos has been influenced by school categorisation from the experiences and practices of teachers and principals of the study schools. Lot of hours were spent in the five study schools to obtain an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon of school ethos as influenced by school categorisation. Drawing from the preceding argument it was evident that interpretivism paradigm acknowledges that reality consists of communities or individuals subjective experiences. Thus for this, permissions was obtained from the principals and teachers of the study schools to gather their experiences on school ethos as influenced by school categorisation.
Cohen, et al., (2011) suggest four aspects under which a researcher makes assumptions when investigating a phenomenon. These are ontology which deals with nature of reality, epistemology which deals with the theory of knowledge, axiology which deals with the role
50
of values or ethics in research and lastly methodology which deals with quantitative or qualitative study. In the following paragraphs I proceed to explain these aspects in detail.
3.2.1 Ontology
According to Nieuwenhuis (2007), the study of nature and form of reality (that which is or can be known) is called ontology. Interest and politics shape multiple values and beliefs and these values and beliefs are socially constructed, privileging some values of reality and under-presenting others (Cohen, et al., 2011). Interpretivists believe that it is the responsibility of the researcher to understand the multiple social constructions of knowledge and meaning (Nieuwenhuis, 2007). This takes me to the point I mentioned earlier that interpretivism paradigm assumes that reality is socially constructed and it endeavours to understand the subjective world of human experience. In this study the reality was constructed by the participants through interaction and observation of the school context.
Multiple realities offered by different participants provided substantial information on the study. This assisted me to gain clear insight in exploring school ethos as influenced by school categorisation.
3.2.2 Epistemology
As I have discussed above that ontology deals with nature of reality, whereas epistemology relates to how things can be known, how facts or truths or even physical laws if they do exist can be disclosed and discovered (Nieuwenhuis, 2007). In simple terms the latter therefore states that epistemology looks at how one comes to know reality and the method for knowing the nature of reality thus assumes a relationship between the knower and the known (Cohen, et al., 2011). On this occasion the researcher was able to perceive the issue under study from the viewpoints of the participants. Therefore the researcher’s biasness was then toned down resulting in authenticity of the study being enhanced (Nieuwenhuis, 2007). I found the epistemological assumptions of the interpretivism paradigm suitable for this study as it pursued to better explore the school ethos as influenced by school categorisation from the views of principals and teachers in the study schools. The study elucidated the participants’
understanding as well as knowledge of school ethos as influenced by school categorisation while also enhancing the researcher’s understanding on the phenomenon. Punch and Oancea
51
(2014) state that interpretivism concentrates on the meaning people bring to situations and behaviour which they use to understand their world.
3.2.3 Axiology
Cohen, et al., (2011) postulate that axiology deals with the principles (what is acceptable to do in what conditions) in conducting research, the ethics that govern these principles. The aim of axiology is to provide guidelines during the research process on what constitutes appropriate moral behaviour. It is crucial for the researcher to be aware of how he or she positions himself or herself in relation to the context of the study, participants and how such positioning may influence the study as well as the researcher to make his or her values known in the study (Rule & John, 2011). In doing so, I have undertaken all ethical values in conducting this study which are outlined in the following section of this chapter.
3.2.4 Methodology
Methodology is based on assumption about the nature of the reality being studied, what constitute knowledge of that reality and what therefore are appropriate ways (methods) of building knowledge of that reality (Punch & Oancea, 2014). Given the above definitions methodology is a procedure that is used by the researcher during the investigation in finding out about a particular phenomenon under study. Qualitative approach is favoured by the researchers within interpretivism paradigm because participants meaning is interpreted as embedded in the social context and in the people who live in that context. Having discussed the methodology I proceed in discussing the suitable research design for this study and also justifying why I find it appropriate.