The organisation of my case study report included a Microsoft Word self-created template in which I typed my findings in the appropriate areas so that explanations, descriptions, and causal analysis of the identified phenomenon could be produced. This brought clarity to the part I played and parts played by the participants, which provided the foundation for developing one traceable story from different stories given by the participants (Green, 2007; Hesse-Biber &
Leavy, 2011; Creswell, 2014), into a clearer picture of the participants’ perceptions of their role in the professional development of teachers under their care. The non-participant stance adopted leads to a participant viewpoint to help with the process of being able to channel observations from a broader picture to a tighter one (Creswell, 2014). I believe that this approach helped limit the assumptions and biases that I carried into the participants’
educational setting.
The final section of this process of data analysis was to gain an understanding of assertions or interpretations of participants which might be inherent within the case (Creswell, 2014). I therefore argue that the manner in which I analysed the data appeared to be methodically sound.
The analysed information was then saved in a password protected computer file. This addressed and transferred my participants’ meanings that came from learning about the perspectives that they held as SMT members concerning their role in their teachers’
professional development participation. Stake’s (2010) chapter whereby the manner in which one ought to go about writing the report, was likewise adapted and adopted.
In extension of the above, I concur with the postulation echoed by Stake (2010) that qualitative research of superior quality is founded on the principle of trustworthiness. With this in mind, the precautions I took to ensure trustworthiness of the findings, hence follows.
managed this study along the lines of good practice. Yin (2014) suggests that organisation and database building is crucial to the process of assessing the merit and worthiness of the design of the research for authenticity and solidness. Yin (2014) developed a framework of ensuring trustworthiness of the findings, and that framework comprises credibility, dependability, confirmability and transferability.
4.11.1 Credibility
On the issue of credibility, Yin (2014) suggest this to be critical in verifying the issue of trustworthiness, where the researcher takes pains to prove the honesty and authenticity of what is being reported on. In pursuance of the above, participants in this study were encouraged to be honest, while I assured them that since there was no right or wrong answers to the questions being asked, they were free to contribute ideas and talk without fear of being prejudiced or negatively judged. Probes to elicit data through iterative questioning were incorporated, whilst long-term engagement, literature control and specific boundaries around the study was ensured (Check & Schutt, 2012). Furthermore, credibility was enhanced by member checking where transcripts, field notes, data analysis and findings were returned to the participants to verify that what they had said is a true and accurate account (Check & Schutt, 2012), in an attempt to assure the reader that the study is trustworthy.
4.11.2 Dependability
As far as dependability is concerned, Yin (2014) claim that tight links exist between credibility and dependability, arguing that in indicating credibility, dependability is likewise assured.
Attempts to certify traits of dependability, requires the researcher to reveal the innate processes that defined the study, so that should the research be repeated, similar findings may be yielded (Yin, 2011). In light of the above, I employed an audit trail where all procedures, data generation and data analysis methods was documented in a notebook. The audit trail reflected my documentation of how the study was conducted; including what was done, when, and why (Babbie, 2008). Seeing that dependability is likened to the notion that the researcher made concerted attempts to describe in great detail the strategies employed by the research, this study found me detailing the various components comprising this study, including matters embracing data elicitation, coding and analysing. In deepening the perception of the effectiveness of the
methods employed and to verify dependability, I used a journal notebook and keep all notes, questions, and correspondence with my participants and my supervisor.
4.11.3 Confirmability
Confirmability can be established through triangulation, reflectivity and objectivity (Yin, 2011). It is suggested by Creswell (2014) that paramount to the question of confirmability, is the degree to which the researcher acknowledges and reveals his or her personal susceptibilities. Thus, as far as was possible, I took measures to fortify this study’s findings to be those expressed encounters, happenings and occurrences of my participants, rather than those of my own (Creswell, 2014). In meeting the triangulation criteria, I elicited the same data through semi-structured individual interviews from two different sets of members of the SMT and two different schools, with the intention of confirming the different data sources used in an integrative manner.
At this point, I should also mention that qualitative inquiries continuously coin new terminologies that are suitable for their ontological and epistemological stance. Therefore, scholars such as Niewenhuis (2007) and Saldana (2013) argue against the use of the term triangulation, and instead, prefer crystallisation. The bone of contention is that triangulation assumes that there is a known fixed point or object that can be triangulated (Saldana, 2013).
Our world as researchers and participants in research is far more complex than two or three sides to be triangulated. That is why the most appropriate term to use in describing what many qualitative researchers continue to call triangulation, is in actual fact, crystallisation, as explained by Saldana (2013).
4.11.4 Transferability
It is important that the results of research can be replicable under similar conditions. That is why it becomes important that a detailed description of all the steps undertaken during the course of conducting an inquiry is completed. Yin (2014) views transferability as the extent to which the results of the research can be applied in similar contexts. However, Lodico, Spaulding and Voegtle (2010) argue that the judgement of transferability may be made by a reader based on the similarities of the participants, schools, resources, policies, culture and other characteristics of the research site against the reader’s own site. Creswell (2014) shares
similar sentiments as Lodico, Spaulding and Voegtle (2010) when arguing that the findings of a qualitative project are specific to a small number of particular environments and individuals.
In the context of the study I conducted, I provided a thick description of all the processes that I followed throughout the research process. This includes the manner in which I conducted the analysis process. In that way, it becomes easier to follow what I did throughout the research process, thereby enhancing transferability of the finding.
4.11.5 Issues of ethical consideration
In ensuring that ethical considerations, a vital component of research, is taken into account, literature suggests that ethical considerations is typically associated with morality, and that both ethics and morality deal with matters of right and wrong. Creswell (2014) suggests that irrespective of the manner in which qualitative inquiry is approached, a qualitative researcher encounters many ethical issues that arise during data elicitation and during the analysis process and dispersing of such qualitative findings. Similarly, since this deals with matters of right and wrong, Babbie (2008) argues that ethical refers to abiding by the standards of conduct of a particular group of people. This implies that those participating in social research ought to take cognisance of the general agreement undertaken by researchers, which highlights those acceptable behaviours and that which is inappropriate.
Taking into consideration that qualitative research denotes the prejudices, attitudes, partialities of the researcher (Creswell, 2014), literature suggests that both ethics and morality ought to form vital components of research. With regard to the above, it is advanced that difficulty is experienced because research generation is dependent on the prejudices of the researcher, both in eliciting the data and in presenting it. It is submitted that researchers may carry with them a predetermined judgement concerning the data to be uncovered during their research. Thus, without planning to, they unconsciously pose questions formulated in such a way that it prompts their participants to offer answers as anticipated by the researcher. In a similar way, the participant may possess preconceived views about the researcher and or their research topic.
Therefore, the participant may not be willing to reveal their personal ideas or feelings, especially when dealing with issues relating to power or sensitive feelings. Likewise, Malm (2009) suggests that the researcher needs to take the welfare of the participants into consideration, arguing that the researcher has to firstly remember that he or she is compelled
to respect the desires, rights, values and needs of the participants. Thus, before the researcher involves the participants in any way, permission must first be received from them, bringing into focus informed consent and protection from harm. To this effect, I proclaim this research to have been conducted as ethically as possible, in that I accorded respect to my participants, whilst I demonstrated respect for the knowledge acquired. Likewise, I showed appreciation for the democratic values portrayed by my participants, and displayed respect for the merit of educational research, as postulated by Creswell (2014). Bearing the above in mind, as a qualitative researcher, I worked as ethically as I possibly could to ensure that before involving the participants in any way, permission was first obtained from them. Appendix Five, being the Ethical Clearance Certificate (p, 267), bears testimony to my endeavours at ensuring that the code of ethics was upheld. In light of the above challenges encountered by qualitative researchers, the issue of informed consent will now be examined.