The main purpose of the case study design is to make meaning and explore group and individual experiences so as to understand the different truths about a phenomenon or a similar one (Creswell, 2009). For this reason, qualitative researchers are more concerned about the trustworthiness of the findings, rather than accurate measurement and the justification of one truth. The terms of trustworthiness or credibility are therefore used to describe the reliability of this study. To ensure the trustworthiness of the research, the principles of dependability, confirmability and transferability were observed in relation to ethical rules and measures.
102 4.8.1 Dependability
A key concern for most case study researchers is how the ‘social constructions’ in natural settings can yield dependable or reliable findings (Rule & John, 2011). For this reason, the data generated by case studies have been critiqued as subjective, biased, short-sighted and peculiar in nature, which affects the credibility of the study (Cohen et al., 2011).To increase the trustworthiness of this study as much as possible, certain measures were considered.
First, my stance and choice of the participants was crucial. I used purposive sampling with some element of convenience as a criterion to select the three FP teachers and their contexts.
“Although these sampling strategies can be used in isolation, using them in combination contribute[d] to [trustworthiness] and triangulation” (Cohen et al., 2011, p. 230). In the same vein, direct observation and classroom video-recording indicates the complexity of the teachers’ learning and its impact on their practice. Lesson observations data from the three phases were consistently corroborated with the video-stimulated interviews and field notes data, so as to build a ‘thick’ description of each case.
Second, to increase the levels of trustworthiness, modest measures were followed for less disturbance in the classroom. For instance, the classroom schedules were communicated to the teachers one month earlier and I reminded them one week prior to the school visits. If a teacher unexpectedly cancelled an appointment during the data collection period, I rescheduled the appointment with the consent of the teacher. However, this prolonged the timeline of the study by two months.
I had to bear in mind the teachers’ working hours, so interviews were done after the school teaching hours. In addition, refreshments were provided whenever the teachers spent longer periods of time than anticipated. This created a relaxed atmosphere and trust between the participants and myself. However, one teacher who was uncomfortable with video-recording the EFAL during the last phase (October 2015), was given more time to prepare for the lesson - which she did.
Third, although it is hardly possible to be completely unobtrusive when collecting data, (Blanche et al., 2014), I tried as much as possible to collect data with the minimum influence on the classroom setting. For instance, the research assistant had to be cautious with the curious
103
learners when video-recording and I did not make any movement or contribution during the lesson proceedings. I also did not criticise the school contexts or judge any information given during the interviews. This reduced the chances of the teachers and the learners doing things differently during lessons and interview sessions. Lastly, this study involved humans and so ethical clearance with all the stakeholders was mandatory as detailed in section 4.9.
4.8.2 Conformability
According to Pandey and Patnaik (2014, p. 5746), “Conformability can be seen as a degree of neutrality or the extent to which the findings of a study are shaped by the respondents and not researcher bias, motivation or interest” in qualitative research. This means the researcher must ensure as must as possible that the findings are a true reflection of the participants’ reality rather than the researchers’ preferences. Qualitative writers like Blanche et al. (2014) affirm that using multiple methods in qualitative studies offers the opportunity to compare the different data sources thereby increasing the trustworthiness of a study. In this case, multiple data collection methods and three different analytical tools were used.
To avoid compromising my findings, several measures were also taken during the period of transcription and analysis. First, I persistently read and wrote all the transcripts during the data collection phases and thereafter, in order to eliminate errors. Second, I consulted individual teachers either through emails or telephoning whenever clarification was needed after a data collection phase, on either interview data or on extracts of video-recorded lessons and photographs, and appropriate measures were taken. According to Mouton (2012), such measures confirm the researchers’ interpretations and the consistency of the data which facilitated the composition of coherent, strong and persuasive arguments during the writing stage. Third, as I have verbally said, “it is easier for other people to locate errors or mistakes of a writer or researcher, during the final stages of writing”, I gave various chapter drafts to peer readers and later my dissertation to a professional editor evidence on Appendix 9.
4.8.3 Transferability
It is not possible to generalise empirical data from case studies. However, complex phenomena such as teacher learning and its impact on the teachers’ practice as determined during cross analysis can result in ‘fuzzy generalizations’ (Bassey, 1999). The same principle applies to this
104
particular study, where the complexities of teacher learning were described. This does not mean that the limitation of generalising the findings of a case study were ignored. For instance, Cohen et al. (2011) assert that case study designs have limited generalisability due to their peculiar nature. Nevertheless the generated notions or findings can be tested on one or more empirical cases (Yin, 2009, p. 15), creating an analytic generalisation.
Since these ‘thick’ descriptions were based on a small sample, I do not claim empirical generalisability in accordance to qualitative rules and terms. However, such research would give some insights on professional development activity and have an influence on the learning of the practising teachers. Such insights are in line with ‘fuzzy generalisations’ (Bassey, 1999) which researchers should test in their own situation or conceptualise them further.