It is taken as a fact among scholars that research is not worth doing if its findings cannot be viewed as credible. Quantitative researchers have their own ways of ensuring trustworthiness of the findings and they use terms such as validity and reliability. Since qualitative researchers use their own alternative concepts of ensuring trustworthiness, Guba (1981) suggested that trustworthiness of qualitative studies should be achieved by giving attention to the study‟s credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability. Tshifura (2012) defines trustworthiness as convincing audiences and self those findings of an inquiry are worth paying attention to or worth taking account of. To ensure that research is worthwhile and is an adequate representation of social representations that have been studied, I used the four criteria as articulated by Lincoln and Guba (1985). These criteria form part of trustworthiness and they are credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability.
They are discussed in details below.
4.8.1 Credibility
Lincoln and Guba (1985) regard credibility as a means through which researchers assess the extent to which the data that has been gathered and analysed is believable and trustworthy.
According to McMillan and Schumacher (2006), credibility in qualitative research
78 determines that the research is conducted in such a way that the phenomenon is accurately described. Therefore, one can argue that credibility depends more on richness of information gathered rather than amount of data gathered. It ensures that what participants said is true and interpreted correctly so that the findings of a study will be believable. Credibility depends more on richness of information gathered rather than amount of data gathered. To ensure credibility of the findings in this study, I used a number of techniques. For instances, to gauge accuracy in this study, I used triangulation and member-checking. I used two methods of triangulation; namely, that of different participants. In this case the main participants were school principals; HODs and the teachers. By so doing I ensured that the implementation of Inclusive Education policy was viewed from the perspectives of School Management Teams and also from that of the teachers.
The other triangulation used was that of data generation methods, and this took the form of semi-structured interviews and documents reviews. The second technique used to enhance the credibility of the findings was member-checking. Doyle (2007) says that member-checking is primarily used in qualitative inquiry methodology. Harper and Cole (2012) define member- checking as a quality control process by which a researcher seeks to improve accuracy, credibility and validity of what has been recorded during a research interview. Again, Romm (2010) remarked that member-checking can be seen as part of the process of developing enhanced intersubjective understanding as a dialogical process. Cho and Trent (2006) state that member-checking can operate within a range of epistemological outlooks; it can be seen as part of the process of developing enhanced intersubjective understanding as a dialogical process. In the context of this study, I ensured that I cross checked my interpretation of what the participants had said with them. I made sure that my interpretations of claims made were consistent with their own understanding by asking for clarity. In that way, any misunderstanding in terms of interpretations between me and the participants were resolved.
Rager (2005) argues that qualitative researchers using member-checking might consider that activity can also be therapeutic for them especially when the focus of research can be rendering.
79 4.8.2 Transferability
There seems to be agreement among various scholars that transferability is the extent to which the findings can be applied to other areas (Lincoln & Guba, 1998; Maxwell, 2002).
Research findings are transferable only if they fit into new contexts outside the actual study context. There are contrasting views on this issue, since findings of a case study are always specific to a small scale of participants, within a particular context (Erlandson & Edwards, 1993). Lankshear and Knobel (2004) argue that transferability is the way to determine whether the results of a study can be generalised to other contexts and settings and further state that transferability is achieved through producing detailed and rich descriptions of the contexts. In the context of this study, I ensured that comprehensive details of sampling size, the location of the study and the data generation methods were provided for the readers to be able to relate the findings on their own situation. Results from three sampled schools assisted readers to compare findings and real situation and were able to utilise findings of research for their situation.
4.8.3 Dependability
According to McMillan and Schumacher (2006), dependability is used to test the relevance of data that has been generated and analysed to the actual situation under investigation. These scholars further emphasise that dependability is concerned with precision and accuracy.
Lincoln and Guba (1985) state that in order to address dependability issue more directly, processes within study should be reported in detail, thereby enabling a future researcher to repeat the work and if not necessary to gain same results. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2011) concur with Lincoln and Guba (1985) that for a research to be reliable or dependable, it must demonstrate that if it were to be carried out on a similar context, then similar results would be found. In this study, all processes of study were given in details to ensure dependability for readers to get more understanding of what steps were taken to reach the findings.
80 4.8.4 Confirmability
Confirmability is defined by Lincoln and Guba (1985) as a qualitative inquirer‟s comparable concern to objectivity. Barbie and Mouton (2009) and De Vos (2010) refer to confirmability as the degree to which the findings are a product of focus of inquiry and not biases of the researcher. In confirmability steps must be taken to help ensure as far as possible that the work‟s findings are the result of experiences and ideas of the participants rather than the characteristics and preferences of the researcher (Shenton, 2004). Miles and Huberman (2009) consider that key criterion for confirmability is the extent to which researcher admits his or own predispositions. In my study it might be issue of sampling where participants will be chosen by principal.