Credibility, Dependability and Trustworthiness

There are three parts to the research design in this study; a qualitative component in the form of a case study, a quantitative component being the survey, and a document analysis. Reliability in quantitative research concerns notions of dependability, consistency and replicability over time, over the tools used and over the groups of respondents, in essence this means that, according to Cohen et al. (2007), if the study were to be carried out on a similar set of respondents, in a similar context then similar results would be found. The spread of respondents in the survey makes it likely that if the survey carried out in this study were to be replicated, similar results could be expected.

Qualitative research requires validity more than reliability with maximising validity the goal of this study. According to Cohen et al. (2007) more recently validity has taken a broader range of forms than just addressing accuracy of measurement. Validity might also be addressed through depth and richness of the data gathered, the participants approached and honesty and objectivity of the researcher. Blumenfeld–Jones (as cited by Cohen, et al., 2007, p. 134) refers to this as ’fidelity’. “Fidelity requires the researcher to be as honest as possible to the self-reporting of the researched.” Maxwell (as cited by Cohen, et al., 2007) argues for the notion of authenticity to replace positivist notions of validity and that it is the meanings that are attached to the accounts people give rather than to the method used that provide the validity. The findings must accurately reflect or describe the situation being researched, the data should support this outcome, and this provides the evidence of validity.

Credibility has been equated with internal validity by Guba and Lincoln (as cited by Mertens, 2005) who also go on to include the category of authenticity for qualitative research like Maxwell. Lincoln (as cited by Mertens, 2005) added a number of criteria for quality that have emerged from the critical theory paradigm (she prefers not to use the term critical theory paradigm as she considers critical theory as one of the theories that fits within what she calls a transformative paradigm) with these being:

• Credibility – as it parallels internal validity

Triangulation between sources of data contributes to determining credibility. • Transferability – as it parallels external validity

The researcher has provided as rich a description of the case as possible to enable the reader to determine the degree of similarity between this study and their own context.

• Dependability – as it parallels reliability

Detailing each step in the research process and sending transcriptions to participants for checking addressed dependability in this study.

• Confirmability – as it parallels objectivity

In this study the data can be traced to its original source and the logic used to interpret the data is explained in Chapters Four and Five.

• Authenticity

Is about the researcher presenting a balanced view of all the perspectives, values and beliefs and answers the question. Has the researcher been fair in presenting views? Studies emanating from this research should answer this question so my adherence to this criterion is for future researchers to decide. • Emancipatory

Community – requires the researcher to know the community well enough to be able to link the research to them and their actions. Attention to Voice

whereby the researcher gives a voice to those who cannot speak for themselves and actively seeks out to include the marginalized was a focus of this study. An additional requirement was that the researcher needed to have a

critical reflexivity – a heightened self-awareness for personal transformation and critical subjectivity. The researcher also acknowledged those who

participated in the study, crediting the quality of this study to their involvement. (adapted from Mertens, 2005, pp. 253-259)

To provide for trustworthiness in this research the use of triangulation mentioned in the criteria above needs to be specifically addressed. Using triangulation, the survey data was analysed along with the results of the focus groups, and a review of the policy documents related to discipline in each of the schools to contribute to the trustworthiness of the findings. Triangulation allows for convergence and corroboration of the results from the different methods utilised in the research.

3.9 Chapter summary

In this chapter justification for the use of a mixed method approach incorporating a case study, survey and document analysis has been provided along with a full explanation for how the study was conducted and exposition of how the research meets quality criteria for mixed method research was outlined.

In chapter four the aforementioned thematic analysis strategy consisting of providing a comprehensive description of the process those boards take and the perceptions of the board members of the process and the situation that come to their minds when they make their decision will be presented. This will be accompanied with an identification of themes which emerged across the four units of analysis i.e. the two boards, board chairs and the principal. The themes that emerged will be presented with explanation and discussion. As Johnson and Christensen (2008) suggest “cases are seen as holistic entities that have parts and that act or operate in their environments.”(p. 406). So for my research the four boards represented in the case study and the lone principal are intended to be indicative of how boards of trustees might make their decisions. This approach should provide a better understanding of how boards of trustees might generally make decisions about excluding students from school along with drawing conclusions about possible impacts decile ratings may have on this process.

4. Findings