Epistemological Considerations

The epistemological assumptions underpinning this study are categorised under a constructivist-interpretative approach to qualitative research and more specifically to social constructionism. These assumptions include; that individuals construct, interpret and interact with their reality, that individuals can exist within the same empirical world yet hold different constructs of that reality, and finally that realities and meanings exist within situated contexts and change over time (Patton, 2002). An important element of these assumptions for this research is the role that wider contexts play in the meanings and realities individuals use to make sense of their world (Crotty, 1998). This study is inherently situated within this perspective as the emphasis of the inquiry concerns the examination of how participants’ realities and context(s) change over time. The importance of the interpretation of events by those involved and the development and evolution of interpretations (Dawson, 2003a , Pettigrew, 1985c , Yanow, 2000) is a feature of social constructionism, where past experiences and current contexts influence sense-making engaged in by individuals (Flick, 2007). Fischer (2003b:130-131) describes this process of construction as the production of accounts of science by observers, placing the emphasis on “human meaning-making” (Yanow, 2003:241). In the context of this study of policy implementation, policy problems or issues are not simply “out there” as current structures, situations or events, but rather they are the result of “complicated

processes of inscription and re-iteration” (Gottweis, 2003:249). The processual/contextualist perspective used in this study supports thick-description or thick-particularity (Fischer, 2003b) which ties in with Geertz’s (1973) notion that many events cannot be reduced to simplistic linear interpretations and that thick description is needed to represent their inherent complexity.

Thick description is provided within study to set acts and events within context, centring on individual social understandings and intentions of actions and events, tracing the development and evolution of both, and providing a textual account for the reader to engage with his own interpretation (Denzin, 1989). Actors and context, therefore, are central tenets of the study and temporality is of significance. Yanow (2003:236) describes this as the accessing of “…local knowledge…derived from lived experience”. Context and interpretation influence translation and implementation of policy (Ball, 1994). Further to this, the study is influenced by Blumer’s (1969) emphasis on interpreting and situating current action by considering historical actions and contexts. This is also considered from the perspective of policy implementation literature which holds that a study of policy must consider the area prior to implementation (Pressman and Wildavsky, 1984).

In the case of this research, the context of change in the processual/contextualist perspective, provides this historical backdrop internally within the institution i.e. modularisation and the evolution of teaching and learning structures but it also provides an insight into wider external contexts i.e. Bologna, sectoral competition, which shape current actions and sense making of actors. Furthermore, and in recognition of the study’s epistemological assumptions the study rejects the notion that one account of policy implementation exists, which is consistent with a rejection of one true objective reality (Flick, 2009). This study incorporates and accepts the notion of the existence of multiple plausible and perhaps conflicting interpretations of

events and actions (Fischer, 2003b:135). With respect to social constructionism the study incorporates a monist approach and does not distinguish “…between the actual state of affairs and perceptions, interpretations, or reactions to those affairs…” (Patton, 2002:102) in contrast with the dualist approach to social constructionism (Berger and Luckmann, 1967). In the case of this study the adequacy of the interpretations of participants is not distinguished or questioned against “...the objective features of the domain and member’s representation of those features” (Patton, 2002:102). The findings demonstrate in some instances, however, a coalescing around meaning by participants (Guba and Lincoln) which supports the notion of shared and socially-constructed meaning by actors (Flick, 2009).

Further to this, adopting a monist approach also carries implications for the study with respect to the processual/contextualist approach of conducting the analysis of implementation (Fischer, 2003a , Pettigrew, 1990 , 1992). Reynolds and Saunders (1987) implementation staircase provides a useful tool to conceptualise levels and to situate participants within the institution. Participants representation are then provided to provide insight into how policy is interpreted, mediated and re- interpreted by individuals at these levels (Ball, 1994 , Bowe et al., 1992) but does not distinguish or judge the adequacy of those representations in the context of the level. A final epistemological assumption of this study is that the case study is a second-degree construction (Flick, 2009) i.e. a construct of the subjective construct of participants (Schütz, 1962). Flick (2009:77) outlines the process of this construction of reality as being based on the subjective construct of participants, which is then constructed through the scientific based or reasoned constructions of the researcher in the collection, treatment and interpretation of data and finally in the presentation of findings. In summary, the epistemology adopted within this study

rejects a positivist or post-positivist approach of establishing “assumed conditions and relations” from the theoretical literature to be operationalised and then empirically tested (Flick, 1998:41). The flexibility of a qualitative approach and the constructivist paradigm provides for a flexible exploration of the research question.

The paradigm supports an inductive approach to knowledge generation and is consistent with the research aims; to provide a situated, multi-framed, contextualised account of policy implementation. The study is designed to provide a situated, contextualised account and therefore, the worldview of the researcher is interlinked with the construction of this account. Furthermore, the literature review identified the issues of adopting linear approaches to policy implementation and recipe-based or formulaic approaches to considering organisational change. The emphasis of the theoretical frame on context and the creation of multiple realties based on the interpreted constructions of participants further embeds this study within the qualitative approach to research. The methodological and interpretative processes by which scientific understanding is facilitated within this study is dealt with in greater detail in the remainder of this chapter.