Methodological Framework

There are different methodological approaches used to conduct educational research that are based on a variety of philosophical, ontological, and epistemological understandings. Researchers’ beliefs and views are embedded in their theoretical perspective. Creswell (2005) argues that researchers must understand the philosophical foundations and the ontological and epistemological assumptions which instruct their research methodology and data collection methods and that their perceptions of knowledge and social reality affect their examination of the conjunction between the phenomena and social behaviour. Answering the ontological question, “What is the form and nature of reality and, therefore, what is there that can be known about it” (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p. 108) is the first step for

73

researchers to deal with a research problem. The epistemological view, the theory of knowledge, what constructs this knowledge, whose knowledge it is and what should be known about it (Wellington et al., 2005) must be coherent with the ontological view.

In general, researchers in the social and behavioural sciences have different beliefs about how knowledge is constructed and how we recognize it. Teddlie and Tashakkori (2009) categorize research into three groups:

1. Quantitatively oriented social and behavioural research (QUANs) related to the positivist paradigm that includes numerical data and analyses to describe the phenomenon of interest or looks for differences among groups and variables. QUAN researchers believe that a theory refers to “a unified, systematic explanation of a diverse range of social phenomena, employing deductive logic which involves arguing from the general to the particular” (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009, p. 23) and that “social research should adopt a scientific method, that this method is exemplified in the work of modern physicists, and that it consists of the rigorous testing of hypotheses by means of data that take the form of quantitative measurements” (p.5).

2. Qualitatively oriented social and behavioural research (QUALs) is related to the constructivist paradigm and includes narrative data and analyses. QUAL researchers and constructivists believe that they “construct the meaning of the phenomena under investigation” (p.6) “employing inductive knowledge which involves arguing from the particular to the general” (p.25).

3. Mixed methodologies (MM) related to the pragmatist paradigm that includes both numeric and narrative data and analyses to answer the research

74

questions. It is defined as “ a type of research design in which QUAL and QUAN approaches are used in types of questions, research methods, data collection and analysis procedures, and/or inferences” (p.7).

There are arguments against the use of a mixed methods approach to research that are primarily based on the qualitative and quantitative debate (Sale, Lohfeld & Brazil, 2002). One aspect of the argument against utilizing a mix methods approach to research is based on the idea that quantitative and qualitative research paradigms are incompatible on the philosophical level (Haase & Myers, 1988). In addition, the qualities of the data (Objective Close - ended data Subjective Open - ended data), data collection tools, sample size, type of data produced, validity and bias and the methods of analysis contradict each other (Symonds & Gorard, n.d.). However, researchers have increasingly documented the benefits of combining both quantitative and qualitative data collection in a single study (Creswell, Clark, Gutmann, & Hanson, 2003). Since all research methods “have limitations, the use of multiple methods can neutralize or cancel out some of the disadvantages of certain methods” (Jick, 1979; cited in Creswell, et. al, 2003, p. 164). Furthermore since social phenomena are very complex, different types of research methods are required in order to better understand these complexities (Greene & Caracelli, 1997). I chose a mixed methods approach for this study and qualitative and quantitative research methods were combined because the goal of this study is to gain understanding of the world (Haase & Myers, 1988). I believe that in order to truly understand the decision-making process that occurs in the Independent Schools, I would need to gain insights provided from both qualitative and quantitative research. These methods offer the best chance to obtain well-developed and useful

75

participants’ responses. I think this study would greatly benefit by, first, collecting quantitative data, analysing the data and, then based on this data, following up with qualitative data collection (interviews). I would argue that this can reduce the chances of any “gaps” developing in the information or collected data. Also, I think the qualitative interviews allowed me to build on the quantitative data by probing and collecting additional information. Furthermore, using several methods for data collection provides triangulation, increases the validity of the study, and provides answers from the participants from several perspectives.

4.2.1 The Positivist Paradigm

Positivism assumes that the “world conforms to permanent and unchanging laws and rules of causation and happenings” (Aliyu, Bello, Kasim, & Martin, 2014, p. 81) and the complex world can be understood by reducing phenomena to become simpler or basic understandings by focusing on impartiality, measurement, objectivity and repeatability (Aliyu, Bello, Kasim, & Martin, 2014). Positivism assumes that reality can be understood by quantitatively measuring independent facts (Healy & Perry, 2000). In other words, positivist research only deals with what can be seen or measured.

The social reality for positivists is empirical facts exist separately from personal thoughts and are ruled by stable patterns and cause and effect laws (Marczyk, DeMatteo, & Festinger, 2005). Lincoln and Guba (2000) point out that the positivist framework sustains that reliable knowledge must be grounded on direct observation or manipulation of phenomena through empirical means.

Aliyu, Bello, Kasim, & Martin (2014) state that “positivism could be regarded as a research strategy and approach that is rooted on the ontological principle and

76

doctrine that truth and reality is free and independent of the viewer and observer” (p. 81). Positivism assumes that “social observations should be treated as entities in much the same way that physical scientists treat physical phenomena” (Tuli, 2010, p. 98). The researcher is to collect and interpret data objectively resulting in research findings are usually observable and quantifiable. Researchers who work within this paradigm explain “in quantitative terms how variables interact, shape events, and cause outcomes” (Tuli, 2010, p. 100).

With respect to the present study, the first phase of the study utilizes quantitative methods to determine the thoughts of a large group of participants, in this case school administrators and schoolteachers. These results reduced and restructured the issue of schoolteachers and their role in decision-making in schools and then qualitative methods can then be used to probe these issues in order to gain a more complex understanding of the phenomena.

4.2.2 The Interpretive Paradigm

Nesfield-Cookson (1987) defines life as inner experiences related to individuals with freedom, moral responsibility, and unique ability to interpret their experiences in the universe as living organisms. Crotty (1998) argues that it is through social interactions within everyday social experiences that one can begin to understand individuals’ perceptions and social reality.

The interpretive approach stresses individuals’ (or school administrators and schoolteachers) ability to construct meaning and create their social world and reality (Cavana, Delahaye, & Sekaran, 2001; Grix, 2004; Mertens, 2005; Rowlands, 2005;). Reality is a subjective phenomenon as “the social world is governed by normative expectation and shared understanding and hence the laws that govern it are not

77

immutable” (Ritchie & Lewis, 2003, p. 23). It allows us to have a deep insight into “the complex world of lived experience from the point of view of those who live it” (Schwandt, 1994, p. 118). Therefore, “social reality is based on people’s definition of it” (Neuman, 1997, p. 69).

Researchers in the interpretive paradigm attempt to understand this social reality through the eyes of the participants in their natural state (Bryman, 2001; Patton, 2002) rather than explain phenomena through theirs in a manipulated context (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1983). Therefore, reality is seen as multi-layered and complex because people interpret events and situations differently which result in multiple interpretations and perspectives of a single situation (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2009).

With respect to the present study, the second phase of the study aims to understand and interpret the nature of school administrators and schoolteachers’ perceptions and social reality. Thus, the focus here is to understand how truth, meaning, and knowledge are interpreted, and uncover individuals’ awareness of social reality in order to determine some standards to attempt to establish a consistent image of a common and cooperative approach among school administrators and schoolteachers.