METHODOLOGY

Introduction

The investigation of ‘leadership development in the Seychelles’ is being conducted to highlight aspects of school leader development in a small island developing state (SID). The study is guided by seven main research questions:

1. What is the process by which school leaders are identified and recruited to take part in the MBA/MA programme in educational leadership?

2. What are the experiences of the participants taking part in these programmes?

3. What is the process by which participants taking part in these programmes are identified for leadership roles following completion of the programme? 4. What is the impact of the leadership development programme on leadership

practice in schools?

5. To what extent is the effectiveness of school leaders enhanced following successful completion of the programme?

6. What arrangements exist for the ongoing support and professional

development of graduates from the MBA/MA?

7. What is the perception of senior Ministry of Education officials of the impact of leadership development on leadership practice in schools?

116

This chapter examines the research approaches used for investigating ‘leadership development in the Seychelles’. It begins by looking at what constitutes research in educational contexts and explaining and applying the research paradigms. It discusses the author’s broad research approaches and explains the specific research methods that have been used for this study. Sampling and instrument design are discussed and the pilot study is explained. Issues of access are addressed, and the ethical implications of the research are examined. The issues of reliability, validity and triangulation are reviewed, and the chapter concludes with a short summary.

Educational Research

Hitchcock and Hughes (1989), state that research is systematic, critical and self- critical enquiry and that it is characterised by sets of principles and guidelines for procedures. Bassey (1999, p.38) believes that research “aims to contribute to the advancement of knowledge and wisdom”. Johnson (1994, p.3) adds that research is:

“A focussed and systematic enquiry that goes beyond generally available knowledge to acquire specialised and detailed information, providing a basis for analysis and elucidatory comment on the topic of enquiry”

According to Bassey (1999, p.38), research is a “systematic ... enquiry which aims to contribute to the advancement of knowledge and wisdom.” Cohen et al. (2000, p.45), however, restrict the use of the term ‘research’ to “those activities aimed at developing a science of behaviour, the word science itself implying both normative

and interpretive perspectives”. They identify the three main characteristics of research as “systematic and controlled, empirical, and self-correcting”, and point out that the nature of research is “a combination of both experience and reasoning and

117

must be regarded as the most successful approach to the discovery of truth” (ibid, p.5). The value of educational research is to:

“Enable educators to develop the kind of sound knowledge base that characterises other professions and disciplines; and one that will ensure education a maturity and a sense of progression it at present lacks” (Cohen et al., 2000, p.45).

The planning of the author’s investigation has been done in such way that the criteria stated in the definitions above are met. The enquiry is systematic, controlled, and empirical, produces new knowledge and provides the basis for analysis and conclusions.

As in all research, the element of subjectivity exists (Blaxter et al., 1996). According to Finch (1986, p.95), the dominant tradition of the research-policy relationship, especially in Britain, “sees research as providing objective, factual information which is handed over to policy-makers for their use”. They believe that this approach “embodies a clear distinction between facts and value judgements as two separate activities, which are pursued sequentially.” In conducting this investigation, the author is aware that it is almost impossible to view research as a wholly objective activity and sensitive issues pertaining to leadership development in the Seychelles will be examined within both a narrow and a broad context. Factors that influence research, such as religion, political belief and power relations, personal experience, social positioning and cultural values (Blaxter et al., 1996) are taken into consideration. These factors cannot be wholly objective, so it is difficult for the research to be value free.

118

Research Paradigms

There are two broad traditions in educational research, which are positivism and interpretivism. These terms overlap with other similar concepts. Positivism may be called ‘quantitative’ while interpretivism is sometimes described as ‘relativism’ or ‘qualitative’.

Positivism or quantitative research

The principal paradigm affecting educational research is what is popularly referred to as the scientific approach. This approach is essentially quantitative and is based on collection of facts and observable phenomena. Quantitative research is grounded in the positivist tradition (Anderson and Arsenault, 1998).

The main features of the positivist approach are that:

 People are the objects of the educational research

 Only observable phenomenon, not feelings, can be considered valid knowledge

 Knowledge is obtained through the collection of verifiable ‘facts’

 Researchers should be objective or ‘value free’

 Findings should be capable of generalisation beyond the location of the project.

(Adapted from Morrison 2002, p.17-21)

In more simple terms, Bell (1993) believes that quantitative researchers collect facts and study the relationship of one set of facts to another. According to her, they measure, using scientific techniques that are likely to produce quantified and, if possible, generalizable conclusions. One of the criticisms of positivism has been that observation is not value free as the positivists declare, as some of the most important

119

aspects of human behaviour, such as intentions and feelings, cannot be directly observed (Anderson and Arsenault, 1998). However, Easterby et al. (1991) argue that one of the main strengths of the quantitative approach is that it can provide wide coverage of situations; it can be fast and economical and, particularly when statistics are aggregated from large samples, they can be directly relevant to policy decisions. However, they also see these approaches as rather inflexible and artificial; not very effective in understanding processes or the significance that people attach to actions; not very helpful in generating theories, and because they focus on what is or what has been, they make it hard for policy makers to infer what changes and actions should take place in the future (ibid).

Interpretivism or qualitative research

Anderson and Arsenault (1998, p.119) say that interpretive research “is a form of inquiry that explore phenomena in their own natural settings and uses a multi- methods approach to interpret, understand, explain and bring meaning to them”. They believe that qualitative approaches gather information from many sources. The differing opinions, and different methods of collecting, analysing and interpreting data, are put together to produce an intense and rich form of research (ibid). Denzin and Lincoln (1994, p.2) add that:

“Qualitative research is multi method in focus, involving an interpretive, naturalistic approach to its subject matter. This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them”.

Such research undoubtedly involves the studied use and collection of a variety of empirical materials such as; case-study, personal experience, introspection, life story,

120

interview, observational, historical, interactional, and visual texts that describe routine and problematic moments in individual’s lives (ibid).

These statements show that interpretivism focuses on conducting research with people as the subject. Its main features are:

 Research is ‘grounded’ in people’s experience

 People understand events indifferent ways

 Research focuses on the meaning placed on events by participants

 The emphasis is on words rather than numbers. (Adapted from Morrison 2002, p.12-21)

Researchers adopting a qualitative perspective are more concerned to understand individuals’ perceptions of the world, seek insight rather than statistical analysis, doubt whether social ‘facts’ exist and question whether a ‘scientific’ approach can be used when dealing with human beings (Bell, 1993).

Qualitative methods are described as particularly suitable for educational evaluation where justification of the investigation is understanding rather than evidence. According to Hopkins (1989), this is not to imply that qualitative methods are unable to provide proof, but rather to emphasise that evaluation is often more concerned to generate hypotheses about complex social situations rather than to test them.

The author’s selected approach

The approach chosen for this research is primarily interpretive or qualitative. This is because this study involves people as subjects rather than objects of the research. As Cohen et al. (2000) suggest, it deals with human experience and offers the researcher

121

an insight into the real dynamics of situations and people. In this enquiry, the subjects (key people) are the senior leaders in educational institutions and senior officials of the Ministry of Education in the Seychelles. However, there are occasions where quantitative techniques were used in relation to the investigation of ‘senior leaders’ practices impact on school outcomes’. As Bell (1993, p.5) states, “there are occasions when qualitative researchers draw on quantitative techniques, and vice versa”. She believes that classifying an approach as quantitative or qualitative does not mean that, once an approach has been selected, the researcher may not move from the methods normally associated with that style. This is because each approach has its strengths and weaknesses and each may be suitable for a particular context (ibid).

Broad Research Approaches

The author adopts two broad approaches for this enquiry; ‘survey’ and ‘case studies’. These are discussed below.

Survey research

Survey is one of the two main approaches to educational research. According to Bell (1993, p.10), “the aim of a survey is to obtain information which can be analysed and patterns extracted and comparisons made”. De Vaus (1991) believes that surveys are generally used to ascertain facts and simple opinions, and that the aim is usually to be able to generalise in a valid way. Johnson (1994) defines survey activity as “eliciting equivalent information from an identified population”. She elaborates by stating that ‘equivalent’ “means that the same kind of information is sought from all

122

respondents and that survey questions are standardised” (ibid, p.14). Bell (1993, p.11) adds that:

“In most cases, a survey will aim to obtain information from a representative selection of the population and from that sample will then be able to present the findings as being representative of the population as a whole”.

She elaborates Johnson’s notion of standardisation by saying that “in surveys, all respondents will be asked the same questions in, as far as possible, the same circumstances” (ibid, p.11).

The author’s research involves a survey dimension in that 100% of the population of trained leaders (MBA/MA course participants) at system level, and in educational institutions, were interviewed, as well as all senior Ministry personnel relevant to this enquiry. These participants were asked the same questions, in more or less the same circumstances - that is in a place of their choice such as their office, for example.

The author’s approach matches the main characteristics of the survey method summarised by Wilson (1984, p.35):

 It requires a sample of respondents to reply to a number of fixed questions under comparable conditions

 It may be administered by an interviewer, as in the author’s research, or involve a printed questionnaire

 The respondents represent a defined population. There may be a 100% sample or census, as in the author’s approach, or only a fraction of the population, or sample, may be included

 A survey sample should be representative of its population so results can be generalised.

123

According to Cohen and Manion (1994, p.83), the survey is “perhaps the most commonly used descriptive method in educational research”. It is popular because:

“Surveys gather data at a particular point in time with the intention of describing the nature of existing conditions, or identifying standards against which existing conditions can be compared, or determining the relationships that exist between specific events. Thus, surveys may vary in their levels of complexity from those which provide simple frequency counts to those which present relational analysis” (Cohen and Manion (1994: 83).

Surveys have some elements of the scientific style such as systematically selecting respondents and seeking data in the same way from each of them - but the survey instrument may influence that which it is seeking to investigate (De Vaus, 1991; Nicols, 1991).

Limitations of survey research

As with all types of research, the survey approach has several limitations. Because of the standardised approach, surveys do not give the opportunity to explore a topic in depth. Questions must have a clear meaning and responses must be fitted into a limited range. Replies may be simplified and subtler differences between respondents may not be observed. As such the coverage of the topic under investigation tends to be shallow (Wilson, 1984). However, in the author’s research, through good use of interviewing techniques, greater depth was achieved.

As the research is an ‘insider’, some limitations of survey research were eliminated. This was particularly helpful with respondents in need of encouragement, and a sense of rapport with the researcher and the research, in order to provide factual information and opinion on sensitive issues. As surveys often do not have the

124

flexibility to provide this kind of supportive atmosphere, it is sometimes unsuitable for ‘sensitive’ issues (Cohen and Manion, 1994). However, this was not the case in the author’s research as less ‘sensitive’ issues to do with leaders’ training and professional experience were being discussed.

The author also avoided a flawed sample, unrepresentative of the population, by including a 100% sample, thus eliminating bias which may arise from a low response rate (Hoinville and Jowell, 1984).

Strengths of survey research

Because the research tool is standardised, it is usually possible to approach a large number of respondents. In the case of the author’s research, 47 trained leaders and 100% of the sample population were interviewed to collect a lot of information in quite a short time (in a total time of approximately 47 hours – 1 hour each interview). This provides breadth of coverage of the topic under investigation. As an ‘insider’ researcher, for whom visiting schools and being in contact with leaders is part of her everyday duties, conducting the survey was also at low cost compared with other approaches (Bell, 1993). However, the researcher did find interviewing some colleagues an uncomfortable experience for both parties and quickly came to realise that, as an ‘insider’, she has to live with her mistakes after completing the research (Bell, 1987). Furthermore, the close contact with the institution and colleagues made objectivity difficult to attain and the constant feeling that the respondents are telling the researcher what she wants to hear rather than their own ‘beliefs’ (ibid).

125

Surveys also typically produce a large amount of information, which can be compared to provide a wealth of description. It may be possible also to go beyond description to look for patterns in the data. This might mean that survey findings do not simply describe what has happened but also provide explanations about why it happened (Johnson, 1994). As such, this proved to be a valuable research approach for the author’s enquiry.

Case study research

Case study is the second broad approach used in educational research. It takes the school itself, or sub-units or programmes within it, as the ‘case’ and examines this unit with a view to increasing understanding of the phenomenon and, in some cases, to generalising it to a wider population of schools (Bush, 2002). The author’s research includes one case study of a head teacher of a primary school. The case study approach is particularly appropriate for individual researchers because it gives an opportunity for one aspect of a problem or concern to be studied in some depth within a limited time scale (Bell, 1993). The particular focus of the author’s research case study is changes in the senior leader’s practices and their impact on school and pupil outcomes during before and after leadership training.

According to Nisbet and Watt (1984), case study research approach involves systematic collection of evidence and is not simply an example or an anecdote. Adelman et al. (1984, p.94) describe case study as “an umbrella term for a family of research methods having in common the decision to focus an enquiry around an instance”. The main members of the ‘family’ are interviews, observation and

126

documentary analysis. To Bell (1993) they are; observes, questions and studies, while Bassey (1999, p.81) refers to these methods as; asking questions, observing events and reading documents. All three methods are used in this study, and are examined in detail in the next section.

These statements are supported by Johnson (1994, p.20), who defines case study as: “An enquiry which uses multiple sources of evidence. It investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident”

Bell (1993, p.8) believes a case study to be “much more than a story about or a description of an event or a state”. She confirms that, as in all research, “evidence is collected systematically, the relationship between variables is studied and the study is methodically planned” and that “case study is concerned principally with the interaction of factors and events” (ibid, p.8). Nisbet and Watt (1980, p.5) add that “sometimes it is only by taking a practical instance that we can obtain a full picture of this interaction”. Though Bell (1993) claims that observation and interviews are most frequently used in case study, as is the case in the author’s research, no method is excluded - as methods of collecting information are selected according to their appropriateness for the task.

Cohen and Manion (1994, p.106-107) define case study:

“Case study research typically observes the characteristics of an individual unit – a child, a clique, a class, a school or a community. The purpose of such an observation is to probe deeply and to analyse intensively the multifarious phenomena that constitute the life of the unit with a view to establishing generalisations about the wider population to which that unit belongs”.

127

This statement reflects the intentions of the author’s research, where the headteacher is the primary ‘unit of analysis’ and the students, staff and school constitute the life cycle of the unit, as actions taken by the senior leader in the school do have a direct effect on those within the school as a community. Yin’s (1994, p.137) definition of the ‘unit of analysis’ reinforces the author’s intention:

“An individual person is the case being studied, and the individual is the primary unit of analysis. Information about each relevant individual would be collected and several such individuals or ‘case’ might be included in a multiple case study”.

The author’s research involves one case study of a headteacher of a primary school.

Limitations of case study research

Case study research is criticised because it does not match the survey approach in terms of generalisation. According to Adelman et al. (1984, p.95), although