Methodology: Grounded theory

Grounded theory methods developed by Barney Glaser and Anslem Strauss are complementary to constructionist epistemology and cultural historical activity theory. The position of theory generation in sociology as described by (Glaser, 1971) has a number of parts: to enable prediction and explanation of behaviour; to be useful in the theoretical advance in sociology; to be useable in practical applications – thus, prediction and explanation should be able to give the practitioner understanding and some control of situations; and to provide a perspective on behaviour - a stance to be taken towards data and to guide and provide style for research on particular areas of behaviour.

Grounded theory consists of systematic, inductive guidelines for collecting and analysing data through coding and generating theoretical frameworks. Throughout the research process, grounded theorists develop analytical interpretations of their data to focus further data collection, which in turn is used to inform and refine their developing theoretical analysis (Charmaz, 2000: 509), a process described as the constant comparative method. The method uses data gathered in a number of different forms (eg. interview transcripts, field notes and historical documents) collected typically using interviews, workshops, focus groups and participant observation.

The power of grounded theory and constant comparison lies in its capacity to generate an understanding of empirical worlds (Charmaz, 2000: 510). Glaser (1971), describes two

4

Post-positivism is the modern version of positivism. While the underlying principles of positivism still apply in post-positivism, a more critical and less rigid use of the rules apply. It is termed critical realism in that ‗real‘ reality exists but only imperfectly and probabilistically apprehendable. The evolution of positivism into post-positivism saw modifications in experimental designs and falsification of the hypothesis.

69

grounded theory types: substantive or formal. Substantive theory is generated through comparative analysis between or among groups within the same substantive area. Formal theory generated through the comparative analysis is made among different kinds of substantive cases, which fall within the formal area, without relating them to any one substantive area.

Grounded theory begins with the data source, and open questioning of events. The process of refining the questioning and coding (see Section 4) of data eventually leads to the development of conceptual linkages (Figure 9). The constant comparative method involves continuous searching, returning to the original data and conducting repetitive comparisons. Memo writing is used throughout the process, to record concepts as they emerge. The memos are used at each stage of the conceptual analyses and when saturation occurs (i.e. no new concepts emerge), the concepts are integrated into a theoretical framework.

The theory that eventually emerges is grounded from the constant comparative process. Thus the hypotheses and concepts not only come from the data but are systematically worked through during the course of the research (Glaser and Strauss, 1967).

Glaser‘s position on grounded theory remained that data should be gathered without forcing either preconceived questions or frameworks upon it. Whereas, according to Glaser (1992), a Straussian methodology of grounded theory evolved to be dependent on deductive preconceptions which forces data to fit preconceived ideas.

Despite the conflicting directions adopted by Glaser and Strauss, their epistemological positions remain guided by the principles of positivism (Guba and Lincoln, 1994 cited in Charmaz, 2001:510). However, according to Charmaz (2001:510)

―A constructivist approach to grounded theory reaffirms studying people in their natural settings and redirects qualitative research away from positivism. Grounded theory strategies need not be rigid or prescriptive; a focus on meaning while using grounded theory furthers rather than limits interpretive understanding and; we can adopt grounded theory strategies without embracing the positivist leanings of the earlier proponents of grounded theory‖.

The rigour of the grounded theory approach offers qualitative researchers a clear set of guidelines from which to build explanatory frameworks that specify relationships among concepts (Charmaz, 2001:510). Grounded theory methods do not detail data collection techniques; they move each step of the analytical process toward the development, refinement and interrelation of concepts (Charmaz, 2001: 510).

70

Data source (i)

Data source (ii) Data source

(iii) Identify events

code and compare

Identify events, code and compare

Identify events, code and compare Write theory memos and compare Write theory memos and compare Write theory memos and compare

Figure 9. Constant comparative method used in grounded theory

A constructivist approach to grounded theory has been taken for this study, firstly due to the nature of the problem domain. Little is known about the substantive area of farmlet learning platforms and starting with a ‗clean theoretical slate‘ will allow theory to emerge without preconceived ideas. Secondly, the methodology for this project needed to have flexibility and not require detailed data collection techniques, rather allowing for an emergent process where each stage of the analytical process moved towards the development, refinement and interrelation of concepts. Thirdly, the methodology needed to account for an interactive research process with the researcher being part of what was being observed rather than separate from it. And finally, constructivist grounded theory remains open to refinement and accounts for social reality being dependent on human action. This means that this project is the starting point for developing the conceptual construct of farmlet learning platforms and studying how the RD&E continuum work and learn together.