Tests of reliability and validity

Reliability refers to “the consistency of a measure of a concept” (Bryman & Bell, 2007:21). This means obtaining the same results by repeating the same research using similar methods. The nature of this study required the collection of primary data only since the study sought answers that related to the way in which the variable mentioned above would have affected student attitudes and compliance. In order to gain the trust of the respondents and to enhance the response quality, a cover letter, which explained the nature of the research, was attached to the questionnaire. The questionnaire was classified into several sections which covered the general orientation of the research.

68

“The reliability of the instrument was then estimated using Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient which is used to assess the internal consistence or homogeneity among the research instrument items” (Awino, 2013: 127). As Malebana and Swanepoel (2015: 97) suggested, “(t)he reliability of the measuring instrument was tested by means of Cronbach’s alpha. Garson (2009) states that the cut-off criteria for internal consistency reliability is 0.60 for exploratory research and that an alpha value of at least 0.70 or higher is required to retain an item in an adequate scale”. The calculation for the Cronbach’s alpha was carried out effectively in the study. The alpha values are presented in the next chapter.

Reliability refers to something that is dependable and will give the same results over time. For example, according to Golafshani (2003), if a sportsperson is able to perform in the same way over and over, it may be claimed that the person is reliable. The researcher is in agreement with Zohrabi (2013) that it is relatively easy to obtain similar results in a quantitative research study because the data is in numerical form. However, this is not always the case with a qualitative research design. The data in qualitative research is in a narrative form and subjective, thus making it difficult to obtain similar results. However, Zohrabi (2013) suggests overlooking the issue of same results and advise considering the dependability and consistency of the data, thus implying that the researcher should collect data until the data collected becomes redundant. Three techniques have been suggested to ensure the dependability of the results:

i) The position of the researcher: The researcher must explicitly explain the process and phase of inquiry.

ii) Triangulation: Different procedures, such as questionnaires which contain both open- and close-ended questions, as well as interviews and observations should be used to collect the requisite data. In addition, the data should be obtained from different sources, such as students, lecturers and teaching assistants.

iii) Audit trail: Finally, the researcher should explain how the data was collected and analysed as this will help subsequent researchers trying to conduct the same research in order to obtain the same result and demonstrate the reliability of the study (Zohrabi, 2013:260).

69

In general, validity refers to ensuring that a research study is both true and believable. As Joppe (2000:71), in Golafshani (2003:11), notes:

Validity regulates whether the research truly measures what it was supposed to measure or how truthful the research results are. In other words, does the research instrument allow you to hit “the bull’s eye” of the research object? Researchers generally determine validity by asking a series of questions, and will often look for the answer in the research of others.

In general, validity is about looking at the quality and the acceptability of the research. Validity requires that the instruments used are validated, as the results or conclusions emanate from both the data and the instruments used (Zohrabi, 2013). Six techniques have been suggested by Zohrabi (2013:252) as tools to ensure validity:

i) Triangulation: The data collection should include different sources, as gathering data using one technique only may be both questionable and biased.

ii) Member checks: This refers to taking the results and interpretations back to the interviewees to validate that they are an accurate representation of what they said during the interviews.

iii) Long-term observation: Repeating the observations and visiting different classes may help to validate the research.

iv) Peer examination: During this process the research data and findings should be reviewed by the researcher’s peers who have an understanding of the subject being studied but who are not part of the research itself. v) Participatory or collaborative modes of research: The participants, for

example, students, teachers, ex-students and language instructors, should be involved in all phases of the inquiry. Their views and suggestions may help to enhance the research and also to look at it from a different perspective.

vi) Research bias: As in any other research study it is easy for a researcher to be biased towards a study.

As mentioned above, a good researcher collects data and analyses and interprets it without being biased. In addition, such a researcher observes all the ethical considerations of research. The researcher should always try to be non-judgemental and, as already stated, adhere to all the ethical considerations mentioned by Zohrabi

70

(2013). The latter issue has been explored in section 3.3.6. If used, all the above- mentioned techniques will help to ensure that the research is as valid and reliable as possible.

All of the above have been taken into consideration by the researcher with most of the above-mentioned techniques of questionnaires, interviews and observations being used to avoid unreliable and invalid results.