Validity and reliability

Procedures for evaluating the rigour of action research evolve around “well-formulated processes for testing reliability and establishing validity” (Stringer, 2008, p. 47). Validity is concerned with whether the research is really doing what it claims to be doing and whether the results are credible (McNiff, 1988).

Hamersley (1992) suggests that validity in qualitative research replaces certainty with confidence in one‟s accounts becoming representations of a certain reality rather than reproductions of it. Lomax (1986) suggests that action researchers do not claim to possess a final answer to a question, but rather profess to improve and change educational practice through practitioners‟ professional development. As a result, the validity that action research claims is the degree to which claims are relevant in guiding practice for teachers involved and have the ability to inform and speed debate about improving practice in the wider teaching community.

79

Keerlinger (1973), cited in Lincoln and Guba (1985), states that reliability is

“synonymous with dependability, stability, consistency, predictability and accuracy” (p. 292). Therefore, it is estimated by measures of the extent to which similar results may be expected from similar samples within the population studied, across different contexts at different times (Stringer, 2008). Lincoln and Guba (1985) further state that “reliability is not prized for its own sake but as a precondition for validity; an unreliable measure cannot be valid” (p. 292).

However, Stringer (2008) notes that, because there can be no “objective measures of validity, the underlying issue is to identify ways of establishing trustworthiness, the extent to which we can trust the truthfulness or adequacy of a research project”

(p. 48). Lincoln and Guba (1985) propose that means for establishing trustworthiness involve procedures for attaining: credibility, transferability, dependability and confirmability. The present study tried to achieve validity and reliability by following the four procedures suggested by Lincoln and Guba (1985).

Credibility

Qualitative research is easily open to sloppy, biased processes that merely harness the biases and perspectives of those in control of the research process (Stringer, 2008). However, to minimize the extent to which researcher‟s own view points intrude, Linclon and Guba (1985) suggest a careful adherence to the following processes. That is, spend enough time to study the research context and use multiple and different instruments. The researcher planned to collect the data in a period of three months. This time period allowed ample time for the researcher to study and get to know the research site. The teaching of the study unit did not start until after three weeks. Within these three weeks, the researcher familiarized himself with the research site and the participants, seeking to establish a natural and non-threatening relationship. Credibility was also achieved once the relationship between researcher and the participants became natural and non-threatening (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Stringer, 2008).

The present study employed eight different data collection methods (as set out in section 4.2.3). The aim was to collect rich data and to triangulate them so that all

80

participants‟ views were taken into account from different angles using different methods.

Transferability

Transferability, according to Lincoln and Guba (1985), refers to when researchers seek to provide the possibility that results can be transferred to other settings to enable people to take advantage of the knowledge acquired in the course of study.

Stringer (2008) states “such application is possible if the other setting is sufficiently similar to allow results to be applicable” (p. 50). The present study sought to achieve transferability by including a detailed description of the study in the introductory chapter. In Chapter 3, the context of the study was discussed in detail in terms of relevant aspects pertaining to the subject of the study. The present study also reviewed relevant literature that is directly related to the topic.

A detailed description of the study methodology is also given here. The presentation of findings will be followed by a discussion of these findings. Such detail should allow other readers to make a self-judgement on the suitability of conducting a similar study in a different setting.

Dependability.

Trustworthiness also depends on the extent to which observers are able to ascertain whether research procedures are adequate for the purposes of the study (Stinger, 2008). One of the ways to achieve dependability in research, as proposed by Lincoln and Guba (1985), is to have an inquiry audit. The task of this group or this person is to check that the details of the research process, including processes for defining the research problem, collecting and analysing data are sufficient. The present study sought to maintain dependability by adhering strictly to the University of Waikato‟s Ethical Conduct in Human Research and Related Activities Regulations (2008)¹. The early stage of the present study was also closely monitored by my supervisor. The ethics application was approved before the researcher travelled to the research site.

1 http://calender.waikato.ac.nz/assessment/ethicalConduct.html

81 Confirmability

Confirmability is achieved when information gathered from the research is reviewed (Lincoln and Guba, 1985, Stringer, 2008). The information enables the participants or other observers to confirm that the research accurately and adequately represents the perspectives presented in the study. By this means, the trustworthiness of the study is enhanced (Stinger, 2008).

The present study used the associate teacher as a critical friend. The critical friend conducted the observations, check-marked the formative assessment tests, pre-test and the post-intervention test. The interview students were not available to validate their responses after the interview transcription; it was given to my critical friend to double-check by listening to the recorded interviews. Teacher interviews were transcribed, and then given back to them for validation. The translation of the interviews (students and teachers) was double-checked by my critical friend.