Validity, reliability, trustworthiness, generalisability and transferability According to Yin (2009,) case studies should be well designed to include construct validity,

internal validity, external validity and reliability. In this study, construct validity was established through multiple sources of data collection that was used to create a “chain of evidence” (Yin, 2009, p. 41). Mixed qualitative/quantitative methods were used to collect data. Hesse-Biber (2010) suggests that linking these two methods can enhance the reliability and validity of research findings. As discussed earlier (see 3.13, p. 108) in this study, patterns and themes were used to develop conceptual understanding of factors facilitating the engagement in learning of Pāsifika students. This has created internal validity for this study, which according to Yin (2009), includes “pattern-matching, and explanation building” (p. 41). External validity in case studies is created when case studies can be generalised to theory (Yin, 2009, p. 44). The current study generated a Roots Model of Pāsifika student engagement that will be tested in other school environments in the future.

Validity was also achieved through the use of triangulation, which determined if the results in one data gathering method agree with the results in other methods. For example, results from the interviews and observations (qualitative) were compared with results from the survey

(quantitative and quantitative) to investigate the students’ perceptions of their most favourite subject. Here triangulation was utilised to create valid findings and to establish a chain of evidence to determine if it was actually measuring what it intends to measure.

In case study research reliability refers to how stable, accurate, and precise measurement happened, and how well protocols, and procedures were documented (Yin, 2003). Reliability was addressed at two levels to ensure the data gathering tools produced stable, consistent results. Firstly, data collection protocols for the researcher were established early on in the planning stages of this research. These protocols included the same instructions and timeframes for the different groups of participants when surveys and interviews were completed. Observations were all conducted within the same timeframes, and the same protocols for arranging the observations, engaging in and exiting from the observations were utilised. Secondly, it involved the “extent to which research findings from similar questions yield similar responses” (Hesse-Biber, 2010, p. 466). Similar questions in the various data gathering resources referred to (for example) the participants’ knowledge of the Pāsifika Education Plan. The responses consistently confirmed a low percentage of participants were aware of its existence.

Trustworthiness and credibility for this study firstly involved the relationships the researcher established throughout the current study. These relationships included: that between the researcher and the participants, the researcher and the all important sourcing of appropriate literature reviews, the researcher and those consulted to provide cultural support, the researcher and those who helped co-contruct knowledge and understanding during the data- anylis stages, and lastly between the researcher and the analysis of the collected data. The consultation processes related to co-constructed and cultural knowledge were only activated after the researcher had analysed data and wanted confirmation about her interpretation of the outcomes. For example, once the researcher asked teachers to confirm her interpretation of reading outcomes (National Standards) supplied by the school.

The researcher followed the research guidelines by Anae et al. (2001), the advice and guidance from the Pāsifika Reference Group and the research supervisors to create a research environment of mutual trust and respect. The ethical considerations of this study furthered these relationships, as participants contributed knowing their rights to anonymity and confidentiality took priority.

102

Shenton (2004), Yin (2003) and Anae et al. (2001) claim credibility is determined when a researcher uses well-established research methods. The mixed qualitative/quantitative research method chosen for this research was based on case study research, informed by Bronfenbrenner’s ecological approach and the Tree of Opportunity metaphor. Although the research method utilised for this study was critical to credibility, the researcher also relied on the principles of building trusting, respectful relationships – a shared commonality between the cultural values of the researcher and the participants, particularly that of Pāsifika. Although the researcher was familiar with the culture of Pācific Intermediate School, cultural support was sought to ensure cultural appropriateness for engaging with the diversities of the Pāsifika peoples.

Other approaches that were followed to promote credibility included the use of triangulation, debriefing sessions and reflections on the research processes. Other methods utilised included peer scrutiny of the different phases of the research (mainly members of the Pāsifika Reference Group) and processes to ensure openness in respondents (participants knew they could withdraw from the research at any stage). The researcher therefore made every effort to establish a researcher- participant rapport.

Lastly, the researcher aimed to provide “thick descriptions” (Shenton, 2004, p. 10) or detailed descriptions of the answers to the research questions, which lead to identifying factors facilitating the engagement of Pāsifika students at Pācific Intermediate School. These ‘thick descriptions’ could enhance future sharing of the research outcomes with professionals, who could use these outcomes in their practice and research studies. Transferability, according to Polit and Beck (2010), is a “third model of generalizability that was proposed by Firestone (1993) in what he called case-to- case translation” (p. 1453). In transferability, the researcher provides thick descriptions (Shenton, 2004, p. 10) about research findings and allows readers to make “inferences about the findings to other settings. It is therefore the readers and users of research who ‘transfer’ the results” (Polit, & Beck, 2010, p. 1453). Although generalisability was supported in this research through the careful detailing of participants, the Pāsifika theoretical basis and the integrated research method, it is anticipated that transferability will become a bigger focus in the future.

3.16 Summary

This chapter began by outlining the research questions used in this study. It explained the research methodology as a case study informed by Bronfenbrenner’s ecological approach and the Tree of Opportunity metaphor. The mixed qualitative/quantitative data gathering methods were described including interviews, surveys, whole class observations and documentation analysis of information from the school’s database.

The chapter outlined the three stages of planning and consultation, data collection and analysis of this research. The first stage was concerned with permission for the research at various levels: Massey University, school level (The Board of Trustees) and at individual participant level. In the second stage, the participant demographics and strategies for data collection were explained. These included the preparation stages for data collection and the actual data collection approaches that were used in this research. The surveys’ interview schedules, observation schedules, and use of documents from the school’s database were described in terms of aims, format and procedures for administering. This was followed by the options to participants and the advantages, disadvantages of using these approaches. This section concluded with reflection on the research processes and exiting from the school. The third stage described the data analysis stage, focusing on the ecological, Pāsifika nature of this study and providing answers to the research questions. Although data analysis is the main focus in the third stage of this study, there is also a focus on data presentation and reporting. The roles of the Pāsifika Reference Group and research supervisors (consultation, negotiation and for reflection purposes) are evident in all three stages.

The following three chapters present the findings of this research. Each chapter responds to a research question. Chapter Four focuses on participant perceptions of factors that are barriers and facilitators of Pāsifika student engagement in learning. Chapter Five presents information related to teaching and learning practices that influence student engagement. Chapter Six explains how this wider understanding of engagement (derived from information from Chapters Four and Five) has extended the research into the social and cultural environment as the wider communities in which the students are involved. This wider, socio-cultural understanding of engagement factors also represents the discussion of the outcomes of this study.

104

CHAPTER 4