Weaving methodologies

The importance of using a combination of methodologies has been acknowledged in the area of educational research.5 This research utilized a combination of methodologies, primarily the case study methodology, participatory action research, narrative inquiry and grounded theory. The thesis is a case study of ten years of environmental education practice of the Center for Environmental Concerns- Philippines, which employs a participatory action research (PAR) approach in conducting its work with local communities. Hence, it is understandable that PAR is identified as one of the research methodologies utilized in conducting this research. However, given that the thesis is a major scholarly reflection on ten years of practice and has used organizational documents as its main source of data, it has identified narrative inquiry as an additional research methodology. Furthermore, the examination of these documents has been guided by a grounded theory approach that involved interrogating the organizational documents and allowing the themes and patterns to unfold and reveal themselves.

Case study research, according to Sharan Merriam6 has been defined as a research process, an end product or a unit of study. Robert Yin views it as a process of

… empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between the phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.7

5

Andrew Sturman, “Case study methods” in J.P. Keeves (ed), Educational research, methodology and measurement: an international handbook, 2nd edn. (Oxford: Elsevier Science, 1997), pp. 61-66. 6

Sharan B. Merriam, Qualitative research and case study applications in education (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998), p. 27.

7

Robert K. Yin, Case study research: design and methods, 2nd edn. (Thousand Oaks, California: Sage, 1994), p. 13.

14

Merriam earlier defined it as an end product that is “an intensive, holistic description and analysis of a single instance, phenomenon, or social unit.”8 In a revised and updated edition of her book, Merriam argues that the “single most defining characteristic of case study research lies in delimiting the object of study, the case.”9 A finite group, phenomenon, event or amount of time must bind the case under study. Each definition emphasizes one particular aspect which, seen as a part of the whole, makes up a case study research.

This thesis encompasses all three aspects identified by Merriam as necessary in a case study. It is a research process that investigates and reports on the particular practice of a single organization within a given timeframe. Specifically, it investigates, describes and analyzes ten years of environmental education practice of the CEC- Philippines. It can be characterized as an historical case study as it describes and analyzes a single institution’s programs and practices through a specified time frame, in particular CEC’s attempt to localize its educational practice. Because the thesis is concerned more with the processes and the factors that influenced the localization of practice, a case study approach is even more suitable because of the emphasis of the study on process and context.

A case study design was also selected because the research was more concerned about “insight, discovery and interpretation rather than hypothesis testing.”10 However, it is not limited to insight and interpretation based on reflection of practice but attempts to "enhance the understanding of educational action,"11

8

Sharan B. Merriam, Case study research in education: a qualitative approach (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1988), p. 21.

which according to Sturman makes it an educational case study, as well. Furthermore, this

9

Merriam, Qualitative research, p. 27 10

Merriam, Qualitative research, p.28. 11

15

understanding of educational action is expected to contribute to “bringing about change” or social action through education.12

The close link between the research and action components of the thesis is the key characteristic that makes the research an action research case study. Stephen Kemmis and Mervyn Wilkinson described PAR as a process that is often “inadequately described in terms of a series of mechanical steps” 13 within a spiral of planning, acting, observing, reflecting, re-planning and so forth. Yoland Wadsworth argues that in essence, “all research is action research.”14 However, she emphasizes that in action research, the action component is an explicit goal of the research process. In this case, two kinds of action can be identified the improvement of educational practice and wider social and environmental change. The thesis studies in greater detail the action in relation to educational practice. Wadsworth, in describing PAR, focuses on the aspect of participation. She argues, however, that all research involves participation, specifically, " the participation of people who are more or less party to the inquiry effort.”15 However, she emphasizes that in participatory action research the participants are more consciously involved in both the inquiry and action phases of the research.

Robin McTaggart argues that the “conception of [educational] ‘practice’ in action research has been too narrowly understood.” 16 In education, he continues, the term ‘practice’ often has a “purely technical meaning”17

12

Sturman, p. 63.

or “something relatively small and

13

Stephen Kemmis and Mervyn Wilkinson, “Participatory action research and the study of practice” in B. Atweh, S. Kemmis and P. Weeks (eds), Action research in practice: partnership for social justice in education (London: Routledge, 1998), p. 21.

14

Yoland Wadsworth, Do it yourself social research, 2nd edn. (St. Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin, 1997), p. 36.

15

Wadsworth, Do it yourself, p. 36. 16

Robin McTaggart, Action research: a short modern history (Geelong: Deakin University, 1991), p. 45.

17

16

disconnected.”18 However, McTaggart argues, “educational practice is linked with personal and social histories – its transformation with individual responsibility and collective action.”19 Therefore, instead of a narrow definition of practice, this study takes “a broad, historically sensitive, socially and politically aware perspective in action research”20 in an effort to contribute to the growth and development of CEC’s educational practice.

Kemmis and Wilkinson stress PAR’s use “to help people investigate and change their social and educational realities by changing some of the practices, which constitute their lived realities.”21 Specifically in the field of education, PAR has been used “ as a means for professional development, improving curricula or problem solving in a variety of work situations.”22 As a research method PAR is consistent with the nature of the work of the CEC, which consciously uses the action-reflection process in all aspects of its environmental work and continues to value and increase the involvement of the local community organizations in its programs. Furthermore, Robottom and Hart describe it as a research process that is very similar to the process of progressive contextualization of educational practice being examined.

There is a need, in participatory research in environmental education, for the methodology to be continually negotiated with participants as the substantive environmental and educational politics change and as joint understandings of the substantive issues and the relationships of the research to these issues become clearer.23 18 McTaggart, p. 49. 19 McTaggart, p. 51. 20 McTaggart, p. 51. 21

Kemmis and Wilkinson, p. 22. 22

Kemmis and Wilkinson, p. 22. 23

17

It is therefore an essential aspect of this research to examine progressive contextualization of CEC’s grassroots environmental education practice as both educational and research processes.

Narrative inquiry is the third research methodology utilized in this study.

Narrativists believe that human experience is basically storied experience. ... [Therefore] one of the best ways to study human beings is to come to grips with the storied quality of human experience, to record stories of educational experience, and to write still other interpretative stories of educational experience.24

The aim of most research that utilizes narrative inquiry, as a methodology is to “study the experience through stories.”25 This research, being a historical case study of an organization, studies and analyzes the narratives and stories of the CEC and the individuals who were and are involved in the development and implementation of its educational practice. These narratives and stories are equivalent to what would commonly be called data, but in the realm of narrative inquiry these are generally referred to as “field notes.”26 It worked to the advantage of this research that CEC, like many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the Philippines, has been meticulous in documenting both processes and outcomes. Such a practice was developed due to the need of regularly reporting to external funding bodies. The CEC has maintained in the past ten years an extensive archive of documents, which was made available to the researcher.

While for some NGOs annual reports have become the final repositories of their experiences, CEC has regularly reflected on and theorized its experiences. Some of

24

F. Michael Connelly and Jean Clandinin, “Narrative inquiry” in J.P. Keeves (ed), Educational research, methodology and measurement: an international handbook, 2nd edn. (Oxford: Elsevier Science, 1997), pp. 81-85.

25

Merriam, Qualitative research, p. 157 26

18

these papers have been published. The relevant papers, both published and unpublished, that have been cited in the thesis are included as a separate list in the bibliography. Most of these reflection and theory-building processes have been internal discussions involving CEC and its local partner organizations. However, on a number of occasions, individuals from the university, government agencies, people's organizations and other NGOs have been invited to participate in the discussions. Aside from these, there have been few opportunities to further extend this dialogue between the theory borne from CEC's practice and the theory documented in the literature and from other people's practices. The use of narrative inquiry helps provide equal importance to the wide range of existing field texts and notes; from the everyday local stories of the workshop participants, evaluations of the local educators, workshop documents and even academic articles on popular environmental education.

The final approach that informed the research methodology is grounded theory. The research did not begin “with a preconceived theory in mind” but rather the research involved allowing “the theory to emerge from the data.”27 Because“emergence is the foundation of the approach to theory building” in grounded theory, neither was there “a guiding theoretical framework” applied to study CEC’s educational practice.28 Progressive contextualization is strictly not a preconceived theory or a guiding theoretical framework but rather was identified as the starting point of this particular stage of the research. In fact progressive contextualization was identified from one of the main field texts, the RENEW Manual, examined as part of this research. Situating this within the language of grounded theory, it is the “overarching explanatory scheme” 29 that surfaced from the previous conceptual ordering of the experience under study.

27

Anselm Strauss and Juliet Corbin, Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (California: SAGE, 1998), p. 12.

28

Strauss and Corbin, p. 34. 29

19

While the thesis identifies progressive contextualization as the starting point of this particular research, it is important to acknowledge that prior description and conceptual ordering, which Strauss and Corbin identified as essential components of theorizing, have been conducted before the start of this current research. Duhaylungsod30 identified progressive contextualization as one of the lessons learned from CEC’s experience in developing and conducting the Restoration Ecology Workshops (RENEW). This research builds in these previous processes, the outcomes of which were identified at the beginning of this chapter, specifically the two descriptions of progressive contextualization proposed in 1996 and 1997.

The current research revisits and builds on these previous attempts to describe and conduct a conceptual ordering of the field texts, within the overarching explanatory scheme of progressive contextualization. These previous attempts have in effect, become a key part of the process of developing a theory of progressive contextualization, which is proposed as one of the outcomes of this research.