Chapter 3
METHODOLOGY
This paper aimed to capture the experiences of Grade 11 students in Tagum
City National High School choosing senior high school track.
This chapter presented the research design, role of the researcher, research
participants, the process of data collection, data analysis, and trustworthiness
that includes the four criteria: credibility, confirmability, dependability, and
transferability. All individuals that were concern with this study was also included
as well as the process of ethical consideration.
Research Design
This phenomenological study will describe the different perspective of
TCNHS Grade 10 students with regard of choosing senior high school track. It will
focus into what common perception the participants had encounter in choosing
senior high school track.
This qualitative study will involve interviews with Grade 11 students who were
going to decide what senior high track they may possibly take proper
implemented by the Department of Education. We willl use descriptive method in
this study to examine the different perspective of students in their chosen track.
On the other hand, Burns and Grove (2007) illustrate qualitative research as
concerning more on human experience conducted in natural settings where
information are processed through observed phenomenon. We will use
phenomenology in our study because it is centered on the peoples’ lived
experiences (Carpenter, 2007).
As suggested by Creswell (2012), sources of qualitative data include
profoundly interviews, personal observations, and reliable documents. In this
study, we used specific strategies in obtaining information such as substantial
interviews using audio recorder, taking down notes, and focus group discussion.
We will give focus on the emotional details of the participants to create a
significant output and significance of the study.
Themes of the phenomena from the six participants of the individual interview
and with six members of the focus group discussion will be describe using
thematic analysis, which is widely used in qualitative analytic method (Boyatzis,
1998; Roulston, 2001) because of its flexibility. Participants from five to six
individuals who experienced the phenomenon is ideal for in-depth and multiple
interviews. Thematic analysis as a foundational method for qualitative analysis
(Halloway and Todres, 2013) provides a flexible and useful reearch tool, which
can potentially provide a rich, detailed yet complex account of data (Roulston,
2001).
Role of the Researchers
Grade 11 students of year 2018-2019 are the next batch to experience the
implemented K-12 program of the DepEd for the students to be aware what are
the outcome in choosing the right track. It is a very argumentative to know if the
program is effective or not. This is the reason why we decided to conduct this
study. As a part, we wanted other people hear our sides. To show them what
we’ve got.
We can readily relate with this study since we are a part of this K-12 program.
We can personally present our own biases and prejudices on the research
questions being explored. Our role in this study is to interview Grade 10 students
perception in choosing senior high school track for us to know their insight
towards decision-making.
We will gather our data by conducting in-depth individual interviews with six
students and by facilitating a focus group discussion with six participants. An
expert or professional data analyst will be the one who will analyzed data that will
be gather from audio recordings after which, we construct our personal insights.
Research Participants
The participants of the study where the Grade 11 students choosing senior
high school track. We will use convenience sampling to interview six students
from Tagum City National High School and one focus group discussion (FGD)
with six participants both male and female. Although this people have different
perceptions but there are some shared the same perception.
In this phenomenological study, the respondents will be taken from Tagum
City National High School. According to Dornyel (2007), the size of a focus group
ranges between 6-10 (sometimes 12) people. Fewer than six would limit the
potential of the collective wisdom whereas too large size would make it difficult for
everyone to participate. When designing a focus group study, the two key
technical questions to decide are (a) whether to have a homogeneous or
heterogeneous people in a group , and (b) how many group to have.
We had also one focus group discussion (FGD) consisting of six members as
stated by Dornyel (2007) the focus groups ranges between 6-10, who are also a
student of TCNHS and part of K-12 program. We are confident that this number
of participants that we’re going to interview will be considerable enough to have
in-depth and credible information about the subject that we have explored.
Data Collection
We will employ in-depth individual interviews with the participants in
collecting data using multilingual in interviewing the participants. Meaning, the
participants will answer in English, Bisaya, or a mix of any of these three
languages. Interviews will be save in the personal computer and several copy
from the team to secure the data.
In focus group discussion, we will focus our attention to every detail that each
member of the group would be share in order for us to have a throrough
understanding on their perception in choosing senior high school track. We will
made certain that there were no obstacles while the discussion was going on. A
well- defined FGD depends on the researcher’s focus and the group’s
communication.
Interviews will be conducted during free time or after classes in the afternoon
in a quiet and private room to ensure there were no distractions that might
happen. In addition, to have privacy and confidentiality of the perceptions the
participants have shared. Audio clip during interviews were all well taken. After all,
data will be coded, analyzed, and reduce into the most essential themes.
Data Analysis
Data Analysis is the systematic organization and synthesis of research data
(Polit & Hungler 1995: 639). The tape-recorded interviews will be transcribed and
translated verbatim and analysis done according to the method of Tesch
(Creswell 1994: 155)
The answer of the participants will be analyzed using thematic analysis.
Thematic analysis is a method of analyzing and reporting pattern or themes with
a data (Boyatzis, 1998; Roulston, 2001). Using thematic analysis on this study is
very helpful because it is flexible and a useful research tool that can probably
grant a substantial, complex, and rich account of the data. As suggested by
Boyatzis (1998), we’re going to perform the following steps in analyzing the data
a to mention: familiarize data, generate initial codes, search for themes, define
and name themes, and construct the report.
Data reduction will be used in analyzing data, which means deleting
unnecessary data and modifying them into a useful material for the study so that
many readers can easily understand it (Namey et al, 2007; Atkinsol and
Delamont, 2006; Suter, 2012). In this method.
Following the steps suggested by Boyatzis (1998), we will first listen to the
audio clip and then transcribe the interviews. This is to transform the data into
texts and so that it would be easier for us to code our data after. Then we will
read our data many times to get acquainted with them. Then we will look for
possible themes, coding them along the way. To show data in an organized and
orderly manner, data display will be used.. Data display is the organization of
data and showing them through matrices, charts, and graphs that enable the
reader to draw out their ends (Suter, 2012).
Drawing conclusions and verification was the last step of analyzing qualitative
data. It is essential to review and revisit the data many times to double check and
verify the existing conclusions (Atkinsol and Delamont, 2006). These conclusions
were generated from the descriptive themes that came out from the interview of
the participants; these were woven together making it a useful material for results
and discussions.
Trustworthiness of the Study
Parallel to the criteria of quantitative research as suggested by Guba (1981),
such as internal validity, reliability, and objectivity, qualitative research has also
different criteria for its evaluation (Lincoln, 1995). We considered the
trustworthiness as suggested by Guba and Lincoln (1985) such as credibility,
dependability, confirmability, and transferability of the study (Cutcliffe & McKenna,
1999; Linccoln & Guba, 1985; Sandelowski, 1986; Streubert-Speziale, 2007).
Trustworthiness is the true value on the findings of the study and the
accuracy of data interpretations collected from the participant’s experiences
(Lincoln and Guba, 1985).
Credibility
Credibility is the trustworthiness concept that roughly corresponds to internal
validity (Morrow 2005; Rolfe, 2004). In positivist research, internal validity refers
to the ruling out of rival hypothesis, that the constructs are likely real and reliable,
and the instrument is measuring the right content (Straub et al. 2004).
Credibility refers to how much the data collected accurately reflects the
multiple realities of the phenomenon. Credibility can be established through
prolonged engagement with informants, triangulation of data or getting data from
a variety of sources (interviews, documents etc.), sharing with each participant
the verbatim transcript of the individual interviews, and the emerging concepts
and categories or respondent validation (Carcary, 2009) or participant checks
(Morrow, 2005).
Dependability
Dependability is a trustworthiness concept that closely matches reliability
(Morrow, 2005; Rolfe, 2004). In positivist research, reliability is the extent to
which a variable or a set of variables is consistent with what it is supposed to
measure when repeated multiple of times (Straub et al. 2004).
Dependability refers to the confirmation that the data represents the changing
conditions of the phenomenon under study (Brown, et al. 2002) and should be
consistent across time, researchers and analysis techniques (Morrow, 2005).
This is done by another individual who audits and confirms that the GTM
procedures are followed and verifying that they are used correctly (Brown et al.
2002). Peer researchers, student advisors or colleagues can examine the
detailed chronology of research activities and processes or audit trail to
determine the reliability of the findings (Morrow, 2005).
Confirmability
Confirmability is a neutral criterion for measuring the trustworthiness of qualitative
research. If a study demonstrates credibility and fittingness, the study is also said
to possess confirmability (Streubert Speziale & Carpenter, 2003). It is a creation
for evaluating data quality and refers to the neutrality or objectivity of the data by
an agreement between two or more dependent persons that the data is similar
(Poli & Hungler, 2004). Confirmability is a strategy to ensure neutrality (De Vo,
1998). It means that the findings are free from bias.
Transferability
Transferability is a rustworthiness concept that can be seen a external validity
(Morrow, 2005). External validity I positivist research is how well an instrument
generalizes or is consistent across diverse constituencies (Straub et al. 2004).
Transferability refers to the applicability of one set of findings to another
setting. Transferability can be enhanced through clear descriptions of the
research, the participant’s diverse perspectives and experiences, methodology,
interpretation of results, and contributions from peer debriefs (Brown et al., 2002)
Information about the researcher as an instrument in the process, the
relationships between the researcher and participants enhance transferability
(Morrow, 2005). An audit trail shoul be provided and be detailed enough to allow
other researchers to repeat the same inquiry in a similar setting (Cooney, 2010).
Ethical Considerations
The main concerns of our study were individuals who are custody on the
code of ethic, they are all students and still striving to achieve professional
degree. Therefore, we have to ensure their safety, give full protection so that they
will not lose their trust to us. We followed ethical standards in conducting this
study as pointed by (Boyatzis, 1998; Mack et.al, 2005), these are the following:
respect for persons, consent, beneficence, confidentiality and justice.
Respect for person’s needs, an obligation of the researcher not to exploit the
weaknesses of the research participant. Self-sufficiency was avoided in order to
maintain friendship, trust, and confidence among the participants and the
researcher. Beforehand, we asked for the participants’ vacancy and availability
(Creswell, 2012). This was done to pay respect for the individuals concerned in
the study.
Consent, is another most important way of showing respect to persons
during research (Creswell, 2012). This is to let all participants became aware on
the purpose and objectives of the research study that they are going to involve.
Written consent was provided for them to get their approval. After getting their
nod, they have actively participated the in-depth interviews and focus group
discussions. Of course, they were informed on the results and findings of the
study.
Beneficence require a commitment of minimizing risks to the research
participants rather maximizing the profits that are due to them. Anonymity of the
interviewee was kept in order not to put each participant into risks. At all times,
participants were protected, so every files of information were not left unattended
or unprotected (Bricki and Green, 2007).
Confidentiality towards the results and findings including the safeguard of
the participants, coding system were used. Meaning, the participants’ identities
were hidden (Maree and Van Der Westhuizen, 2007). As recommended by
Maree and Van Der Westhhuizen (2007), all materials including videotapes,
encoded transcripts, notes, and others should be destroyed after the data were
being analyzed.
Justice requires a reasonable allocation of the riks and benefits as results of
the research. It is very important to acknowledge the contributions of all the
participants as they generally part of the success of the research. They must
given due credits in all their endeavors (Bloom and Crabtree, 2006).