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).