L A GUERRA CIVIL DE 1936-1939

‘Every research tool or procedure is inextricably embedded in commitments to particular versions of the world and ways of knowing that world made by researchers using them’ (Hughes 1998, cited in Corbetta 2003: 12). The commitments of the researcher undertaking this project, made explicit within Chapter 1 of this thesis (pages 21-35), are further exposed in this section of this chapter. Thus the following discussion

will illuminate the philosophical positions that have informed decisions about the way in which this investigation into academics’ perspectives should be carried out.

As discussed in earlier chapters, the current work is informed by a critical realist ontology. It makes the assumption that there can be no determinism or objectivity, rather there is a mutually interactive influencing process that occurs between the researcher and the researched, with the ‘biographically situated researcher’ being embedded in all the research processes (Denzin and Lincoln 2005: 21). The two main philosophical paradigms in social research, ‘positivism’ and ‘interpretivism’, (Corbetta 2003: 12) represent opposing theoretical views on how social reality is understood and as such, each perspective has generated a range of research methodologies and strategies most appropriate to that school of thought (Corbetta 2003). Positivists view social reality as objective and existing independently from, or outside of, human behaviour and interpretation (Crossan 2003). This scientific, empiricist approach incorporates the view that ‘reality can be measured’ and that causal relationships can be conceived in terms of the interaction of variables (Creswell 1994: 116). This approach is vehemently rejected by critical realists (Sayer 1992) and would not enable an appropriate investigation of the research questions and purposes set out for this project, as attempts to understand human perceptions, behaviours, feelings, actions and beliefs, are not within the scope of a positivist framework. By contrast, the interpretivist philosophy suggests that ‘reality is not simply to be observed, but rather ‘interpreted’ (Corbetta 2003: 21). Cousin (2009: 8) uses ‘this broad term [interpretivist] to embrace any perspective that foregrounds the search for meanings’, as in this research where the approach considers human behaviours as resulting from deliberations, planning, reflexivity and attributing particular understandings and values to reality (Cohen et al. 2000: 22).

The strong ontological basis of critical realism has been set out in the first chapter of this thesis (pages 21-27). However, with regard to the philosophical underpinnings of this project, the alignment and consistency between ontology, epistemology and methodology are crucial (Scott 2000). Based on this understanding, the research has been conducted within an interpretive framework, using qualitative research methodology to ensure congruence between the principles of critical realism and the project’s interpretive approach to investigation. Sayer (1992: 179) confirms, from a critical realist position, that ‘qualitative analysis of objects is required to disclose mechanisms’ (italic in original). The qualitative approach aims to elicit rich experiential and interpretive data about continuing professional development within the everyday context of higher education, within which it is negotiated and made meaningful.

Qualitative research has been defined as ‘a situated activity that locates the observer in the world … the studied use and collection of a variety of empirical methods … that describe routine and problematic moments and meanings in individuals’, (Denzin and Lincoln 2005: 3), where ‘the emphasis … is upon words rather than numbers’ and ‘textual analysis predominates’ (Morrison 2002: 19-21). The information sought ‘concerns processes, activities, relations and episodes of events’ and explores relationships, interdependencies and experiences (Sayer 1992: 242). However, the rigour, validity and reliability of data collected and analysed using qualitative approaches is contested, particularly when contrasted or seen in opposition to quantitative, positivist traditions (Hammersley 2007; Whittemore et al. 2001). Scott (2005) deepens this debate through a critical realist approach and proposes that the fundamental issue is that researchers must ensure coherence between epistemology, ontology and methodology. Throughout this research process and strategy, explicit

alignment and consistency to the philosophical underpinnings derive from commitment at the ontological level (Scott 2007).

Following the interpretivist paradigm, this research is not value or bias-free, but has been informed by both my own constructions and beliefs and those of the individuals and organisations who have participated in the research. Thus, as discussed in Chapter 1 of this thesis, this research is ‘deeply influenced by [the researcher’s] own positionality’ (Cousin 2009: 32). Inevitably, every element of the research project has involved interpretation which is influenced by values and experience. For that reason, throughout the project, a commitment has been maintained to maximise research objectivity by ensuring clarity in relation to bias and value assumptions and being open to conflicting evidence, alternative views and critique from peers and ‘consumers’ of the research.

Methodology

The research methodology is founded upon the contention that the qualitative, interpretive approach enables credible investigation into ‘things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena [in this case, continuing professional development] in terms of the meanings people bring to them’ (Denzin and Lincoln 2005: 3, content in parentheses added). Through a comparative, multi-case study design ‘a holistic approach to the exploration of real life situations’ (Cousin 2009: 132) can be taken. Case study research provides a ‘comprehensive research strategy’ (Cousin 2009: 14), which involves in-depth inquiry into a small number of defined cases (Scott and Morrison 2006). Further to this, the multi-case study approach adopted allows for ‘the study of a few cases’ in order to ‘collect large amounts of data and study it in depth’ (Scott and Morrison 2006: 17), thus ensuring ‘quality and intensity’ (Cohen

realities” … expected’ (Stake 1995: 43). Significantly for this study, the principal emphasis of case study research ‘is upon giving the people of the case “a voice”’ (Scott and Morrison 2006: 17) and being ‘grounded in “lived reality”’ (Hodkinson and Hodkinson 2001: 3). Technically all research is case study research in that there will always be an entity, or ‘case’, about which data is collected and analysed (Gomm et al. 2000: 2). However, ‘case study research’ is ‘a specific form of enquiry’ (Gomm et al. 2000) or more precisely ‘case study research can be identified as ‘a paradigmatically separate form of research’ (Scott and Usher 1999: 87).

Case study research was particularly applicable for this investigation, as an appreciation of contextual conditions was considered an important aspect (Yin 2003). In order to realise the sampling requirements, detailed later in this chapter, a multi-case study investigation, involving two participant institutions, was considered to be the most appropriate strategy to achieve the aims and questions of this research. The value of case study research has, however, been questioned (Bassey 1999: 34; Gomm et al. 2000: 5-7), a particular criticism is that it considers ‘peculiarities rather than regularities’ (Smith 1991, cited in Cohen et al. 2000: 183). Whilst it is recognised that the multi-case study approach does not allow for generalisability across all academia, it is asserted that through adherence to disciplined practices of triangulation and analysis (Stake 2005), a multi-case study approach ‘adds confidence to findings’ (Miles and Hubermann 1994: 29, italics in original), has analytical benefits (Yin 2003), and allows for the highest possibility of transferability of findings. The methodological approaches taken promote the validity, transferability and ‘practical adequacy’ (Sayer 1992) of the knowledge resulting from the data, ‘the epistemology of the particular’ (Stake 2005: 454). From a critical realist position, the knowledge gained from this research can claim to provide increasing clarity to current interpretations of reality. Moreover, in order to

enhance comparability, transparency and reliability, and acknowledging the fast changing context of academia, all data for this study, across both case study institutions, was collected within the same academic year, 2007-8. Further rigour was established through a single case pilot study carried out at the start of the same academic year, which forms the subject of the following section of this chapter.