INFORMACIÓN FINANCIERA POR SEGMENTOS

3.2.1. Rationale for adopting a qualitative methodology

Quantitative research, which is linked to positivist paradigms, focuses upon testing hypotheses through gaining numerical data in order to generalise findings to a wider population (Robson, 2011). Qualitative data, however, linked to constructivist paradigms, focuses upon the collections and analysis of usually non-numerical data gathered in order to facilitate a rich exploration of individuals’ experiences of a phenomenon (Banister, 2011). A qualitative case study design is most appropriate when in-depth descriptors of human behaviour and circumstances in context are the primary phenomena being studied (Yin, 2008). This study aims to explore staff and pupil constructs of a phenomenon within a school context; as such, it is argued that it is appropriate to adopt a qualitative methodology.

Qualitative methods emphasise the importance of gaining the unique individual constructs of participants and, crucially, also acknowledge the influence of the researcher's own perspectives upon the nature of the research, the relationship with participants and the final interpretation of the data (Banister, 2011). The research participants are viewed as helping to construct ‘reality’ with the researchers. Values of the researcher and others are assumed to exist and subjectivity is an integral part of the research (Robson, 2011).

3.2.2. Critique of qualitative methodology

Robson (2011) identifies that quantitative methods are useful in determining a particular outcome, whereas qualitative approaches give more information about the processes underlying this. However, there are limitations and challenges inherent in adopting qualitative methodologies that need to be acknowledged and addressed. These include issues with generalisability, rigour, validity and reliability etc. (Robson, 2011). These points will be addressed later in this section.

3.2.3. Rationale for selecting a case study design

This research adopts a case study design. In case studies, the ‘case’ is the situation, individual, group or organisation (Robson, 2011) and, in this research, the ‘case’ refers to the girls’ secondary school the study is carried out in.

Yin (2011, pp.16-17) provides a definition of the scope of a case study (see below):

• Investigates a contemporary phenomenon in depth and within its real- world context, especially when

• The boundaries between phenomenon and context may not be clearly evident.

This piece of research intends to investigate the effectiveness of a girls’ secondary school in identifying anxiety problems in their pupils. Secondary school staff’s identification of anxiety problems is the contemporary phenomenon in question and the real-world context is the school. The boundaries between the phenomenon and the context are not clearly evident, as the nature of the school context will impact on staff’s abilities to identify anxiety problems.

Yin (2011) advocates considering three factors when considering which type of research method to deploy: a) the type of research question posed; b) the extent of control a researcher has over actual behavioural events; c) the degree of focus on contemporary as opposed to entirely historical events. He deduces that case studies are an appropriate method to use in research when there is no control required over behavioural events and when the focus is on a contemporary phenomenon. Both these criteria are met in this study.

It is proposed that the study will follow a single-case design. It is a single-case design as one ‘case’ is involved in the study, i.e. one school. This was selected over a multiple design, as, although having different schools to contrast would have been valuable, it was felt that a more comprehensive treatment of a single case would allow for a more in-depth and richer account and deeper understanding of the context and its influence.

3.2.3.1. Critique of case studies

Case study research has been criticised for its limitations including low generalisability and replicability, potential researcher bias, being open to selectiveness and subjectivity, and a lack of systematic organisation of data (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison., 2007; Robson, 2011 and Yin, 2008). Case studies have been deemed to have high levels of unreliability due to a lack of external control over variables; they are limited by a purported lack of generalisability outside the immediate study and are very context-specific. They are considered to be affected by researcher involvement, and it is suggested that researchers could be selective in what is reported, which may potentially omit information that contradicts the theoretical propositions (Cohen et al., 2007; Coolican, 2014). These criticisms will be addressed below.

3.2.3.2. Generalisability

Maxwell (1992) as cited in Robson (2011) makes a useful distinction between internal and external generalisability. Internal generalisability refers to how confidently conclusions can be generalised throughout a setting. External generalisability refers to being able to generalise beyond the setting. In the case of this research internal generalisation is being sought in order to make confident conclusions pertinent to the case, i.e. the secondary school. Case studies can be criticised for their limited contribution to the body of research in question, in this case the identification of anxiety problems in girls within a secondary school. Yin (2011) also makes another useful distinction between statistical and analytical generalisability. Statistical generalisability draws inferences from data to a population whereas analytical generalisability refers to the notion that findings from case studies can be generalisable to theoretical propositions.

Finally, the researcher would argue that, in the efforts to promote external generalisability, the predominant, more positivist research position has limited the enquiry around context and in doing so artificially emphasises the importance of within-child factors.