MAC: LAS ESCENAS Y LA MIMESIS (SHOWING)

Guba (1981) proposes four criteria that researchers using non-numeric data should pursue when doing research: credibility, transferability, dependability and conformability. Other criteria can also be used as basis for judging the quality of a study. According to Fraenkel

65 and Wallen (2008:2) qualitative data “...encompasses instrument reliability and validity, as well as internal validity”. Bassie (1999:75) writes that the “...concepts of reliability and validity are vital concepts in surveys and experiments – but not in case study research.” He further states that an alternative to reliability and validity is the concept of trustworthiness which will be discussed during this section. Guba and Lincoln (1981) states that qualitative data are credible when others can recognise experiences after only reading about them. Opie (2004:71) states that “...credibility is a useful indicator of goodness in case study research” and will be discussed in the next section.

3.5.1 Validity and Credibility

In the use of qualitative methods the term credibility is used to refer to the quantitative concept of validity (Creswell, 2007). Credibility in qualitative research may be established through triangulation. In order to ensure triangulation for this study, employers, lecturers and graduates were selected as participants. Triangulation involves obtaining data from different sources in order to enhance the validity of the outcomes (Burton, Brundrett and Jones, 2008).

Validity also refers to matters of accuracy, the appropriateness of the data and whether it measures what it claims to measure (Leedy and Ormrod, 2005; Mason, 2002). A researcher must ensure that the data obtained in a study is grounded extensively in fieldwork and empirical data as the validity of a study “...depends on the relationship of your conclusions to reality” (Maxwell, 2005:105). Throughout this study, and as indicated in the next chapter, relevant literature was used to ground the findings of this study. Also, the fieldwork in this study addressed a real-life problem and concern that has been agreed upon as a material problem in need of being solved.

66 Tuckman (1994) and Ellis and Levy (2009) distinguish between internal and external validity. Internal validity is when the “...outcome of the study is a function of the program or approach being tested rather than the result of other causes not systematically dealt with in the study” (Tuckman, 1994:6). Internal validity can be examined by using face validity and is “...based on appearance” and whether the instrument or process seems to pass the test for reasonableness (Ellis and Levy, 2009:334). In my opinion the process followed in this study was reasonable, the research question valid and the results obtained true for those participating in the study (Anderson, 1990).

If external validity is achieved the “...results obtained would apply in the real world to other similar programs and approaches” (Tuckman, 1994:6). It is not possible to claim that this study will achieve external validity in terms of the results as the results in other settings might be different. It was therefore pointed out in the final chapter of this thesis that the study be duplicated in other areas where the national tourism curriculum is offered. External validity was achieved in terms of the process followed during the research as will be discussed in section 3.6.

External validity was also enhanced in this study as respondents positively participated. The findings of this study are also similar to the results of a study6 that was performed by the Further Education and Training Institute (Facilitating College to Work Transitions for FET college students in the Western Cape, 2012).

6 _{The project was commissioned by the DG Murray Trust in collaboration with the Western Cape Education}

Department Further Education and Training directorate in January 2012. Phase 1 of the project included research to establish what industry requires from entry-level employees. Tourism was one of four sectors investigated.

67

3.5.2 Reliability

The research process must be open for audit and evaluation by peers. Reliability of a study might be problematic to establish as it refers to a degree of consistency in a study (Merriam, 1991). When only one researcher is involved, such as is the case here, how will one establish whether the person was consistent in how the process was conducted? I am of the opinion that my actions were reliable as the data obtained within this study indicate similarities across respondents (Fraenkel and Wallen, 2008); this is also referred to as internal consistency (Ellis and Levy, 2009). Reliability also simply means to answer the question about whether the “…researcher’s efforts would yield similar results under similar circumstances“ (Murray, Bagby and Sulak, 2010:37). A similar study may yield similar results as I was consistent in how I conducted the research process. Ultimately this study will also be evaluated by peers as I will submit the findings to the Department of Higher Education and Training.

3.5.3 Transferability and generalisability

Transferability ties in with external validity as discussed earlier. It is defined by Fraenkel and Wallen (2008:9) as “...[T]he degree to which an individual can expect the results of a particular study to apply in a new situation or with new people.” As stated earlier, it will not be fair to claim that the results of this study may apply in a different institutional or regional context, but it remains as a possibility for further research (Shenton, 2004). Any claim to generalisability for this study would be problematic as this research was limited to one town in one region and to one institution (Auerbach and Silverstein, 2003; Chenail, 2010).

3.5.4 Trustworthiness

Opie (2004) writes about the work of Lincoln and Guba (1985) that stated that trustworthiness involves credibility, transferability, dependability and conformability. Savin-

68 Baden and Major (2010) also list these four aspects as criteria for trustworthiness. The first two aspects were discussed previously in this section. I will now only briefly refer to the last two, dependability and conformability.

Dependability is the notion that “...research can be trusted over time” (Savin-Baden and Major (2010:174) and repeated by future researchers (Shenton, 2004). In this case this criterion seems likely to have been met as the results of this project can potentially be used for replanning purposes based on real needs as expressed by various role players. Dependability will be further enhanced if this study could be replicated at other FET colleges.

Conformability refers to the “...idea that the researcher has remained neutral in data analysis and interpretation” Savin-Baden and Major (2010:174). Throughout this research study I consciously tried to distance myself from the data (Shenton, 2004) and acted as a researcher and not as a lecturer or employee from Boland College or a programme head that had to defend anything. The skill of ‘bracketing’ oneself is a difficult one which I have consciously promoted throughout my research.

3.6 Ethical considerations

This section deals with ethical issues inherent in the research setting. As a student enrolled at the University of Stellenbosch I was subjected to institutional ethical clearance processes before starting any research. This process included applying for ethical clearance with the Departmental Ethics Screening Committee by completing the relevant documentation and obtaining institutional consent by obtaining a letter from the Campus Manager at Boland College, Stellenbosch Campus (see Addendum E) which stated that she was aware and approved of the study.

69 As indicated on the application, the study involved minimal risk and all protocol as required by the University of Stellenbosch was followed. I could only continue with the study once the approval notice was received from the ethics committee (see Addendum F).

Every respondent that participated in the study was asked to sign a ‘Consent to Participate in Research’ document (see Addendum G). I also indicated to participants that they did have the right not to participate and would remain anonymous as I was not to reveal their identity (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2007). Informed consent involves informing participants of the nature and purpose of the research, its risks and benefits, and participants must agree to participate in the study without being coerced (Anderson, 1990).

The data obtained in the interviews were kept secure and confidential and will only be destroyed upon completion of the study (Tuckman, 1994). I also assured participants throughout that their responses would be kept confidential and ultimately securely destroyed. I further assured respondents that their anonymity would be maintained where their responses might be reported in any published form (Burton, Brundrett and Jones, 2008).