Medidas de Evaluación

Social research is underpinned by philosophical assumptions about the knowledge claims it seeks to investigate. According to Brannen (2005), researchers need to develop a research frame of reference, which is driven chiefly by such assumptions. Those assumptions, referred to as paradigms (Kuhn, 2012) or worldviews (Creswell, 2003), differ in five elements: ontology, epistemology, axiology, methodology, and rhetoric (Creswell & Plano Clark 2011). These elements determine our perspective of what and how we can know and investigate social phenomena.

The table (3.1) below is an overview of the research paradigms and their philosophical stances as provided by Creswell and Clark (2011). As can be seen, each worldview element is interpreted differently across philosophies. Ontology is concerned with “what we believe constitutes social reality” (Blaikie, 2000, p. 8). Ontological claims are viewed “the starting point of all research, after which one’s epistemological and methodological positions logically follow” (Grix, 2002, p.177). Positivists view reality “like the world of natural phenomena, as being hard, real and external to the individual” (Cohen et al., 2007, p.8). However, constructivists are of the opinion that “social actors negotiate meanings about their activity in the world. Social reality therefore consists of their attempts to interpret the world” (Scott & Morrison, 2006, p.131). In this study, the researcher began with reality gained from the empirical approach about the socio-demographic factors affecting ECCE and policy responses to them. In addition to representing multiple realties, they are

p.76). This provides more than one perspective of examining the phenomenon under investigation.

Table 3.1

Elements of the worldviews and their stances

Adapted from: Creswell and Clark (2011, p.42) Related to the beliefs about the nature of reality are the “epistemological beliefs concerning what it is possible for one to know” (Rocco, Bliss, Gallagher & Perez- Prado, 2003, p.20). Epistemology refers to “the possible ways of gaining knowledge of social reality, whatever it is understood to be” (Blaikie, 2000, p.8). It questions the nature of knowledge, the extent of that knowledge and the way it can be acquired. In educational research, epistemology “refers to how educational researchers can know the reality that they wish to describe” (Scott & Morrison, 2006, p.85). In this respect, two forms of epistemology, objectivist and subjectivist, can be identified. Positivism is closely related to the objectivist epistemology, where social phenomena are viewed to occur independently from social actors. Thus, knowledge claims stem from empirical approaches employing quantitative methods. Those methods value data received from the senses and treated logically and mathematically (Cohen et al., 2007).

Worldview

Element Post Positivism Constructivism Participatory Pragmatism

Ontology Singular

reality Multiple realities Political reality Singular and multiple

realities

Epistemology Distance and

impartiality Closeness Collaboration Practicality

Axiology Unbiased Biased Negotiated Multiple

stances

Methodology Deductive

(Quantitative )

Inductive

(Qualitative) Participatory (Usually

Qualitative)

Combining (Quantitative and

Qualitative)

Rhetoric Formal Informal Advocacy &

turn to constructivism philosophy, where meaning is constructed by the individuals themselves, and obtained and interpreted by qualitative methods. Constructivism asserts that knowledge is actively built rather than being just received. Individuals “build their own knowledge and their own representations of knowledge from their own experience” (Martin & Loomis, 2007, p.63). Researchers adopting this view and qualitative methods in turn “are more concerned to understand individuals’ perceptions of the world. They seek insight rather than statistical analysis” (Bell, 1993, p.5).

Purist researchers believe that quantitative and qualitative methods encompass incompatible epistemological and ontological assumptions about research and therefore cannot be brought together in a research design (Rosseman & Wilson, 1985). Thus, they tend to choose one approach for their inquiry which is best sought to answer their research questions. However, Teddlie and Tashakkori (2009) have rejected this rigid dichotomy and rather viewed epistemology as a continuum. This could be argued to be closer to the concept of pragmatism; a position akin to that of the researcher herself.

Pragmatism is “a deconstructive paradigm that debunks concepts such as ‘truth’ and ‘reality’ and focuses instead on ‘what works’ as the truth regarding the research questions under investigation” (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003, p. 713). It draws on many ideas using diverse approaches, valuing both objective and subjective knowledge (Cherryholmes, 1992). Pragmatism as a research paradigm has become “a third choice that embraces superordinate ideas gleaned through consideration of perspectives from both sides of the paradigms debate in interaction with the research question and real-world circumstances” (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009, p. 73). It values both subjective and objective knowledge and encourages the use of diverse approaches to research on the basis of ‘what works’ (Cherryholmes, 1992; Creswell & Plano-Clark, 2007).

The third element is axiology which refers to the philosophical assumptions of value. More specifically, it refers to the role of values in inquiry (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998, p.7). Underlying a researcher’s philosophical assumptions are a set of value assumptions which guide the research. Axiology is important as values can

unbiased in their research, using accountability checks to eliminate any bias. In contrast, constructivists believe that the evidence they collect are neutral and contingent on their interpretation. Being cognizant of the current research standpoint, the researcher acknowledges the values, attitudes and biases that could potentially influence the conduct and outcome of research. This might be manifested in research praxis in terms of “(a) what questions are asked or not asked in …[the] research;(b) what type of data is or is not collected; and (c) the type of methods, measurement, analysis, and interpretation that shape our understanding of the research process” (Hesse-Biber, 2010, p.171). This leads to the methodology choices that are bound by the researcher’s value choices.

Methodology refers to the strategy or plan of action which links the choice of research methods to the required outcomes (Crotty, 1998). This can be distinguished from research methods which refer to the specific techniques of data collection and analysis (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007). Quantitative methodologies and their specific methods are deductive reasoning based and employed in “hypothesis-testing research” (Newman & Benz, 1998, p.18, citing Kerlinger, 1964). Deduction is a process to “explicate the consequences (more crucially the testable consequences) of conjectures proposed as answers to a question or problem under investigation” (Levi, 2012, p.77). Qualitative methodologies and their methods, on the other hand, are grounded in inductive reasoning and used to describe the phenomenon under investigation and explain why it happens. Induction is regarded here as a verification process “on the basis of which conjectured answers to the given question are eliminated” (p.77). Mixed methods research is also influenced by the abduction reasoning mode, which can be viewed as a “process of forming explanatory hypothesis” (Peirce, 1998, p.216). It serves the task of hypothesising potential answers to the research question. It could be regarded also as a combination of induction and deduction.

Accordingly, the mixture of inductive, deductive, and abductive inference is valued in mixed methods research based on a pragmatic view of using all the methods that are necessary to answer the research questions. Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004), further noted that the logic of inquiry encompasses the use of

and abduction (uncovering and relying on the best of a set of explanations for understanding one’s results) (p.17).” A mixed method approach in the study, therefore, presents a logical and intuitive appeal hence provides a platform for bridging the divide between qualitative and quantitative paradigms.

The final element rhetoric is concerned with the style of language of research (Creswell & Plano Clark 2011). It is an essential element for the community of scholars and researchers who need to communicate and share their knowledge. Positivists and post-positivists tend to adopt quantitatively rhetorical structures to maintain objectivity in writing research accounts (Betz & Fassinger, 2012, p.261). On the other side, constructivists adopting a qualitative approach in their research are more likely to use a language to express subjective meanings and experiences. This research uses both language orientations as its design combines quantitative and qualitative research approaches.

Applying the above paradigms to the current research, the ontology of ECCE in the Egyptian context and the epistemological assumptions about the socio- demographic factors affecting ECCE require a pragmatic approach to knowledge which considers multiple perspectives and standpoints of qualitative and quantitative research. Therefore, the use of a descriptive design based on mixed methods in this study is an acknowledgment of the different worldviews and the need for a design to seek answers to complex questions which require more than purely quantitative or purely qualitative study. This design values the strengths of the paradigmatic integrity of qualitative and quantitative methods and tries to integrate them at the data collection, analysis and interpretation levels (Wray & Kumpulainen, 2010).