Modelamiento del patr´ on de difracci´ on a partir de la

Creswell (2014:35) refers to paradigms as ‘worldview’, meaning ‘a basic set of beliefs that guide action’. He sees this as a general philosophical orientation about the world and the approach chosen by a researcher for his/her research. Worldviews originate from discipline orientations, student advisors’ preferences and past research experiences. In this study, the beliefs and orientations that I picked up from the literature review, led to my decision to embrace mixed method as the approach to better understand and present the outcome of the study. For example, Ledwith and Manfredi (2000:20) show how the child-bearing experience influenced a young woman who spaced her anticipated maternity leave through different workplaces as she would be climbing her career development ladder.

Creswell and Plano (2011:41) argue that positivism/post-positivism, constructivism/interpretivism and participatory assumptions discussed above, have common elements but only differ in the nature of reality (ontology), how we gain knowledge of what we know (epistemology), the role value played in the research (axiology), the process of research (methodology) and the language of the research (rhetoric). These stances assist researchers to conduct and report their investigations accordingly. For this research, only three of the five (ontology, epistemology and methodology) are key and were applied.

Research paradigms played an important role since they outlined the nature of the investigation that I needed to undertake in order to answer the research questions stated in chapter one. These are all systems of interrelated thinking and practice that define the route that the researcher needs to take in order to achieve the objectives of

the study. This is based on the aim of the study, i.e. what the study seeks to achieve. The three paradigm dimensions are: ontology, epistemology and methodology (Terre Blanche et al., 2006:6).

4.4.1 Ontology

Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003:140) present the post-positivist paradigm’s ontological view as the fact that there is only one reality, i.e. one truth that can be known from a certain level of probability. Terre Blanche et al. (2006:7) further explain that ontology stipulates the nature of reality, that which is to be investigated and what needs to be known about it. Should the researcher believe that the reality to be studied consists of people’s subjective experiences of their world, she/he may then adopt the inter- subjective or interactional epistemological stance towards that reality. The use of interviews and participant observation that rely on a subjective relationship between researcher and subject may be applied. This is a characteristic of the interpretive approach, which aims at explaining the subjective reasons and meanings, leading certain social actions to occur (Terre Blanche et al., 2006:7). In this study, I have opted to use the characteristic outlined above, by conducting interviews and interpreting what the participants said about their world, i.e. in this case in general, how a number of theories that characterise their world influenced the choice of careers of young women, resulting in their low number in the STEM fields.

The truth in this investigation is that the numbers of young women in the STEM fields is significantly lower than those of their male counterparts in South African universities. What then needed to be known were the reasons for that, by finding out from young women in the STEM fields themselves, their male counterparts, their lecturers and government officials, who work closely with universities and provide support, to check where there could be blockages in the whole system. As a result, interviews were conducted with the subjects.

When analysing data, my experiences also helped to interpret certain statements, e.g. I could easily understand the act of parents from a traditional/cultural point of view, who believed that they had a duty to choose the right career for their daughter from the response of a young woman who complained that she did not choose a career in the STEM but she was ‘bullied by her parents’ to do so.

4.4.2 Epistemology

Epistemology refers to the relationship between the researcher and what is to be known. This paradigm applies in the case where the researcher believes that the subject consists of a stable and unchanging external reality, e.g. the law of gravity. He/she may then assume an objective and isolated epistemological stance towards that reality. The researcher can, as a result, use a methodology that relies on control and manipulation of reality. The purpose of this kind of investigation would be to provide an accurate description of the laws and mechanisms that operate in social life. This may be recognised as a positivist approach (Terre Blanche et al., 2006: 7). As Tashakkori and Teddlie (2003:141) explain, objectivity is paramount and may be achieved from observing the subject from a distant and detached position and that it is believed to be bringing a balanced and complete view of the processes and effects without any bias, as a result of misunderstanding the main viewpoints.

The unchanging reality in this study is that the world is experiencing socioeconomic challenges because of climate change and concerns about food security. To alleviate this situation, people are being encouraged to join the STEM fields (ACTO, 2014:i). However, young women are a missing talent in these fields. The fact of the matter is that young women have the ability to study the STEM subjects as well as their male counterparts, who currently dominate the sector. The literature review indicates that countries like North Korea (Marginson & Tytler, 2015:36) have put mechanisms in place to support women in the STEM fields, specifically policy programmes as control measures and to manipulate this reality. The results were positive as more women joined and stayed in the STEM. Evidence from this scenario played an important role in the development of the programme, as an outcome of this study.

As lessons from this and other research that brought about positive results, I developed a young women-specific programme with the intention to improve the participation of young women in the STEM fields in South African universities and cast away the stereotypes and societal beliefs that disadvantage women in general form benefitting by entering this sector. Since part of my study’s purpose was to verify what can be used, which is already in existence, I took advantage of the fact that young women have the ability to study the STEM subjects and that fact could be used to turn

around the situation of the low numbers of young women who take up careers in the STEM fields. The aim is to change the situation, i.e. the reality under which the subject lives can be changed.

4.4.3 Methodology

According to Terre Blanche et al. (2006:7), if the researcher believes that reality consists of an unstable and a flexible set of social constructions, she/he may adopt a suspicious and politicized epistemological stance and apply methodologies that allow the researcher to criticise such reality. This is a characteristic of constructionist research, which aims at displaying how certain parts of the social world are produced differently and to demonstrate how such constructions of reality make certain actions possible and others impossible. Methodologies therefore specify how the researchers may go about studying what they believe can be known.

For this study, the fact that the number of young women in the STEM fields is significantly lower than that of young men, while the number of young women is already higher than that of young men in South African universities (Department of Women, 2015:34), made me suspicious and awoke in me the desire to know the reasons. My argument was that young women should be spread proportionally across different careers in these institutions, instead of flocking to certain career fields that are already oversupplied. In addition, the survey which was conducted quantitatively in this study, showed that the participants were aware of the skills that were critical to the labour market in order for them to stay employed, and in high salaried careers (see Figure 4). My other question was, ‘Why would young women deliberately choose careers where there are no guarantees for them to find employment in the first place, and in addition employment that would put them at the top of the market with regard to socioeconomic sustainability?’

That suspicion was confirmed during data collection and analysis that, there are social constructions formed in the minds and hearts of boys and girls through socialisation, e.g. that girls are more exposed to cooking and boys to cars and driving. That somehow results in girls taking up careers in the social sciences and boys in the STEM fields.

The type of enquiry of this study warranted the use of mixed methods, enabling me to conduct this investigation both qualitatively and quantitatively. Implementation of these methods, however, was guided by the research question, whereby different techniques were applied in situations where they were most suitable and served in harmony with the intention of the study. For example, the background against which this study is founded presented a quantitative status quo, i.e. the number of young women is dramatically low in the STEM fields in South African universities. The technique to unpack that situation was not mainly intended to confirm if it was true or not, which would be quantitative in nature. Even though the literature reviewed confirmed the status quo, the intention was to determine the cause of that reality and if possible, turn it around. As a result, I used qualitative methodology to understand the reason and meaning presented by the subject, i.e. participants, and I also used that to interpret and pick up trends that constructed the reality about the causes for young women’s choices of careers. I then used that newly constructed reality as a baseline to develop the programme that would respond positively to assist young women to freely choose careers that are dear to them without any contextual factors.

Hazari et al. (2017:1) highlight the importance of the use of mixed methods where hypotheses need to be tested in both quantitative and qualitative methods, by reporting that although research was conducted on the effect of a few peers/classmates on students’ educational outcomes, as explained in chapter two of this research, the collective effect of peers in science classroom environments has not yet been largely researched through quantitative methods. Qualitative research has been undertaken and demonstrated the ways in which peers in a classroom environment can ‘facilitate or inhibit students’ identifying with science’. This argument presented the need for these authors to do the same research with a different method. That encouraged me to identify factors using both methods because one method alone would not reach a conclusion.

4.5 POPULATION AND SAMPLING