Plan de Implementación

Since each paradigm requires paradigm-specific criteria for addressing research rigor, the concepts of validity and reliability, which have been used to judge quality of quantitative studies, cannot be entirely applicable to qualitative research (Cohen et al., 2007; Merriam, 1998). Some of the researchers (Patton, 2002; Mishler, 2000; Seal, 1999; Lincoln & Guba, 1985) considered the idea of ‘trustworthiness’ (which is intended to establish confidence in the research findings) more appropriate to qualitative investigations. When the reliability of qualitative research is concerned, it can be understood as a fit between researcher’s records and what actually occurs in the natural setting being observed or, in other words, whether the collection and analysis of data are reliable and valid (Cohen et al., 2007). Researchers developed several validity categories to judge the validity of qualitative research. Those applied to the current research are described below.

3.3.4.1 Descriptive validity

The concept of descriptive validity refers to the accuracy of data. Descriptive validity is claimed to form the foundation on which all the other forms of validity are built upon (Golafshani, 2003; Maxwell, 1992). In the present study, the researcher tried to transcribe the recorded interviews as soon as possible after they were conducted. The primary goal in transcribing the interviews was to provide an accurate account of what was said by respondents. (Maxwell, 1992). Interview transcripts were submitted to the interviewees to ensure accuracy.

3.3.4.2 Interpretive validity

Interpretive validity means how well the participants’ meaning of events and behaviours are understood by the researcher and how accurately they are reported (Maxwell, 1992). In the present study, the researcher followed the principle of ‘low-inference descriptors’ introduces by LeCompt & Goetz (1982) and defined by Seal (2006: p.148) as reporting the data ‘in terms that are as

60

concrete as possible, including verbatim accounts of what people say, for example, rather than researchers' reconstructions of the general sense of what a person said…’. In reporting qualitative findings, a large amount of verbatim quotations from the research participants were used to support researcher’s inferences. At the time of transcribing the interviews, details were noted of the body language of a respondent (a smile or laughing, for instance) in order to ensure an accurate evaluation of his/her tone (Maxwell, 1992). Also, to reduce the influence of researchers' personal perspectives on reporting, respondent validation was used. The findings of thematic analysis w ere submitted for checking by teachers and students in order to ensure that their views, thoughts and experiences were accurately understood by the researcher.

Since qualitative research is a creative and interpretative process, whereby the researcher not only collects data, but rather constructs qualitative interpretations, researcher bias and subjectivity are claimed to be inherent in qualitative study (Bryman, 2004; Merriam, 1998). In the process of text encoding, the researcher was assisted by ‘critical friends’ - the university and college lecturers who had the experience in text encoding. Their purpose was to review the results of encoding in order to ensure that the themes identified were representative of the interview and documentary data. A reinforcement of the interpretive validity implies that researchers must be constantly self-critical and reflexive to ensure the analytical description and interpretation of the case. Merriam (1998) holds that researchers expect readers to judge that the results of their studies make sense and are consistent and dependable. To achieve the transparency of the research process, the researcher articulated his experiences and assumptions in reflective memos written during the data collection and analysis.

Sources of bias might be the characteristics of the interviewer, characteristics of the respondents, and the content of questions (Cohen et al., 2007). These factors include the attitudes and expectations of the interviewer, seeking answers that support preconceived notions and misconceptions that may emerge when researcher’s questions or respondents’ answers are misunderstood. To reduce bias, the researcher was careful to clearly formulate questions and make questions as neutral as possible to avoid wording which might influence the answers of respondents. The researcher was advised by ‘critical friends’ how to conduct an interview properly (Cohen et al., 2007).

61

In addition, the researcher was aware of the inclination to more easily accept the evidence that supports his prior beliefs about the phenomenon being studied, rather than the facts that contradict his convictions. Such an inclination is known as ‘confirmation bias’ (Regehr, 2004; Kaptchuk, 2003). For instance, researcher’s belief that older teachers would be more reluctant to use intervention methods was challenged. This belief was based on the fact that education in Arab sector is characterised by a high level of formalism and authoritarianism (Abu-Asbah, 2012; Arar, 2012). However, some of the intervention group teachers (who themselves claimed that they were educated traditionally) appeared to be more inclined to the HOTS-based instruction than their younger counterparts. This evidence required reviewing researcher’s perspectives on the views of Arab teachers on education and pointed out to the necessity of further investigation into the possible relations between Arab teachers’ education, working experience and their beliefs about knowledge and learning.

An additional method for ensuring descriptive and interpretative validity was data triangulation. It refers to the use of various data sources and examining evidence from the sources used in order to build a coherent justification for themes (Hammersley & Atkinson, 2007; Creswell, 2002). In the qualitative part of this study, the data from interviews, written narratives and documents served the purpose of the within-method triangulation which involved varieties of the same method to investigate the research issues (Denzin, 1989).

3.3.4.3 Theoretical validity

Theoretical validity seeks to evaluate the validity of the researcher’s concepts and how well the findings explain the phenomenon under study (Maxwell, 1992). It means that patterns, concepts, categories and dimensions developed by researchers must fit together to create the valid theoretical constructs (Auerbach & Silverstein, 2003). For this purpose, the researcher was careful to support his inferences and explanations by the concepts presented in the relevant research literature. The process of investigation was constantly discussed with researcher’s supervisors. In addition, the method of peer reviewing was used: the research results were submitted for examination to two Israeli Arab scholars working in the field of educational research. Peer review is considered an essential arbiter of the scientific quality of research and is aimed to provide an independent and

62

critical assessment of the research findings (Rooyen, Godlee, Evans, Black & Smith, 1999; Wadsworth, 1997).

3.3.4.4 Generalizability

Generalizability of qualitative research means the ability to generalize the findings of qualitative research to other contexts or settings, or to universally apply the theory resulting from the study (Walsh, 2003; Maxwell, 1992). Merriam (1998) argues that in order to have any effect on educational theory or practice, educational research studies must be rigorous and present results that are true to other educators and scholars. Being analogues to the external validity of quantitative research, generalizability was put by some researchers under the heading of ‘transferability’ (Walsh, 2003; Guba & Lincoln, 1985). According to Guba & Lincoln (1985), a qualitative researcher ensures transferability by doing a thorough job of describing the research context in order to help readers make a decision concerning the transfer of these findings to another situation. By collecting the data through various tools, this research sought to obtain the amount of information which would ensure a rich description of the phenomenon being studied.

3.4 The quantitative research strand