Reconocimientos 61

This chapter gives an overview of the research methods chosen for the study. It will

locate them within a philosophical and methodological framework and identify some

of the tensions which exist between the process of gathering robust and valid data,

with my positioning as a reflexive explorer within the research process. The blurring

of boundaries between the researcher and the researched, and the transition of

informants from non-analytic to analytic is also of relevance here (Francis, 2004).

Personal tensions also exist between my wish to be taken seriously as a researcher by

adopting a safe role within the accepted traditions of the academic community and the

lived experience of my own fascination with the subject of my research. These

tensions, in their turn, reflect wider debates about the nature of research and how

concepts such as validity and generalisability may be constituted within more recent

research paradigms.

Philosophical framework for the study

On considering the ontological and epistemological paradigms o f different research

positions and, from this, my own philosophical stance within the world o f research, I

was driven by the question ‘What kind of inquirer do I want to be?’ (Schwandt, 2000,

p.205).

In view of my personal fascination with this subject area, I was aware that my

‘authorial subjectivity’ (Fine, 1994, p. 19) could bias the responses. The nature o f the

Research methodology

human action is inherently meaningful and the purpose of inquiry is to grasp

(interpret) the meaning behind the action. (Action here is used in its broadest sense,

encompassing the idea of a ‘speech act’ as well as e.g. physical action). Some

interpretevist philosophies support the notion that the inquiring ‘self should neither

affect nor be affected by the process of understanding. If the interpreter’s own self

‘intrudes’ then it must inevitably distort or bias the interpretation, hence the research

methods chosen should seek to eliminate or minimise this interference. Some branches

of phenomenology would support this position, although there appears to be some

hangover from a positivistic, scientific view of the world that exists ‘out there’ in this

stance. ‘Philosophical hermeneutics’ (Schwandt, 2000, p. 194), however, views the

inquirer trying to ‘understand’ as an inescapable component in the act of

understanding. This is a stance echoed in feminist theory, which views knowledge as

inextricably linked to socio-cultural structures, where the observer can never be

unbiased, but is ‘positioned’ in relation to that knowledge (Fivush, 2004). From this

viewpoint, the role of the inquirer is to become aware of their own personal traditions,

prejudices, biases and the effect these may have on reaching an understanding of

others. In the case that these might negatively affect the interview process, the inquirer

must be prepared to challenge and change them. Within the context of this inquiry, I

have avoided any spurious claims to objectivity, but have adopted a reflexive stance

within a hermeneutical epistemology, in which my own involvement in the process

has been acknowledged and explored.

This inquiry has a qualitative rather than quantitative focus, being located within:

..this discrepant, plural, ambiguous and multiple world in which researchers work and in which they try to make meanings.

(Brizuela et al, 2000, p.xii)

As such it involves trying to uncover these meanings from the complex, fuzzy and

ambiguous conceptual understandings o f ‘silence’ that individuals develop, linked to

their own histories, cultural environments and psychological leanings. My overall

purpose has been to generate as rich and ‘thick’ data (Geertz, 1973) as possible in this

under-researched area which, once analysed, could provide a practical and theoretical

basis for any future studies. However, in order to resist any temptation to produce an

overly superficial exploration o f ‘silence’, my intention was to avoid over-prescriptive

techniques which might incline me to premature and potentially limiting data analysis.

Hence the approach I adopted was designed to avoid an extreme deductive or

inductive approach (Miles and Huberman, 1994) and to operate in the fashion

suggested by Rudestam and Newton where:

The investigator remains watchful of themes that are presented, but resists any temptation to structure or analyze the meaning of an observation prematurely.

(Rudestam and Newton, 2001, p.3 8)

At the same time, I had to consider how best to represent the individual realities

inherent in the meanings constructed and also, how to address the ‘crisis of

legitimation’ in which the traditional means of evaluating qualitative research i.e.

validity, generalisability and reliability, have been re-evaluated, re-configured, and

redefined (Denzin and Lincoln, 1994).

Positioning

The major conceptual framework for my research is ‘figured worlds’ which represent

‘social encounters (like activities) in which participants’ positions matter and are

localised in particular times and places’ (Holland et al, 1998, p. 141). My positioning

Research methodology

leanings, preferences and the sediments of my personal life history, interact on an

individual level with the personal life histories and orientations of the research

participants, and on a broader level with the wider socio-cultural-historical

environment of which we are all part. From an individual perspective, my life history,

my gender, my race and my class, as well as my genetic make-up, may predispose me

to view the subject of silence and the responses of the participants in a particular way.

But the difficulty of extricating this from the complex web of social structures which

bind and support me meant that any attempt to present myself as an unbiased observer

would be a falsification of my research stance. Here I recognised my alliance with the

positioning of feminist research. This indicates that knowledge is embedded in social

interactivity and that the researcher is always observing from a particular historical,

cultural and contextual standpoint. It also acknowledges that power relationships

within the research process are unequal (Fivush, 2004). Hence my approach needed to

provide as much space as possible for participants to generate their own ideas, whilst

keeping the data generated within manageable limits for analysis. Here a process

which partially involved ‘co-construction’ was used, in which listening and

responding to the other played an important part (Fivush, 2004). A particular dilemma

in terms o f drawing conclusions from the research data was how to explore individual

conceptions of silence, through an accepted process of qualitative research i.e. the

research interview, within a conceptual framework which views ‘meanings’ as

socially constructed.

As an experienced teacher and teacher educator, I also wanted to ensure that my views

of the dominant cultural resources available to the education community were not too

personally biased. Hence I conducted a survey of forty-eight teacher educators from

institutions across the country to establish the major texts they drew on to inform

training in practical teaching. Although I only received eleven responses, some of

these were detailed and provided useful information to ensure that my own

understandings were supported by others in the field.

Developing theory

In the figured world of academia there are accepted discourses about research and

these formed the cultural resources from which I drew to inform the approach I would

take. As the ideas from this research have developed through interactions between

myself, as researcher, research participants and a range of different cultural resources

related to silence, it seemed appropriate to draw on research processes which allowed

for this fluidity. The development of theory has involved an ongoing iterative process

of trying to understand and make meanings from the data, and hence my approach has

drawn from the ideas underpinning grounded theory which links to the type of

research attempting to understand social phenomena about which little is known

(Strauss and Corbin, 1994). The ‘social practices’ pertaining to the figured world of

this research share characteristics in common with social practices in any culturally

defined arena in that they involve adaptations and ‘mid-course corrections’ (Erickson,

2004) in response to changing situations and the acquisition of new knowledge.

My aim here was to develop substantive theory, related to the use and practice of

silence in the specific contexts of everyday life and classroom settings, leading to the

development of a more formal theory linked to the significance of silence across the

Research methodology

examining silence in everyday life this would provide a broader set of cultural

resources from which to examine the constraints of the classroom.

The ontological importance of the transferral from the limited to the general is

signalled by Douglas when he discusses the:

ontological emergence of theoretical concepts beyond singular perceptions o f phenomena.

(Douglas, 2004, p.65)

In other words, the formal theory has something to say about ‘being’ in the world, for

example about social processes in general, that moves beyond the mere practical

application.

Sampling

The following section will discuss the approach to sampling used within the research.

Mason (2002) identifies four main sampling strategies - statistically representative; ad

hoc; a close up view of (often) a single case; and lastly, the use of a relevant range of

participants who are indicative, rather than being representative, of particular

experiences, types or examples. In the final sampling strategy, the researcher

purposively selects on the basis of this indicativity, hence the term ‘purposive’ or

‘purposeful’ sampling (Patten, 2002). As the nature of this study is related primarily to

the meanings and perceptions of individuals, it would be neither possible nor

appropriate to treat it as a hard-edged, objective and scientific study, with a sampling

process based on a statistically representative sample.

Hence the purposive approach, oriented to the selection of participants who will

provide the richest sources of data, seemed the most appropriate strategy to meet the

aims o f this study, with its goal of generating instances which display a wide variety

of perspectives to illuminate the research question and to capture central themes which

cut across variations in participants (Dane, 1990).

Qualitative researchers usually work with ‘small samples of people, nested in their

context and studied in depth’ (Miles and Huberman, 1994, p.27) and are generally

based on purposeful sampling, as random sampling would destroy the potential

coherence of the studied and the site of study. Sampling was planned to be an iterative

process - a means by which theory was being generated on an emerging basis, leading

to the next set of choices about who would be interviewed, and operating to put ‘flesh

on the bones of general constructs’ (Miles and Huberman, 2004, p.27). I made

sampling decisions based on the need to identify, confirm or enrich the main emergent

patterns and themes, but also to discover contrasting views. Within this process, I paid

attention to the notion of ‘maximum variation ’ seeking for cases where more extreme

positions might be held, in order to test the viability of the core tenets, in particular

seeking deliberately for negative instances or variations, where there was the

possibility of disconfirmation as well as confirmation. I was mindful here of my own

positioning, where my disposition to view many aspects of silence as positive and

valuable, may have caused me to seek participants to support my own ontology.

Hence, I deliberately interviewed people who expressed dislike of silence, as well as

Research methodology

In some instances, I sought ‘information-rich’ cases where I had a strong suspicion

that these participants would favour positive notions of silence with some intensity.

The yoga teachers, the performing arts teacher who developed a module on silence

and the teacher who used the ‘horse whisperer’ techniques with her pupils were all

examples of these intense cases.

In Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) discussion of sampling as an iterative process, emergent

and sequential, they use the analogy of a detective trail, following clues which lead the

researcher in a particular direction (Robson, 1993). Here the snowball or chain

method, has some use and I make a distinction here between using the snowball

approach as a strategy for making contact, and using it as a formal method of

sampling. As a formal method, it has serious problems in persuading of its validity,

but as a lived experience of the actual processes of interpretative research, it can be

seen to have some practical use. This was of particular importance when I was seeking

for teachers who used silence consciously in their teaching. Samples can usually

evolve during the process of inquiry in what Miles and Huberman call ‘conceptually-

driven sequential sampling’ (1994, p.27) where ‘initial choices of informants lead you

to similar and different ones’ and where the researcher is led to explore different

facets of the area of study, seeking out relevant informants as these are revealed or

indicated through the process of data collection. The implications for myself as a

researcher using this approach was to set boundaries for this research which took into

account the limits o f my time and resources and which set a frame to help uncover,

confirm or qualify the basic constructs as they emerged.

To counteract the potential problem that the researcher ascribes too much value to

those members of the population who are available, I undertook a peripheral boundary

survey. Although this was not intended (nor would be able) to be seen as a

representative sample of a wider population, it did provide an opportunity for my

views and my interpretations to be challenged by conflicting data, to act as a ‘de­

centering’ device (Miles and Huberman, 1994). Hence, having completed the pilot

study, I also decided to use an additional wide, but shallow purposive sample of one

hundred and sixty-four informants, to provide supporting or contradictory data as a

backdrop to the in-depth qualitative data from the long interviews. It is important to

emphasise that this was not to be used statistically, but as a heuristic to provide

security for any claims to potential generalisability, by confirming, qualifying or

providing warnings against over-simplification or over-complacency in my use and

interpretation of the data. This function is reflected in my term - ‘numero-qualitative’

(n-q) sample - which reflects the larger numbers, but also the qualitative nature of the

questions given (See Appendix C).

Participants in the in-depth qualitative interviews

In the initial exploratory study, the sampling process was based on access and on the

range of experience of the participants. The main function of the interviews in this

initial study was to provide a variety of perspectives on the concept of silence and the

significant factor in choosing who to interview was to produce as rich data as possible

in the short time available. To provide a range of perspectives on the concept of

silence, five respondents were selected who came from different backgrounds and

occupied different positions on the spectrum of teaching experience from highly

Research methodology

subject disciplines; one was a yoga teacher in adult education; one was an ex-FE

lecturer with a background in teacher training; one was a French experimental

musician and photographer, teaching part-time in Higher Education. In terms of

gender sampling, there were two males and three females. All were in the thirty to

fifty age-range.

Following on from the initial study of five participants, twenty teachers were

interviewed, making a total of twenty-five in all (Appendix A). The sample was

chosen on the basis that this would be a sufficient number to generate a range of

conceptions and a variety of practices to illuminate the conceptualisation and use of

silence.

All participants in the detailed qualitative interviews were teachers. There were four

main reasons for this. Firstly, they all operated within a similar socio-cultural context

i.e. a formal learning environment, bounded by certain rules and expectations of the

purposes of education and the interactions between teacher and learners. However,

they worked in different educational contexts with different types of learners.

Secondly, I have many years experience in teaching and teacher education and could

use my knowledge of the context and activities to inform questioning and discussion.

Thirdly, I had a good level of access to this community and was fairly confident that I

would be trusted, that participants would be prepared to give a considerable amount of

time to participating in the research and that they would be inclined to discuss fully

and honestly. Lastly, and extremely importantly, these participants were well-placed

to provide the data required from my research questions. In all but two of the last

interviews, where primary school teaching was involved, all participants were

teaching learners over the age of sixteen. Of particular importance was the need for

theoretically-driven sampling, where the informants were selected, not on the basis of

‘representativeness’, but on the basis that they would help to provide some insights to

inform the conceptual questions of my research. The difference of perspectives,

located in different conditions and nested in different sites, with the potential to

provide a multi-faceted view of the concept of silence was of significance in the

choice o f participants.

In choosing teachers who worked in a number of different learning contexts from

educational institutions my aim was to balance heterogeneity with homogeneity -

heterogeneity in that a major focus for my sampling was multi-disciplinarity;

homogeneity in that the participants needed to belong to a community which, to some

extent, engaged in a consistent set of culturally prescribed activities. The reason for

the multi-disciplinarity was that my readings about silence were strongly multi­

disciplinary in themselves and hence the importance of viewing silence from the

perspective of different modalities. All participants came from different subject

disciplines to get as broad a spectrum of views as possible within the confines of the

research study. However, in order that there would be boundaries to and a means of

comparison between the data generated, these views needed to be grounded in some

kind of communality of context and experience. Hence all participants but one had

been teacher educated and all participants in the second stage cohort of interviewees

were trained as teachers at the same institution. This choice was based on the

assumption that they had all been exposed to a consistent philosophy and approach to

teacher education, including a commonality o f discourse and immersion in particular

In document Descripción de la Estructura Organizacional del Area de Responsabilidad Social del Banco Av Villas (página 61-124)