La revisión en 2010 por parte de la Universidad Nacional a los proyectos de la

Reliability and validity are both tools of an essential positivist epistemology (Watling, in Winter 2000:7). Gall, Gall and Borg (2011:27) are of the view that terms (such as “validity” and “reliability”) are weakly used in qualitative research, which applies to open-ended instruments to collect data. Walcott (2009:73) argues, on axiomatic grounds, against the use of reliability and validity in qualitative research. He cautions that these criteria do not satisfy a qualitative research methodology, because of differences that exist between the axioms of interpretivism and positivism.

4.8.1 Reliability of the design

Reliability is a measure of consistency over time and over similar samples, in the extent to which a procedure produces similar results under constant conditions on all occasions with the same person or across interviewers (Cohen et al 2000). Reliability refers to the degree of consistency with which instances are assigned to the same category by different observers or the same observer on different occasions (McMillian & Schumacher 2010:23). Joppe (2000:1) expands on this by defining reliability as the extent to which results are consistent over time and is an accurate representation of the total population under study. This is referred to as reliability and if the results of a study can be reproduced under similar methodology, then the research instrument is considered to be reliable.

Merriam (2009:209) agrees with the previous researchers by writing that, “Reliability in qualitative research involves conducting the investigation in an ethical manner and reliability can be ensured by the way in which the data is collected, analysed, interpreted and findings presented”.

4.8.2 Reliability in data collection

Cohen et al (2011) posit that reliability is the precision and accuracy of research instruments. According to Burns (1994), reliability in qualitative research may be enhanced if researchers outline the reasons for the research and the major question they wish to address. Qualitative research uses a naturalistic approach that seeks to understand phenomena in context-specific settings, such as a "real world setting [where] the researcher does not attempt to manipulate the phenomenon of interest" (Patton 2001:39). Furthermore, Patton (2001) supports the notion of the researcher's

122

involvement and immersion into the research by discussing that the real world is subject to change, and therefore a qualitative researcher should be present during the changes to record an event before and after the change occurs. Merriam (1998) suggests that reliability in this type of research should be determined by whether the results are consistent with the data collected. The following techniques are provided to achieve this:

 Explain the assumptions and theory behind the study;

 Use multiple methods of data collection and analysis (triangulation);

 Explain in detail how data was collected to allow for an audit trail if necessary.

4.8.3 Validity

Validity is defined as the degree to which a measurement process measures what it purports to measure, or the degree to which it gives the correct answer (Miller 2014). Creswell and Miller (2000) suggest that validity is affected by the researcher’s perception in the study and his or her choice of paradigm assumption. As a result, many researchers have developed their own concepts of validity and have often generated or adopted what they consider to be more appropriate terms, such as, quality rigor and trustworthiness (Davies & Dodd 2002; Lincoln & Guba 1985; Mishler 2000; Seale 1999; Stenbacka 2001). Merriam (2009:213) regards validity as how congruent the findings are with reality. Validity is a goal rather than a product: it is never something that can be taken for granted (Merriam, 2009:213).

In order to ensure the validity of data, information collected from interviews and observation was triangulated to ascertain the accuracy and consistency of the data from the different sources and methods. The corroboration of data also helped to ensure consistency and validity of research findings.

4.8.4 Measures for trustworthiness

Trustworthiness in qualitative research refers to the clear demonstration that the evidence for the results reported is sound; and when the argument made based on the results is strong (LaBanca 2010). Henning, Van Rensburg and Smit (2011:3) describe four main criteria for trustworthiness, namely, credibility, transferability, dependability, and conformability. These concepts are clarified briefly below.

123

● Credibility: This concept refers to the extent to which the findings of a study embody the meanings of the research participants. In this regard, a qualitative researcher must deal with the risks of research reactivity and partiality (Lietz & Zayas 2010; Padgett 2008). According to Sikolia, Biros, Mason and Weiser (2013:3), credibility involves extended engagement with participants, triangulation of data from interviews, observation and documents, thick description of data and adequacy of data evaluation, participant validation of interview transcripts and emerging concepts and categories, use of participants’ words in the emerging theory, and peer debriefing. Denzin and Lincoln (2003:240) explain that the term credibility in qualitative research design replaces the terms validity and reliability as applied to the positive stance in quantitative research designs.

● Dependability: Dependability, or consistency, of qualitative research findings corresponds to reliability of findings in quantitative research (Merriam 2009:154). Sikolia et al (2013) posits that dependability refers to the confirmation that the data represent the changing conditions of the phenomenon under study and should be consistent across time. Accordingly, dependability concerns itself with the examination of a detailed audit trail by an observer. Therefore, dependability also accommodates the researcher’s understanding of the research phenomenon. Henning et al (2011) assert that dependability may be achieved through auditing, which consists of the researcher’s documentation of data, methods, and decision-making during a thesis, as well as its end products. Auditing for dependability requires that the data and descriptions of the research be intricate and rich. In this research, dependability is achieved through my knowledge of what is entailed in strategic leadership and management, also through vast experience in the TVET sector.

● Transferability: This refers to the degree to which the findings of a study are applicable or useful to both theory and practice, being able to fit situations outside of the study and in future research (Lietz & Zayas 2010). Issues taken into consideration in transferability include the thick description of the entire research, the participants, methodology, and interpretation of results, and the emerging theory. Generalizability refers to the extent to which one may extend the account of a particular situation or population to other persons, times, or settings other than those directly studied (Maxwell 2010:45). However, transferability is regarded as a major challenge in qualitative research due to the subjectivity from the researcher as the key instrument,

124

and is a threat to valid inferences in its traditional thinking about research data. Hence research findings are transferable or generalizable only if they fit into new contexts outside the actual study context. Seale (1999:45) advocates that transferability is achieved by providing a detailed, rich description of the settings studied to provide the reader with sufficient information to be able to judge the applicability of the findings to other settings that they know.

● Confirmability: Transferability may be defined as the assertions of enduring value that are context–free (Bowen 2013). This refers to the ability of others to confirm or corroborate the findings (Lietz & Zayas 2010). Confirmability complements dependability in that it takes care of the examination of a detailed audit trail by an observer of the research process (Sikolia et al 2013). In the case of this study, all data collected from the semi-structured interviews (audiotapes and notes) have been archived in retrievable form. It will be made available to other researchers if the need arises or should the findings be challenged.

In order to ensure the the trustworthiness of data, researcher established facts that are valid and worthy of replication by other researchers, the research study was undertaken in the natural settings within which the study was situated. The researcher also used a multi-method approach (making triangulation possible) in the collection of data in order to ascertain the verification of data by one data collection method against the other