In advance of finalising my research proposal based on an agreed set of high level requirements, I have turned my attention to the research strategy and the methods I could potentially employ to characterise and assess the learning environment. The process is initiated in terms of philosophical questions that relate to the understanding of the world, knowledge and the intended research environment i.e ontology, epistomology and axiology. Whilst history has witnessed a evolutionary cycle of deductive and inductive preferences, research is ultimately founded on a personal perception of truth and reality i.e that my subjective set of values will inevitably effect the form of the research and the output.
In terms of diametrically opposing paradigms, the world can be interpreted from the following extreme perspectives: 1) a positivist; the knower and the known are independent, inquiry is value free and based on a single reality. Time and context free generalisations are possible 2) a constructivist/interpretivist; the knower and the known are inseparable, inquiry is value bound and there are multiple, constructed realities. Only time and context bound conclusions are possible.
On the basis that the derivation of truth is deductive in nature, my ontological stance would appear to be positivist i.e I am starting with the hypothesis that student-tutors are able to teach student-learners, a priori to building a supporting case based on definitive evidence. Inductive research on the other hand is based on the detailed exploration of a phenomena and possible relationships between variables, a-priori to advancing a hypothesis or theory.
Whilst scholars defend one world view as opposed to another, in the real world a continua of philosophical orientations rather than dicotomous distinctions seem to reflect more accurately the positions of most investigators (Teddlie and Tashakkori, 2009). Definitive paradigms that exist on this notional continuum include: 1) Pragmatism; the search for practical answers that interest the investigator. There may be causal relationships but they are transitory and hard to identify. 2) Transformative; places central importance on the lives and experiences of marginalised groups. Causal relationships should be understood within the social justice framework. Generisation is based on representative statements with links to social justice 3) Post-Positivist; There is a real reality but it can only be understood imperfectly or probabilistically.
Along this paradigm continuum there will inevitably exist a range of approaches related to research methods, categorised as follows: 1) definitively QUAN approach 2)Approachs that emphasise QUAN and use QUAL as a source of supplemental data. 3) Mixed Methods, QUAN and QUAL approaches are used in equal measure. 4) Approaches that emphasise QUAL and use QUAN as a source of supplemental data. 5) definitively QUAL approach.
The Prof has suggested a strictly positivistic approach (what?) to research based on student outcomes (quantitative testing) which could be supplemented by a on-task behavioural analysis (categorising student actions on a periodic basis). Whilst this view of school value would be the easiest to assess, it effectively acknowledges the diploma disease that seems to have infected the African perception of education i.e its only purpose is the attainment of qualifications. This view may reflect the truth but it ignores the fact that school is an intensely value-laden environment with significant explicit and implicit influence over its subjects. A strictly positivist approach would therefore be limited in its ability to characterise the environment and the learning process i.e why (based on subjective student and parental perspectives) a particular outcome was recorded as opposed to simply what was recorded. It is suggested that this qualitative aspect of research has particular significance when considered in relation to the chosen topic as so little is known about the needs, attitudes and perceptions of excluded children despite the fact that a vast UN effort (EFA programme) is being undertaken on their behalf.
From a practical standpoint, the quantitative approach is also dependent on whether a number of variables can be effectively controlled (in the absence of a definitive control group) i.e learning time, age and background differences etc.
This definition of research project would suggest a pragmatic paradigm based on some form of mixed method approach within the overall context of a case study, an indepth analysis of a single case. More research will be required in order to assess the validity of MM and the precise relationship between the QUAN and QUAL components.