Chapter
Two: My paradigm and methodology
2.1 Overcoming “intellectual
seasickness”
Using
feminist theory, where the personal is
the political, encourages researchers to take action to improve the lives of
people (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2003; Fontana & Frey, 2000). In my case the
action is my own emancipation from ignorance which will help me to become a
better leader and perhaps future principal, as well as signpost some practical
and challenging insights in how to support future female leaders (Bishop, 1997;
Kemmis & McTaggart, 2003; Ryan, 2004; Megginson
& Clutterbuck, 2005). Therefore, I chose to highlight Janet’s
unique lived experience and the significance of her everyday life (Neal &
Ozkanli, 2011) on her journey as a first time principal.
I
am “drawn to multiple, seemingly incompatible, feminist gender theories” (Fuller,
2013, p.5) as I see both sides of the ‘equality-versus-difference’ debate.
Gender theory is complex and I often experience “intellectual sea-sickness”
(Reed, 2001, as cited in Fuller, 2013, p.5) where my thinking becomes paralysed
(Fuller, 2013). Sometimes I believe in essentialism and that men and women are
different but equal while at other times, I am drawn to arguments that women
and men are more alike than different (Shakeshaft
et al., 2015). It wasn’t until I embraced
Fuller’s (2013) ideas that it was acceptable to move between the seemingly
opposed concepts that I could finally, on an intellectual level, relax and
understand that it is acceptable to draw on multiple gender theories to explore
this issue.
2.2 Methodology and a fascination
with the “minutiae of human life”
As well as being comfortable with multiple truths,
roles and realities I am fascinated in the “minutiae of human life” (Fontana
& Frey, 2000, p. 665). As I don’t
hide under a “veil of neutrality” (Stake, 2000, p. 447) I
chose to conduct a qualitative study using
the guided interview framework; characterised by my creation of themes with
open ended questions which gave Janet and me the freedom to go choose our own
path to some extent (Fontana & Frey, 2000, p. 654-5).
After
receiving ethical approval from the University of Waikato I sent out a number
of emails to female high school first time principals from the First Time
Principals Programme website (http://www.firstprincipals.ac.nz) and
received five replies agreeing to participate in my research. I chose Janet as she was closest for me to
visit and was the principal of a co-educational school which is the sector of
education that I am most interested in. After
a number of emails I spent over two hours with her at her school discussing her
career pathway and her present position and recorded the interview. When I returned home the recording was
transcribed and I emailed it to Janet to see if she sought any changes or
additions as she may not have been able to express her true meaning during the
interview (Bishop, 1997; Delamont, 2002). I also sent her a number of emails to
clarify certain ideas. This was essential
to me as I wanted to respect Janet as a human being with the right to define
meaning in her own life alongside helping to dispel bias and increase validity
(Weiler, 1997). However, Delamont (2002) reminded me
that I shouldn’t assume that Janet holds more of the truth than I do and that
to create quality research I need the reader to experience my interpretative
commentary as “the glue” I have added to her words (Eisenhart, 2006, p. 571).
2.3 Coding,
creating thick descriptors and my interpretative commentary as the glue I have
added to Janet’s words
I coded and indexed the transcript by
drawing out patterns and then revised and revamped my codes (Delamont, 2002;
Hansen 2014; Menter, Elliot,
Hulme, Lewin & Lowden, 2011). This allowed me to create the thick, vivid
descriptors that made the “familiar strange and the exotic familiar” (Delamont,
2002, p. 149). While pasting my interpretative glue to the
descriptors (Eisenhart, 2006,
p. 571) I constructed Janet’s life
history which is an innovative method of pinpointing events in the progression
of her career (Glesne, 2011; Hansen, 2014).
A well-researched life history and therefore a well-researched career
life history “illustrates the uniqueness, dilemmas, and complexities of a
person in such a way that it causes readers to reflect upon themselves and to
bring their own situations and questions to the story” (Glesne, 2011, p.
11). I recognised that my involvement in this topic as a female school leader would
influence my selection of texts (Bell, 2010; Lincoln, Lynham & Guba, 2005; Weiler, 1997) but as it was a qualitative
study this was expected.
2.4 Validity
to ensure that the knowledge Janet and I have created together makes sense of her
life and circumstances
I believe that this solo study into one woman’s
reality of her rise to leadership is valid as validity is established
when it can be determined that a study actually measures what it was intended
to measure (Kvale & Brinkman, 2009, as cited in Neidhart,
2009). This same reasoning was
used by Neidhart
(2009) in her New Zealand study of seven female primary school Deputy Principals
about barriers to becoming principals. I intended to measure the career path of a
first time female principal and I
believe together, Janet and I were able to create a rich, valid description
that will be applicable to myself and other women who aspire to become principals.
2.5 Ethical
considerations and New Zealand as part of a
small-world network
In my initial contact with Janet I was open and honest about what I was
hoping to achieve, especially around the topics I wanted to cover, as I
preferred that she pulled out before the research began rather than half way
through it (Bell, 2010).
For me, the most challenging ethical consideration is
anonymity, or the lack of it, in New Zealand.
Internet commentator David Farrar (2007) pointed out that there is only
“two degrees of separation” between anyone in New Zealand and statisticians
state that New Zealand is part of a small-world network (MacGibbon,
2008). I found a professional connection with Janet
within the first two minutes we met which is important when co-constructing
research (Bishop, 2005) but can be problematic.
Smaller population numbers in New Zealand compared to many other
countries means fewer professional networks and an increased awareness of
colleagues (Neidhardt, 2009). Therefore, when asking Janet for details about
her career journey to principalship I was clear about my definition of
confidentiality and anonymity and heeded any of her concerns (Bell, 2010; Stake,
2000).
2.6 Conclusion and suiting
myself in relation to a research model
Human
beings are complex and ever changing and there are endless ways to discover
information about them (Fontana & Frey, 2000). I listened to the wise words of Judith Bell (2010)
who said that I should “suit myself” (p. 183) and select the research model which
is right for my purpose as there are “many different arguments for doing
different things” to explore the “respondents’ beliefs, interpretations and
understanding of issues” (p. 166). I
believe that I chose the right approach as long as I was reflexive, had good
manners and acted within a strict ethical code.
This enabled me to fashion a valid and ethical piece of research that gave
a voice to Janet on the influences in her career pathway to principalship
(Bell, 2010; Hoppey & McLeskey, 2013; Stake, 2000).
No comments:
Post a Comment