Methodology Literature Review

Posted: January 4th, 2023

Methodology Literature Review

Student’s Name

Institutional Affiliation

Methodology Literature Review

Introduction

This methodology literature critical review intends to support the methodology that will be used to research on privatization of education in Saudi Arabia. The central question of the study is whether Saudi Arabia is prepared to privatize education and whether privatization would meet the education needs of the Saudis in light of Vision 2030. The intended outcome of the study is to support policy decision-making about changing the provision and access of education from public resources to private ones, with the hope of raising the education standards in the country. Although the study will not focus on policy research, it will assess the preparedness of the country for privatized education, considering that it is currently publicly-funded. Privatization of education as an education policy is a social phenomenon because it draws diverse perspectives from the education practitioners, policymakers, and beneficiaries as a lived experience. It is contextually unique to Saudi Arabia, considering that several other countries worldwide have privatized their education already. Therefore, the unique experiences of the education stakeholders in the country would provide critical perspectives regarding this phenomenon. In this regard, the study will be founded on interpretivism paradigm using the qualitative research approach in which data will be collected by interviewing education stakeholders, such as policymakers, professors and other faculty members, education superintendents, and teachers. Qualitative research is suitable for research in the field of education because it can gather in-depth information about the experiences of education stakeholders using a variety of data collection approaches (Creswell & Creswell, (2017). Therefore, the literature reviewed here justifies the different aspects of the methodology to be used, providing a broad perspective that justifies their choice. The critical review addresses the research philosophy (interpretivism), approach (qualitative research), strategy (phenomenology), and design, sampling strategy and techniques (purposive sampling), data collection methods (interviews), and data analysis procedures (thematic analysis).  

Critical Review

Research Philosophy

Interpretivism with provide the philosophical foundation to this dissertation. Research paradigm outlines the philosophical orientation of a researcher by identifying the principles and abstract beliefs of the worldview held by a researcher (Kivunja and Kuyini (2017). This researcher had to choose between positivism, interpretivism/constructivism, critical theory/transformativism, and pragmatism as the philosophical foundation of his or her worldview, although Kivunja and Kuyini (2017) acknowledge the difficulty in applying the research paradigm concept in educational research by higher degree students due to elusiveness of its articulation. In this case, interpretivism/constuctivism is preferred for this dissertation because it will help reveal the subjective human experience on provision of education by seeking to understand and interpret the thinking and meaning drawn by education stakeholders. Rehman and Alharthi (2016) detail the epistemological, ontological, methodological components of interpretivism/constructivism, thus providing a justification for its use in this study. In their exposition, Rehman and Alharthi (2016) reveal that interpretivists view reality and truth as being created rather than unearthed, providing for multiple realities that are socially constructed. Different individuals are used to interpret a social phenomenon through their diverse perspectives, making interpretivism suitable for social phenomena studies, such as the mode of provision of education in Saudi Arabia.

Thanh and Thanh (2015) make a case for interpretivism and its relation to qualitative research, which emboldens Rehman and Alharthi (2016) discussion of the subject and benefits education researchers.. They note that interpretivism helps translocate research that is often constructed in the western world into culturally-different contexts, which is supported by the diverse perspectives of participants in their social and cultural contexts. They argue that the national character of a phenomenon depends on the views of individuals and groups therein, while using their diverse experiences and perspectives to help the researcher gain insights into a social phenomenon in its context (Thanh & Thanh, 2015). In this regard, this study situates education in the Saudi Arabian context, thus giving it a national character.

However, Regmi (2019) and Al Riyami (2015) digress from the paradigm debate by expanding it into the education policy context, which supports the use of interpretivism in this study. In this case, the post-Westphalian tradition of policy analysis is applicable in this study. Regmi (2019) notes that national and global forces when viewed from a Westphalian lens can influence the paradigm chosen for educational policy research. He reveals that the post-Westphalia tradition, in which governments and global forces dominate education policy decision-making, support the application of interpretivism. Similarly, Al Riyami (2015) notes that interpretivism is applicable in educational research, provided the research questions are well designed. This study will unearth the influence of globalization in the education provision policy in Saudi Arabia, and the role of the Saudi government in policy making. The researcher is aware of the current trend of privatizing education in countries as governments seek to share the burden with the private sector, in the wake of higher demand for access and limited public resources.    

Research Approach

Kivunja and Kuyini (2017), Panhwar, Ansari, and Shah (2017), Rehman and Alharthi (2016), and Saldaña and Omasta (2016) divulged that some research approaches support particular research paradigms better than others. In this case, qualitative research will be used in this study and is supported by the interpretivism paradigm. Antwi and Hamza (2015) and Alharahsheh and Pius (2020) narrow this conversation to quantitative and qualitative research approaches and elaborate on their philosophical foundations while differentiating them, which helped the researcher choose qualitative research. They note that qualitative research uses exploratory scientific method, considers human behavior to be dynamic and in flux, uses inductive reasoning, and is conducted in the natural setting of the phenomenon. In this case, the Saudi society and its behavior are undergoing changes as the country endeavors to be a member of the international community. Already, many Saudis are being educated outside the country, where the Saudi government foots much of the education bill. In turn, Alharahsheh and Pius (2020) associate interpretivism with qualitative research while Antwi and Hamza (2015) argue that no one approach is superior to the other, and that their choice should be guided by their suitability to address the research question. In the same vein, Queirós, Faria, and Almeida (2017) and Saldaña and Omasta (2016) delve into the strengths and weaknesses of qualitative approach and revealed that qualitative research offered a bigger focus of comprehending the problem context and group studies dimension, and was more flexible for exploratory analysis. In this case, the strength of qualitative research that justifies its use in this study is its ability to delve deeply into the problem of education provision in Saudi Arabia and whether privatized education would help meet the needs of the Saudis.

Research Strategy and Design

Phenomenological research strategy is selected for this study. Its suitability is justified by Yüksel and Yıldırım (2015), who provide insights into phenomenological research strategy by noting that it unearths the feelings and experiences of individuals from their narratives to yield a detailed understanding of the phenomenon. In this case, publicly-funded education policy is an experience lived by Saudis as they seek to become global citizens and more productive in their country. Further justification of the use of phenomenology in this study is provided by Padilla-Díaz (2015) who explains the different types of phenomenology as a research strategy. One type is descriptive phenomenology, which focuses of personal experiences and generates meanings of the phenomenon through interpretation or description. In this case, descriptive phenomenology is suitable for this study because it focuses on the personal experiences of education stakeholders in Saudi Arabia and generates meaning of by describing and interpreting their perceptions regarding privatizing education in the country. Vaismoradi, Jones, Turunen and Snelgrove (2016) offers further justification by narrowing the discussion by noting that qualitative research helps interpret a phenomenon using detailed, contextual, and in-depth descriptions and interpretations that are desired by the researcher in this study.

A case study, which underpins descriptive research design, is best suited for this purpose because it supports the interpretivism paradigm and seeks to describe and interpret the feelings of education stakeholders in Saudi Arabia regarding education privatization. Twining, Heller, Nussbaum, and Tsai (2017) and Saldaña and Omasta (2016) provides more justification for case studies in qualitative research by revealing that their quality is enhanced if they are aligned with the epistemological, and ontological assumptions, research goals are clarified, and relevant literature is used to inform the study. Similarly, Kozleski (2017) believes that case study is apt for addressing important questions of educational policy and practice because of its ability to engage with education practitioners and attach social validity to the findings within a specific context. In turn, case studies can be used to direct the transformation of educational policy and practice within their cultural contexts. Therefore, case study will unearth the unique attributed of education policy in Saudi Arabia.

Sampling Strategy and Techniques

A sampling scaffold will be used to develop the sampling strategy to support purposive sampling in this study. Qureshi (2018) provides advice to novice researchers by recommending a sampling scaffold that facilitates the execution of a sampling strategy, which can reduce the initial concerns about ambiguity towards an expert appreciation of the flexibility in choosing the most apt approach. She notes that novice researchers that choose to employ grounded theory in their research are often at a loss on how to approach the sampling process or which sampling strategies to use. Sampling scaffold is meant to guide the researcher through the sampling process without restricting him or her to data preconceptions. In the sampling scaffold, a researcher can select a sampling scheme, select participants, determine the number of participants needed, select a cite where the participants will be found, examine the feasibility of the sampling strategy, and conduct an ethics check to ensure adherence to research ethics (Qureshi, 2018). In this regard, this researcher has considered convenient, purposive, theoretical sampling layered along homogeneous, stratified, and snowball sampling, and opted for purposive sampling. In participant selection, the researcher will seek participants that are accessible, eloquent, and willing to share their experiences. In this regard, Qureshi (2018) notes that participants classified as elite groups, like professors, administrators, postgraduate students, are hard-to-reach populations whose access may be challenging. Purposive sampling will be used to access the participants in this study who comprise faculty members in universities, education ministry officials, and experienced teachers, who are not easily accessible to the researcher.

 The researcher will recruit 25 participants, which is in line with Qureshi (2018) who recommended between 10 and 25 knowledgeable participants because they would provide sufficient understanding of the phenomenon without thinning data. Thereafter, a site from where the participants would be approached can be chosen and access procured prior to participant recruitment. In this case, universities, schools, and education offices are the sites from where the participants for this study will be accessed.  The sampling techniques issue raised by Qureshi (2018) is elaborated by Etikan, Musa, and Alkassim (2016) who argue that researchers opt for nonprobability sampling over probability sampling due to personnel, cost, and time constraints, despite loss of population reflection. They proceed to compare and contrast convenience and purposive sampling as two sampling technique popular with qualitative researchers. Etikan, Musa, and Alkassim (2016) revealed that purposive sampling worked best when a judgement of the participants revealed that they possessed qualities of interest to the participant and the study, based on their experience or knowledge. In this regard, the participants targeted by this researcher have expert knowledge about the current public education policy in Saudi Arabia, and are expected to hold an informed opinion about privatized education and the readiness of the country to adopt such a policy. Etikan, Musa, and Alkassim (2016) also help tie the sampling technique to the research approach by arguing that purposive sampling was often used in qualitative research. Nonetheless, Etikan, Musa, and Alkassim (2016) advised that the nature and type of study influenced the choice between the two nonrandom techniques. Singh (2015) facilitated the researcher’s decision-making on the choice of purposive (judgmental) sampling by discussing its advantages and disadvantages. The advantages of purposive (judgmental) sampling included the ability to capture element excluded by random sampling in small sampling units, capture the underrepresented aspects of a population by classifying it using the known attributes, and resolving urgent problems associated by probability sample designs encountered by public policymakers and executives. Contrastingly, purposive sampling was disadvantaged by being fraught with bias because it is not scientific and lacked an objective assessment of results’ reliability. Therefore, the researcher will endeavor to reduce bias by balancing the gender composition of the participants, choose participants from a wide range of experience, locations, age, and teaching disciplines.

The sampling of hard-to-reach issue raised by Qureshi (2018) is addressed by Woodley and Lockard (2016) who revealed that snowball sampling helped access these segment of the population by using a few known participants to help recruit their acquaintances until saturation was attained. They noted that snowball sampling helped recruit female participants often underrepresented or invisible in certain population groups. In the same vein, van Rijnsoever (2017) addressed the issue of sample size raised by Qureshi (2018) by noting that a population comprised sub-populations with diverse information not easily accessed through probability sampling. However, he argued that although the amount of information from each subpopulation informed the population size, minimal information could help attain the minimum sample size needed for theoretical saturation, which he pegged at 50 participants for purposive sampling. Similarly, Rivera (2019) introduced sample matching as an improved sampling approach that reflected the attributed of a population that are not attained by other nonprobability methods. He argued that sample matching remedied the generalizability deficiency of convenient and purposive sampling by helping construct a sample whose subpopulations were proportionately representative of the population. However, the researcher needed to have prior data that could be used as reference source data for the population segmentation proportions, to be applied during sampling to match the sample’s attributes to those of the population. Therefore, the researcher will combine purposive sampling with snowball sampling to help recruit the hard to reach education stakeholders. The researcher will sample a few participants purposively, and use them to recruit other until saturation is achieved.

Data Collection Methods

Interviews will be used to collect data in this study. Creswell and Creswell (2017) define interviews as conversations between the researcher as the interviewer and participants as interviewees where questions are posed to reveal information that valuable to the researcher. Guest, Namey, Taylor, Eley, and McKenna (2017) relate data collection method and the research approach. They argue that individual interviews and focus group discussions are data collection methods popularly used by qualitative researchers. Following a comparison of the two methods, Guest et al. (2017) revealed that while individual interviews did not yield any sensitive themes, they revealed a wide-ranging of issues. In turn, Cyr (2016) noted that interviews facilitated individual disclosures from the interactions between the interviewer and interviewee. This study will use semi-structured interviews. This kind of interviews combines single answer questions and prompts that require elaboration.  This choice is supported by Kallio, Pietilä, Johnson, and Kangasniemi (2016) who found that semi-structured interviews were rigorous in data collection, making studies trustworthy. Moreover, they were flexible and versatile, enabling group and individual interviews to be conducted, varying the structural rigidity to suit the research questions and purpose of the study, and enabling the interviewer to add follow-up questions to deliver in-depth data.    

Data Analysis Procedures

Thematic analysis will be used in this dissertation because of its suitability on making meaning of interviewee responses. Maguire and Delahunt (2017) revealed that thematic analysis was a popular technique of analyzing qualitative data that could be applied across studies with diverse epistemological underpinnings. Thematic analysis unearthed themes, which are either semantic or latent based on the rigor of analysis and input by the researcher. Specifically, semantic themes revealed explicit meaning while latent themes discovered the conceptualizations, assumptions, and ideas hidden in the semantics. In this regard, latent themes produced deeper meanings of the qualitative data compared to semantic themes. For this reason, the researcher will unearth the latent themes hidden in the interviewee responses regarding the readiness of Saudi Arabia to privatize education and the benefits that would deliver to the Saudis. Further support of this choice is provided by Javadi and Zarea (2016) revealed that qualitative data can be analyzed and reported as detailed or rich descriptions of the data. Also, they could be inductive or theoretical depending on whether they are related to the data or based on the preferences of the researcher. The advantages of thematic analysis that helped the researcher make the choice include clarity, simplicity and straightforwardness because it did not require technical expertise or theoretical details. However, thematic analysis was weakened by bias, rephrasing of data content, and misinterpretation, assumptions, mismatch between analytical findings and theoretical frameworks, meanings lost in translation, and being inconsistent and incoherent, which the researcher needs to guard against. However, Javadi and Zarea (2016) notes that these pitfalls emanated from poor analysis or inappropriate research questions rather than the thematic analysis technique. Braun and Clarke (2016) provide an alternative perception of thematic analysis by reporting that sometimes, thematic analysis is thought to have originated from content analysis or it is a single approach to analysis or easily discovered in qualitative data, which are misconceptions that challenge the use of thematic analysis by novice qualitative researchers. The researcher will avoid these pitfalls by endeavoring to be as objective as possible during the analysis process.

Conclusion

The critical review delved into the extant literature on research methodology and different aspects. It revealed while different philosophical foundations of research existed, interpretivism was best suited for this study because addresses social issues, such as the one addressed by this study. The interpretivism/constructivism research paradigm was critical to establish at the onset because it influenced the rest of the methodology, and helped inform the choice of qualitative research, purposive sampling, interviews as the data collection technique, and thematic analysis to make meaning from interviewee responses. In this regard, coherence across the methodology was critical for addressing the research topic and answering the question effectively. 

References

Al Riyami, T. (2015). Main approaches to educational research. International Journal of Innovation and Research in Educational Sciences, 2(5), 412-416.

Alharahsheh, H., & Pius, A. (2020). A Review of key paradigms: positivism VS interpretivism. Global Academic Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(3), 39-43.

Antwi, S. K., & Hamza, K. (2015). Qualitative and quantitative research paradigms in business research: A philosophical reflection. European journal of business and management, 7(3), 217-225.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2016). (Mis) conceptualising themes, thematic analysis, and other problems with Fugard and Potts’(2015) sample-size tool for thematic analysis. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 19(6), 739-743. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1195588.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.

Cyr, J. (2016). The pitfalls and promise of focus groups as a data collection method. Sociological Methods & Research, 45(2), 231-259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124115570065.

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11.

Guest, G., Namey, E., Taylor, J., Eley, N., & McKenna, K. (2017). Comparing focus groups and individual interviews: findings from a randomized study. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(6), 693-708. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2017.1281601.

Javadi, M., & Zarea, K. (2016). Understanding thematic analysis and its pitfall. Journal of Client Care, 1(1), 33-39. https://doi.org/10.15412/j.jcc.02010107.

Kallio, H., Pietilä, A. M., Johnson, M., & Kangasniemi, M. (2016). Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi‐structured interview guide. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(12), 2954-2965. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.13031.

Kivunja, C., & Kuyini, A. B. (2017). Understanding and applying research paradigms in educational contexts. International Journal of Higher Education, 6(5), 26-41. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v6n5p26.

Kozleski, E. B. (2017). The uses of qualitative research: Powerful methods to inform evidence-based practice in education. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 42(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796916683710.

Maguire, M., & Delahunt, B. (2017). Doing a thematic analysis: A practical, step-by-step guide for learning and teaching scholars. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education, 9(3), 1-14.

Padilla-Díaz, M. (2015). Phenomenology in educational qualitative research: Philosophy as science or philosophical science. International Journal of Educational Excellence, 1(2), 101-110. https://doi.org/10.18562/ijee.2015.0009.

Panhwar, A. H., Ansari, S., & Shah, A. A. (2017). Post-positivism: An effective paradigm for social and educational research. International Research Journal of Arts & Humanities, 45(45), 253-259.

Queirós, A., Faria, D., & Almeida, F. (2017). Strengths and limitations of qualitative and quantitative research methods. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(9), 369-386. http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.887089.

Qureshi, H. A. (2018). Rethinking sampling in grounded theory: Reflections for novice grounded theorists. International Journal of Contemporary Research and Review, 9(6), 20187-20194.

Regmi, K. D. (2019). Critical policy sociology: key underlying assumptions and their implications for educational policy research. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 42(1), 59-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727x.2017.1398228.

Rehman, A. A., & Alharthi, K. (2016). An introduction to research paradigms. International Journal of Educational Investigations, 3(8), 51-59.

Rivera, J. D. (2019). When attaining the best sample is out of reach: Nonprobability alternatives when engaging in public administration research. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 25(3), 314-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/15236803.2018.1429821.

Saldaña, J., & Omasta, M. (2016). Qualitative research: Analyzing life. Sage Publications.

Singh, S. K. (2015). Advantages and disadvantages of probability sampling methods in social research. In National Conference on Innovative Research in Chemical, Physical, Mathematical Sciences, Applied Statistics and Environmental Dynamics (pp. 14-18).

Thanh, N. C., & Thanh, T. T. (2015). The interconnection between interpretivist paradigm and qualitative methods in education. American Journal of Educational Science, 1(2), 24-27.

Twining, P., Heller, R. S., Nussbaum, M., & Tsai, C. C. (2017). Some guidance on conducting and reporting qualitative studies. Computers & Education, 106, A1-A9. http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.12.002.

Vaismoradi, M., Jones, J., Turunen, H., & Snelgrove, S. (2016). Theme development in qualitative content analysis and thematic analysis. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 6(5), 100-110. http://dx.doi.org/10.5430/jnep.v6n5p100.

Van Rijnsoever, F. J. (2017). (I can’t get no) saturation: a simulation and guidelines for sample sizes in qualitative research. PLoS One, 12(7), e0181689. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181689.

Woodley, X. M., & Lockard, M. (2016). Womanism and snowball sampling: Engaging marginalized populations in holistic research. The Qualitative Report, 21(2), 321-329.

Yüksel, P., & Yıldırım, S. (2015). Theoretical frameworks, methods, and procedures for conducting phenomenological studies in educational settings. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 6(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.17569/tojqi.59813.