This qualitative study will employ four methodologies that will aid in getting an understanding of the connection between the principals’ mode of administration and strategies to the sustained success in the three selected “Spotlight schools” in Illinois. The research questions that were formulated for this study include the following;
- What is the principal’s perspective on how he/she facilitates aspects of leadership that have contributed to student academic achievement?
- What is the principal’s perspective on how he/she facilitates aspects of leadership that has sustained academic performance over 6 years?
- What is the teachers’ perspective on how the principal facilitates aspects of leadership that contributes to student achievement?
- What is the teachers’ perspective on how the principal facilitates aspects of leadership that has sustained academic achievement?
To answer the research questions, firstly, interviews will be conducted and will be focused on the three principals and the teachers of the respective schools. The interviews will have the aim of establishing the perspective of the principals on how they facilitate aspects of leadership that have contributed to the sustained academic excellence in their schools. This would answer the first and second research questions above. As for the third and fourth research questions, the teachers will also be interviewed to get their views.
The other method will be the use of focus groups. Focus groups will be employed due to the nature of the situation. The fact that the teachers will be discussing their principals, it would be effective to work with them in their large numbers in order to enable them to open up and talk freely about the principals with no fear. This would be important in answering the third and fourth research questions. Observations will also be used in order to get the extra information that would have been difficult to gather from other methods. Lastly, document reviews will be made in order to get recorded information on the various aspects of the administration and management of the schools. All these information will be gathered and analyzed to come up with meaningful findings.
Population and Sample
The population that would be studied for this research would include the Spotlight schools-which are schools that sustained academic achievement over a six-year period and have won the Spotlight School award each year-within the State of Illinois. A sample of three Spotlight schools will be selected randomly from the population. Within each school selected for the study, the principal and a specific number of teachers-who have been working in the school for a specific number of years-will be selected. Before the study is conducted, the principals of the schools will have received a letter and a phone call to get there go-ahead.
Research design
A qualitative research design would be used for the study since qualitative studies aim at gathering an understanding of the human behaviour and some of the factors that govern this behavior (Patton, 2002). For qualitative research design, a small but focused sample size is required as opposed to large samples (Soy, 1997). The three Spotlight schools would be the small sample size with the three principals and a reasonable number of teachers being studied in depth to get an understanding of the behaviour of the principals that lead their schools to excel and sustain the excellence. To answer the research questions, four qualitative research methodologies will be used; interviews, observation, focus groups and document reviews.
Interviews
Valenzuela and Shrivastava (2002) found out that interviews were useful tools used in collecting data for qualitative research. They classified them as tools meant to give an understanding to what the interviewee was trying to put across. Interviews are specifically useful in getting to know the experience of the interviewee on a particular subject of discussion. Hollowitz and Wilson (1993) used interviews as follow-up tools especially when it came to interviewing respondents who had previously filled questionnaires. This was to enable the interviewer to investigate further on the responses given earlier.
Valenzuela and Shrivastava (2000) also determined that an interview is a more personal form of research method than the use of questionnaires because the interviewer works directly with the interviewee unlike in questionnaires where the respondent only fills up a certain form as the researcher remains passive. Interviews may seem much easier for the participant especially if only the opinions or impressions about a certain subject are being sought.
For the present research, in-depth interviewing will be adopted in getting the necessary information from the principals and teachers in the highlighted high-performing schools. Boyce and Neale (2006) used in-depth interviews in collecting data are found them to be especially important when it comes to dealing with a small number of participants. This was important in getting an in-depth understanding of their take on a particular program or situation. The use of in-depth interviews will therefore, be applicable for the present research. The respondents-who are the principals and teachers of the “spotlight schools”-will be interviewed with respect to their association with the same program, and their opinions about how the principals influence on the performance of the school and how the performance has been sustained. In doing this, the thoughts of the respondents concerning the operations of the school program and performances will be obtained and the possible explanation of their thoughts on the changes they believe is as a result of their participation in attaining the success.
In-depth interviews are of great use when it comes to getting details about the thoughts and behaviour of a person. Boyce and Neale (2006) find such interviews to be important in giving context to outcome data as they provide a bigger picture about what led to the given outcome. In this case, it is the institutional academic achievements that are being investigated and credit is being given to the principals of the schools. These schools’ sustained achievements have earned them recognition and hence have won the Spotlight School Award. Interviewing the teachers in the particular schools might help unveil the secrets to success. For example, the increased performance in the school may be due to the good teaching environment provided for by the principal of the school since principals are known to influence the overall performance of the teachers and students.
In-depth interviews are also important tools and may be used in place of focus groups if a particular respondent is not participating in discussion within a focus group or is not comfortable with talking openly within the group. It is also an important alternative when one wants to get individual responses as opposed to group responses. In-depth interviews are useful in refining questions to be used for surveys in the future.
The main advantage of using in-depth interviews in the present research is that they will enable the interviewer to obtaine more details about the topic of discussion than what would have been obtained from other methods of collection such as surveys. They also provide a better atmosphere for collecting information as it is more relaxed. Participants may be more comfortable speaking out about the program or situation rather than filling out surveys.
As much as the use of in-depth interviews is advantageous, Boyce and Neale (2006) identified some disadvantages and pitfalls of using this method of collection of information for qualitative research. One of the limitations is that they are prone to biases. When individuals involved in a certain program are being interviewed, they may tend to give information that favours the program in order to try to prove that the program is working efficiently. Kvale (1996) also agrees with the notion. In this research, the responses from the teachers may also be biased if some teachers have a negative attitude towards the principal. They may give biased information that is not based on truth but driven by emotions. Interviews should therefore, be conducted in a way that would minimize bias and this may be done through designing of proper collection efforts and appropriate instruments.
Another disadvantage of using interviews for qualitative research is that they may be time-consuming. Hollowitz and Wilson (1993) determined that the time taken to conduct the interviews may be long and the next step of transcribing the information may require quite some time. Analyzing the results is no easy task either. For an interview exercise to be successful there needs to be a trained interviewer who has skills on interviewing techniques. This is a disadvantage in this method of collecting information since not anyone can do the interviewing. Some of the skills that a trained interviewer possesses are the skills of making the interviewer feel comfortable, relaxed and interested in the topic of discussion. A trained interviewer must also use interviewing techniques that are effective. The interviewer must therefore avoid leading questions or those questions that require a yes or no answer. They should incorporate favourable languages of the body and have a number of alternatives.
It is difficult to generalize the information that has been gathered from in-depth interviews since the sample that has been chosen for the study is composed of a few individuals. For this research, the respondents include the three principals from the three spotlight schools and the teachers in the schools. There is no randomness in the selection of the respondents and the sample is quite small. In addition, in-depth interviews can be used together with other tools to collect the data that is required for the study. Nonetheless, there is a general rule when it comes to interviews. A sufficient sample size is attained when interviewees have started sharing the same experiences and ideas about an issue or have similar topics (Hollowitz & Wilson, 1993).
In-depth interviews are conducted in a particular fashion as it follows a general process that is adopted by other research methods. The general process starts with planning. The next step involves developing of instruments for the research. Data is then collected, analyzed and the results disseminated back to the people who were involved in the exercise and other interested parties (Prairie Research Associates, 2001).
In the planning process, the researcher (interviewer) will first be required to identify the stakeholders who will participate in the exercise. The researcher will be required to know the kind of information that is needed and the potential sources of that information. A list of the stakeholders to be involved in the interviews is to be created and only a relevant group of participants should be selected. An additional number of people may, however, be considered during the data collection process itself if it is necessary. Pawlas (1995) asserts that the whole process should follow international and regional standards of ethics in research.
Developing instruments is another stage in the process for conducting interviews. An interview protocol should be developed. This protocol is a set of rules that facilitates the conduction and completion of the interviews. These instructions are followed to the latter by every interview. This ensures that there is a kind of consistency in the interviews and therefore, increase the viability of the results. In the protocol, there would be instructions for the interviewer.
Some instructions in the protocol demonstrate what the interviewer should say to the interviewee in the process of setting up the interview (Kvale, 1996). The way the interviewer communicates during setting up process differs from what is communicated at the beginning of the interview. This includes guaranteeing the confidentiality of the interviewee and getting his or her consent. There are also instructions provided for what the interviewer would say at the end of the interview. The protocol also has provisions for what the interviewer will do during the interview, and afterwards.
Kvale (1996) developed a list of questions to be asked during the interviews as a guide for the exercise. A maximum of fifteen questions should be included and probes should be included where deemed necessary. Interview guides between stakeholders may vary due to the need to ask different questions and therefore, the interviewer should prepare different separate guides. In the current research, the principals and the teachers may be asked different questions and therefore, it will require the researcher to develop different guides. It is essential to transform the instructions to the local language to ensure the ease of communication.
Kvale (1996) introduced another step in the process and it involved the training of the data collectors. He suggested that when a research requires more than one interviewer, then it would be necessary to train other interviewers and where there is a local language within the area of research, then it would be appropriate to use interviewers who can comprehend the local language. All the data collectors that participated in Kvale’s research study had to have a certain level and elements of training regardless of their experience. The researcher introduced the trainee data collectors to the process and objectives of evaluation, some techniques on data collection and an explicit training on the items and instruments to use during data collection. The trainees also had to practice how to use the instruments prior to the interviewing process. The trainee data collectors took some exercises on how to conduct interviews and on interpersonal communication. Another important aspect that Kvale involved in the training of data collectors was the issue of ethics. This was important and each data collector had to know what is expected of him or her during the data collection process. In the present research however, only the researcher will be required to do the interviewing and therefore, there would be no need to train other personnel for the exercise.
During the data collection, the first thing to do is to set up the interviews with the participants that will be involved in good time so as not to cause any inconveniences. The participants should be made aware of the purpose of the interview and why a particular group of respondents has been chosen for the purpose. The expected duration of the interview should also be communicated in order to prepare the interviewee psychologically and not to cause any inconveniences.
It is also important at this stage, to acquire the consent of the participant either verbally or in writing. Then the interviewee should be informed again about the objective of the interview, why he or she has been chosen specifically and how long the interview is intended to last. It is vital to mention whether the information will be kept confidential or not and if any notes will be taken or any tape recording be done. If the participant has consented then it is ok to go ahead and conduct the interview. A summary of the key points should be made during the interview by the interviewer. After that, it would be necessary for the interviewer to verify some of the information given by the interviewee in order to check for its validity. In the current research, for example, some of the information from the teachers concerning the principals or the programs of the school may need further clarification.
After data has been collected, the next step in the process is analysis of data. The data is transcribed and reviewed before analysis of all the data is done. During analysis of the data, it is required of the researcher to read through the responses gotten from the interviews and then a common pattern or theme be established from the responses (Kvale, 1996). If a variety of themes exists, then the themes may be grouped in a logical way. For example, the researcher may find that the responses from the male teachers are different from those from the female teachers hence grouping the responses by sex may be the way to go. Responses may also be grouped according to those that were answered with a lot of enthusiasm and those that were explained with a few details.
The last process in the conduction of in-depth interviews is the dissemination of the findings. The researcher needs to write a report on the findings of the interviews. Boyce and Neale 2006 stated that soliciting for feedback is also necessary in this stage. This will include feedback from the interviewees (the principals and the teachers) from the three selected spotlight schools in Illinois. After receiving the feedback, the report will then be revised and disseminated to the respondents, the schools and the community at large.
Focus groups
Use of focus groups is a method in qualitative research and is a form of group interviewing process. In focus groups, there is the interaction between the moderator and the members of the group where the interaction yields information and responses to well designed questions (Morgan, 1986). The dynamism of the process together with the nature of the questions asked by the moderator yields substantial information that is much better than that which is obtained from such methods as observations, surveys and some interview processes since they are somewhat unidirectional. Patton (2002) used focus groups in data collection and found it to be useful.
Focus groups have earned credit as being an accurate source of primary information for research. This is due to the strategies employed in collecting information that is not biased. The methods that are used during the recording of information in focus groups together with the strategies employed for analysis of the information are regarded as trustworthy. Focus groups was widely used for marketing research but later on in the 1980s, it was also deemed important by the social scientists who adopted the method for qualitative research. Even more recently, it has been adopted by the human service organizations for research.
Focus groups are, however, not useful in all occasions but are favourable for certain occasions only. Some of the instances where use of focus groups are applicable may include where the security provided by the presence of other group members allow them to feel free and express themselves more openly and without fear that comes about when mentioning some things. Krueger (1994) found it to be applicable as in the case of juniors in a certain organization either talking openly about the organization or the management. In this research, focus groups will be appropriate methods for getting information about their principals since the presence of the group will give them the security that come with numbers and they will be open about revealing some of the information about their principals.
Focus groups can also be important in giving insight and facilitating understanding to the targeted group especially if they are so differentiated from the decision makers that they might not understand some hard terminologies. This will also be useful if questionnaires will need to be constructed since this will guide the constructing process. Focus groups also come in handy when information about the behaviour or motivations of a certain group of people needs to be collected. Such information is somewhat complex and questionnaires do not reveal such information. Through a number of well-structured questions, more answers that are honest may be arrived at in focus groups. In-depth information about the topic of discussion can also be obtained.
Focus groups are also useful when one needs to understand the nature of the agreement. When using questionnaires, many participants may agree to some proposition or situation but in focus groups, there may be differences with the views the people have about the situation and the fundamental differences among the members will be realized. Depending on the target group, the use of focus groups may apply (Krueger, 1994). For a group of audiences such as teenagers, for example, Patton (2002) found that their seriousness in answering the questionnaires may not be guaranteed therefore, the best tool to get honest and meaningful information may be the use of focus groups. This is because focus groups allow for challenging the superficial and patronizing answers offered by the target group, therefore, putting the discussion into the right context.
Focus groups have various advantages and disadvantages as a method of collecting data for qualitative research. The decision as to whether to use the focus groups or not for a particular social science research depends on the strengths and weaknesses of the method contrary to the other available techniques. For example, the naturalistic observation method may be seen to be more advantageous than the focus groups. This is because focus groups are exercised in a rather unnatural environment. The fact that there is a moderator who offers a direction that the discussion will take might have an influence on the responses that the group members will bring forward. Naturalistic observations surface as the better method since there is a possibility for observing a wider range of information and probably a discussion that is more open. Focus groups are disadvantageous in the sense that they choose a theme or group of themes and use some questioning process that affects the process and therefore reduces the success of the method as a qualitative research methodology (Morgan, 1986).
In another perspective, interviews done on individuals may be seen as a better option. This is so because it is believed that in interviews, the interviewer is able to cover more ground while dealing with one person as compared to dealing with a group of people. As much as little information may be arrived at when dealing with a group, it is certain that the little information generated will not be biased and with a greater depth. The weakness that might be realized in using focus groups is when the participants do not give personal opinions or thoughts about the subject of discussion but relies on a particular group member’s take on the situation probably because the member’s ideas are trusted among the group members. Focus groups can, however, be used successfully together with interviews. Researchers may use focus groups for discussing the broader picture of the situation then later get into individual interviews to get more specific or expanded information (Krueger, 1994).
When focus groups are compared to questionnaires in terms of costs, questionnaires are obviously less expensive and easier to create and analyze. Questionnaires may be directed to a large group of people but focus groups only targets a group of about twenty people who are supposed to be part of the population under investigation. Questionnaires may contain as many questions as the evaluator may want to include in it in order to get the information that he or she desires from the group but as for focus groups, the moderator has to go through a lot before the group tackles only about five questions. Morgan (1986) determined that the reason why some evaluators settle for focus groups despite the disadvantages is due to the need for a deeper understanding of the subject of discussion and this is why the use of focus groups would be important for the present research.
Most researchers use both surveys and focus groups because surveys may leave some loopholes that require clarification by the use of focus groups. Focus groups on the other hand may be useful in making surveys possible. In focus groups, discussions on the areas that need required to be covered to shed some light on the key points about the topic. This enables the survey to be more comprehensive. Focus groups can also be useful in getting clarification on some of the terminologies to be used during the investigation to be conducted. Through the knowledge acquired from the focus groups, the survey developers may get to know of strategies to be used in order to ensure that the questions created would be understood by all the participants in the same way.
Organization of focus groups
The first process is the selection of participants. Within a given focus group, the average participants for the study will range between six to ten individuals who may not know each other but may have a similar take or association to the topic of discussion. Selecting respondents who have such similarities is important as it helps them communicate more freely with each other and it aids in reaching a certain consensus rather than having responses that are so mixed that it prevents the discussion from reaching a certain conclusion. Wheatly and Flexner (1988) prefers focus groups to constitute of members who do not know each other in order to avoid the sharing in a way friends do as to create anonymity in the name of giving honest responses.
The number of groups to be conduct for a certain research to be successful ranges from three to five. It is not advisable to settle for results obtained only after one focus group has been conducted since the ideas expressed in the discussion may have been as a result of the dynamics of the group such as the strong ideas of one or two members who influenced the rest of the group. This is not true to the essence of sampling which should be a representation of the whole population and not only a member or two. Having two similar groups that produce information that are far from similar is an indicator that more information needs to be collected in the particular area. Morgan (1986) determined that the degree to which the researcher follows and adheres to the rules depends on the importance of the research and the resources that are available.
In one session during Krueger’s (1994) research, the target group handled five questions that took duration of approximately ninety minutes. It was useful for the moderator to advice the group that it would run for about two hours in order to avoid misunderstandings in the event of a delayed discussion. To ensure efficiency and reliability of information, the target group should given a comfortable environment. To ensure that the effort of the participants is appreciated, favourable furniture and snacks can be administered to them. The chairs should be arranged specifically to ensure that visibility. Nametags may be provided in order to facilitate interaction among group members. The venue chosen for the exercise should also be in a place where the participants can easily access their work places or homes. This is meant to reduce the travelling time and such inconveniences. The venue should also be considered in accordance to the topic so that the participants would not feel ashamed speaking out some things (Morgan, 1986). For the present research therefore, it would be important for the interviewer to choose an appropriate venue to conduct the interviews.
There is a specific questioning strategy that is adopted for focus groups. They generally involve approximately ten questions that are open ended. In a group process, a lot of time is likely to be consumed, therefore, it is important for the moderator to manage the process effectively so that only about ninety minutes is consumed and meaningful information have been arrived at.
There are two types of focus group processes, structured and unstructured focus groups. Structured focus groups allow the moderator to use a form of guide to keep the group inline with the agenda. These guided agendas are also important when it comes to making comparisons between focus groups. A well-structured guide aids the conversations to go along with the research questions. At times, it is advisable that the moderator leaves the conversation between him/her and the respondent to flow smoothly without any interruptions. He/she just has to ensure that the key segments of the interview are covered.
Information may be recorded in order to capture some of the many points that have been raised over the 90-minutes session. The use of a tape recorder and collection of interview notes are among the most common methods that are used to collect data. It is, however, important to know that the voice recording process should not interfere with the process of discussion. Moderators should ensure that techniques for recording information should capture all the important information. It should also collect information in a way that does not bring biasness. The capture method should also attempt to capture the nonverbal behaviour explicated by the members of the group. Morgan (1986) determined that nonverbal reactions could give useful information about the thoughts of a particular participant about the issue. Interviews would therefore, be important for the present research since some nonverbal information would need to be collected to understand some of the reactions brought forward.
Depending on the goals of the evaluation, the analysis process may vary. This process may also vary depending on the commitment of the evaluator to the cause or the resources available. Analysis of the information may require gathering of impressions of the participants through reviewing the tapes and the notes gathered. For intense analysis of data obtained in the focus groups, data require transcribing and coding of the information collected in each session (Krueger, 1994).
Considerations in making successful focus groups
Greenbaum (1998) believes that a researcher can never do a lot of planning for focus groups. He says that the effort put in the extra planning process for the focus group always results in an improved quality of output. This additional effort includes using proper recruiting parameters, a flowing discussion guide and other strategies. Another consideration to make in order to ensure that the focus group will be a success is the recruiting process. The recruiting process should be done in a way that will ensure that the right people for the group are recruited. Recruitment Organizations usually try their best to recruit the best candidates for the focus group but the ultimate responsibility lies on the moderator who is responsible for the quality of the participants.
Since the quality of the result from the focus group lies on the quality of the people in the group, Greenbaum (1998) decided to invest on a field expert to dwell solely on this aspect. That enabled him to concentrate on the actual group process that ranged from developing the guides, moderating the focus groups and writing good reports. Another key consideration in making successful focus groups is not to judge the respondents by their physical appearance. He realized that appearance of the participants had so little to do with their effectiveness in the group.
For focus groups to be successful there needs to be proper moderators who bring about objectivity and expertise in the process. A well-trained moderator will take enough time to learn more about the topic being discussed to become a useful facilitator. The effective moderator must be able to fish people out of the group mentality and listen to them well enough to interpret the outcome of the session and disseminate the analyzed results in an efficient manner.
Some clients consider groups that impart knowledge and provide entertainment as an efficient tool for a research process. Others have objectives that differ greatly as they require them to be fulfilled for them to feel that it was a success. These may include things such as the comfort of the facilities in the group. For a moderator to ensure that the client is satisfied and is likely to return for the services, he or she should be aware of the factors (Dunn, 1988).
For the research to achieve its goals, the moderator and the participants should combine their efforts at all times during a focus group. To ensure that this happens, the moderator needs to involve the client’s input in the guide. When the observer is briefed on the most efficient methods of working with the moderator, then they would use the least time to communicate enough information for the focus group session.
Observations
Observation is a method used for research and may be in two ways, unstructured or structured observations (Mulhall, 2002). Structured observations are essential tools for collection qualitative data from the target group (character and behaviour) while unstructured observations is used to interpret these characteristics. Structured observations are mainly used in psychology and this explains why many researchers in the field of medicine have adopted this method.
Unstructured observations do not imply that the method is unsystematic or unreliable. It simply does not follow the steps of strictly checking for a list of behaviour as the structured observations do. The observer goes to the field with no idea about what kind of behaviour they might encounter. They may, however, have some idea of what to observe but they are always prone to change in subsequent observations in the same setting (Pretzlik, 1994). Pretzlik (1994) also determined that in the unstructured observation, the researcher can assume a number of roles from either being a participant to being an observer.
On the other hand, structured observation is all about being apart from what is being observed. This is seen as the observers using structured method try to remain objective and avoid contaminating the information given with their own thoughts about it. They always take the information as it is and never try to alter it. They differ greatly from the unstructured observers who are hardly distinguishable from being a researcher or the one being investigated upon. Despite their great difference, Pretzlik (1994) believes that structured and unstructured methods can be used together in a single research where one method complements the other. He gives a relevant example of such a research done by Dunn (1988). Dunn conducted a domestic study that aimed at identifying the feelings and behaviour of the children within their families. He first acted as an unstructured observer when in the family and then investigated the actions of the children in a structured manner. At times, after conducting some observations that are less structured, the researchers can develop structured coding instruments. However, these coding instruments are not highly reliable in psychological research (Adamchak et al., 2000).
Using observation methods are very important when the researcher intends to determine whether the people under investigation actually act as they say they do. It is important to know that what the people claim to be doing and what they actually do are valid in their own respects and only reflect two different sides on the study. Mulhall (2003, p. 3) believes that observational data may undergo more interpretation by the researcher than the interview data. Mulhall says this because he views observers as having more freedom in choosing what to observe, what to eliminate and how to analyze the data.
Researchers using interviews to collect data also have some degree of freedom in choosing the kind of questions to ask but more power lies upon the interviewee since he or she decides on what direction the question will take. Further still, the researcher disseminates back the results to the interviewee for clarification. In this respect, interviewees may alter the analysis process whereas the observed individuals have no stake in the analysis process.
Observations are advantageous in that data is captured in their natural setting. The obvious disadvantage is the Hawthorne effect but Mulhall (2003) believes, through his own experience, that the effect of the Hawthorne effect in participant observation is overestimated. Another advantage of using observation is that it captures the entire social setting of the people since it records the context of their working conditions. Interviews only provide bits and bits of information but observation helps piece these bits together. Use of observation for the present research would be important since observations provide evidence for the process. The effectiveness of observation would also be seen through the way it would give information on the way the physical environment is influenced.
Document Review
Document review is categorized as a qualitative research methodology. As much as it does not reflect practices obtained through evidence, the documentation about the historical accounts on the issue of discussion provides the answer to the reason why a certain phenomenon occurs (Austin, 1958). In the present research on the reasons why the spotlight schools are performing so well and are sustaining these performances for as much as six years, historical accounts on the mode of management of the principal may illustrate the reasons why the schools are that successful.
Austin (1958) referred to this method as a scientific method since it searches for the truth. There exist some rules and common procedures that need to be considered in order to refer to the research as being valid. Document review is a kind of historical approach to the situation where the past events are studied in order to explain what is happening in the present. It adopts two strategies, the neo-positivist and the positivist. The positivist researchers try to establish the cause-effect bond in the situation.
Primary sources give first hand information about someone’s experiences about an institution or program but may not have critical analysis. Secondary sources are those that are written by people who were not associated directly with the events he records. The writer of secondary sources usually gives the opinions about the events and offers his or her own interpretations. Document review qualifies in bringing an understanding to some of the complex issues and can supplement the knowledge that has been acquired from other methods of research.
These reviews of previous events on the issue of discussion have been used extensively by scientists of a wide variety of disciplines. This method of qualitative research has been mostly used by social scientists to investigate contemporary actual events. Experts of the document review method believe that the study of little documentation may not offer any grounds for obtaining reliable results. Other critics feel that intense exposure of the same lead to biasing of the results.
Some critics even dismiss this method of study as being useful for exploratory studies. When carefully planned, however, this method may yield success for studies dealing in actual situations and issues. Six steps are used in the organizing and conducting of the research study using the document review method in qualitative studies. The first step is the determining and definition of the research questions. The researcher forms questions about the situation or phenomenon to be researched on and determines the purpose for the research. This method of qualitative research is used when reviewing a program, person or a group of persons. The researcher studies the situation intensively using a variety of data collection methods in order to produce evidence that end up in imparting an understanding of the situation and provide answers for the questions developed in the first instance (Law, et al., 1998).
The next step involves the selection of the documents and coming up of techniques of gathering and analyzing it. When the researcher decides to use multiple cases approach then each case is treated as one entity. The conclusions from each case are used to add up to the overall study but each still maintains their individuality. An important aspect in the document review is to employ various techniques in the collection of the relevant information and the use of multiple sources.
In preparation for the data collection exercise, the researcher should be prepared to handle a huge amount of information since document review method generates a lot of data that requires to be systematically organized lest the researcher looses focus of the original research objective and questions. Database that aid in categorizing, storing and analysis of the data are important to the researcher at this point.
Collection of data is the forth step where the researcher observes the phenomenon and establish the factors that have led to the situation at hand. This process is usually flexible but when there is need for changes to be made, they are to be documented appropriately by the researcher. Soy (1997) believed that such information was suitably stored in databases in order to ease the retrieval process when there was need to review it in the future for subsequent interpretations.
After the data has been collected and stored, it is analyzed in order to find a linkage between the results obtained and the phenomenon under investigation. Since this method is used together with other data collection and analysis processes, the researcher is in a position to give strength to the results of the research. The last process is the preparation of the report. The report is supposed to display the complex issues that were collected during the research in a way that is easily understood. In the present research, document review would be suitable to assess the past records of the school performance and the type of program adopted by the principal to ensure that the success was sustainable.
References
Adamchak, S., Faith, N. & Holmes, D. (2000). A Guide To Monitoring and Evaluating Adolescent Reproductive Health Programs. Web.
Austin, A. (1958). The historical method. Nursing Research 7(1), 4-11.
Boyce, C., & Neale, P. (2006). Conducting in-depth interviews: A Guide for Designing and Conducting In-Depth Interviews for Evaluation Input. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Dunn J. (1988). The Beginnings of Social Understanding. Basil: Oxford.
Hollowitz, J. & Wilson, C.E. (1993). Structured Interviewing in Volunteer Selection. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 21, 41-52.
Krueger, R.A. (1994). Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Law, M. Fred, E. Moon, B. & Michael, F. (1998). Guidelines for Critical Review Form- Qualitative Studies. Web.
Morgan, L. (1986). Focus groups as qualitative research. Qualitative Research Methods Series, 12(1), 7-17.
Mulhall, A. (2003). In the field: notes on observation in qualitative research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 41(3), 306–313.
Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
Pawlas, G.E. (1995). The Structured Interview: Three Dozen Questions to Ask Prospective Teachers, NASSP Bulletin, 79, 62-65.
Pretzlik U. (1994) Observational methods and strategies. Nurse Researcher 2(2), 13–21.
Soy, S. K. (1997). The case study as a research method. Austin: University of Texas Prairie Research Associates, Inc. (2001). The In-Depth Interview. Prairie Research Associates, Inc. (TechNotes). Web.
Wheatly, K.L., & Flexner, W.A. (1988). Dimensions that make focus groups work. Marketing News, 22(10) 16-17.