Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
Research approach: Mixed methodology
Researchers who advocate for either quantitative or qualitative research paradigms have often found themselves in continuous rivalry. According to Johnson and Onwuegbuzie (2004:15), quantitative purists (positivists) contend that social research should be objective, with hypotheses empirically tested and free from bias and emotional attachment whilst qualitative purist (constructivists and interpretivists) believe in the construction of multiple realities, with logic flowing from specific to general and links being formed between the researcher and subject, who is the source of reality. Although both purists view their paradigms as ideal, Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, (2004:15) argue that the third research paradigm (mixed methods) is more advantageous in that “it draws on the strengths and minimises the weaknesses of both qualitative and quantitative methods in single research studies or across studies.’’ Thus, in this study, the researcher used the mixed methodology to evaluate the livelihood outcomes of adolescent girls both inside and outside institutional care. Mixed methods research are a combination of quantitative and qualitative techniques, methods, approaches and concepts used in a single study (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2004:17). As cited by Schurink, Fouché and De Vos (2011:420), ‘‘data from different sources can be used to corroborate, elaborate and illuminate the research in question.’’ Qualitative research seeks to understand and interpret the meaning of situations or events from the perspectives of the people involved and as understood by them (Spratt, Walker & Robinson, 2004:11). Qualitative approaches are more are sensitive to contexts, processes and lived experiences to bring an in-depth understanding of social life (Punch, 2005:238). Using qualitative research, this study sought to understand the transition phenomena through the experiences and views of adolescent girls in the institutional context.
As noted by Creswell (2009:133), quantitative research inquires about the relationships among variables that the researcher seeks to know. This paradigm places emphasis on measurement to establish objective knowledge that exists independently of the views and values of the people involved (Spratt et al., 2004:9). Quantitative data allows for objective comparisons to be made as well as the measurement of situations and phenomena under study (Punch, 2005:238). In the same vein, this study made comparisons of the following variables;
The transition needs of adolescent girls in institutions A and B
The livelihood strategies for adolescent girls in institutions A and B
The transition programme needs for adolescent girls from Institutions A and B
The gender outcomes of transition programmes provided by institutions A and B
The livelihood outcomes of adolescent girls from institutions A and B
Type of research
Contemporary evaluation research advocates for increased participation of different populations in a study. As an advocate for participatory development, this study takes on the advocacy and participatory philosophy. As postulated by Engel and Schutt (2009:9), this philosophy addresses social issues of the day such as empowerment and contains an agenda for reform aimed at improving the lives of participants. In line with that philosophy, the type of this study is participatory action research. Participatory action research, which is sometimes referred to as action research is also defined as collective, self-reflective enquiry and is undertaken by participants in social situations to improve processes and outcomes (Miller & Brewer, 2003:5). It is also regarded as “interactive social science research, pragmatic, utilitarian, or user-oriented approach to research” (Miller & Brewer, 2003:5). By engaging members of an organisation as active participants, participatory action research raises the voices of marginalised groups as well as their consciousness on issues affecting their lives (Engel & Schutt, 2009:9). As asserted by Holland (2013:2), participatory action research provides opportunities for empowerment through the use of bottom-up approaches where knowledge is generated and analysed by local people. As cited by Berg (2004:197), the first goal of participatory action research is to produce knowledge that will be useful to a group of people and the second goal is to enlighten or empower research participants by motivating them to take up or use information gathered in the research. Participatory action research places the “learner or beneficiary of development
at the centre of enquiry and action” (Cornwall, 2014:3). Therefore, individuals participating in a participatory action research are referred to as participants or contributors instead of subjects (Berg, 2004:196). Participation action research produces tools that enhance lives of marginalised groups and uses methods and approaches that take into account people’s history, culture, activities and emotions (Berg, 2004:197). Similarly, this study positions adolescent girls and the researcher at the heart of scientific inquiry and action through its emphasis on research processes, outcomes as well as the development of policy and programme recommendations.
As noted by Berg (2004:196), participatory action research is a “highly rigorous, yet reflective or interpretive approach to empirical research.” Participatory action research is able to measure qualitative and quantitative changes in processes and relationships, thus, can accommodate both the contextual and standardised (Holland, 2013:8). As stated by Holland (2013:3), participatory statistics can be generated through mapping, measuring, estimating, valuing, scoring and a combination of these (Holland, 2013:3). Valuing and scoring are increasingly being used to quantify the qualitative and measure qualitative changes (Holland, 2013:6). This study uses a combination of statistics to analyse and interpret quantitative research findings.
Methodological and ethical debates exist over the use of participatory action research. Although participatory action research provides an alternative ideology that empowers research participants unlike traditional research which views participants as subjects, the focus on specific cases or contexts has raised questions on the generalisation of participatory findings (Miller & Brewer, 2003:226). However, as argued by Kelly (2007:475), participatory research attempts to achieve a balance between developing valid generalisable knowledge and benefiting the research participants and to improve research procedures by taking into account the knowledge and expertise of community members. Against this background, “participatory approaches reposition ownership and control by asking whose reality counts?” (Holland, 2013:2). While, only two out of scores of institutions participated in this study, the findings can be generalised nationally through the analyses of legal, policy, programme and research documents as well as the participation of experienced and knowledgeable superintendents and the district social services officer who represented the Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare.
CHAPTER 1: GENERAL OVERVIEW
1.1. Introduction
1.2. Definition of Key Concepts
1.3. Rationale and Problem Statement
1.4. Hypothesis
1.5. Research Questions
1.6. Goal of the Study
1.7. Objectives of the study
1.8. Research methodology
1.9. Research report
CHAPTER TWO: CONCEPTUALING AND CONTEXUALISING ADOLESCENT GIRSL’ TRANSITIONS AND LIVEIHOOD OUTCOMES
2.1. Introduction
2.2. Adolescence
2.3. Transitions
2.4. Strategies within institutional care
2.5. Transition needs for youth post institutional care
2.6. Recommendations for successful transitions
2.7. Youth transitions in Zimbabwe
2.8. Legislation, policies and programmes for OVC in Zimbabwe
2.9. Summary
CHAPTER THREE: SUSTAINABLE LIVELIHOODS AND FEMINIST THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
3.1. Introduction
3.2. Development Theories
3.3. The link between gender and development (feminisation of poverty)
3.4. Summary
CHAPTER FOUR: METHODOLOGY
4.1. Introduction
4.2. Research approach: Mixed Methodology
4.4. Data collection
4.5. Data analysis
4.6. Pilot study
4.7. Ethical considerations
4.8. Limitations of study
4.9. Summary
CHAPTER FIVE: PRESENTATION OF EMPIRICAL FINDINGS
5.1. Introduction
5.2. Biographic profiles
5.3. KEY THEMES
CHAPTER SIX: KEY FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6.1. Introduction
6.2. KEY FINDINGS
6.3. CONCLUSIONS
6.4. RECOMMENDATIONS
6.5. Policy and programme recommendations
6.6. Investing in the transitions of adolescent girls in the institutional context
6.7. Recommendation for future research
REFERENCES
