SECONDARY EDUCATION FUNDING MODELS

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

INTRODUCTION

The discussion in Chapter 3 focused on the application of models for funding secondary education in various parts of the world. This was done to place funding for secondary education in Zimbabwe into an international context. This chapter presents a detailed discussion on how the empirical study was carried out, together with a description of the research design and the approach applied. This study aims to examine how Zimbabwe can finance secondary education to ensure sustainable development in view of scarce financial resources. In doing so, the study explores how the ratification of international commitment to the MDGs and EFA has affected funding for secondary school education in Zimbabwe. The study investigates how the country is dealing with colonial disparities in education funding. It evaluates the current funding model, notes the challenges experienced and recommends a sustainable funding model for secondary education in Zimbabwe. This chapter describes the mixed methods approach used in the study as well as the research population and sampling strategies applied. The data collection techniques are explained, namely, the use of questionnaires, interviews, observations and document analysis and the method of data analysis is reviewed. The purpose of this study is once again reflected upon and the role of the researcher and the ethical issues considered in the course of this study are discussed.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A research design is a procedure or strategy which is followed to carry out a research that ultimately shapes how a particular study is conducted. This is well captured by Johnson and Christensen (2004) who define a research design as a plan for carrying out research so that it answers a research question. This study adopted a mixed methods design. Mixed designs are viewed as two-dimensional methods that consider the time aspect of a study, where qualitative and quantitative dimensions are involved in a single research (Johnson & Christensen, 2008).
Three aspects are considered in the use of mixed methods research design, namely time orientation, status and a paradigmatic emphasis. Time orientation refers to whether the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the research take place at more or less the same time (concurrently) or whether this is scheduled into phases over a specified time (sequentially) (Johnson & Christensen, 2008). The other aspect of a mixed method design to be considered is whether the two methods are of equal status or if one dominates the other. Paradigmatic emphasis refers to whether the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the research have equal emphasis in terms of addressing the research questions and interpretation of results (Johnson & Christensen, 2008). This study followed the sequential approach in the use of the mixed design, in which the initial quantitative part of the study (survey questionnaires) is followed by the qualitative aspect (individual interviews, observations and focus group interviews and analysis of documents).
In an attempt to account for the complexity of current challenges in funding secondary school education in Zimbabwe, an explanatory design was used. In the explanatory mixed methods design, the researcher first collects quantitative data (concerning the general challenges of funding of secondary school education), followed by collection of qualitative data (which could explore possible ways of addressing funding challenges). The initial data collected in the quantitative study dictated the type of data which had to be collected in the qualitative component of the research.
In sequential designs, there is a tendency of alternating the qualitative and quantitative aspects when administering a research (Arthur et al., 2012). In the word QUAL-quant, in mixed design, capital letters (QUAL) signify that the qualitative design will be more dominant to quantitative design. In this explanatory mixed methods design, the quantitative aspect of the approach was intended to generate causal explanations of the phenomena as Arthur et al. (2012) suggested, while the high dropout rates from Zimbabwean schools (Rose et al., 2013) prompted the use of in-depth qualitative interviews on how best to address the funding situation in Zimbabwe.
Mixed methods research design is a design which involves collecting, analysing and mixing both qualitative and quantitative methods and data collection instruments in a single study to understand a research problem (Creswell, 2008). This design strengthened the reliability and validity of findings and recommendations, which widens and deepens the researcher’s understanding of the research process itself, as suggested by Bamberger (2012). The argument for using both methods is that it leads to a better understanding of the research problem and questions, than when one method is used. The mixed method approach entails extensive data collection and a great amount of time is invested in the analysis of findings. It translates into creating powerful evidence on the issues investigated. Adopting a mixed methods design presents a better chance of examining the nature of the problem and how best to address it. The main reason for undertaking a mixed approach in this research was to build on the synergy and strength that exist between the two approaches in an effort to understand phenomena in a broader manner.
The prime reason for the researcher using the mix method research design is that qualitative research interrogates both the research process and the product of the research. This differs from the quantitative research design in that the design is not aimed at the generalisation of findings, but focuses on achieving a deeper understanding of the phenomenon being studied. This sets apart the operation of the two designs which, when combined, would produce more conclusive findings in the view of the researcher. While purist researchers may view the use of the two designs as conflicting, Creswell (2012) views them as complementary since they augment each other in the research task. Johnson and Onwuegbuzie in Arthur et al. (2012) argue that one would choose a combination or mixture of methods and procedures which work best for answering one’s research questions. The researcher views the combination of the two approaches as the most appropriate way of trying to answer the research questions.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

To advance the aim and objectives of the study, the researcher found the mixed research methodology appropriate, since the approach shapes the broad assumptions into detailed methods of data collection and analysis (Creswell, 2012). This gives an indication of how the research is going to be conducted. Arriving at results that are reliable and valid in research is critical and therefore, appropriate research methods have to be chosen. Braun and Clarke (2013) state that “methodology” is a broader view which refers to the framework within which research is conducted, whereas “methods” refer to a tool or technique for collecting or analysing data. This view is supported by Macmillan and Schumacher (2012) who define research methods as a clear programme or plan of selecting subjects, research sites and data collection to answer the research questions.
Makoella (2015) explains that a qualitative research approach is an approach that favours a natural setting that is relevant to a study. Following this view, the researcher visited different school sites in an effort to understand the nature of the problem of funding for secondary school education. The qualitative research method is not driven by theory and hypothesis testing as major research priorities, but is guided by the perceptions and experiences of the research participants. In his investigation of the research problem, the researcher played an important role in directing how the research was executed. The researcher shaped the data collection instruments so that they collected the desired data in order to answer the research question and objectives.
In the sequence of this study, the researcher gives priority to quantitative data followed by qualitative data. The sequence is deliberate as to survey the issue under discussion then generalise the population. This is followed by in-depth interviews, focus group interviews, observations and document analysis in order to understand the nature and challenges of funding for secondary education in Zimbabwe.
In broad terms, the two main research objectives of this study are: to understand how the ratification of international commitments to the MDGs and EFA has affected funding of secondary education in Zimbabwe and second, to understand how Zimbabwe is dealing with the colonial disparities in education funding. These two objectives are dealt with mainly through the quantitative aspect of the mixed methods design. The qualitative aspect of this approach deals with practical ways of bringing about sustainable development in the country. The other research objectives (to evaluate the current model of funding secondary education and to recommend a sustainable funding model for secondary education in Zimbabwe) are also dealt with using the qualitative approach. Specific information is solicited using the different instruments that relate to quantitative and qualitative issues in the research objectives.

Justification for the use of the mixed methods

The use of mixed methods is dependent on the research topic that is under review. The nature of the research questions and their aims leads the research in a particular direction (Newby, 2014). The mixed methods approach to conducting research takes advantage of the strengths and weaknesses of the two approaches. The initial stage (quantitative approach) unveils the nature of the challenges to funding, which are then interrogated using the qualitative approach to search for answers to the challenges. Newby (2014) propounds six approaches to show how mixing qualitative and quantitative strategies assist in achieving set research goals. The most significant of these is the view that when one wants to answer research questions that are related, the use of the different approaches (qualitative and quantitative) may be employed.
This study draws on the complementary aspect of using mixed methods research (Creswell, 2012) which yields authentic findings. Combining methods is a powerful way of trying to understand the issues underlying complex investigations into an economy that has suffered decades of perennial stagnation.

POPULATION, SAMPLING STRATEGIES AND SAMPLE

Research population

A population is a large well-defined group with all the elements or characteristics that the researcher wants to investigate, and about which the researcher can make generalisations of the results derived from a sample (Johnson & Christensen, 2012). The population description and composition should mirror what is to be investigated (Gay, Mills & Airasian, 2011). This suggests that the population must be as representative as possible of the issues to be investigated in the study. The population studied comprised 398 secondary schools in the Manicaland province of Zimbabwe, with 398 school principals, 40 education officials and 10 NGOs with a compliment of five members of staff in each NGO involved in the funding of secondary education in this province.
When the research problem is identified, the next assignment in carrying out the research is to identify the units of analysis in the sample population (Merriam, 2009).
The units of analysis are the critical entities being analysed in a study. This refers to 115
“what” or “who” is being studied. This suggests that in the sample population, the researcher identifies research participants who will address certain research objectives of the study. Typical units of analysis include individuals, groups, social organisations and artefacts, which in this case were the schools themselves.

Sampling strategies and the sample

This section presents a discussion of the sampling strategies and sample used in this study. It is imperative that appropriate sampling strategies and correct samples are used in research in order to come up with accurate research findings.

Sampling strategies

This study adopted probability and non-probability sampling strategies to draw its sample. Regarding probability sampling, a random sampling is used in quantitative research where the intention is to ensure that the sample is as representative of the population studied as possible. Random sampling is used to ensure equal chance of selection of participants in the study from the population. In this quantitative aspect of the study, a random sampling strategy was used to give the researcher an assurance that members of a defined population are selected in the sample, which enabled the researcher to generalise the views of the participants in the study as suggested by Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007) and by Johnson and Christensen (2012).
Onwuegbuzie and Collins, as cited in Johnson and Christensen (2012:446) have developed a framework for mixed sampling designs according to “time orientation of components” and according to “relationship between quantitative and qualitative samples”. Time orientation refers to whether the mixed methods are used at the same time or in sequence, while the second category for mixed methods research generates four types of sampling designs, namely identical, parallel, nested, and multilevel (Johnson & Christensen, 2012:238). The researcher adopted the time-orientated approach as propounded by Johnson and Christensen (2012) where a timespan was allowed so that the initial stage would inform the next stage, namely the use of the qualitative instruments. The researcher found the multilevel sequential samples more applicable to this study as the researcher used the quantitative and qualitative samples that are constituted from different levels of the population under study as suggested by Bamberger (2012).
Non-probability sampling strategy was used for the qualitative aspect of this study. This strategy does not use statistics or mathematical formulae to determine the selection of the population studied. Based on the knowledge of the researcher, appropriate individuals and groups were selected and research sites were visited. The researcher sampled schools purposively to obtain the ideal information regarding funding challenges. School principals who had encountered the education transition phases from the mass education system and cost recovery up to the current state of affairs were purposively sampled. Education officials were also sampled purposively, selecting those with vast experience in supervising schools at district and provincial level.
The researcher used this rich data because these participants were aware of the changes that had occurred in education, and, given their experience, they knew best how to address the financial shortfalls in education. The NGOs involved in the funding of education were purposively sampled as they have a direct bearing in terms of disbursement of funding for schools with financial challenges. They have already set criteria on how they fund schools. The choice of these NGOs would assist in obtaining pertinent information regarding assistance given to schools. The researcher anticipated that information would be directly accessible regarding how NGOs had tried to assist the government in addressing the colonial disparities in the provision of education, and how they viewed the current funding programme in Zimbabwe.

Sample

A sample is a group of individuals, events or items that are representative of the larger group under investigation from which the sample is taken. A sample is a subgroup of the target population that the researcher intends to study for generalising about the target population (Creswell, 2012; Punch & Oancea, 2014). In this case, the target population constitutes the people with the desired information or experience with which to answer the research question, namely headmasters, education officials and NGO officials in the Manicaland province of Zimbabwe.
In a population of 398 secondary schools from this province, there are 40 education officials, five education officials from each district and five from the provincial office, 10 NGOs with a staff of five officials in each NGO, totalling 50. The three districts selected are shown in Figure 4.1 below on the Manicaland province map, showing administrative districts of Mutare, Mutasa and Makoni.
A random sampling technique was used to sample 150 school principals who responded to the survey questionnaire (see Annexure 4). The sample represents 37,6% of the population under study, which must be sufficiently representative to supply the required data for this study. The sample size must allow multivariate statistical analysis and inference allowing generalisation to the population. Wiersma and Jurs (2009) argue that a large sample in quantitative studies has greater statistical precision and greater statistical power than small samples. This suggests that the larger the sample, the more realistic and statistically significant the data will be. The sample size was adequate as it captured the views of the stakeholders in education provision while having the capacity to generate data which was statistically significant regarding the issues in question. Given the time factor and costs in collecting and processing the data, this sample size for the quantitative aspect of this study is relevant.
Purposive sampling techniques were used for the qualitative aspect of the research to select six school principals and five NGOs officials who undertook in-depth individual (face-to-face) interviews (see Annexures 5 and 6). Four focus group interview sessions were carried out in gathering qualitative data. Focus groups with four Department of Education officials from the three districts and one group from the provincial office with four members were purposively sampled (see Annexure 8). The total number of education officials who took part in the focus group interviews was 20. The researcher visited six observations sites. These are the six sites where principals were interviewed. The sites were small enough to logistically allow the researcher to move from site to site and collect rich data on the different issues on funding secondary education in Zimbabwe as dictated by the research objectives. Five NGO officials were subjected to face-to-face interviews which formed 10% of the sample from the NGOs, 20 education officials were subjected to interview focus groups that formed 50% of the sample of education officials. Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007) maintain that the quality of a research is not only dependent on the suitability of the methodology and instrumentation used but hinges heavily on the suitability of sampling strategy employed in the study. This means that appropriate research methodology, data collection instruments and correct sampling strategy were used in this study to arrive at the correct findings in the research.

Demographic profile of the sample

The demographic profile of the sample is reported below. The respondents in this sample are believed to share more or less the same values and perceptions concerning the way in which schools are managed and funded. In order to understand the views of the participants, the different aspects of the group need to be explained. Therefore, gender, years of experience and qualifications of the sampled population are discussed. The understanding is that an insight into qualifications and years of experience of the participants has a bearing on understanding how participants respond to the different questions regarding funding of secondary education in Zimbabwean schools.

Gender

Of the 150 school principals in the sample, 66.7% were males and 33.3% were females, as shown in Figure 4.2.
The data shows that the majority (two-thirds) of school principals in Zimbabwean schools are men. This demonstrates the predominance of patriarchy in the country’s school leadership and management system.

Qualifications

Participants in the study ranged from those without degrees, to PhD holders as shown in the bar graph. Data was gathered from different people on the educational scale to find out if their views would have any significance based on their level of education.
In terms of educational qualifications, the largest single group (41.33%) were in possession of a BEd qualification. A further 22.67% had a DipEd, while a similar number (23.22%) had an MEd. A small number (11.33%) had a BSc degree, while only two respondents had PhD qualifications. This suggests that the participants were fairly well educated and had sufficient knowledge to respond to the questionnaire.

Management experience

In the frequency distribution Table 4.1, 46 (30.7%) of the school principals had less than 10 years’ experience in management while 104 (69.4%) had more than 11 years’ management experience. This would suggest that they are experienced in understanding how schools operate and how the funding system is affecting secondary schools.
In Figure 4.4, the majority of respondents (69.34%) had more than 11 years of service while only 30.6% had less than 10 years’ management experience. About one in 10 respondents had more than 31 years of service. The level of experience of school principals would suggest that they are aware of their duties as educational managers and that they are aware of the funding systems used in schools, as well as the constraints posed by the current funding system in Zimbabwe.

DATA COLLECTION STRATEGIES AND INSTRUMENTATION

Quantitative data collection

Quantitative in this study was collected through a survey wherein a questionnaire was used as a data collection instrument. Gay, Mills and Airasian (2011) define an instrument as a tool to collect data in a research process. Therefore, in order to have relevant data to understand the nature of funding issues, relevant and appropriate instruments have to be used to collect data. A questionnaire was used in this research as a way to obtain a picture of conditions, attitudes or events at a single point in time. The survey questionnaire established main patterns of the causes of funding challenges. Twenty-five closed-ended and five open-ended questions were used in the questionnaire to collect quantitative data from school principals. Questionnaires were followed up later with different interviews, observation schedules and documentary analysis as discussed below.

Qualitative data collection

Qualitative data was collected through different research strategies and instruments, namely: face-to-face interviews, focus group interviews, observations and documentary analysis.

Interviews

A semi-structured interview guide with 15 open-ended questions was used in the interviews to solicit an in-depth understanding of the funding system and constraints in secondary schools while probing how secondary education in Zimbabwe should be funded. Face-to-face interviews involved six principals and five NGO officials (see Annexures 5 and 6), in pursuit of establishing and authenticating views that came in the initial quantitative aspect of this study when respondents answered a closed-ended questionnaire soliciting qualitative data. Principals and NGOs responded to 15 interview questions.

Focus group interviews

In this study, focus group interviews were conducted were conducted. Krueger in Babbie (2008:309) presents a focus group interview as having a number of advantages. These advantages include capturing real-life data in a social context, flexibility of use, high face validity, speedy results and cost-effectiveness. Given these advantages, focus group interviews were regarded as some of the main data collection strategies of choice for the study. Four focus groups interviews of between four and six people deliberated in a guided conversation on evaluations of the funding model for secondary education in Zimbabwe, challenges of funding secondary education and recommendations for sustainable funding (see Annexure 8). As recommended by Creswell (2012), focus groups had a maximum of six people, which gave ample time for all participants to contribute. Notes were taken and the focus group interviews responses were taped by means of an audio recorder. Four focus groups comprising of four education officials each took part in the focus group interviews. Three groups were drawn from the three district offices and one from the provincial office. Twenty education officials participated in the focus group interviews.

Observations

Observation schedules were drawn up for the six schools where the principals were interviewed (see Annexure 7). Before the interview was conducted, the researcher first observed the appearance of the school, specialised classrooms, availability of equipment and teaching and learning materials. Field notes were taken at the different sites visited. The researcher obtained first-hand information through observation (Creswell, 2012). This assisted the researcher to get a deep insight into how funding affects quality of education and the availability of teaching and learning materials and specialised rooms in schools (Marishane, 2013).

Document analysis

Document analysis was carried out by scrutinising documents dealing with funding of secondary education from different organisations, namely the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, Ministry of Finance, and NGOs – specifically the National Aids Council,
Canadian Development Agency, Plan International, United States Assistance 125
International Aid, Department for International Development and UNICEF. The documents for analysis were categorised in the following way:
o Policy on funding secondary education o Capital funding for secondary education o Per capita grant
o Targeted funding (vulnerable and orphaned children) o Teaching and learner materials
o Infrastructure funding
o Learner support assistance

INSTRUMENTATION

This section will give an overview of the data collection instruments used in this study from the mixed methods perspective. The instruments used were the questionnaire, semi-structured interview schedule, observation schedules and focus group interview schedules. Data analysis will also be discussed in this section.

Quantitative data collection instrument

A survey questionnaire (see Annexure 4) was designed and administered to collect quantitative data from 150 school principals. Johnson and Christensen (2012) define a questionnaire as a document with a set of questions that a respondent fills out in a research study. The researcher solicited information regarding the challenges for funding for secondary education in Zimbabwe, how the ratification of the MDGs and EFA has affected funding for secondary education, with a view on what the government of Zimbabwe is doing to deal with colonial disparities in education funding. This enabled the researcher to understand the challenges in terms of funding secondary education whose findings were used in the qualitative aspect to get in-depth understanding on the issues raised.
The theory underpinning this study is the “human capital theory” (see 1.4.6). Development of human capital is synonymous with the provision of education to the population which must be seen as active players in the transformation of economies in different societies. The development of the research tools must therefore, be informed with the literature in the provision of education in this case. The researcher’s experience as a school principal witnessed learners dropping out of school due to school fees that has a bearing on building human capital in Zimbabwe. According to (UNESCO, 2013) more that 57 million children may not have right to primary education. Zimbabwe being part of the global community, this challenges the researcher to craft a questionnaire which seeks to answer the challenges faced in funding education leading so many learners to be out of school. This will provide data which will be used to analyse the suitability of the existing BEAM funding model in Zimbabwe. Post-colonial Zimbabwe adopted a mass education model to address the colonial imbalances in education which had a huge effect on the state’s purse. The questionnaire should seek to establish the suitability of mass education in the first place that is believed to have drained the state’s resources. The questionnaire had a range of questions which would to and answer research questions.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Declaration
Dedication
Acknowledgments
Summary
List of tables
List of figures
List of abbreviations
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY
1.3 RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY
1.4 LITERATURE REVIEW
1.5 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
1.6 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
1.7 PURPOSE, AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1.8 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
1.9 QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DATA
1.10 RESEARCH ETHICS
1.11 DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY
1.12 DEFINITION OF KEY CONCEPTS
1.13 CHAPTER OUTLINE
1.14 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW OF EDUCATION FUNDING MODELS
2.1 INTRODUCTION
2.2 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR FUNDING SECONDARY EDUCATION
2.3 SECONDARY EDUCATION FUNDING MODELS
2.4 ZIMBABWE
2.5 SOUTH AFRICA
2.6 KENYA
2.7 CHINA
2.8 AUSTRALIA
2.9 BRAZIL
2.10 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 3 APPLICATION OF MODELS FOR FUNDING SECONDARY EDUCATION IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.2 FUNDING IN AUSTRALIA
3.3 ASIAN FUNDING EXPERIENCE: CHINA
3.4 SOUTH AMERICAN FUNDING: BRAZIL
3.5 FUNDING SECONDARY EDUCATION IN AFRICA
3.6 WHAT LESSONS CAN BE DRAWN FROM THE MODELS AND
EMPIRICAL STUDIES
3.7 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
4.1 INTRODUCTION
4.2 RESEARCH DESIGN
4.3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.4. POPULATION, SAMPLING STRATEGIES AND SAMPLE
4.5 DATA COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND INSTRUMENTATION
4.6 INSTRUMENTATION
4.7 PROCESS OF COLLECTING DATA
4.8 DATA ANALYSIS
4.9 PRESENTATION OF DATA
4.10 DATA QUALITY
4.11 RESEARCH ETHICS
4.12 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 5 PRESENTATION OF DATA, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS
5.1 INTRODUCTION
5.2 PRESENTATION OF QUANTITATIVE FINDINGS
5.3 SUMMARY
5.4 PRESENTATION OF QUALITATIVE FINDINGS
5.5 OBSERVATION DATA
5.6 DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
5.7 CONCLUSION
CHAPTER 6 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION
6.1 INTRODUCTION
6.2 SUMMARY OF QUANTITATIVE DATA
6.3 OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE
6.4 SUMMARY OF QUALITATIVE DATA
6.5 RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE FINDINGS
6.6 LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
6.7 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
6.8 CONCLUSION
REFERENCES.
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT