Part 1

Perspectives on Learner Support

 Research Method 

1. Qualitative approach

Central to our evaluation approach has been a shift away from adjudication by evaluators as outside professionals. Rather our aim has been to better inform understandings of a programme by seeing it from the perspective of those inside it. This approach can be best located within a qualitative research design.

Little numerical data was collected other than to show student enrolment/attrition, pass/fail rates, cost-effectiveness and the like. No comparative data or data of congruence – that is, measurement data – was gathered.

2.  Flexibility of design

As Robinson (in Lockwood, 1995) argues, very little research exists about learner support that is generalisable and this makes it difficult to establish a generic research model across institutions. As each institution is unique, it was necessary to have a flexible investigation design that enabled the researcher to pursue issues which were central in one institution but which were not necessarily important in another context.

Secondly, although certain decisions were made as to what data should be collected, it is not uncommon for issues that were not anticipated, but which are important, to emerge during the research process. The research method used was therefore flexible enough to allow the plan to be amended to include potentially useful additional data. Finally, the research undertaken was determined by what was practical and feasible within the budgetary and time constraints.

3.  The case study

The research reported here is qualitative in nature and case study based. As such, we hope it will contribute to a rich and detailed understanding of learner support. The case studies are based on programmes in order to gain a detailed and holistic picture of a small number of cases. Case studies are usually qualitative in nature and make no claim to be representative (Haralambos, 1994) but they do generate rich and detailed information and are useful for generating typologies or general categories that can then be used in future research.

Bell (1987) notes that a major advantage of the case study method is that because the researcher concentrates on specific situations, it is more likely that (s)he will be able to identify things that may be hidden in a large-scale survey.

Case study research consists of a detailed investigation, often with data collected over a period of time, of one or more organizations, or groups within organizations, with a view to providing an analysis of the context and processes involved in the phenomenon under study. The phenomenon is not isolated from its context (as in, laboratory research) but it is of interest precisely because it is in relation to its context. (Hartley, 1994: 209) 

The case study is ideal to explore not only the uniqueness of each context but also what is of more general interest and significance.

A case study is not a method as such but rather a research strategy. Although issues of validity and generalizability need to be taken cognisance of, the positivistic paradigm is often not appropriate in the case study. This is because the context is usually an integral part of the design and so there will always be too many variables for the number of observations made.

Many researchers have tended to avoid the case study method as it is sometimes seen as biased and lacking in rigour (Yin, 1982). However, as Bell (1987) points out, case study research, like all research, should be collected systematically, and needs to be methodically planned. Furthermore, all research, including quantitative studies, ultimately involves analysis and interpretation and is therefore open to research bias. In addition, by being aware of the possibility of bias, making explicit one’s own subjectivity and engaging continuously with stakeholders during the process of research, one can hope to limit the extent of potential ‘bias’.

	Cohen and Manion (pg 146) cite some advantages of using the case study approach. Of specific relevance to this study is that case studies:
	Provide data that are “strong in reality”, “down-to-earth” and provide a natural basis for generalisation;
	Allow for generalizations while maintaining the subtlety and complexity of each case in its own right;
	The descriptive material obtained by deploying the case study method allows for subsequent reinterpretation
	Can be a powerful “step to action” as they begin in the world of action they can offer insight that can contribute to further action.

Within the case study design, a range of methods was used. Although both qualitative and quantitative research methods were employed, most researchers working within a case study use qualitative methods because of the nature of the questions asked.

Many case study researchers, in their pursuit of the delicate and intricate interactions and processes occurring within organizations, will use a combination of methods, partly because complex phenomena may be best approached through several methods, and partly deliberately to triangulate (and thereby improve validity). (Hartley, 1994: 209, 210)

 4.  The population and sampling

As with any research, the population that it is aimed at must be clearly defined. In this research the population is distance education providers in South Africa. Sampling is used when the population is too large to research and the researcher therefore selects a subset of the population (Bell, 1992). According to Nigel (1992: 73) and Lemmer (1992) in qualitative data gathering, the sample is not a major issue as this type of research focuses on detail and quality rather than generalisability.

 5.  Data collection techniques

A triangulation of qualitative data gathering techniques has been used. It is necessary to use a variety of methods, as each is best suited to generate a specific category of information that it may not be possible to elicit by use of another method. As Bulmer (1984) has pointed out, all methods have their strengths and weaknesses, thus it is necessary to decide which combination of strategies will be the most fruitful. 

The methods used were:

	Interviews with both learners and staff
	Observation of contact sessions
	Review of examination results
	Use of available documentation.

Interviews

Interviewing key personnel and learners offers access to immediate and detailed information.  The interview has been described as a conversation between researcher and respondent with the purpose of eliciting certain information, “A major advantage of the interview is its adaptability. A skillful interviewer can follow up ideas, probe responses and investigate motives and feelings, which the questionnaire can never do…. Questionnaire responses have to be taken at face value, but a response in an interview can be developed and clarified” (Bell, 1993: 91). A further advantage of the interview is that questions can be rephrased and unanticipated issues can be taken cognisance of. Semi-structured interview schedules were designed to act as a guide in the interviews (see Appendix Three). Such schedules were not designed to be adhered to rigidly but rather to offer a framework to elicit and probe key issues.

A problem with interviewing is that it leaves data on the level of “reported” action and so it is also necessary to use observations to verify what has been reported.

Observations

Observation of the contact sessions was undertaken. Observations assist one to engage the question ‘What happens in tutorials?’ This data transports readers into tutorial rooms, adding to the questionnaire and interview data, what tutors and learners actually ‘do’ in tutorials – as distinct from reflections upon it.  

A common criticism leveled at participant observation is that it can result in accounts that are subjective and biased (Cohen & Manion, 1989). Despite this potential weakness, participant observation is nevertheless a useful research method to glean things which cannot be gained from interviews, as interviews only reveal how people “perceive” things, not what “actually happens”. However, a further problem during participant observation is that in the presence of a researcher, participants may not act as they usually do.

Review of examination results 

Some institutions have systematically been keeping records and collecting data about the performance of learners, the number of learners registered and the number of learners who enter into tertiary institutions. Where available, these are used in the case studies and contextualised within the other findings.

Documentation

Documentary records were also drawn on extensively. In some instances the documents provided the key source of information while in other cases, they provided background and additional information, to be read in conjunction with data from other sources.  

A key area that has to be negotiated by all researchers is gaining access. As Burgess (1984) has maintained, “Access should not merely be negotiated with those who occupy the highest positions in a social situation but with individuals at different levels so as to avoid misunderstandings.”  We therefore take this opportunity to thank all the individuals and institutions that made it possible for this research to be undertaken.