Assessment of the study’s quality

The terms reliability and validity used in research are referring to how accurate the data material is, and to which degree credible and valid conclusions can be drawn from the results of a study in the light of the study’s purpose (Christoffersen & Johannessen, 2012: 23-24;

Grønmo, 2004:220-221). As researchers, we must discuss the quality of our study by exploring its credibility, verifiability, and transferability.

Regardless of the type of research, validity and reliability are concerns that can be approached through careful attention to a study’s conceptualization and the way in which the data are collected, analyzed, and interpreted, and the way in which the findings are presented

Merriam (2009:210) 3.4.1 Reliability of the study

The term reliability is used to describe how accurate the data material is, where the goal is to have the most reliable data (Christoffersen & Johannessen, 2012:23). Since the accuracy of the method contributes to the reliability of the research, Postholm (2017) clarifies that it is vital to consider the choice of method in collecting data. Creswell (2014) states that the chance of reproducibility will drop if the method is inaccurate. To get the most accurate results as possible, researchers have to deal with reducing sources of error and bias in the study (Christoffersen & Johannessen, 2012:23). This could be done by having a wide range of collected data. Considering our limited research time, we had no opportunity to collect data from an extensive range of participants. In conversation with our supervisor, we understood that collecting data from at least five teachers would be realistic to achieve and give us enough data to discuss in this study, which is also in line with Postholm’s (2017) recommendations referred to in 3.3.2.

Christoffersen & Johannessen (2012:23) state that the understanding of the informant's statements and actions in the quantitative approaches will strengthen the reliability. This

research project is dependent on our interpretation of the participants’ realities and understandings of drama as a teaching method. This makes the participants’ experiences central. Due to the focus on the participants’ subjective and personal experiences, the reproducibility is not an essential criterion for the reliability of the study (Postholm, 2017:169).

Another method of increasing this study’s reliability is to lay forward and present negative or discrepant information that will be counter to the theme of this study (Creswell, 2014:202).

This to give a realistic view on the theme, as the world is “…composed of different perspectives that do not always coalesce” (Creswell, 2014:202). We have done this by including all collected data from the interviews, and we have discussed all of them. “By presenting this contradictory evidence, the account becomes more realistic and more valid”

(Creswell, 2014:202).

Given the fact that we are two students doing this research together, it will contribute to strengthening this study’s reliability (Creswell, 2014). This makes it possible for us to discuss with different perspectives and evaluate information along the way in our project, and to identify more easily possible sources of error in hindsight (ibid). To a large extent research and investigations in qualitative studies will be developed during the actual collection of data and thus depend on the researcher's interpretations and analysis (Grønmo, 2004:228).

3.4.2 Validity of the study

As our collected data is a representation of our informants’ experience of reality, the validity of it will refer to how relevant and valid the data material is to the reality - the correlation between what the study claims to be investigating and what is actually being investigated.

Regarding high validity, high reliability is required, and this can be done by assessing whether the research method investigates what it intends to investigate (Grønmo, 2004:231, Postholm, 2017:170).

Internal validity

Internal validity is about the degree to which the result of the study corresponds to reality, and whether we, as researchers, do study what we believe that we are studying (Merriam,

2009:213). Trying to ensure such a direct connection between the reality and our collected data, we had to reflect on what kind of information we wanted (which was the teachers’ own thoughts, experiences and attitudes) and how to perceive it. Therefore, the questions in our interview guide are designed to bring up the teachers' subjective perspective by making the questions as open as possible. Additionally, we saw it necessary to continually ask ourselves during the whole project, whether our data can provide answers to our research question. In order to provide that, we designed an interview guide with questions that correspond to what we wanted to study, and we used it as a foundation in the interviews we conducted.

Postholm (2017:132) mentions that it is common to use triangulation in qualitative research methods as it adds internal validity to a study. This includes using many and different sources and several data collection strategies, in addition to using research results from several

researchers and different theories to support our findings (Creswell, 2014:201; Merriam, 2009:215; Postholm, 2017:132). To ensure that our data would derive from people with different perspectives, we succeeded in collecting data from several different sources as the teachers were from different schools and towns. We strategically sought-after participants based on their teaching background, with competence and experience in TEFL, and based on what we assumed would provide valid information. Since we knew the teachers from

previous practice periods, we knew they were positive to using social and practical activities as teaching methods in TEFL. This makes our study somehow one-sided, and we understand that this weakens the overall validity of our study. Ideally, we would have some informants that could provide some counterpart to our analysis and discussion of our findings. This would strengthen our study’s validity, especially the external validity, but it would also have led us to use the triangulation in a better way, making sure that our data was collected from different perspective and making our findings more valid.

Another method for strengthening this validity is by practicing member checking, which involves letting the participants get an insight into the descriptions and interpretations we have made from the interviews (Creswell, 2014:201; Merriam, 2009:217; Postholm,

2017:132). This allows the participants the opportunity to comment on any factual errors or

other interpretations they may not agree with (Merriam, 2009:217). We have practiced this kind of member checking with our participants.

External validity

External validity encompasses how the findings of a study can be relevant and applied to other realistic and real-world conditions and situation (Grønmo, 2004: 233). Due to our limited research time, we have not used different data collection strategies and methods, which weakens the validity of our study. However, we have based our study on similar previous studies and relevant theories (Creswell, 2014), and connect our findings to these relevant concepts regarding drama as a teaching method in TEFL as described in Chapter 2.

By doing this, we have provided some external validity to our project.

In order to achieve high validity, one has to conduct systematic and critical discussions of the arrangement of the study, the collection of data, and the final data material with an emphasis on how relevant it is to the research question (Grønmo, 2004:237). As mentioned earlier, our limited number of participants makes it hard to generalize our results, especially since the results are quite one-sided. The only thing that we can do is to present the participants’

experiences and discuss the results from the participants’ perspective.