Simply put, the researcher read the documented surveys, and analyzed the inter-linkages of these responses. When responses are not explicit, inter-judge validation was used, with another researcher agreeing on the category under which the response may be grouped. The meaning and interpretation of each response was noted, and related to the organizations overall profile. In this sense and taken as a holistic approach, the data from the chosen institution may be considered as a case study.
The study also has methodological limitations. First, it did not make use of any other quantitative measure to study the phenomenon apart from qualitative procedure of thematic analysis (Patton 2002). Second, there was only one participant institution, Elfed and its responses may not be reflective of the population it represents (Zikmund 1997).
It may be worth noting that the goal of the study is to generalize about the phenomenon across schools; thus, the use of participants from a cross-section of different learning institutions. Third, there were some time constraints on the part of both interviewer and interviewees, which may be a factor in the length of their responses or the duration of the interview.
Had there been more time, more probing questions and more data may have been gathered. Moreover, since the study has been limited to an UK-based school, its conclusions may not be able to create a comprehensive generalization to other countries or regions. This is especially true when cultural and economic factors are taken into consideration.
Biases in the responses may have occurred since the only source of primary data is the knowledge and perception of the interviewee. The respondent may not be so honest with their answers and express only what is socially desirable, especially because they were carrying the name of their school. Logically, they would not want to put the school in a bad light. In addition, since the interviews were conducted at the place of work, the respondents may not be at ease in answering the questions. In effect, their responses may not be as candid or as honest (Denzin & Lincoln 2000).
Results and Discussion
For this part of the study, the results gathered from both the interview and the focus group discussions will be presented in this part of the study. In addition to this, the results will be evaluated and examined with the literature presented in the review of related literature to gather any existing relationships or occurrences within the data gathered. For the first part of this section, the results of the focus group discussion will be presented and will be discussed.