The main purpose of this quantitative case study will be to explore parental perception about effectiveness of the inclusion taking a case study of an elementary school in a local authority. In arriving at this purpose, the research design seeks to establish: 1) how inclusion concept has advanced learning in the mainstream classes; 2) how inclusion concept has affected the learning processes; 3) how inclusion concept has affected the learning processes and outcomes. The quantitative research methodology will be employed to establish parental perception about effectiveness of inclusion, identifying knowledge of their perceptions with the inclusion concept and their know-how with the concept in learning. In an attempt of so doing, a quantitative as well as a non-experimental design of correlation will be taken as the appropriate way of addressing the research questions.
This research will take the form of case study of an elementary school in a local authority. A case study will be applied in this research because the findings of the case study depend on the context of the observable fact and as a result, generalization cannot be done to serve the same purpose in various contexts (Mertler and Charles, 2011). Owing to this opinion, several experts assert that results of the case study are generalized only to proposition of the theory and not really to a population (Creswell, 2003; Yin, 2009). Theory of making decision is the main proposition of theory for the research study. The possibility of connecting abstract theory together with a multifaceted practice is addition to the strength of design of the case study. A case study does not require a place over a time period. Again, a case study can occur at a particular point in a specific time period (Yin, 2009). This case study is designed to permit the collection of information and data from one time period and not over duration of time.
Basically, data will be collected using a survey instrument. This will have a lot of benefits in such studies which are based on the communication where perceptions of people are measured. The assertion made by Creswell (2003) was that surveys have a specific advantage when a person carrying out the research has intention of describing opinions, attitudes, behaviors or even characteristics of a given population. A cross-sectional design of survey gives the possibility to make a groups’ comparison, establish existing attitudes as well as evaluation of practices (Creswell, 2003). Making use of a distributed self-administered form of questionnaire as an instrument of survey was an appropriate methodology for gathering collection in the research study. This is because the main objective of the research was to examine the parental perceptions about effectiveness of the inclusion concept and thereby make suitable comparisons on various degrees of engagement in learning.
Due caution was exercised in phrasing questions for the purpose of coming up with clear as well as complete succinct instrument with the ability to attain high rates of response and eliminate biases and errors during processing and completion. To enhance the confidence that the survey instrument incorporates the appropriate theoretical framework, or includes a significant part of it, selection of the items to be included in the survey instrument was guided by the Herzberg and Maslow’s theories which deal with the hierarchy of needs. In the end, I anticipate having 20 items included in the instrument of survey.
Validity and Reliability
Validity is the level to which an instrument of survey can really measure the things it was designed for, while on the other hand, reliability is the accuracy, as well as the precision, of the procedure of measurement which ensures production of the same outcomes. Validity is connected to the correlation that exists between findings of a study and its reality. Creswell (2003) defined validity as the possibility of coming up with justifiable and meaningful inferences coming from scores concerning a particular sample or a given population. There are two major kinds of validity: internal and external. Both these and reliability are discussed concerning this study of research.
Internal validity of the survey instrument will basically be addressed through the use of content experts while the content will be determined through statistical procedures and construct validity (Yin, 2009). External validity describes the ability of the data to be generalized all through the individuals, times and settings (Mertler and Charles, 2011). In promoting the validity of the instrument content, four specialists in the management of human resources and psychometry will carefully review the initial draft of the survey instrument. They personally will be requested to make a judgment of suitability of the questions, completeness and their clarity as well as the instrument of survey in its totality for appearance, sequence of questions and time of completion.
The process will again be repeated with other four different experts. The end result of both these interviews of the experts will be used to present a final identification of the questions overlying in construct, some other questions with vagueness, ambiguity or may be redundancy, and others which apparently will not be relevant to the intents and purposes of the study. This process will be very important in making sure that the unnecessary questions will be taken out and thus a twenty-item instrument of survey will in the end be attained. Reliability can be influenced by absence of the procedures which are standardized (Creswell, 2003). Having laid out such procedures, it is anticipated that this would be a good approach to collect enough information that will help in making informed conclusions on the topic of study.