Complete thesis - Murdoch University

theory and user of that theory, thereby bringing theory and practice closer together. Brew(1999)’s journey metaphor, with its transformative nature, aligns well with the focus oninterventions that are the basis of this study.This research is undertaken with an acceptance of the view that not only is education asocial discipline, but also the (knowledge/discipline) domain into which the students expectto enter. These social systems define the roles, values and rewards of the system members,and their expectations regarding their participation within them. The action of the researchcan only be understood by an ongoing act of interpretation (Mansell, 1991) and reflection(Schön, 1987). However, this interpretation can never be complete, but rather always includeelements of uncertainty and open-endedness. This demands an iterative interweaving ofmultiple interpretations until a sophisticated understanding is negotiated (Merleau-Ponty,1962; Polkinghorne, 1988).The study adopts a mixed method approach as the most appropriate for the development ofmultiple interpretations (guided by the concept of complimentarity), and appropriates techniquesas required. This reflects the intention to use the results of one strand to elaborate,enhance, and illustrate the results from the other strand. In this study the predominant approachis qualitative but containing smaller quantitative data collection phases. And, sincechange is accepted as the overarching goal, an evaluation strategy that applies a fundamentallyqualitative approach to the collection and analysis of data is seen to have the potentialto provide the information required. As Creswell (2003) indicates, the value of the nestedmodel is that it provides broader perspectives than by using the predominant method inisolation.Consequently, for the reasons noted in this chapter, Action Research is the strategy of choice.The context of this study is an institution of (formal) tertiary education, therefore requiringan acknowledgement of theories of learning (fostering cognitive change through the constructionand organisation of knowledge), the role of the researcher as facilitator/agentof change within the context, and the position of the researcher as a ‘reflective practitioner’/learnerengaged in ‘double loop learning’. Since the remit of this study is to bothinform Software/Requirements Engineering educators in order to change the way educationfor Requirements Engineering is practiced, then the role of ‘agent of change’ fits comfortablyin Kemmis’ approach for resolving conflict between espoused and applied theory, ieEnhancement/Critical-Emancipatory/Critical Science Action Research.Implicit in this alignment is the focus on a non-positivist tradition based on qualitativemethods and an acknowledgement that the results of this work are a contribution to ongoingresearch on this issue, not a final analysis of its ‘truth’ (Lather, 1993). The value of such210