Trustworthiness and Limitations

Trustworthiness

 

The study demonstrates its trustworthiness through its data’s dependability, credibility, confirmability, and transferability as following:

Data dependability was ensured through evidence that was gathered from multiple sources of information included in the document analysis and interviews. Every effort was made to ensure that the individuals representing the multiple sources of information were selected based not only on their professional affiliation with the topic, but also on the fact that they are prominent leaders in the stakeholder groups they represented for this study.

Data credibility was ensured through the richness of the information gathered and the analytical process used in this study. Data Summary Views were used to match patterns and commonalities identified in the data collected with their corresponding positive or negative indicators on the theoretical construct created for this study. Furthermore, the case study methodology chosen for this inquiry is a recognized credible form of qualitative research, capable of generating new knowledge regarding the making and implementation of public policy, as well as the factors influencing policymaking (Edwards, 1980; Larson, Moses & Gair, 2004; Schneider, & Ingram, 1997; Yanow, 2000). Triangulation of data sources, theoretical knowledge and my experience as an e-learning leader at a California community college were used to ascertain the credibility of the study.

Data confirmability was demonstrated through the availability of a trail consisting of the raw data, analysis notes and synthesis, process notes, and personal notes (Hoepfl, 1997). Additionally, member checks were used to corroborate interview findings for those interviewees who agreed to confirm the accuracy of their phone interview input as transcribed.

Finally, aiming at transferability, the study provided stakeholders with naturalistic generalization and sufficient information to determine whether its findings can be used to justify modifications in the current policy or related implementation practices.

Other considerations that contribute to the study trustworthiness include the following:

a. An Institutional Review Board review, regulated by the U.S. Department of Human Services, assured that the participants in this study were not harmed in any way.

b. The study delimitations have been disclosed in the Introduction section of this study.

c. Finally, knowledge structures included in this study demonstrated a high degree of local and global coherence with a clear and straightforward knowledge construction in which attention to inconsistencies between the perspectives, data findings and their interpretation was evident.

Limitations

             It is important to note that the snapshot provided in this research study findings was taken along a continuum of a dynamic Web accessibility policymaking and implementation process. By the time this research is completed, it is quite possible that new policies, standards, guidelines, or implementation practices at the federal, state or local CCC levels may enter the big picture that is used to inform this study. However, it is also important to recognize that this exact limitation is also identified as one of the problems in this study involving the additive approach to Web accessibility policymaking and its implementation on the policymaking level, ICT development level, higher education implementation level, and other levels as discussed in chapter 5 of this study.

Furthermore, while most documents and interviewees identified for inclusion in this study were within my reach and access, several government policies could not be analyzed in this study since they were still in their development stages. Similarly, at least three interviewees that I believed to be invaluable for informing this study either did not respond to my inquiries or were unable to participate at the time this research study was conducted.