Truthfulness
The barriers to access are multidimensional, and this study investigated the experiences
of 10 minoritized students only. One of the aims of this study was to present a set of guidelines
or recommendations for practitioners. The small sample size may be a limiting factor; however,
because this study sought “believability based on coherence, insight, instrumental reliability, and
trustworthiness” (Creswell, 2007, p. 206), data may reveal useful insights about experiences of
participants that may resonate with the experiences of other minoritized students in HyFlex
courses.
It is unlikely findings from this study will be generalizable to all levels of education or to
all institutions serving minoritized students everywhere, but it is also unlikely findings would be
entirely irrelevant or useless for practitioners and researchers. Findings of the study, and the
truthful reporting of those findings, provide as faithful as possible of a representation of the
voices and experiences of participants, and the resulting guidelines and recommendations should
have some generalizability in the context of the California Community College system and the
University of California and California State University (CSU) systems because it is standard
practice for community college transfer programs to have articulation agreements with 4-year
institutions in the state. Therefore, graduating transfer students from California Community
Colleges are likely to transfer to University of California and CSU institutions because of the
existing articulation pathways. This means students at universities like San Francisco State
University—as an example of a CSU—have much in common with Skyline College students.
63
Ethical Considerations
This study was conducted as prescribed by the Institutional Review Board at San
Francisco State University, upholding the strictest protocol methods to ensure participant
confidentiality and protection of human subjects. I presented all participants with a copy of the
informed consent letter explaining the purpose, procedures, risk, and their right to withdraw from
the study at any time (see Appendix B). In reporting and discussing the data, data analysis,
findings, participants’ names, institutions, and any identifiable information have been changed to
protect the identity of the participants.
Although strict measures were taken to protect the participants’ identities, the study did
involve minimal potential risk of loss of privacy. To minimize this risk, as soon as each
interview transcription was completed, I deleted the original audiovisual recording from the hard
drive and ensured no copy was stored in the Zoom cloud storage system. Using password-
protected files accessible only to me as the sole researcher, as Bogdan and Biklen (2007)
recommend, all transcripts and electronic documents were stored in a password-protected Box
account provided by San Francisco State University.
Because participants have the right to anonymity indefinitely, all recruitment scripts,
demographics surveys, consent forms, and communication exchanges via email emphasized the
voluntary nature of their participation in the study. I did not communicate with any of the
participants in person. Furthermore, I made sure participants understood their right to decline to
answer any of my questions and their right to terminate the interviews at any time for any reason
without consequences.
|
