CHAPTER III

METHOD AND PROCEDURES

This chapter provides an overview of the research methods used in the study. It provides information
regarding the method that was used in venturing this research. The researchers describes the research
design that was chosen for the purpose of this study and the reasons for this choice. The instrument that
was used for data collection is also described and the procedures that were followed to carry out this
study are included. The researchers also discusses the methods used to analyze the data. Lastly, the
ethical issues that were followed in the process are also discussed.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

According to ( Patton, 2002 ) qualitative research method are designed to provide both depth as well as
detailed explanations to the researchers. Research methodology on the other hand, seek to use large data
sets and statistical analysis to create comparisons within the data. The purpose of this thesis was to
investigate and comprehend the meanings generated by the participants. The study's goal was not to
reveal the universal truths about the research issue, but rather to analyze a specific way of viewing and
interpreting the occurrence under examination. A qualitative research strategy was chosen as the
methodology because it fosters greater awareness and semantic meaning and motives underlying human
interaction. Information was collected through in-depth questionnaires. The focus of this research was to
explore the views of a group about financial literacy, hence qualitative research was deemed appropriate
for this research topic. The research goal was to investigate a specific meaning without presenting the
findings as absolute fact. In accordance with the research methods mentioned in the preceding
paragraphs, the purpose of this study was to better understand financial literacy. There was enough time
spent evaluating the data to guarantee that the conclusions appropriately reflect how the participants
generate inherent value.

RESEARCH INTRUMENT

Since this is an exploratory study, the use of a semi-structured interview allowed the researcher some
flexibility in the way researcher worded the questions for each individual participant. It also gave the
researcher the opportunity to probe for more information and clarification where necessary (Kvale, 1996;
Walker, 1985). According to Neuman (2000), the researcher needs to have a skill to match the research
question to an appropriate technique. This author further stated that for exploratory research, open-ended
questionnaires are the most effective. This view supports that of Riessman (1993, p.54), when he pointed
out that it is useful “…to ask questions that open up the topic and allow respondents to construct answers
in collaboration with the listeners, in ways they find meaningful.” How the participants tell their stories is
suggestive of what meaning they attach to their experiences. This is in line with Neuman’s (2000) point
that the researcher needs to note the non-verbal communication as it might add meaning to the content of
the participants’ stories.
RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS

According to Neuman (2000), the focus of the qualitative researcher is more on the selected participants’
ability to clarify and deepen the understanding of social life than its representativeness. He further
indicated that the qualitative researcher should be concerned with obtaining cases that can enhance his
learning process about social life in a specific context, and that is the reason why they tend to use a non-
probability sampling method. In non-probability sampling, subjects are chosen according to their
relevance to the research topic because the aim is to gain a deeper understanding than to generalize to a
larger population (Neuman, 2000). The researcher used purposive type of non-probability sampling.
Neuman (2000) describes purposive non-probability sampling as making use of experts who work with
the prospective subjects to get cases which are informative. He further indicated that this method is
mostly useful in exploratory research of a difficult to reach group as the researcher uses the locations
researchers knows to access to suitable cases for.

The participants of this study were grade 10 and 12 students. The researchers distributed surveys to 50
people. They were selected from different schools where the researchers would come into contact with
them. They were handed to the participants and they were asked to fill out both sides of the survey. Most
of the participants were people who the researchers had seen or met before the survey was given to them.
They were encourage to complete the survey immediately although some choose to take a screen shot and
send it via social media messenger app. Of the 50 participants, some of them did not put down their
affiliation, and only filled out half of the survey. Most of the participants who took the surveys are grade
10 students. The researchers addressed these potential volunteers, and those who fulfilled the criteria and
were willing to participate in the study were contacted.

RESEARCH ENVIRONMENT

The research will be carried out in Cebu City, the most populated city in Visayas. It is a first-class highly
urbanized city in the Philippines' Central Visayas area. According to the 2020 census, it has a population
of 964,169 inhabitants, making it the fifth-most populous city in the country and the most populous in the
Visayas. The researchers conducted the research in Cebu City, and the survey was given to different
schools inside and outside of Cebu City.

DATA GATHERING PROCEDURES

As early as the 1980s, qualitative researchers demonstrated sensitivity to the impact of research
interviews on participants (Cowles, 1988; Munhall, 1988). Reacting to the hegemony of standardized
measures that were thought to “squelch or deform the localized and personal knowledge of research
participants” (Gergen, 2001, p. 21), researchers focused on learning about people's often deeply
meaningful and emotionally laden personal experiences. In recognizing the potential vulnerability of
persons participating in such projects, early approaches included the development of an ethics of care
(Noddings, 1984).
In the study, Personal Information Form developed by researchers, Financial Literacy Attitude
and Behavior Scale developed by Sarıgül (2015), and Interview Form developed by researchers
were used as measurement tools. The form prepared to collect the demographic information of
the participants contains questions about the importance of financial literacy. Participants were
given a questionnaire consisting five questions about the relevance of financial literacy during
the research procedure, particularly during the data collection phase. As a result, each participant
was requested to fill the form at a time convenient for her. The researchers will distribute the
forms via social media chat app. Implementing the interview forms in different schools allows
the researchers to learn about their different points of view.

The form was prepared by the researchers in order to collect the opinions of some of the students
included in the experimental group on the program. First of all, the purposes of the experimental
process were listed, and in line with these purposes, items were written. These items were
presented to the common opinion of the researchers, and a total of 5 open-ended questions were
formed. Highlighting responsive research participation complicates the notion that participation can be
adequately described in terms of what researchers' designs and activities afford (Macran & Ross, 2002).
Although participants do have fewer opportunities to explain what is salient for them when interactions
are more structured, it does not make sense to assume that responsiveness is eliminated.   Answers might
still be chosen in response to what is salient for them in the moment or for their anticipated futures.
Conversation can be called productive to the extent that it is not subject to the conscious control and
prognostic anticipation of the participants. The logic of dialogue reveals its creative potential precisely in
what is unexpected, in opening up unforeseen possibilities of understanding (Kögler, 1960/1996)  (p. 117).

Existing articles that have addressed researchers' ethical practices offer valuable data for considering how
to go about interviewing for research. In rare cases, articles are inspired by participants' reports on some
of the negative aspects of their experiences (Bar-on, 1996; Lieblich, 1996). In other instances, researchers
describe the impact on their lives of doing qualitative research (Grafanaki, 1996; McLeod, 1996).
Notably, researchers also describe efforts to follow up on their projects by asking participants about the
experience of sharing personal narratives for the purpose of research (Grafanaki, 1996; Josselson,
1996; Lieblich, 1996; McLeod, 1996). Given the researcher's significant position in the research as well
as her admission to the participants, the discussion in the next section concentrates on the researcher's
involvement in qualitative research, or persistent observation.