Motivation for developing a qualitative methodological basis for the analysis of historical curriculum changes

The qualifications National Diploma (NDip) and Baccalaureus Technologiae (BTech) have been offered by Technikons and since 2006 by Universities of Technology (UoTs). As a result of government drives for a new technology training programme a Bachelor of Engineering Technology (BEngTech) is being introduced. This study of perceptions of change by industry, lecturers and the professional body is meant to serve as feedback to enable curriculum development to be more aligned to the needs of the stakeholders. For engineering researchers the difference between theory and epistemology is still often confusing and while engineering theories are often well established and tacitly understood (essentially positivist); social science theories however embrace different ways of seeing the world and different epistemological positions. With this as background, a choice had to be made between a quantitative and a qualitative research process to accomplish the objectives of the study in question. The present research is aimed at exploring the extent to which stakeholders have inputs (and of what value) in the process of curriculum development, as little is known about the relevant curriculum changes and their impact on technology students in South Africa. As there is no present analysis of such change, the preferred research approach was originally undefined and open to a wider range of methodologies than is common for engineering research - even in engineering education. As a result of an analysis the decision was made to follow a qualitative, exploratory, descriptive and contextual methodology. In particular grounded theory was selected as the research method of choice. The aim of this paper is to describe why a qualitative methodological approach is better suited to an analysis of historical curriculum changes and their impact on technology students in South Africa than a quantitative approach.