4.6. Methods of data collection
4.6.5. Data collection: Administration of questionnaires
The initial proposed method for the administration of the first questionnaire was that it would be administered to the aspirant barristers in their assigned areas of placement during the attachment period between April and June 2011. However, a few studies reviewed in the literature outlined the problem of absenteeism by the aspirant barristers from their areas of placement as one of the major challenges experienced by the NLS regarding the conduct of the law office attachment programme. This problem has been attributed to the Bar examinations which are often scheduled after the attachment programme, hence most aspirant barristers tend to use the attachment period to prepare for the examinations (Anaekwe, 2000: 101; Okoye Ordor, 2007: 71).
It was also noted that the earlier timing for the administration of the questionnaires coincided with the scheduled national elections in Nigeria which were to commence in April 2011. As a result any events following on the elections were bound to affect the conduct of the
administration of the questionnaires particularly to the aspirant barristers who were located in different parts of the country for the attachment. Consequently, based on these issues as well as suggestions offered by the Law School, changes were made to the timetable for the
administration of the questionnaires in order to ensure a good response rate.
The outlined methods of data collection for the study included the administration of two separate questionnaires to the aspirant barristers at the various campuses of the Nigerian Law School and to the selected law firms across the country. This process was divided into two phases for easy administration and collation of the data (See section 4.2.4).
The first phase of the administration of the questionnaire was to the second batch of aspirant barristers registered for 2010/2011. This batch of aspirant barristers had returned to the various campuses of the Law School where they were being assessed for the attachment. From the format of the questionnaire, provision was made in the questionnaire by which the aspirant barristers could provide the name and location of the law firms to which they were attached, in
this way, the researcher was able to align the respondents to the particular law firm where the attachment was done for purposes of analysis (See research instrument 1 questions 1c & 1d).
4.6.5.1. Phase 1: The aspirant barristers Pre-test
The research instrument was pre-tested on the 21st- 25th March 2011. It was administered in Jos, Plateau State, Nigeria to practicing lawyers who are in legal practice and have been working for not less than one year. Five questionnaires were administered and all were completed and returned. Observations from the responses of the pre-test showed that the instructions on each section of the questionnaire were clear and well understood. Responses to question 10 section 5 however, which required respondents to rank the skills in order of importance using the key provided, revealed that most respondents ticked their appropriate response instead of ranking them. Also a few errors were noted with the numbering sequence of the questions and were corrected before the actual administration of the questionnaire. Generally, responses from the pre-test showed that the questionnaire was appropriate in meeting the aims and objectives of the study.
Questionnaire administration
The first phase of the questionnaire administration to the aspirant barristers was conducted on the 5th- 11th April 2011 to all the campuses of the Nigerian Law School with the following results:
Kano campus - 300 questionnaires administered, 285 (95%) were returned.
Lagos campus - 110 questionnaires were administered and 104 (95%) were returned.
Abuja campus – 110 questionnaires administered, 92 (84%) returned.
Enugu campus - 100 questionnaires administered, 76 (76%) were returned.
A total of 620 copies of the questionnaire were administered to the various campuses of the NLS of which 557 were completed and returned. However, 42 (9%) of the 557 data returned were invalid leaving a total of 515 of the valid responses representing 83% of the total questionnaires administered.
Reflective journal
The reflective journal produced by the aspirant barristers was also a source of data for the study.
Consent was sought by the researcher from the authorities of the Nigerian Law School for this purpose. However, it was discovered that the journal essays are usually returned to the aspirant barristers after the assessment so the researcher had to request access to journals from some of the academic staff of the Law School who were responsible for assessing the journals, as well as obtain the consent of some of the aspirant barristers whose journals were being examined in order to make copies of them. Consequently, the researcher was only able to get five copies each from three of the campuses of the NLS - Abuja, Kano and Enugu (total 15); none were obtained from Lagos campus.
Challenges and observation
Generally, the administration of the questionnaires at each of these campuses was successful judging by the outcome of the responses to the data. Even though 354 were drawn as the sample for the administration of the questionnaire, a total of 515 responses were obtained indicating the willingness and interest in participation in the study by the aspirant barristers (See section 4.6.5.1 Phase 1). Similarly, the support and cooperation provided to the researcher by the authorities of the Nigerian Law School ensured a very good response rate especially considering that the timing for the administration of the questionnaire coincided with the assessment period and scheduled Bar examinations which were due to commence soon afterwards.
4.6.5.2. Phase 2: The law firms Pre-test
The second research instrument was pre-tested on the 25th-30th April 2011 in Jos, Plateau state, Nigeria. The questionnaire was administered to law firms which were not listed among the 341 selected law firms from the database of the Nigerian Law School. Five questionnaires were administered which were all completed and returned. Respondents were favourably disposed to the questions and general instructions of the questionnaire. However, a few of the respondents raised objections to the covering letter of the questionnaire, particularly, the format of the informed consent in which they were required to append their signatures in order to affirm their consent to completing the questionnaire, which they felt was not necessary. This problem was
however not an issue for some law firms who not only signed the form but also placed their official stamp on the page. Consequently, changes to the format of the informed consent form were not considered necessary. Secondly, a few lawyers also noted that the font size of the characters of the questionnaire were rather small which made it difficult to read. However, explanations were given to the fact that a bigger font size would have made the length of the questionnaire longer which may be discouraging to some respondents. Consequently, in the actual administration of the questionnaire, for those who complained, the researcher was able to read out the questions from a copy of the questionnaire while the respondents ticked their appropriate responses from the copy administered.
Questionnaire administration
The second phase of the fieldwork began on the second of May 2011 to third of June 2011.
From the 32 states selected from the list of law firms, the researcher was able to cover 26 states including the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja. Of the 341 selected law firms, the total responses from the questionnaires administered and returned from the various states was 202 representing 59% of the total responses. Also of the 32 states, the researcher was not able to visit some states (seven) due to certain security challenges arising from post-election violence (See section 4.6.5.2 Phase 2).
Challenges and observations
The administration of the questionnaire was arduous but the general response was positive and encouraging. One of the main difficulties experienced was locating the law firms as some of them had changed their office address from that obtained from the database of the NLS. Another major challenge after the national elections was that quite a number of law firms across the country were involved in the election petition tribunals that were established by the Federal Government of Nigeria in every state to resolve any dispute arising from the outcome of the exercise. This situation affected the response rates for such major cities as Lagos, Port Harcourt, Kano and Abuja where most of the selected law firms are located. However, generally, the data collection process was a challenging experience and provided the opportunity for the researcher to physically examine the context of the legal practice across Nigeria as well as make informal
observations on how changes in legal information resources and use are influencing current legal practice in Nigeria.