CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
4.4. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
4.4.3 Data collection process
The educators I interviewed were all females with varied ages and experiences. When I decided on sampling the educators, I had to group them in such a way that they would feel safe and willing to participate in the focus group interview (Appendix 7).
In retrospect,I think it was best to keep the educators from the same school together. I achieved this by grouping the educators according to their experience with learners with autism: I grouped four educators with many years of experience together, and two new educators with hardly any experience together. I did this for various reasons:
the four educators knew and trusted each other,had a good working relationship with lots of experiences to share, while the new educators were still finding their feet.
There were two other educators who were quite inexperienced, but could not find the time to be interviewed with a group, and were therefore interviewed individually (Appendix 8). In order to enhance the richness of the data, multiple research techniques were used with participants with various teaching backgrounds, that is, focus group interviews and individual interviews, to contribute towards trustworthiness.The interviewees came from different cultural backgrounds (English, Afrikaans, and Indian),spoke either English or Afrikaans,and had different teaching qualifications as indicated by table 4.2. I felt conducting interviews with educators with so many differences contributed towards rich and varied study findings.
attempts to build a positive interviewing relationship, marked with respect, interest and good manners (Seidman,1998).
Interviews offer a researcher access to the participants' knowledge, thoughts, interpretations and experiences in their own words. It is about understanding the experiences of individuals, their perceptions and meaning-making of these expenences (Seidman, 1998; Ezzy, 2002; Mason, 2002; Henning, 2004). As behaviour throws light on how one is affected by experiences,the interviewer cantry
to understand the participants by observing their actions as well,and by seeing them in the context of their lives (Seidman, 1998; Greeff, 2002). Interviews are not a naturally occurring conversation between people, and the interviewer and participants are unequal in power and in ownership of the process, which implies that careful positioning be used. With an interview there needs to be some direction or focus (Ezzy,2002; Mason,2002;Henning,2004),provided by,for example,an open-ended interview question.
I had to be sensitive to the context being researched, and aware of the participants' ethnographic background and culture. This context would lead to more productive research, helping with the understanding of perspectives and interpretation of data (Greeff, 2002). Prior to conducting the interviews, I gave each participant a consent form with all the information regarding the research topic. After the participants had read and understood the research topic, I consulted them about their willingness to participate and when and where would be most suitable for them to be interviewed.
The interviews were then scheduled for a specific time and place. I informed them that the interviews would be tape recorded.
4.4.3.1.1 Focus group interview
Focus group interviews enable a researcher to find out what individual research participants think and feel about a phenomenon under consideration: their subjective feelings, experiences, thoughts and the meaning of their experiences to them (Seidman, 1998; Greeff, 2002; Henning, 2004). This strategy yields multiple viewpoints, expressions of a variety of ideas and opinions that a group has about a
specific phenomenon. A large amount of concentrated data was produced in a short period of time because ofthis methodological choice. Focus groups communicate a willingness to listen without being defensive, and the participants feel relatively empowered and supported in a group situation. Participants also compare experiences and opinions, which help the researcher gain insight into complex behaviours and motivation(Seidman,1998;Greeff,2002;Henning,2004).
A focus group is a planned interview,consisting of more than one participant,usually 4 - 12. In a focus group,each participant gets a chance to interact, eliciting a variety of responses from the other participants. The selected participants should have something in common relating to the phenomenon,in this case working with learners with autism,as data gathered should reflect the participants' subjective feelings about the phenomenon,i.e. their emotional well-being (Greeff,2002).
Given the fact that it is important to create an atmosphere of trust and empathy in order for the interviewees to speak freely without interference, the interview should take place in a comfortable environment. At the same time,the interview needs to be controlled to keep the participants focussed on the subject of the interview,in a non- interfering way to prevent 'contamination' of data (Seidman, 1998; Mouton, 2001;
Greeff,2002; Henning,2004).
In order to apply the group interview technique, open-ended questions were used because they.elicit a wide range of responses. They also allow questions that do not necessarily lead the participant to say something the interviewer wants to hear.
Instead,the researcher is able to guide without interfering,as these questions allow objectivity and neutrality. The researcher needs to observe how the participants communicate their thoughts, as well as how their role in society and their cultural knowledge are featured in the interview (Seidman,1998; Mouton,2001; Greeff,2002;
Henning,2004).
Educators oflearners with special needs from two schools in the KwaZulu-Natal area, who work with learners with autism, were interviewed by using focus group interviews. The focusgroups consisted of2 - 4 educators participating in an informal conversation, withtwo interview questions, with the occasional clarifying or probing
questions. It was an unstructured interview exploring new territory with the participants,asking the following open ended questions:
Tell me about teaching learners with autism?
How does it influence your well-being?
I tried out the open-ended interview questions to determine whether they allowed the participants to respond richly about the phenomenon under investigation. Each group was interviewed twice and each interview was scheduled for an hour, as this allowed the participants enough time to reconstruct their experiences in the context of their professional lives and.. . . . how they were affected by them (Seidman,.. 1998). I chose to interview them the first time at the end of a term, and the second time at the beginning of a term.I did this as I know that educators are normally very tired and more likely to be negative towards the end of a term, and more responsive and positive at the beginning of a new term. I thought this would lead to different viewpoints from some individuals, but there were no differences in their response. The information gathered during the interviews was consistent, leading me to trust the information (Siedman, 1998).
I interviewed 10 parncipants from 2 different schools in KwaZulu-Natal. By interviewing a number of educators, I could effectively analyse and compare their perceptions. This helped towards trustworthiness (Seidman, 1998). I also felt that I had enough information, that the participants were repeating what they had said the first time, i.e. that data saturation was achieved, and therefore felt that I had no need to interview more educators.
4.4.3.1.2 Individual interviews
After the focus group interviews,four individual interviews followed. This was due to the difficulty of scheduling another focus group interview, as two educators could not arrange a time together. Therefore, two educators were interviewed individually as well as two therapists working with learners with autism,as I felt this would enhance the richness ofthis research. They were provided with the same consent form, the
same open-ended questions, and I conducted the same type of interview as the focus groups. Each participant was interviewed for about 30 minutes to 1 hour which provided me with a large amount of rich data (Greeff, 2002). The data from the individual and focus group interviews complemented each other. This confirmed data saturation (Ezzy, 2002; Greeff, 2002).