Individual interviews and focus group discussions were used to collect data for the study.
With the individual interviews, the researcher was interested in capturing the experiences and perspectives of the participants using their own words (Kelly, 2006; Marshall & Rossman, 2011). The focus group discussions were used in order to gain the intersubjective experiences of participants in the group. Diversity in stories as told by the participants was also of interest (Mason, 2010). The researcher conducted a total of six individual interviews and two focus group discussions. The study initially proposed to conduct only focus group discussions;
however, ethical clearance was later sought for individual interviews to be used as a data collection strategy as well. This decision was taken (and an amendment to the research
38
protocol was applied for with the HSSREC) when it became apparent that getting participants to commit to a focus group discussion was difficult.
The researcher conducted the interviews and focus group discussions in a semi-structured interview format. Using the semi-structured format allowed the researcher the flexibility to let a conversation drive the data collection process (Miles & Gilbert, 2005). The questions were open ended in order to facilitate the conversation and also not to limit the participant’s answers (see Appendix 8 for FGD guide and Appendix 9 for interview guide). This strategy of using open ended questions allowed both the researcher and the participants to discuss the topic in detail (Miles & Gilbert, 2005; Srivastava & Thomson, 2009).
The interviews and focus group discussions were conducted at different venues and the choice of venue was largely dependent on where the participants were on campus. One of the individual interviews and one of the FGD were conducted at a residence television room, one FGD and two individual interviews were held in a university seminar room, and four interviews were conducted on a bench within the campus property. Although the television room and bench were public spaces with a risk of interruption from other people, these spaces provided participants with a feel of a conversation rather than a formal interview. The researcher ensured that the above venues were secluded and quiet to ensure privacy and confidentiality for the participants. The researcher chose to sit in areas within the University property that were far away from people.
3.8.1. The focus group discussions
The researcher conducted two focus group discussions for the study. The two FGDs were conducted in the year 2016. The first FGD was conducted at a student residence and the second FGD was conducted in a university seminar room. In the first FGD, eight participants responded to the invitation and agreed to meeting with the researcher to conduct the FGD.
However, at the time of the scheduled FGD, there was large scale of unrest, turmoil and protest action at universities throughout South Africa. As earlier mentioned, this protest action also took place at UKZN and in the UKZN residences, and as a result, a number of
39
students resorted to going home for their own safety. The originally scheduled FGD had a very low attendance of only two participants, and the researcher decided to continue with the FGD rather than reschedule with the participants who made the effort to attend. In the second scheduled FGD, that also took place in 2016; six participants responded to the invitation and agreed to be part of the FGD. The FGD was scheduled to take place at a university seminar room, however only two participants arrived for this discussion. Again, the low attendance of the second FGD was attributed to the protest action and turmoil on the campus. The researcher also continued with the FGD.
The focus group discussions were estimated to take 90 minutes but both FGDs took less than 90 minutes to complete. The researcher began the FGD by introducing herself and a brief introduction of the study. The researcher then handed out the information sheet with the consent form (see Consent and information sheet Appendix 11a) to the participants. The participants were given the option of having the information sheet and consent form in IsiZulu (see Appendix 11b). The researcher went through the information sheet page by page with the participants ensuring that they understood the study and what was expected of them as participants of the study. The researcher proceeded to the consent form and the audio recording consent with the participants (same as consent and information sheet appendix 11).
The participants were given the information sheet to keep with the relevant contact details if they needed further information or had complaints about the researcher or the research study.
At the beginning of the FGD, the participants gave themselves pseudonyms to use for the FGD. The participants then engaged in an exercise (see FGD guide Appendix 12) that was aimed at building rapport among the participants and the researcher; the exercise also served as a starting point for the discussion. The participants were asked to recall or think about their career dreams and ambitions from the time of childhood until matric year. The participants had to write down their stories of career decision-making from the moment they were young to finally choosing the course to study at University (see Participant story Appendix 13 for an example of one of the stories), the participants were then asked to share their stories of career decisions with the group. The FGD proceeded from the exercise to the semi-structured interview, which the researcher used as a guide and director for the conversation. Although the FGDs were started in English, as they progressed, the participants and researcher
40
naturally progressed to using a mixture of English and IsiZulu. However, IsiZulu was the dominant language used overall.
3.8.2. Individual interview
The researcher conducted a total of six individual interviews for the study. Two interviews were conducted in September 2016 and the rest of the interviews were conducted in March and April 2017. As discussed above (see Section 3.6), the interviews were conducted in various areas within the PMB campus. These areas included a university seminar room, student residences, and outside on a bench on the lawn. In all these areas, the researcher ensured that they were secluded and that the participants were free and comfortable before the interviews proceeded. The majority of the participants who were interviewed were recruited using snowball sampling. A semi-structured interview guide (see Appendix 14) guided the interview sessions.
The interview sessions were anticipated to take 45 – 60 minutes each. In the interview session, the researcher began by introducing herself and the study briefly. The researcher then proceeded to hand over the information sheet and consent form to the participants. The researcher went through the information sheet page by page with the participants. The researcher ensured that the participants understood what was expected of them as research participants and made it clear that they could discontinue their participation in the study at any point without facing any adverse consequences. The participants were then asked to consent to participate in the study and also to consent to be audio recorded. The participants were given the information sheet to keep with the contact details of the researcher, the study supervisor and the ethics board contact person should the participants have questions or queries about the study. The participants were then asked to give themselves a pseudonym to be used throughout the interview session. The interviews were started off in English but as the interview process continued the participants were comfortable to answer questions mixing English and IsiZulu.