DEDICATION
3.2 Data production plan
In this section the important aspects of the research process that underpin the stages of data production, namely methodological approaches employed in the study is discussed.
To investigate sporting excellence of learners in a transforming society and to understand how excellence was achieved, in-depth interviews were conducted with all of the participants (provincial coaches, learners and significant others). Cohen et al.
(2007, p. 349) state that “interviews enable participants, be they interviewers or interviewees to discuss their interpretations of the world in which they live, and to express how they regard situations from their own point of view. In these senses the interview is not simply concerned with generating data about life: it is part of life itself, its human embeddedness is inescapable”.
54 The use of the interview in research, according to Cohen et al. (2007, p. 349) “marks a move away from seeing human subjects as simply manipulable and data as somehow external to individuals, and towards regarding knowledge as generated between humans, often through conversation”. Kvale (1996, p. 14) perceive “an interview as an inter- view, an interchange of views between two or more people on a topic of mutual interest, sees the centrality of human interaction for knowledge production, and emphasises the social situatedness of research data”.
Interviews are inherently social encounters (Rapley, 2001, p. 303), and according to Lofland and Lofland (1995) an in-depth interview is a dialogue between a skilled interviewer and an interviewee. The goal of the interview is to elicit rich, detailed data that can be used in analysis. Interviews are authentic when conducted face to face, although telephone interviewing in certain situations can be successful. In-depth interviews are characterised by extensive probing and open-ended questions. Typically, the researcher prepares an interview guide that includes a list of issues or questions that need to be explored and suggested probes are also noted for following up on key topics.
This guide for interviewing helps the interviewer pace the interview, making the process of interviewing more systematic and comprehensive.
Patton (1990) states that it is the responsibility of the interviewer to be an attentive listener who shapes the process of the interview into a familiar and comfortable form of social engagement, becoming more of a conversation since the quality of the information obtained is largely dependent on the interviewer’s skills and personality. In contrast to a good conversation, however, an in-depth interview should not anticipate a two-way form of communication and sharing. Rather, the key to being a good interviewer is when he/she focuses on listening skills and questioning ability. It is not the role of the interviewer to provide personal opinions, perceptions or feelings.
Interviewers should be trained and focused individuals who are sensitive, empathetic and able to establish a non-threatening environment in which participants feel comfortable.
Frechtling and Sharp (1997) suggest that in-depth interviews are appropriate when the subject matter is complex and highly sensitive, when detailed information is sought, and
55 when the participants are busy, high-status individuals. In-depth interviews do the following: permit face-to-face contact with participants, yield the richest data as they are detailed, provide new insight and an opportunity to explore topics in-depth, afford the ability to experience the affective and cognitive aspects of responses, allow the interviewer to explain or help clarify questions, increase the likelihood of useful responses, and allow the interviewer to be flexible in administering to particular individuals or in specific circumstances. On the other hand, in-depth interviews can be expensive and time-consuming, requiring well-qualified and highly trained interviewers.
Also the interviewee may distort information through recall error, selective perceptions and a desire to please interviewer, flexibility can result in inconsistencies across interviews, and the volume of information can be enormous making transcribing and reducing the data difficult.
The interview is “a flexible tool for data generation, enabling multi-sensory channels to be used: verbal, non-verbal, spoken and heard” (Cohen, et al., 2007, p. 349). In this study informal unstructured interviews reminiscent of non-directive counselling approaches were used. The unstructured interview is an open situation which has greater flexibility and freedom. As Kerlinger (1970) notes, although the research purposes govern the questions asked, their content, sequence and wording are entirely in the hands of the interviewer. Although the interview is unstructured, it is carefully planned.
This method of data generation was valuable in eliciting data from the learners, taking into account the susceptible nature of the learners, and also provided the flexibility required in interviewing the provincial coaches and significant others.
An in-depth interview as the principal method of inquiry involves the collection of qualitative data from participants. This data generation method allows interpersonal contact with participants and creates opportunities for follow-up questions and comments. According to Frechtling and Sharp (1997) this technique begins with the assumption that the participants’ perspectives are meaningful, knowable, and able to be made explicit, and these perspectives affect the success of the project. An interview is selected when interpersonal contact is imperative and when opportunities for follow-up of interesting and fascinating comments are desired. The two types of interviews used in evaluation research are structured interviews (in which a carefully worded questionnaire
56 is administered) and in-depth interviews (in which the interviewer does not follow a rigid form). In structured interviews the emphasis is on attaining answers to carefully phrased questions. Interviewers are trained to deviate only minimally from the question wording to ensure uniformity of interview administration. In the in-depth interview the interviewer encourages free and open responses, and there may be a trade-off between comprehensive coverage of topics and in-depth exploration of a further (limited) set of questions.
Both methods of interview were used in this study to elicit data from the learners.
Structured interviews (Appendix 11) were used to generate standardised information on biographical data and in-depth interviews (Appendix 13) to generate data on learners’
interpretations of the world in which they live and their personal point of view. The interviews helped to elicit data that encouraged capturing of the learners’ perceptions in their own words, a very desirable strategy in qualitative data generation. This allowed the researcher to present the meaningfulness of the experience from the learners’
perspective.
Adding to these two forms of data generation, learners also presented (not compulsory) a drawing of a portrait of themselves, depicting how they saw themselves as provincial athletes, and wrote an essay describing their journey towards sporting excellence (Appendix 7). Hence for the learners four sets of data generation were conducted. The research process is summarised in Table 1: p 57, which shows the research participants and the research instruments used for data generation.
57
CRITICAL QUESTIONS
MODE OF ENQUIRY
SOURCE OF INFORMATION
INSTRUMENTS FREQUENCY
Critical question 1:
Who are the learners excelling in school sport?
Qualitative (Denzin &
Lincoln, 1994) (Cohen, et al., 2007) (Orlick, 2008) (Kvale, 1996)
Learners Structured interview schedule
(Appendix 11) In-depth interview schedule
(Appendix 13) Drawing of a portrait and an essay
(Appendix 7) analysed by Dr S. Pillay
Each learner was interviewed once and the structured interview schedule was filled in during this interview
Provincial coaches
In-depth interview schedule
(Appendix 12)
Each provincial coach was interviewed once
Significant others In-depth interview schedule
(Appendix 14)
Each significant other was interviewed once
Critical question 2:
What contributes to these learners’
excellence in school sport?
Qualitative (Denzin &
Lincoln, 1994) (Cohen, et al., 2007)
(Bronfenbrenner, 1979)
(Kvale, 1996)
Learners In-depth interview schedule
(Appendix 13)
Each learner was interviewed once
Provincial coaches
In-depth interview schedule
(Appendix 12)
Each provincial coach was interviewed once
Significant others In-depth interview schedule
(Appendix 14)
Each significant other was interviewed once
Critical question 3:
Why do these learners excel in school sports in a transforming society?
Qualitative (Denzin &
Lincoln, 1994) (Cohen, et al., 2007)
Derived from data collected for critical questions 1 and 2
In-depth interview schedule
(Appendices 12,13,14)
The information gleaned from data for critical questions 1 and 2 will inform the answer to critical question 3
Table 1: Methodological approaches used in the study
Data from the learners are presented as narratives from the stories told by the learners.
Out of these stories emerged themes, thereafter elaborated on through the data yielded by the interviews with coaches (Appendix 12) and significant others (Appendix 14).
The interviews were planned according to Kvale’s (1996) seven stages: thematising, designing, interviewing, transcribing, analysing, verifying and reporting. The two broad frameworks of the study were used as a guide to thematise the interview, focusing on the psychological and sociological perspectives of the study. This helped in preparing and designing the interview schedule (structured and in-depth) in a way to adequately reflect what the research was trying to find out. The first step in constructing interview questions is to specify the variable by name. According to Tuckman (1972), variables
58 are what is being measured in the study; in this study they related to who the learners are and what contributed to their sporting achievements.
The interviews were initiated once the participants were informed of the nature and purpose of the interview (letters to each appear in Appendices 1, 3, 5 and 8). The researcher strove to put the participants at ease by assuring them that she would be honest and that all information given would be in confidence. All participants signed a declaration (Appendices 2, 4, 6 and 9) stating that they understood the nature of the research project and that they consent to participating in the research project and consented to participate, with the understanding that they were free to withdraw from at any time should they desire to do so.
Transcribing of the data produced in the interviews is a crucial step in ensuring authenticity of the data. According to Cohen et al. (2007), transcription inevitably loses data from the original encounter. This problem is compounded since a transcription represents translation from one set of rule systems (oral and interpersonal) to another, very remote rule system (written language). All data from the three sets of participants were transcribed (further elaborated on in section 3.4).
With qualitative data the data analysis is inevitably interpretive and more of a reflexive, reactive interaction between the researcher and the decontextualised data that are already interpretations of a social encounter. In this study patterns and themes were noted from repeated explanations and constructs from the three cohorts of participants.
Data analysis is further elaborated on in section 3.4.
Kvale (1996) states that validation must take place at all seven stages of interview-based investigations. In this study the interviews were more faithfully represented in words, and as such quotations are were made use of. Kvale (1996) suggests that direct quotations should illuminate and relate to the general text, be contextualised and accompanied by a commentary and interpretations, be particularly clear, useful and the best of the data, should include an indication of how they have been edited, and be incorporated into the natural written style of the report.
59 When interviewing and interacting with participants, especially the learners, I became acutely aware that the lives of these young participants were being exposed, in that some were from oppressed or poor backgrounds, while my life remained protected and not implicated in the text. This kind of disclosure and exposure is very often one-sided, and Fine (1994) defines it as a form of imperialism. As a result of this one-sidedness, I endeavoured each time to disclose my background, my standpoint as a researcher and the purpose of the research, fully cognizant that who I am affected the participants’
responses.
There are many viewpoints in the literature concerning the disclosure and anonymity of research participants’ identities. Yin (1994), on the one hand, is of the view that using individuals’ real names allows for cross-checking by the reader, unless the issues are controversial in which case anonymity becomes necessary. On the other hand Ely, Anzul, Friedman, Garner and Steinmetz (1991) argue that even when research participants agree to have their names used, researchers should guard against this because participants in their naïve willingness need to be protected. Williams (1996) is of the opinion that omitting to refer to actual research participants reduces the opportunity for public acknowledgement or praise. Other researchers, such as Carter and McCarthy (1997), prefer to use pseudonyms when interpreting participants’
comments, because when doing so the researcher is changing or appropriating something of that individual, but resort to using their real names for oral or written quotes, as is the case where participants speaks for themselves. In this study all of the learners as well as the schools they attended have been allocated pseudonyms to ensure anonymity.