EAL speakers in SLT caseloads
Process 3: Assessment
9. Are there factors operating within the primary settings that can inhibit or promote performance on the competencies assessed?
4.6 ETHICAL AND LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
• The importance of their role in the research and what would happen to the data generated from the research
Careful choice of participants: As the researcher, I was sensitive to the cognitive and developmental stages of the child participants. Therefore, anticipating that they would have difficulties in maintaining concentration or attention span for prolonged periods necessitated that both the research tool and the children’s focus group (voice of the children) did not take longer than 20 minutes. In the classroom setting, the lessons planned and implemented by the grade one to grade three teachers ranged from 30-45 minutes. The children were thus accustomed to having to focus on tasks that were for a longer period. The children were also consistently reassured that there was no failure or obligation to comment.
Engagement (respect, rapport, openness, listening):Rapport was established with each of the children by having an informal, interactive talk or game with them prior to
commencement of data gathering sessions, to ensure that they were comfortable with the context and researcher.
Privacy, confidentiality, consent, choice of participation: Due to the possible bias in power relations between the children, their guardians/parents and the researcher, it was explicitly and repeatedly explained to them, in simple but clear terms, that they had the right to decline or withdraw from participating at any time and that, if they decided to decline or withdraw, this would not be held against them. It was explained to them and their parents that their
participation would be kept confidential by ensuring the children’s anonymity, i.e. by using coding. A simple story with pictures was used to explain the concept of confidentiality in simple terms to the children that no one but my supervisors and I would be dealing with the data and that it would be kept locked away in my home and thereafter at the Discipline of Speech-Language Pathology.
Control of Research materials: If the parent agreed to the participation of the child but the child declined, the child’s rights were respected and thus, in those instances where the parent had signed and submitted the consent form but the child was shy and did not want to
participate, the child was not forced to do so. Such children were thanked with a little token in the form of a sucker and allowed to return to class. It was made clear to them that there would be no penalty.
Review, revision and dissemination of research: The school principal, participants within the community/ parents’ focus group, academics who participated in the individual
interviews and SLTs were given the option to receive a copy of the findings of the research in the form of a summary if they requested. These summaries would be explained in a clear, simple manner, avoiding professional jargon. Work in progress has been presented at the Conferences of South African Speech-Language and Hearing Association in Pretoria in 2010, Multilingualism Conference in Lithuania in 2010 and Canadian Speech-Language Pathologists Association (CASLPA) in Montreal in Canada in 2011. A workshop with SLTs and Audiologists in KZN was also conducted in April 2011. A publication in the biannual research journal Studies about Languages 2010 No.17 has been produced and more publications on the study will be produced and published in accredited journals.
Use of participatory methods: The presentation of the test material in the children's focus group was done in a manner that was fun and appropriate for the age group. The mother- tongue of the children was used to address them.
Appreciation and reward: Each of the participants in the parent and community focus group was assisted financially to get to the venue of the meeting and refreshments were provided to create an informal and comfortable atmosphere. Each of the children were
thanked and rewarded with a lollipop for their participation in the study. They were not informed of their reward prior to their participation.
Careful choice of context: A setting that is comfortable, safe and predictable was used for the children. The school environment is a familiar setting that children normally regard as known and natural and therefore an appropriate setting for them. The room used was part of the administration section and was detached from the other classrooms where the other children could see them participating. It was a room that was usually used when the social worker sees the children at the school as it provided privacy.
Participant’s perspective: The participants were allowed to freely express themselves with minimal intervention from me as I merely facilitated the discussion during group sessions.
During the data collection and analysis, care was taken to retain the core participants’ input via audio and video recording that had been set up prior to the session.
Summary
In this chapter, the methodology design, data collection with analysis and the motivation for the procedures applied in the study were discussed. It elaborated on the RAPT as a research instrument and how it was applied in the study. The preparatory stage which was comprised of the survey to the SLTs was presented. Phase 2 which included the voice of the children, focus groups of the children, parents and community member was discussed. The individual interviews with the academics also formed part of phase 2. The review of the adapted tool with the assistance of SLTs was described. The principles and techniques of rigour applied to ensure the trustworthiness of the research were explained and, finally, the application of the ethical considerations was discussed.