4.7 CONSIDERING DATA GENERATION
4.7.6 Photovoice as a participatory method to document gender
Photovoice was used for participants to identify and capture specific instances. All the participants were each given a disposable camera and a spool with 27 exposures to “take pictures of what for them best defined how they experienced gender”. Photovoice as a research method rests on the assumption that people are able to identify and represent their own realities (Wang, 1999). Through discussing the subjects of their photographs, girls and boys understand their circumstances and the economic, social, psychological and political forces that shape them.
Photographs were valuable tools to engage participants as they enhanced their expression of experiences of gender in their everyday lives at school. One of the criticisms of using photographs in research is not simply that they can be falsified, but that they are highly subjective in that cameras do not take pictures, people do (Byers, 1968). Within the context of
123 this study, the intention of using photo was based on this quality; the intention was to shift ownership of data generation process from the researcher to the participants or the researched, in order to allow participants to identify and represent their realities without the interference and guidance from the researcher. The rationale for the use of photovoice was based on the following understanding.
Like our field notes and other forms of empirical data, photographs may not provide us with unbiased, objective documentation of the social and material world, but they can show characteristic attributes of people, objects and events that often elude even the most skilled words (Prosser & Schwartz, 1998, p. 115).
The use of photovoice was also based on the understanding that photographs have the potential to extend and deepen our understanding beyond the observable or written record (Dowdall &
Golden, 1989). The method has been successfully applied in studies researching with children and youth (for example, Jacob & Harley, 2008; Zenkov & Harmon, 2009; Findholt & Michael, 2011). In order to ensure the success of this aspect of data generation, I drew from practical suggestions from literature (from, for instance, Wang, 1999; Mitchell, De Lange, Moletsane, Stuart, & Buthelezi, 2005). The research process involved the following four steps:
Firstly, I clarified again the motivation behind the research project to participants then, each girl and boy were assigned a disposable camera each and a spool with 27 exposures. They were excited to use cameras, however they expressed their concern that they might get lost. They agreed on their own that they will leave the cameras at
124 school with the class teacher who was supervising the aftercare at school and who therefore was leaving school late. We discussed themes for taking pictures as a guide to keep the participants on track and to avoid diverging.
As most of the participants were used to using cell phone cameras to take photos, very few participants had ever had any experience with a camera. As a result, I spent some time with the participants at each school to demonstrate how the cameras work, and allowed them to practise taking photographs with them.
In order to ensure that the exercise was implemented in an ethical manner, participants were instructed to always ask for permission before taking photographs where people were going to be captured in the photographs.
Participants were then given a period of five days to take as many as they could as long they were still within the guidelines that we had discussed, after which I collected the cameras and had the spools processed.
Together with participants, a reflective group working session was held, during which photographs were discussed in terms of what they depicted, why particular photographs had been taken, and what participants thought the photographs reflected.
The photographs therefore served as a trigger for discussions (Young & Barrett, 2001). The issue of concern was the quality of some of the photographs. For instance, distance when taking photographs was not always correct as some of the photograph were too small to be able to make sense of.
Discussions, explanations and reflections in the workshop were conducted in isiZulu as it was the participant‟s home dialect. The discussions were voice recorded (with the consent of
125 participants), transcribed verbatim and translated into English. As with other data generation methods, some challenges were experienced with photovoice. For instance, some educators and learners in the two schools, who were potential subjects of photos as they were not part of the study, raised concerns about the possible use of the cameras to capture incidents and spaces they regarded as private and out of bounds. It took the principals of the schools to address the matter at their school assembly in order to explain the purpose of my project for the second time and to request for calm and give assurance that where photographing involved potential subjects, permission was to be requested before taking the photo (Young & Barrett, 2001; Pink, 2006).
There were some obvious benefits for using photovoice as a method for data generation. For instance, the participants loved the part of taking photos. Therefore, it could be concluded that the technique was both participant-friendly and participant-centred. Photovoice also allowed me to explore affective aspects of the study, particularly those that could not be captured with more conventional language-bound methods. This was also the case with the participants as it made available to them more ways of thinking about and representing their social world without language presenting as a barrier. This point to the importance of action-orientated methods, which are often non-threatening to participants and provide safe spaces for participants to represent their social worlds (Young & Barrett, 2001; Schratz & Walker, 1995). Lastly, photographs served as a valuable trigger of discussions as, it would seem, the participants found it easier to relate to the photographs than to respond to interview questions (Morojele &
Muthukrishna, 2012).