3.8 DATA GENERATION
3.8.1 Quantitative data generation
The selected quantitative approach to inquiry comprised survey research mainly to provide a background to the life worlds of hearing parents raising deaf children. The data generation instrument used in my study was a structured questionnaire. The use of the term ‘participants’ (which is generally associated with qualitative research) rather than the term ‘respondents’ (which is usually linked to quantitative research) is preferred for this study given the fact that the qualitative approach to inquiry is dominant and given priority. What follows is a brief discussion about the questionnaire as a quantitative data collection instrument, including its advantages and limitations, after which the quantitative data generation procedures of this study will be explained.
3.8.1.1 The questionnaire as a quantitative data generation instrument
The questionnaire is a data generation instrument generally used to collect survey information. There are three different types of questionnaires, including structured, unstructured, and semi-structured types. A structured questionnaire comprises closed questions, and enables the researcher to identify patterns and make comparisons. An unstructured questionnaire comprises open-ended questions that allow participants the freedom to write what they want, and are more word-based. The semi-structured questionnaire is a “powerful tool” with a clear focus and structure, but is open-ended and comprises a series of statements, items or questions which participants respond to or comment on in their own words (Cohen et al., 2007: 321).
In this study a structured questionnaire was administered. It was developed on the basis of discussions with relevant stakeholders, namely, psychologists, social workers, educators and hearing parents of deaf children, as well as through a survey of literature pertaining to the parenting of deaf children. A Likert-type scale questionnaire with three response categories, namely agree, disagree, uncertain was constructed. The three response categories facilitated the placement of responses into one of the three categories, thereby enabling the researcher to determine the direction of their responses. The main purpose of
135
the questionnaire in this study was to obtain background information about the life worlds of hearing parents of deaf children, and to address the research question: To what extent do various ecosystemic variables influence the experiences of hearing parents raising their deaf children in this country?
The first section of the questionnaire called for biographical information and comprised five items, pertaining to participants’ relationship to the deaf child, their gender, home language, age of deaf child, and age of the child when deafness was diagnosed. To protect the identity of the participants they were not required to provide their names. The next section comprised 25 questions in the form of statements relating inter alia to the diagnosis of deafness, as well as issues related to family, school and community that influence their experiences as hearing parents raising deaf children. The findings from the quantitative data were used to complement support to the qualitative enquiry which was the dominant research method used.
3.8.1.2 Advantages and limitations of questionnaires
Questionnaires have their strengths as well as their limitations. According to Wilson and McLean (1994: 21) the questionnaire is a useful and widely used instrument for the generation of survey information. It provides structured data and can be administered in the absence of the researcher. Neuman (2006: 299), as well as Lewin (2005: 219), claim that it is often relatively straightforward to analyse, and that this type of survey is by far the cheapest and can be sent to a vast geographical area, and conducted by a single researcher. Delport (2005: 167) concurs in that data can be obtained from a large number of participants within a short time, and adds that the participants enjoy freedom in completing the questionnaire, since they are shielded from the possible influence of bias from the field worker. Beside the low cost, a distinct advantage of a self-administered questionnaire is that of anonymity, as participants are more likely to give valid answers when answering questions of a sensitive nature (McIntyre, 2005: 167). Structured questionnaires containing closed questions can be quick and easy to code, and participants
136
are not unduly discriminated against on the basis of how articulate they are (Wilson &
McLean, 1994: 21).
However, there are certain limitations to the use of the structured questionnaire as a survey instrument. It is time-consuming to develop, pilot and refine the questionnaire.
Oppenheim (1992: 115) states that the scope of the data to be collected as well as the flexibility of response can be limited, as the participants cannot add any remarks, or explanations for the categories, and that the categories might not be exhaustive. Some of these limitations also applied to this study as flexibility of responses was restricted, and some categories were not exhaustive.
With regard to questionnaires that are posted, Cohen et al. (2007: 345) claim that often,
“the postal questionnaire is the best form of survey in an educational inquiry”, and that it has several distinct advantages, especially in terms of time, and resources. However, Delport (2005: 167) and Neuman (2006: 299) state that one of the biggest problems with posted questionnaires is that people do not always complete, respond to, or return the questionnaires. Neuman (2006: 299) adds that the conditions under which a questionnaire is completed cannot be controlled by the researcher, and that incomplete questionnaires can also be a major problem. Delport (2005: 167) adds that if the questionnaire is long and if questions are unclear, or complex and require in-depth thought, the non-response rate may be very high. However, with regard to this study the response rate to the questionnaire was acceptable as 63% of the questionnaires were completed and returned.
3.8.1.3 Quantitative data generation process
The questionnaire was piloted amongst parents of two deaf children attending a school for the deaf and a few minor amendments were effected. In the biographical section the question pertaining to family income was omitted as the pilot participants felt that it was confidential information that would not affect their responses to the rest of the questionnaire. After gaining permission to conduct research at schools for the Deaf, the questionnaires were posted to the principals of three schools in Gauteng and the Western
137
Cape. Questionnaires were personally delivered to the principals of three schools in KwaZulu-Natal, and their assistance was enlisted to distribute them to hearing parents of deaf children who were currently enrolled at their schools. School administrators and participants were informed of the reasons for conducting research among hearing parents of deaf children, via written communication. A total of 250 questionnaires were disseminated, of which 157 (63%) were returned. This is a high response rate, considering the claim by Cohen et al. (2007: 345-346) that a well-planned postal survey is expected to yield at least a 40% response rate. The high return rate may be indicative of the perceived need of the participants for an inquiry into their particular experiences and their need for assistance.
A covering letter, in which ethical issues were also addressed, accompanied the questionnaire. This informed participants of the purpose of the research, and the potential benefits of the research. Participants were assured of confidentiality and anonymity.
Simple instructions were given regarding the answering of the questionnaire. The estimated time for completion of the questionnaire was half an hour to forty five minutes (See Annexure 1: Questionnaire).