not enough to empower teachers to comfortably address such topics (Khan, 2020). In response to public concerns, the Department of Basic Education (DBE) clarified that in-service training on subjects like Life Skills and Life Orientation have been present since the year 2000, with detailed training manuals as well as scripted lesson plans for sexuality education (Khan, 2020).
Since I have had teaching experience in multiple Chatsworth schools, I also witnessed discussions on ‘the inappropriate nature of the sexuality curriculum’.
Having provided contextual background into the research context and the research sites, attention will now shift to the sample and recruitment plan undertaken to meet the anticipated research objectives. It is important to note that the COVID-19 pandemic that wrought havoc in South Africa and across the globe, held me to ransom. However, with the easing of lockdown restrictions after some time, I was able to continue with the data collection process. In what follows, I explain my recruitment plan as well as document the changes that were implemented due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
and provides rich data on the phenomenon of interest. Creswell (2007) acknowledged that purposive sampling is frequently used by qualitative researchers in the interpretivist paradigm to explore a particular phenomenon within a specific context. By applying purposive sampling techniques, I was able to meet the inclusion criteria to select the participants. For example, (1) all qualified teachers, (2) employed in public primary schools, (3) in the Chatsworth area. I consciously selected this sample because in spite of primary school environments being susceptible to diverse gendered experiences, teachers’ opinions on sexualities and gender identities have yet to be explored.
Even though teacher participants were selected based on the purposive criteria in order to encapsulate understandings which exist in a specific population, I combined purposive and convenience sampling techniques to enhance the methodology of the study. Robinson (2014, p. 32) describes convenience sampling as selecting participants who are on a “first-come- firstserved-basis”. This sampling technique is seen during the data collection process through voluntary participation and teacher availability to carry out telephonic interviews and WhatsApp group discussions. Subsequently, 30 teachers were selected from public primary schools restricted to the Chatsworth area. Robinson (2014) mentions that convenience sampling also means choosing a sample that is easily accessible to the research. Since the Chatsworth suburb is my hometown, it was therefore convenient and feasible for me to make contact with the different primary schools.
Prior to the enforced COVID-19 lockdown, I approached five (5) primary schools in the Chatsworth area and briefly explained the nature of my study to each principal. I made enquires as to which schools would be interested in contributing to the study by posing questions like: “Would teachers be available to complete interviews?” and “Will you be willing to share your views on the topic?”
From the outset, three (3) of the five (5) school principals expressed interest in the study. They were eager for the schools to be used as a research site and distributed sample consent forms to possible participants. The sample consent form explained the nature and purpose of the study to the teacher participants, informing them of the topic before engaging in the data collection process. The principal and heads of department (HODs) assisted in the distribution of the sample consent forms and kept in close contact with me throughout the data collection process.
After obtaining ethical clearance from the DoE (see Appendix A), I visited the schools with the hopes of encouraging teachers to participate in my study by explaining the nature of
my research. This was on the suggestion of the principals from all three (3) schools who claimed that it would be beneficial if the teachers knew who they were talking to. Taking this into consideration, I visited the schools and briefly explained my research topic whilst stressing the importance of voluntary participation. Shortly after my encounter with the primary school teachers, I received confirmation from the principals that their teacher staff were willing to participate in the study.
My intention was to ensure that the sample of participants was evenly represented in terms of race, gender, and age group. However, the sample representation became reliant on the demographics of the schools as well as the interest and availability of the participants.
Since the two schools that contributed to the study complied at convenience, the sample group reflects the schools, but I did make a conscious effort to obtain diverse representation. I noticed that the sample group did not comprise any male teachers, and since the sample group had complete female representation at a certain point, I specifically asked the principals to communicate with their male staff. As a result, three (3) male teachers willingly agreed to participate in the study after initial unease. The lack of male teachers in primary school environments became apparent together with the lack of racial diversity. I attempted to gain further inclusion of participants, however, teachers indicated that they were unable to avail themselves due to overworked schedules, and overseeing and implementing COVID-19 regulations.
The tables below provide the demographics of the participants from Eden Primary (Table 2) and Ale Primary (Table 3). Pseudonyms have been used to protect the identities of the schools and maintain anonymity.
Table 2: Demographics of participants from Eden Primary School
No. Name of participant
(pseudonyms)
Sex Race Number of years
teaching
1 Linda F I 25
2 Patricia F I 2
3 Jennifer F I 13
4 Barbara F I 10
5 Susan F I 10
6 Jessica F I 5
7 Margaret F I 20
8 Richard M I 40
9 Dorothy F I 6
10 Sandra F I 12
Table 3: Demographics of participants from Ale Primary School
No. Name of participant
(pseudonyms)
Sex Race Number of years
teaching
1 Deborah F I 6
2 Sharon F I 4
3 Cynthia F I 6
4 Helen F I 5
5 Brenda F I 4
6 Rachel F I 13
7 Maria F I 8
8 Diane F I 14
9 Megan F I 5
10 Natalie F I 2
11 Lauren F I 32
12 Thomas M I 30
13 Anna F I 4
14 Joseph M I 50
4.4.1 COVID-19 restrictions in qualitative research
The COVID-19 lockdown and government-imposed restrictions hampered communication with the principals and teacher participants. This was confirmed by Van Der Berg and Spaull (2020) who mentioned how the initial 3-week lockdown that was effected in March 2020 morphed into hard restrictions that saw the close of schools ongoing into the fifth month of August. Principals and staff were unattainable and prior application for ethical clearance had to be reconsidered in order to facilitate research studies that maintained the safety and security of the researcher and participants. The country was still in lockdown in August of 2020, which to a great extent prohibited this research from taking place. However, alternative data collection strategies were accepted by the Humanities & Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee (HSSREC) and data collection commenced from August 2020.
Initially, based on the interest of the schools and the total number of available staff, 34 participant informed consent forms were delivered to schools, pending approved COVID-19 strategies. Since I was not allowed to physically enter the school environment at this point, I relied heavily on constant communication with school principals to organise and manage time to conduct my research. The principals were reluctant to conduct research, fearing the safety of staff; however, I assured both principals of the change in data collection methods from faceto-face individual interviews and in person focus groups to telephonic interviews and WhatsApp group discussions. This eased their concerns and from there 34 forms were distributed, of which 30 teachers voluntarily agreed to participate.
Even though the study had achieved the desired sample size at this point, there were further challenges, as certain participants from both schools were working from home due to comorbidities. Mthethwa (2020) explained ‘comorbidities’ as concessions given to employees (in this case teachers) with medical conditions, which may place the individual at higher risk of complications should they be infected with COVID-19. The DBE published a statement in late September urging teachers who were granted concessions to return to school (Mthethwa, 2020). Subsequent to these implications, only 24 of the 30 participants contributed to the telephonic interviews and 9 in the online WhatsApp group video call sessions. From the initial 12 participants at Eden Primary, 10 teachers contributed. One teacher participant retired and the other went on maternity leave. From the initial 18 participants at Ale Primary, only 14 teachers contributed to the study, as one teacher moved overseas to continue her educational career just before the country’s borders closed. Three others withdrew for various reasons cited, which included lack of time to participate in engagement sessions, and infection of self
or close family members. Despite the number of challenges, I considered 24 participants (see Table 4) to be a reasonable size to obtain rich, in-depth data.
Table 4: Number of participants who participated in engagement sessions Telephonic individual
interviews
WhatsApp video call discussions
Ale Primary 14 6
Eden Primary 10 3
Total 24 9
Having outlined the recruitment process above, I will now go on to describe the data collection process, which includes the instruments employed in this study, namely telephonic individual interviews and online group discussions.