CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
3.7 QUALITATIVE APPROACH
This section details the qualitative approach of the study. The qualitative method allowed the researcher to obtain in-depth information from the participants. In this phase, the research questions addressed seven internal and external factors found to contribute differently to the health status of high schools in the Mankweng area. The methods followed are described in more detail below.
3.7.1 Population
The population for the qualitative approach of this study was the student representatives who took part in the quantitative study. All School Management Team members of two high schools under the Limpopo Department of Education in Mankweng area, within the Mankweng Circuit, served as key informants.
3.7.2 Sampling and sample size
For this phase of the study, the researcher purposefully selected four participants from two schools who completed the survey and were student representatives, serving on the school governing body. These are decision makers from the two high schools with the highest reported health risk prevalence rates. The participants included the deputy
45 principals, LO educators, School Management Team members, School Governing Body members and/or representatives of educators’ unions and Representatives Council of Learners (RCL) from each school. A total of twelve (n=12) key informants from the selected schools were also interviewed. Their participation in the study, reminded them of the health priorities, concerns and priorities for developing health promotion interventions (Weathers et al., 2011).
Inclusion criteria
Only high schools which were under the jurisdiction of the Limpopo Department of Education at the time of the study were included in the study.
Exclusion criteria
Staff members who were not directly responsible for decision-making related to health promotion programmes at school were excluded from the study.
3.7.3 Instrument for data collection
A semi structured interview guide, the content of which was grounded in the quantitative results from the first phase, was developed and used to collect qualitative data, because the goal of the second, qualitative, phase was to explore and elaborate on the results from the first, quantitative phase of the study (Creswell & Inquiry, 2013).
The researcher pilot tested the interview protocol on one participant, purposefully selected from those who had completed the survey in the first, quantitative, phase of the study. Based on this pilot interview analysis, the order of the protocol questions was slightly revised and additional probing questions were developed.
Apart from the demographic section, other sections ranged from views regarding risks, physical and social environment, community involvement, curriculum, services and policies at school. The central question was, “could you describe the risks of learners, environmental problems, curriculum and policy issues that hinder teaching and learning at your school?”
Creswell and Inquiry (2013) points out that a study is contextual when the researcher collects data from participants at the natural site where they experience the phenomenon, rather than in a laboratory. Learners and educators were interviewed at their schools in their natural settings. This enabled the researcher to have an idea of
46 the school environment where a HPS could be initiated. The field notes and tape- recorded data were transcribed after interviews.
3.7.4 Data collection
To provide richness and the depth to the study, the researcher used multiple sources for collecting the data: (1) in-depth semi-structured interviews with four participants;
(2) researcher’s reflection notes on each participant’s perceptions, recorded immediately after the interview; and, (3) in-depth interviews of key informants purposefully selected. In addition, observations and mapping of the school environment, as well as elicitation materials such as photos, formed part of the data collection sources. One-on-one in-depth interviews were conducted using a semi- structured interview guide. The central question was: “could you describe the risks of learners, environmental problems, curriculum and policy issues that hinder teaching and learning at your school”?
Appointments were made with the school principal in order to conduct in-depth interviews with key informants during periods that best suited them so as to avoid interference with their duties. A separate office in a school was allocated for the in- depth interviews. All sessions were conducted in English or Sepedi to accommodate those who preferred either one of the two languages. Questions were posed in a neutral manner, with the researcher listening attentively to participant’s responses and asking follow-up questions. Probes were made, where necessary, based on the responses by participants. On average, all interviews lasted 30 – 40 minutes.
A voice recorder was used, with the permission of participants, to capture all spoken words. All participants had an opportunity to share their views and data was collected until data saturation was reached (Polit & Beck, 2010). Field notes were taken during interview sessions to capture non-verbal information. The audiotaped data were transcribed verbatim immediately after the interview. Any form of activities taking place during the data collection period, or sign boards with messages and school environment factors that could influence the health of the school community, were noted.
3.7.5 Data analysis
47 A thematic analysis of the text data was conducted on two levels, data provided by the learners and data provided by the key informants. The analysis of the interviews started with a transcription of the information from the tape-recorded data in order to produce a manuscript. A comparison was then made between the transcriptions and the notes taken to verify accuracy. Transcribed interview texts were presented according to discrete steps for qualitative data analysis. This process involved the creation of codes, categories and themes using the following steps (Creswell, 2014):
• Familiarisation: As a first step, all interview transcripts were read several times to get a sense of the data, as a whole, and its key features and transcribed.
• Generating initial codes: This is an interpretive technique that affords the researcher an opportunity to both organise the data and to provide a means of introducing the interpretations of the data into certain qualitative methods (Johnson & Onwuegbuzie, 2010). Coding required the researcher to read the data and to demarcate segments within it. Each segment was labelled with a
“code” – usually a word or short phrase that suggests how the associated data segments inform the research objectives.
• Categorising: Various codes were then compared for differences and similarities and sorted into fewer content-related categories, with sub- categories describing their different dimensions or characteristics.
• Themes: Finally, categories were organised into themes which reflect the underlying meaning, which can then be extrapolated from the data. A theme is considered a thread of meaning that recurs through the data for easy interpretation. Themes attain their full significance when they are linked to form a coordinated picture.
• Producing the report: This step involves writing up a clear, concise and straightforward logical report, with themes that make meaningful contributions and answers research questions. The qualitative data played a secondary supportive role to explore health risks and HPS practices in high schools. Data present the categories and contextual factors that play a role for the development of the training programme. Out of the views shared by participants, priority areas were identified and used as entry point examples to HPS during the training of educators.
48 3.8 MEASURES TO ENSURE TRUSTWORTHINESS IN QUALITATIVE STUDIES