Individual interviews, focus groups, document analysis and survey questionnaires were the research instruments utilised to collect and generate data.
Chambliss & Schutt (2012), observed that data collection instruments such as observations, focus groups and interviews are best suited for qualitative exploratory
studies and more appropriate when looked at from a phenomenological lens. The questions for interviews and questions for discussions during focus group sessions were all designed to respond to the overall research questions. In focus groups, participants interact with the researcher, where essential, together with a moderator, in probing for deeper insights about behaviours, experiences and knowledge (Kolb, 2008).
4.7.1 Focus groups
Focus group is a term used in social science research that refers to a research interview conducted within a group with an intention to access the group’s inter-subjective experiences (Kelly, 2012). In addition, Kelly (2012) explains that a focus group is, “a group of people who share a similar type of experience, but a group that is not naturally constituted as an existing social group” (Kelly, 2012:305). Kumar (2011) indicates that there is a distinct advantage to using focus group interviews, in that focus groups allow the researcher to explore the perceptions, experiences and understandings of group of people that have the same experience in common with regard to a situation or an event.
Social cooperative members, board members and middle managers of the Department of Social Development were used as participants in the focus group discussions. They shared similar contextual and environmental experiences, being involved in the youth development academies.
During the focus group discussions, as was the case with the semi-structured interviews, certain linguistic patterns, expressions, metaphors, idioms and proverbs began to emerge as the participants expressed themselves through their usage. The linguistic patterns that participants used later produced themes that were critical for highlighting the cultural signals, nuances and idiosyncrasies of the participants.
4.7.2 Interviews
One of the instruments that were used to generate the data for this study was the semi- structured interviews. Interviews are a commonly used method in social science research of collecting information from people (Kumar, 2011; Mkhize, 2017). Most literature describes interviews as verbal interchanges in which the interviewer elicits information, beliefs, or opinions from another person (Burns, 1997). Kelly (2012) describes interviews
as conversations intended to generate information. The most appropriate description of an interview for the purpose of this study is that it is an arena within which nuanced linguistic patterns, such as metaphors, tales, idiosyncratic phrases or viewpoints, become more pronounced (Kelly, 2012). The interview is indeed a data collection instrument that is very common in descriptive research especially in surveys. Interviews can also be useful in other types of research when collecting reliable and valid information as argued by Smith et al., (2016). As opposed to questionnaires, interviews serve the purpose of:
a) Making greater use of open-ended questions through further probing;
b) Making use of small and purposive samples; and c) Yielding huge amounts of unlimited data.
Collis & Hussey (2003) wrote about the opposite ends of the interview continuum where in one end there are highly structured and interviewer- administered questionnaires, and on the other end the open-ended in-depth and unstructured interviews. The different types of interviews as explained before serve different purposes. The highly structured interviews such as surveys may be used for quantitative research (Babbie & Mouton (2009). Contrastingly, open-ended, unstructured or semi-structured interviews essentially serve the purpose of qualitative information gathering methods. These data gathering methods offer wider opportunities for discussions that allow the researcher to explore and understand the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ of the contextual dynamics of the study at hand (Swetan, 2014). The different forms of interviews can be very useful in increasing the validity and reliability of the findings from the study. The data obtained during the semi- structured or unstructured interviews can then be used as a basis to design structured interviews to further examine specific themes and the interaction of the categorical variables in the study. In the study the researcher followed this approach and it is in agreement with the assertion by Burns & Grove (2004) who posited that the second phase of the research process which is characterized by quantitative or survey-based questionnaire, open-ended or unstructured or semi-structured interviews can be employed to further explore, validate and triangulate results from the questionnaires.
Cooper et al., (2009) had observed while the open-ended, semi-structured interview process is underway it is generally not possible to take notes as this can be very distracting to the participant and thus having a potential to interrupt the natural flow of the interview process. During the interview the researcher may also give the informant pointers regarding particular areas of emphasis and thus potentially influencing the informant’s responses further down the interview process. In short, the interview is the most appropriate tool to gather certain types of research data (Wiid & Diggines, 2010).
As highlighted above, there is a possibility of subjectivity because of potential sources of bias from the study informants.
In this study, a number of the interviews were conducted predominantly in isiZulu, the language spoken and understood by the majority of the NPO board members, local ward councillors and traditional leaders, or amakhosi. This was to enable the participants to express themselves freely in their home language. During these interviews and focus group discussions certain linguistic patterns, expressions, metaphors, idioms and proverbs began to emerge, as the participants expressed themselves. The linguistic patterns that participants used later produced themes that were critical in highlighting the cultural signals, nuances and idiosyncrasies of the participants.
4.7.3 Document analysis
When discussing document analysis, Kumar (2011) cited in Mkhize (2017) explains it as a process of collecting data using secondary sources that have been collected for a purpose other than the aims of the research study in question. The secondary sources that were used to collect information for this study were the Statistics South Africa Youth Skills Report (2016), the Auditor-General’s Management Report for the Department of Social Development (2014; 2015), the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Treasury Quality Assurance Report on Youth Development (2015; 2016), the Department of Social Development’s monitoring and evaluation reports and the Service Level Agreements between the Department of Social Development and the NPOs appointed to manage the youth development academies on behalf of government. These documents were studied and analyzed and the findings are presented in Chapter 5, which is the qualitative data analysis chapter. Other narrative reports and various types of quantitative data that had
already been collected by the Department of Social Development for its own purposes were used to gain more insight into the workings of the youth development academies and to further the objectives of this study.
4.7.4 Questionnaires
When collecting data for quantitative purposes, a set of questionnaires were applied to a group of officials from within the Department of Social Development, officials from other government departments and the staff from NPOs managing the youth development academies. Since the study employed the mixed methods approach, qualitative and quantitative application, this allowed for triangulation, complementarity and the development of new models based on the initial qualitative data collection, which seeks to establish points of convergence, corroboration and cross-checking of results based on the quantitative data analysis. This assists with explanation, improvement, illustration and further clarification of results.