RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
4.6 Research objective two: Exploring the lived experience of RCs with a focus on their journey of professional identity construction within the profession of psychology in journey of professional identity construction within the profession of psychology in
4.6.4 The current status of the sample who participated in Qualitative Interviews
4.6.4 The current status of the sample who participated in Qualitative Interviews
There were 26 RCs who participated in qualitative interviews. Table 4-8 provides an overview of the current status of the sample who participated in the qualitative interviews (please note this sample also participated in the survey so their demographic features also are also included as a part of the overall features highlighted in Table 4-6). Given how instrumental the RCs who participated in the qualitative interviews were - in illuminating some of the nuances of the lived experience of being a RC with specific focus on their construction of professional identity within the profession of psychology in South Africa. Table 4-9 provides an overview of these participants providing demographic information as well as information that provides a basis for understanding the sample more fully. To protect the identity of the participants each is referred to by their code name.
93 Table 4-8 The Current Status of the Sample who were Interviewed
Status Indicators Current Status of the sample
Demographic Indicators
Gender Female 73% (n=19)
Male 27% (n=7)
Transgender None
Ethnicity African 19.23% (n=5)
Coloured 11.54% (n=3)
Asian/Indian None
White 69.23% (n=18)
Geography Eastern Cape 7.6% (n=2)
Free State None
Gauteng Province 23.07% (N=9)
KZN 11.53% (N=3)
Limpopo 3.8% (N=1)
Mpumalanga None
North West 2.98% (N=2) Northern Cape 3.8% (N=1) Western Cape 30.7% (N=8)
Note: It should be noted that during the 26 interviews theoretical saturation was attained.
94 Table 4-9 The Demographic Information of Participants in Qualitative Interviews
Code Gender Ethnicity Age Year of
Do you supplement your income?
Doing what?
RC#26 Female Coloured 34 2004 WC No Teaching No
RC#25 Female White 55 2012 WC Yes Private
Practice
Yes Working as a remedial teacher.
RC#24 Male White 36 2006 EC No Unemployed
RC#23 Male White 31 2010 GP No Business Yes I started working as a RC I wasn’t earning enough money. So I started my own business in transport.
RC#22 Male White 61 2012 GP Yes Community
Policing Forum
Yes I earn nothing from being a RC. After a 40 year career as head of a correctional services facility, I rely on my retirement.
RC#21 Female White 35 2016 GP Yes Private
Practice
No My practice is thriving because I am working in a wealthy area.
RC#20 Male White 39 2007 EC No Unemployed
RC#19 Female Black 53 2013 KZN Yes Private
Practice
Yes Working as a nurse. I would love to have my own practice but it is not financially viable.
RC#18 Female White 51 2004 WC Yes Private
Practice
No I have become a trauma expert and I am working in a wealthy suburb.
RC#17 Female White 40 2013 LP Yes Private
Practice
No I work in a practice with a psychologist who sends many referrals my way.
RC#16 Male White 37 2010 KZN No Unemployed
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
95
Do you supplement your income?
Doing what?
RC#15 Female Black 27 2016 GP Yes Voluntary
work in NGO
Yes I’m not earning anything from this work. I am trying to gain experience.
RC#14 Female White 27 2012 WC Yes Private
Higher Ed
No I worked voluntarily from 2012 – 2016. Last year I got a job in PHE.
RC#13 Female White 37 2004 GP Yes Private
Practice
No I have worked very hard and have a thriving practice with about 50 – 60 clients.
RC#10 Male Black 28 2013 WC Yes NGO Yes I started my own NGO but I have to support
myself working in entertainment.
RC#11 Female White 56 2012 WC Yes NGO Yes I couldn’t find work as a RC from
2012-2016. Last year I was offered part time work with an NGO. I get by financially but it is not easy.
RC#12 Female White 60 2013 GP Yes Private
Practice
No Because I was trained in EMDR therapy I have a thriving private practice.
RC#9 Female Black 33 2007 NW Yes Employee
wellness
No I have been working in employee wellness since 2009.
RC#8 Female White 58 2013 GP Yes Private
Practice
No I have my own private practice which ticks over slowly but because I am older this works for me.
RC#7 Female Coloured 33 2006 WC Yes Voluntary
work in NGO
Yes I volunteer in an ECD centre. We are trying to apply for funding but it is not easy.
RC#6 Female White 31 2010 NP Yes Private
Practice
No I work in a small rural town and it has taken time to establish my practice so I am still working full time so I practice out of hours. I
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
96 Code Gender Ethnicity Age Year of
Registration
Province Employed as RC?
Where do you work?
Do you supplement your income?
Doing what?
am able to make some money off it but not enough to survive.
RC#5 Female White 52 2007 GP No Teaching Yes I have a few clients in mining companies
here through their employee wellness programme but it’s not enough for me to leave teaching.
RC#4 Female Black 31 2012 NW No Unemployed Since 2012 I have been jobless. I cannot
stick to this position of RC anymore it is too difficult. So I am just applying for any job.
RC#3 Female White 35 2015 GP Yes Private
Practice
Yes I am working as a cashier at Shoprite.
RC#2 Male White 33 2010 KZN Yes Private
Practice
No I have a joint practice with a psychologist in the area so I have never had a problem in getting fulltime work as a RC. I also work a significant amount of corporate hours doing employee wellness.
RC#1 Female Coloured 53 2008 WC No Private
Practice
Yes I've limped along doing part time counselling in a very poor area in Cape Town, at my home but I have another job as a bookkeeper.
Stellenbosch University https://scholar.sun.ac.za
97 4.7 Research Objective Three: Investigating the realities and challenges for training
RCs
4.7.1 Research Design
As previously discussed survey research was employed to explore the realities and challenges of training RCs. Throughout the rest of this dissertation this survey will be referred to as Survey Two: Realities and challenges for training RCs. I requested the participation of academic staff in both public and private HEIs who considered themselves to have a view on the realities and challenges for training RCs. This meant that participants were from institutions that both offered and did not offer BPsych training.
4.7.2 Instrument Design and Development
I designed the instrument for this research question attentive to the recommendations discussed in 4.4.3 namely:
• Ensuring that items in the survey could be easily understood (Visser et al., 2000);
• Ensuring that items were unambiguous (Graesser et al., 2006; Groves et al., 2004), and,
• Ensuring that the survey was designed in such a way that the order in which items appeared made sense (Visser et al., 2000).
After the initial design the three stages of testing proposed by de Leeuw et al. (2008) were employed to enhance survey validity as discussed earlier in this chapter.
4.7.3 The Final Instrument
The final survey had three sections and consisted of 38 questions. Of these items eight were closed questions, 27 were open-ended questions and three were multiple choice questions that required the respondent to select from a pre-set range of answers.
The first section included details about the institution the participant was from, department the participant worked for and the position they held within the department.
Participants were also requested to indicate if their institution trained RCs. The second section of the survey was dependent on whether the participant’s institution was training or not training RCs. If the participant indicated that their institution offered BPsych (RC) training they were directed to a section that addressed the realities and challenges of training RCs.
98 Items included:
• The route the institution offered to become a RC
• Minimum entrance requirements
• Motivation for offering training
• Key challenges to offering this training
• The institutions understanding of the role of the RC
• The perceived adequacy of training relative to scope of practice of the RC
• Key strengths and weaknesses in the curriculum
• The role of the practicum
• Key experiences that stood out relating to training RCs
• Where graduates end up working
• The role of training in building the RCs sense of professional identity
Those who were not training RCs were directed to items that related to this, including:
• Whether the institution had been trying to get approval to train RCs
• Key challenges in gaining approval
• Whether the institution used to offer training and if so why they no longer offered this training
• Why the institution had opted not to train RCs
The third section applied to all participants and addressed:
• To what extent participants felt the profession, the public and RCs had embraced the role
• Unique challenges for RCs
99
• Provision for RCs in the marketplace
Finally, participants were asked they would like to add anything they felt would enhance the visibility of the RC in South Africa.
The survey took on average 15 minutes to complete which was well within what was considered a reasonable length for a survey (Czaja & Blair, 2005; Dillman, 2007). It should be noted that this survey was designed in a generalised mode (de Leeuw et al., 2008) so that in the implementation phase it could be administered either in an online survey mode or in a structured interview mode (Balden cited in de Leeuw et al., 2008). This mixed method mode was first employed by Hochstim (cited in de Leeuw et al., 2008), who suggested that mixed mode surveys were recommended when a high response was desirable. Siemiatychy (cited in de Leeuw et al., 2008) and Dillman et al. (cited in de Leeuw et al., 2008) also found that this mixed mode increased response rate. A concerted effort was made to reduce non-response error in this way. Offering the two different modes built “goodwill and improved the attitude toward survey taking” (de Leeuw et al., 2008, p. 300). It has also been reported to reduce under coverage of those who may opt not to participate in a survey either because they did not have web access or because surveys were not the participants preferred mode of participation in research (Czaja & Blair, 2005). See Appendix E for the final training realities survey.
4.7.4 Sampling and Data Collection
Non-probability purposive sampling was used to recruit a set of “information rich participants” to participate in the study (Nelson & Prilleltensky, 2010, p. 289). This type of sampling allowed participants to be sampled with the research goals in mind. In terms of Section 16 of the Health Professions Act, 1974 (Act 56 of 1974), the Professional Board for Psychology (HPCSA) has been mandated to “set the minimum standards of education and training for registration” (HPCSA, 2016a), and a list of HEIs who offered professional training programmes for registration with the HPCSA in South Africa was available from the HPCSA website (HPCSA, 2016b). The contact details of the various Heads of Department (HOD) from each of the HEIs were provided in the list (HPCSA, 2016b). A total of 23 HEIs are currently accredited by the HPCSA, Professional Board for Psychology to offer professional training in Psychology including: MA/MSocSci Counselling/Clinical/Industrial/Research Psychology, MA/MEd Educational Psychology Industrial Psychology and the BPsych (RC/Psychometry) training (HPCSA, 2016b).
100 At the time of the study, 9 institutions were accredited to run BPsych (RC) training. Table 4-10 lists the institutions offering BPsych (RC) training.
Table 4-10 HEIs currently offering the BPsych (RC) Training
HEIs BPsych (RC) training
Cornerstone Institution Bachelor of Arts in Psychology (Hons) - BPsych Equivalent (RC) Programme Midrand Graduate Institute5 BPsych (RC) degree
Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU)
BPsych (RC) degree North West University (Vaal Triangle
Campus)
BPsych (RC) degree The South African College of Applied
Psychology
BPsych (RC) degree; and Bachelor of Social Science Honours (Psychology) - BPsych Equivalent (RC) Programme
University of Limpopo BPsych (RC) degree
University of the Free State BPsych Equivalent (RC) Programme
University of Venda BPsych (RC) degree
Walter Sisulu University BPsych (RC) degree
Non-probability purposive sampling was employed to create the sampling pool. An email invitation was sent to the Head of Department (HOD) from each of the 23 institutions (HPCSA, 2016b). The purpose for including all 23 accredited institutions is that this section of the study sought to explore the realities and challenges for training RCs. The email invited the HOD of the department of psychology to participate in the study (See Appendix F). HOD’s were asked to indicate their willingness to participate in the study by either completing the online survey or by completing the survey during an interview. A total of 13 HOD’s/Academic staff involved in professional training indicated their willingness to participate in the study yielding a
5 Although in 2017 MGI are no longer offering BPsych (RC) training, they are included in this list because at the time of the study they were still in the process of making a decision about whether they would continue offering the programme (Personal Communication, Nina Du Plessis, 16th July 2016).
101 response rate of 56.5% which is above the rates typically expected (Mellin, Hunt, & Nichols, 2011). Of the 13, 11 participants opted to complete the online survey and two participants indicated their willingness to participate in the structured interview. Participants who indicated their willingness to participate in the online survey were sent the web link in an email. The participants clicked on the link which directed them to the survey. The survey began with an informed consent page which outlined:
• The purpose of the survey and how long the survey would take;
• That no potential risks and discomforts were envisaged from participation in the study;
• That participation in the study was voluntary;
• That participants could choose to withdraw at any time and were under no obligation to complete the survey;
• That the answers supplied in the survey would be collected anonymously;
• That confidentiality of the research records and data collected would be maintained and no attempts would be made to identify respondents without their signed consent;
• That all original data would be destroyed once the study was complete.
• That if they would like to receive a report of the main findings they should provide their email address; and
• That all email addresses would be extracted from the datasheet before analysis and stored separately.
Participants were advised that by clicking on the button to start the survey they were indicating that they consented to participating in the survey. As was previously mentioned Survey Monkey only allowed one response from an IP address entirely eliminating the risk of multiple contribution to the study by the same participants.
For the two participants who indicated they would prefer to be interviewed, interviews were set up at a time that was convenient for the participant. One of the interviews was conducted face to face and one was conducted telephonically. Before the interview commenced the participant was presented with an informed consent form (See Appendix D). I went through
102 the informed consent form with the participant and provided an opportunity for the participant to ask any questions they may want answered. Once the informed consent form had been signed the interview then commenced. The interviews were recorded using a smart voice recorder and took 40 minutes to complete. The interviews were transcribed verbatim and then manually input into Survey Monkey so that they could be analysed with the rest of the data collected.
Participants who were involved in the second survey were academic faculty directly involved in the training of RCs or academic faculty who were not directly involved in the training of RCs. These participants were included in order to gain a fuller perspective on the perceived realities and challenges for training RCs from institutions who had selected to not provide the BPsych (RC) training. Thirteen institutions participated in the survey. Three were private HEIs and the other 10 were public universities. Seven of the institutions were not offering BPsych (RC) training and six were BPsych (RC) training providers. The training profile of the academics who participated in the research included eight HOD’s; four Senior Lecturers; and one Professor. There was just one academic faculty member who participated in the survey per Higher Educational Institution.