Data Collection

Eighteen semi-structured, intensive interviews were conducted, each lasting one to one and a half hours. At the beginning of the interview, the consent form (See Appendix D) was reviewed and signed (if participant did not do this ahead of time) and then demographic information was collected on a facesheet (See Appendix E). This allowed me to have certain aspects of the participants’ experiences recorded so that I could refer to them during the interview process and also utilize them as a means of comparison during analysis. A general interview guide with open-ended questions was used (See Appendix G). The prompts in this guide were informed by the literature review. As Lofland et al. (2006) suggest, the interview guide was utilized in a flexible format. The interview prompts were reminders of topics of discussion, allowing the conversation to take a natural flow, varying somewhat from interview to interview. I began the interview by telling participants the purpose of the interview would be for them to describe the story of the practicum and how their experience influenced them and their social work practice and perspectives, highlighting specific experiences they had along the way. I encouraged them to share both the positive and negative perceptions and related experiences. Interviews were recorded and, later, transcribed by me or by a research assistant10_.

A complete interview guide is available in Appendix G and is based on the following information. First participants were asked to talk about their motivations for study abroad and the process they went through in preparation for their international field practicum. Next they were

10 _{Research assistants were not given names of participants and signed a required form to keep information}

confidential.

64

asked to describe significant experiences during their practicum experience. After responding in an open ended manner, they were asked to discuss the following: language issues, specifics regarding their internship experience, supervision, feelings of being alike or different than the dominant population, and any significant relationships and friendships built in the community they studied. They were asked to also discuss any missing components or weaknesses they felt existed in their program or personal experience. Then they were asked to describe their transition home and any related experiences that were significant to them.

After participants described their international experience and any related perceptions or feelings, they were asked how they felt these experiences influenced their personal and

professional development, including career goals, practice approaches, and worldviews. If they had not already explored this area, they were asked to discuss how their experiences influenced their perspective of social work, cross-cultural and international social work, aid and

development. To allow participants to further explore the outcomes of their international practicum, they were asked how they felt their practice would be different if they had not had this study abroad experience.

Participants were prompted to explore any regrets or changes they would have made if given the opportunity to do another practicum. Related to this, they were asked if there were any aspects of their international practicum that they felt could have been arranged differently in order to have been better prepared for their social work practice. In conclusion, they were asked to be a “consultant” for the development of future study abroad programs through giving their perspectives on what experiences or components they felt were important to include in such experiences and/or if there was any other information they felt would be beneficial for the development of such programs.

After sixteen interviews, the data had become saturated, meaning the themes discovered through the participants’ stories were becoming repetitive. The information received through the interview was not providing any new information or further insight into the study (Cresswell, 2007). However, two more interviews were conducted with participants with varied

demographic information, which added more diversity and further depth to the study11_{. This} resulted in eighteen total interviews.

3.4.6 Data Analysis

Lofland et al.’s (2006) methods were utilized for data analysis. Relevant field notes were recorded immediately after the interview in order to record impressions and analytical ideas. This process contributed to the development and refinement of further questions to be asked in future interviews. Analysis of the first interviews also contributed to the addition of a new prompt related to how the internship experiences impacted participants’ views of cross-cultural and/or international social work practice. I did not explicitly use this prompt in the first four interviews, but all of the participants discussed at least one way their experiences impacted their cross- cultural or international worldviews and/or practice approaches. By the fifth interview, I began to use this prompt as it not only naturally fit into the flow of the interviews, but also directly related to the critical, anti-oppressive theoretical framework of the study and allowed the participants the opportunity to explicitly articulate their views of international and cross-cultural practice.

This process of constant comparison also helped me to develop initial codes, and to see that the data was saturated, which Creswell (2007) describes as “looking (and interviewing) until the new information obtained does not provide further insight into the category” (p. 160).

Transcribed interviews were inputted into Atlas.ti computer software, which was utilized as a

11 _{One was a male who had studied in Canada, which contributed to more gender diversity and experience in a}

developed country. The other had the unique experiences of now living and practicing social work in the country of her placement.

66

platform for organizing of the data. Then data was interpreted through open or initial coding, by looking for major categories. These categories included: experiences that participants had during their study abroad program, outcomes of their experiences, and suggestions for future

development of programs. I then went through a process of focused coding, which Lofland et al. (2006) describe as building on initial coding by “beginning after the initial coding is well under way and has accumulated; by using a selected number of expanding or more analytically interesting initial codes to knit together larger chucks of data; and by using these expanding materials as the basis for asking more focused and analytical questions” (p. 201). These focused codes developed into the analysis of the data.

In combination with coding, Lofland et al.’s (2006) strategy of memoing was also utilized to make note of ideas regarding themes based on the perspectives of the participants, overall connections and other ideas to help assist in the methodological process and analysis. This began as memos and further developed into the analytical themes, written in longer form. These notes contributed to the completed analysis.

Relevant outliers were also analyzed to look for experiences unique to participants in order to pay attention to any contradictory patterns. This process is consistent with Corbin and Strauss’s (2008) concept of “negative case.” Outliers were compared and contrasted to common themes identified and utilized, which helped to both confirm emerging patterns, while bringing awareness of any exceptions to common themes.

Member checking was utilized in order to validate the accuracy and credibility of the interpretation of each interview (Creswell, 2007; Lofland et al., 2006). A summary of the interpretation of each interview was shared with the participants so they could give any further clarity or feedback. After the interviews were transcribed, but before coding was completed, a

summary of each participant’s interview was emailed to them, asking them to respond to correct any inaccuracies in this initial summary and interpretation. If they did not respond back after the initial email, the email was resent, stating that if I did not hear back from them, the information was assumed to be accurate. The majority of the feedback received noted the interpretation was accurate; any inaccurate information was corrected based on participant feedback. Next, human subjects and related ethical issues are discussed.