Data collection methods

Three different approaches were used for data collection in order to increase the efficacy of the project. The data collection methods were selected to fit the purpose of the research: methods which seemed most appropriate for the nature and essence of the research and answered the research questions and aims. The three approaches used in the process are: student performances, questionnaires and interviews. The main source of data collection was observation of the classroom theatre activities; the other two sources of data supplemented the research.

Student performances

The primary source of data collection for the research was student performances and improvisations. This was the primary method of data collection and production. The dialogues on cultural differences and perceptions were all generated as a result of students’ performances. The immediacy of these performances showed us how students engaged with the text. Every activity in each session was followed by a feedback round, and a final feedback round was conducted at the end of each session in both schools.

Pre-Performance Interviews

The format of the interviews was semi-structured and the motivation behind the interviews was to collect descriptive data about different aspects of the students’ life. At least 20-25 open- ended questions were asked. Participants were asked about: family life, religion, political views, views on Islam, basic information such as their age and their school. Some questions were asked about theatre which resulted in questions on Faust. Each interview lasted for at least half an hour. A semi-structured, descriptive interview approach was used to elicit responses which would either disprove or confirm findings on the students’ information. The main reason for conducting interviews was to ascertain the interest of the students in the project and their comfort level with the subject matter being discussed in the study.

Interviews were also used as a way to collect students’ background information with regards to the text and general life-style. This approach is used commonly within qualitative research where interviews can serve as an important primary or secondary source of information. Although there are several different kinds of interview design, the purpose of these interviews was to supplement the data gathered through performances. Some of the

strengths of standardized, open-ended interviews, according to Cohen, Manion and Morrison, are that they can increase ‘comparability of responses; data are complete for each person on the topics addressed in the interview.’ Such a style of interview also ‘reduces…bias when several interviewers are used [and] permits decision makers to see and review the instrumentation used in the evaluation.’78 _{The weaknesses pointed out by Cohen, Manion and} Morrison are that interviews pose ‘little flexibility…; standardized wording…may constrain and limit…relevance of questions and answers’.79 _{Since interviews were not the primary source} of data collection, any weaknesses were overcome by the fact that other sources of data collection were employed. A sample of interview questions is attached in the appendix.

Post-performance Questionnaires

Questionnaires or surveys were used as the third form of data-collection at the end of the project. The main aim of the questionnaires was to collect the immediate impressions of the students on the whole project. Before the end of the last rehearsal, the class teachers had informed me that the maximum time each student would spend on a questionnaire would be no longer than 2-4 minutes. Hence, I was asked to keep the questionnaires extremely short and succinct. The brief and immediate responses of the students supplemented the data generated during the feedback round of each session. For the questionnaires, a mix of a dichotomous and multiple-choice question approach was used. There were a total number of 8-10 questions. Questionnaires were used as a means of confirming or adding any information about the students’ responses towards the text and performances. However, the final performances and students’ involvement in the classroom was more telling of their attitudes towards the text. A sample of questionnaires is attached in the appendix.

Overcoming obstacles

There were several anticipated problems regarding the methods chosen. The first and foremost problem was regarding the language of the text. The language used in the text is extremely difficult and complicated, and the ideas can be quite complex and philosophical, especially for secondary-school students. Hence, safeguarding the integrity of the text was also important for the project since it meant not reducing the value and meaning of the text to mere social

78_{Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion and Keith Morison, Research Methods in Education, 8}th _{edn (UK: Taylor} and Francis), p.271

constructions. I tried to overcome this problem by first interpreting the text myself, discovering key themes in it and then creating activities which focused on the themes within the text, so that the students could ease into the whole process.

Secondly, another problem was the end of school year disturbances and school holidays which affected the timings of the class and therefore the students’ attendance. This meant that the data collected would not be smooth or from a consistent group. For instance, some of the students were absent for a series of classes. During the interview stages as well, two students requested not to be interviewed which affected the information I collected on all students. While I was not able to have a fixed number of students for all the sessions, the absence of certain students did not affect the analysis drastically.

Thirdly, I was unsure how much the teachers would actually cooperate with the project; I anticipated they would not be available for the sessions or their methods of teaching might conflict with those I had chosen for my study. However, this did not pose a problem as I had the full cooperation of the class teachers throughout.