DATA COLLECTION

The overarching research question directed this study to explore classroom teacher, school-based administrator, and system-based administrator perceptions of ASA succession practices. The data collected for this study exploring the perceptions of these ASA employees was undertaken in two phases. Phase One involved collecting data via an online survey. Phase Two involved collecting data via a series of semi- structured interviews.

3.6.1 Phase One: Online Survey

Surveys can take a number of different forms, with closed-ended, open-ended and a mixture of both common types, with closed-ended surveys providing quantitative or numerical data, and open-ended surveys providing qualitative or text information. Zohrabi (2013, p. 255) however, concludes that “it is better that any questionnaire include both closed-ended and open-ended questions to complement each other”. Such advantages are well documented: efficiency of collecting data on a large-scale basis; ability to be sent simultaneously to large numbers of people; anonymity allows respondents to share information more easily; time efficient as a data collection method; similarity of questions administered simultaneously to a large number of people provides data that is more identical, correct and standard; cost efficiency; and ease of data analysis for closed-ended questionnaires. Commonly noted disadvantages also exist, however, including the following: sometimes answers are inaccurate or questionable; potential for low return rates; ambiguity of some questions; and the potential for wording of questions to cause misunderstandings (Zohrabi, 2013). The survey questionnaire used in this study was adapted from previous research undertaken by Tony d’Arbon, Patrick Duignan, Deirdre Duncan, Jack Dwyer and Kim-Maree Goodwin at the Australian Catholic University. d’Arbon et al. (2001) developed their questionnaire after a thorough review of the literature was

undertaken, with a number of relevant stakeholder groups also consulted. Importantly, its initial development was also guided by four additional criteria. Firstly, it was important that it cover the concerns of aspiring principals with regard to succession

planning. Secondly, its structure needed to be consistent with the general principles of questionnaire development and be internally consistent. Thirdly, individual items within it must be sensitive to the differing levels of concern expressed by respondents. Lastly, ease of administration and considerations of statistical analysis were

considered.

This d’Arbon et al. (2001) survey was adapted for use in an ASA education context, after consultation with people familiar with this educational setting. As noted below, this initial survey was then piloted. Responses from the pilot study resulted in further adaptations to the survey to ensure it was respondent appropriate.

3.6.1.2 The Online Survey: Pilot Study

Briggs, Coleman and Morrison (2012, p. 152) write “The single most effective strategy to minimise problems is to make sure you pilot your instruments”. Draft surveys were piloted with a small group of people who had a good understanding of the three hierarchical levels considered in this study in order to test its reliability and validity. Current classroom teachers, current school leaders, former principals and regional (Conference) education directors were all consulted in an effort to test and modify the draft survey so as to identify any potential problems in its administration. The pilot study resulted in the revision of a number of the principal perception items found in questions nine and ten of the survey, as well as identifying structural issues and a much-needed correction to the layout of the Likert scale being made. These changes made the instrument more user-friendly, and the feedback aided in providing a more cohesive, concise instrument. The final survey was then ready for distribution to ASA employees via email, along with instructions on its completion and statements regarding the guarantee of anonymity (Appendix Items C, D).

3.6.1.3 The Online Survey: Content

The content of the online survey was divided into 6 dimensions. These are covered below:

Dimension 1 (Demographics) The region (Conference) the respondent works within;

respondents’ current working position; How long respondents have held this position; The highest qualification held by respondents; Gender; Age category.

Dimension 2 (Career Aspirations) Respondents’ career aspirations (5 Items). Dimension 3 (Perceptions of ASA School Leadership – Reasons NOT TO apply)

The extent to which the listed perceptions would influence you NOT TO apply for a school leadership position within an ASA school (38 Items on a 4 point Likert scale).

Dimension 4 (Perceptions of ASA School Leadership – Reasons TO apply) The

extent to which the listed perceptions would influence you TO apply for a school leadership position within an ASA school (12 Items on a 4 point Likert scale).

Dimension 5 (Open-ended statements) The three most important factors that would

influence a decision NOT TO apply for a school leadership position in an ASA School.

Dimension 6 (Open-ended statements) The three most important factors that would

influence a decision TO apply for a school leadership position in an ASA School.

3.6.1.4 The Online Survey: Data Collection

The survey was distributed to ASA employees over the one-month period February 16 - March 13, 2015. This timeframe was chosen in order to minimise the disruption to educators as they embarked on their teaching year, and aimed to catch these respondents at a time when they would be settling into the rhythms of their school term. An email was sent which included an information letter with more detail regarding the purpose of the study, a link to the online survey (Survey Monkey; www.surveymonkey.com) and an invitation to participate in the research project. All emails were sent as blind copies, which allowed anonymity to be maintained.

Participants were informed that the survey would take 8-12 minutes of their time. 1173 emails were sent out in total, with 504 respondents completing the online survey, representing a 42.9% response rate.

3.6.2 Phase Two: Interviews

The focus of these interviews was to gather information on ASA employee

perceptions of both current and ideal succession practices. Interview respondents were purposefully selected based on the following criteria: age; hierarchical level; teaching

level; experience; and gender. This process of selection resulted in seventeen interviewees being selected for participation in this research study. The first step in the interview process was to make contact with those selected and gauge their willingness to be involved in this research study. This initial contact took place via email. With all selected participants willing to participate, dates, venues and times were then negotiated for the interviews to take place.

In preparing for the interviews, the researcher considered the overarching research question and identified that semi-structured interviews would be the most appropriate interview type for the second set of research sub-questions. This form of interview would allow the interviewee both time and scope to talk about their views and perceptions of succession practices, while allowing the interviewer to ask probing questions where appropriate in order to elicit further information, such as exploring content in more depth (elaborating) or asking for more detail relating to a response (clarifying) (Creswell, 2012).

In addition to a list of interview questions and probing questions being developed, a research information statement, interview participant consent letter, and interview protocol list, were also prepared in planning for these interviews (Appendix Items G, D1, E, F).

3.6.2.2 The Interviews: Content

All interviewees were asked five questions over the duration of the interview. Firstly, all interviewees were asked to share their experience or views of ‘succession’ within Adventist Schools Australia. This broad question allowed the interviewee to share their perceptions of succession from their lived experience. For each broad question a number of prompts were generated that could be used to solicit more information or seek clarification. Secondly, interviewees were asked from their perspectives, when thinking about current succession planning within ASA, what processes they currently saw as being in place. Thirdly, interviewees were asked what they thought succession planning within the ASA education system should look like. Fourthly, interviewees were asked whether they perceived that personal factors such as a balanced lifestyle, workload, family issues, preparedness for leadership or working in a faith-based

education system, for example, should impact on how they saw succession practices should be designed. Finally, interviewees were asked at the end of the interview if they had any other comments or thoughts on succession practices within the ASA education system that they wanted to make mention of at this point in time.

The full list of interview questions and associated prompt questions that could be asked if required can be found in the appendix (Appendix G). The purpose of these interviews was to collect data from three hierarchical levels on perceptions of ASA education system succession practices, both current and ideal.

3.6.2.3 The Interviews: Data Collection

All interviews took place within a three-month period between July and September of 2015. The interviews lasted for periods ranging from 23 minutes to 63 minutes in duration. The researcher travelled across both NSW and QLD for interviews that were conducted on site, and were typically either conducted in a classroom, often during a classroom teacher’s free period or lunchtime, or the office of the interviewee. Three phone interviews also took place to enable the possibility of interviewing where face- to-face interviews were not possible due to geographical distance or other factors. These semi-structured interviews followed a consistent procedure: Greet the

interviewee; outline the nature of this study and the purpose of the interview; clarify the topic under discussion; provide the format of the interview; leave time for the interviewee to read and consider, before signing, both the information statement and the informed consent form; assure confidentiality of information and highlight that the interview could be stopped at any time or questions declined to answer; provide some personal background of the interviewer; ask permission to commence recording the interview; start both audio recording and the interview.

The goal of the researcher was to have involvement through semi-structured questions, but probe for in-depth understanding. The semi-structured interview questions, and relevant prompts to be asked if required, are presented in Appendix G. The interviews typically consisted of four stages: (1) The informal or conversational stage that took place before the commencement of the official interview, (2) The presentation of the formal permission and information documentation and interview

purpose; (3) The semi-structured interview itself, and (4) The informal or conversational stage which took place after the completion of the interview.

The researcher completed an interview log directly after concluding each interview. The log contained details such as the interview location, date, respondent number, those parties present (in coded form), the time the interview commenced, the time the interview concluded, the device the interview was recorded on, and observations and reflections about the recently completed interview. The template used for the

interview log is presented in Appendix H.