Focus-group discussions are discussions run by researchers, as facilitators, and participants or respondents (Boddy, 2005), and these discussions are becoming increasingly popular in social science and humanities research for exploring what people believe or feel as well as why people behave the way they do (Rabiee, 2004). The main aim of a focus group discussion is “…to understand, and explain, the meanings, beliefs and cultures that influence the feelings, attitudes and behaviours of individuals” (Rabiee, 2004, p. 655). Thus, in this action research, a focus group discussion was also used to generate data in order to critically explore educators’ reflections on their practices of Agricultural Sciences Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement. It was from the focus group discussion that the in-depth and core implementation practices were critically and collectively discussed and debated. The active interaction between participants, in a language of their choice (English and isiZulu), allowed effective and efficient data generation for this research. Thus Lunt and Livingston (1996) assert that focus-group discussions are appropriate for exploring the depth and nuance of opinions regarding issues affecting individuals and for understanding different perspectives. I, and the educators, therefore conducted the focus group discussion twice at a school central to all the four participants.
104
Furthermore, both of the focus group discussion phases were allocated a forty-five (45) minute period, even though the second phase exceeded this and took about sixty (60) minutes due to intense discussion and active participation of all the participants. During the first phase, the educators (participants) were still in their learning stage; from the second phase it was evident from their inputs that they had transformed; as such, 45 minutes was not enough time for a discussion. The discussion did not affect or compromise their teaching time(s) because I first consulted then of a day where they will all be free and available even if we exceed the allocated time. Requesting the meetings in advance allowed them to schedule their timing properly and make arrangements, without any inconveniences. In addition, we all scheduled time during normal working hours so that those who don’t reside closer to their respective schools could be able to leave school on their normal school leaving time. The duration is in accordance with an assertion by Lunt and Livingston (1996) that a focus group discussion should be conducted for 45 to 90 minutes, and beyond that most groups become less productive due to fatigue. Primarily, exceeding the time becomes an imposition on participant time.
Cohen et al. (2011) further assert that a focus group discussion is structured around a set of carefully predetermined questions, in which in this action research they were based on the ten curricular archetypes. The discussion should be free-flowing as the participants’ comments stimulate and influence the thinking and sharing of others. Thus, as part of the transformation process, some participants found themselves changing their thoughts an d opinions during the discussion (Boddy, 2005). Cohen et al. (2011) also emphasise the issue of homogeneity levels amongst the participants, in order to avoid superiority and dominance during the focus group discussion. Thus, all of the participants were post level one (PL1), meaning that they were all at the same level.
Furthermore, Krueger (1998) emphasise the significance of questions that yield powerful information during focus group discussions. This includes avoiding the use of dichotomous questions that need a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer. Open ended questions like ‘what do you think/feel?’ questions, are best. Krueger also asserts that ‘think back’ questions should be used, in which participants are first taken back to their experiences and then moved forward to their future plans. Thus, the questions designed for the focus group discussions were based
105
on what educators have been doing; how they have been doing what they have been doing and are still doing; why are they are doing what they are doing; and with what are they using to do what they are doing. All the information taken from participants was also recorded using a smart-phone and later transcribed for accuracy and precision. This was done with participants’ permission and consent. Figure 3.4 below shows how and why the data were generated.
Figure 3.4 shows the three objectives of this study and the methods of data generation used to acquire information for each objective. It also shows the sources of data, the phases in which data were generated, as well as the rationale for the data generation plan for each objective of this study.
106 Figure 3.4: Data Generation Plan
107 3.6 Data analysis
According to Biggam (2011) data analysis is about organising the information, breaking it into manageable units, synthesising it and searching for patterns while discovering what is significant and what is to be learned. This is all done in order to decide what you, as a researcher, tell the readers. Thus, to make analysis of data easier, I made sure that the reflective activity, interview and focus group discussion questions reflected the main objectives and answered the research questions, in which these were aligned with the aim of this qualitative research which is to explore educators’ reflections on their practices of Agricultural Sciences Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement. This is accordance with an assertion by Cohen et al. (2011) that, qualitative data analysis is mainly about making sense of data based on the information given by the participants. The data also need to be classified or arranged into groups or classes based on common characteristics (Kothari, 2004). Thus, I distilled, from the participants’ reflections, the assertions, explanations and understanding of their practices and their perceptions of what and how they implement the curriculum (CAPS) based on their naturalistic framework.
This qualitative action research adopted a guided analysis which encompasses inductive and deductive approaches. See a book by Christiansen et al. (2010) entitled ‘Understanding research’, in which qualitative data analysis is clearly explained to be categorised into two approaches: the inductive and the deductive. Inductive approach includes the logic of reasoning proceeding from particular facts to a general conclusion, while deductive involves inferences from general principles and related to logical deduction. Including the two approaches (inductive and deductive) in a guided analysis is in line with a description by Dhunpath and Samuel (2009) that it (guided analysis) is characterised by a priori judgement and through interaction with data. Thus, I also consider that my initial observations and at the beginning of the research, were part of the data analysis process. The informal discussions I had with the participants at the beginning of this study, during the planning stages, were also recorded so as to ensure that no information was lost.
Moreover, the inductive approach was utilised by synthesising the raw data and searching for patterns in order to draw conclusions. Through the reflective activity, semi-structured interviews and the semi-structured focus group discussion, I was able to detect the patterns
108
and draw conclusions from the results found. Based on the results, I then induced (inductive approach) the results to be in line with the questions rooted on the curricular archetypes. Categories were then set and delineated into data needed for the deductive reasoning. Moreover, open coding was utilised; open coding is defined by Cohen et al. (2011) as the new label that a researcher attaches to a piece of text to describe and categorise the piece of text. Hence, I guided analysis was utilised to code participants’ responses in order to draw precise conclusions of this study. Conclusions were made after data reduction took place (Christiansen et al., 2010). The recorded data from the reflective activity, semi-structured interview, and focus group discussion was then reduced for the interest of data reduction. I then read the transcribed data and articulated the assertions in a language suitable for readers. Furthermore, the data lead me to establish themes or topics which assisted me to organise and group data into sets of topics.
On the other hand, transcribing data could be expensive and time consuming, especially to those researchers who employ people to transcribe data (Cohen et al., 2011). In addition, the scribe could also articulate the wording into his/her own word and that could cause misrepresentation of the results. Thus, I recorded the data using my own phone and transcribed the data myself in my own time. This allowed me to choose significant data directly from the original source as opposed to a mediated transcribed source. Through all this, ethical consideration was well recognised so as not to violate the participants’ rights and free will.
3.7 Ethical considerations
A fundamental aspect of any research, whether quantitative or qualitative, is the ethical consideration undertaken during the process (Babbie, 1990). Creswell (2009) states that it is of paramount importance that any research follow a certain ethical and moral principles. These principles should protect the rights of humans from any harm that might be caused by the research. Nkohla, Gxasheka, Lyu, Qin, and Tyasi (2015) also state that, even animal research should take into account the welfare of the animals involved the research. This is due to the fact that fear and discomfort may arise during the course of the research, thus animals should also be treated in a humane manner (Tyasi & Nkohla, 2015). Thus, I had to apply for an ethical clearance from the University of KwaZulu-Natal before the research
109
began. This has to be done because ethics put more emphasis to human and animal dignity (Cohen et al., 2007; Nkohla et al., 2015; Tyasi & Nkohla, 2015).
Furthermore, I also requested permission to conduct the research in writing from the Department of Basic Education (DoBE) through the Ingwavuma circuit manager and Umkhanyakude District Director (refer to Annexure B). The permission for this study to be conducted and access to the three selected schools was granted by the Head of Department, KwaZulu-Natal DoBE (see Annexure D). After being permitted by the DoBE to conduct the study, I then requested written permission in writing from the schools principals to work with their Agricultural Sciences educators. The permission was granted (see Annexure A). Lastly, I visited the educators and sincerely requested them to participate in the research. I verbally explained everything about the study and after they agreed, I issued each educator with a consent form which also explained their rights to confidentiality, anonymity and status as voluntary participants. Each participant signed the consent form shown in Annexure C. This was in accordance with an assertion by Babbie (1990) that it is the researcher’s responsibility to be granted permission to conduct his/her research and inform the participants about their rights. The participants have the right to privacy and confidentiality, thus the researcher should make it a point that participants are aware of such issues in order for them to provide the information confidently and with assurance on privacy.
Babbie (1990) together with Johnson and Christensen (2011) further states that in the concepts of informed consent, there should be ethical norms of voluntary participation and no harm to participants. Furthermore, the issue of benefits should be clearly understood by the participants in that there would be no financial benefits from the study and if they feel any discomfort, they were free to discontinue their participation at any given time.
In addition to the above, research conducted in an ethically sound manner enhances the trustworthiness and quality of the research (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). This is why, like many other professional studies conducted throughout the world, I had an obligation to adhere to strict ethical principles/standards. This study is aligned with the ethical principles employed
110
in any qualitative research, as it has respected autonomy, justice, informed consent, social value, validity and an independent ethical standard.
Moreover, the study received an ethical clearance certificate from the university of KwaZulu- Natal Humanities and Social Sciences Research Ethics Committee, after a proposal was developed and approved by the university, with the assistance of a supervisor (See Annexure E for the Ethical Clearance Certificate and all the terms and conditions of its validity). However, issues such as deception, where participants are not told that they are researchers and are sometimes promised of monetary benefits after the study, are a failure of ethical standards. Also, issues such as exposing the participants and the institutions they work in, are a barrier to ethical principles (Cohen et al., 2011). Thus, I first verbally explained the background, rationale and the objectives of the study. Also, the information generated will be kept by me and my supervisor for five years (then destroyed) at the Edgewood Campus Library, and will not be used without participants permission.