Focus group discussions (FGDs)

In addition to reviewing written sources, conducting interviews and participant observation, I also held two FGDs. Focus groups are “a form of group interview which consists of several participants and a moderator” (Bryman, 2008:474). FGDs are also considered as being complementary to semi-structured interviews and other qualitative methods (Denzin and Lincoln, 2011; Mason, 2002). Therefore this method was chosen to provide more evidence to support the data gathered from

other methods, particularly the interviews. One of the strengths of FGDs is that, whilst researchers may be reluctant to point out contradictions in a conventional interview, participants will argue and challenge each other’s opinions in a group discussion, as they provide “the opportunity of allowing people to probe each other’s reasons for holding a certain view” (Bryman, 2008:348). As I found discrepancies in the information given by interviewees on the private and public dimensions of dakwah among different levels of the Tarbiyah movement/PKS dakwah community, this research method helped me to ‘fill in the gaps’. Therefore data gathered from the FGDs were useful to triangulate (clarify, strengthen, compare, and contrast) the data collected from other methods (see also section 3.3 above). For example, the FGDs helped me clarify the culture of polygamy and the ideology of ‘enemies of Islam’/ghazwul fikri among the Tarbiyah activists. These issues were not often mentioned during the interviews and observations. Using FGDs to triangulate my research enabled me “to see the same thing from different perspectives and thus be able to confirm or challenge the findings of one method with those of another” (Bell, 2005:116).

I identified and recruited participants purposively for the group sessions based on either their level of experience in Liqo sessions or their familiarity with my research topic. The participants had come from a variety of different Islamic organisations (The Muhammadiyah, the NU, and the Tarbiyah movement) and covered an age range of 30-45 years of age. Using this research method, I allowed each participant in a group session to discuss their own views and their reasons for holding them. I provided some direction to the discussion as the researcher, and the participants’

emphasised issues that they felt were significant to my main research topic. This

method thus helped me to gather more realistic and accurate views of what the participants thought about the Liqo’s understanding and practice of dakwah.

I arranged two FGDs in different locations, with participants from different backgrounds. The first was at my home university – the University of Muhammadiyah of Prof. Dr. HAMKA (UHAMKA) – in Jakarta with the main aim being to generate outsider perspectives on the dakwah of the Tarbiyah movement. I invited a mixture of scholars, University lecturers, NGO activists and one senior Tarbiyah activist. I decided to invite this senior Liqo activist as he was also a researcher on Islam and Middle Eastern issues and had a doctoral study background.

In addition, I thought that it would be useful to invite participants that were senior lecturers, and thus had well established interactions with the dakwah community of the PKS that had been formed over a period of time. Fifteen participants attended, most of who were lecturers at UHAMKA, and the majority were Muhammadiyah activists, while the rest of the group came from different backgrounds of Islamic activism, comprising the NU (1 participant), PERSIS (2 participants), and PKS (1 participant).

The discussion was moderated by a young lecturer who was a Muhammadiyah activist, and he was involved in a number of the discussions on Islamism. He started the discussion with a short introduction about the dakwah of the PKS in Indonesia, and then gave the first speaker time to talk about his opinions on the Liqo-dakwah of the PKS. The first speaker was a senior dakwah activist of the PKS, but he preferred to see himself as an academic. During the discussion, all the participants projected a spirit of knowledge and enthusiasm, sharing their knowledge about the Liqo of the PKS dakwah and their experiences of interactions with Liqo-PKS activists. They

also raised questions and comments on their dakwah concepts and practices, and I was very aware of the sensitivity of some of the issues raised, such as the widespread practice of polygamy among the dakwah community of the PKS and their rigid social interactions with the wider society (see Chapter 6).

The second FGD was conducted in Tangerang – the closest neighbouring city to Jakarta. In order to fill in the gaps that existed in the previous discussion, whose audience was dominated by male contributors, I invited six female activists only to this focus group, all from the lower Liqo level. The core aim of this second FGD was to generate insider perspectives/perceptions and their lived experiences of joining the Liqo. I expected that they would be able to share their opinions and feelings on their lived religion before and after joining the weekly Liqo sessions. I thus decided to use this group session to focus more on a particular issue. As Bryman (2008) explains, there are two types of focus group discussion – the group interview, which often spans a number of topics; and the focus group, which generally emphasises single themes. Unlike the first FGD, which spanned a number of research themes concerning the Liqo’s conception and practice of dakwah, this FGD focused solely on how joining the weekly Liqo sessions affected the participants’ lived religious experiences, opinions and feelings.

Although I had only had three months of interaction with the participants, they agreed to take part in the discussion after I explained my research project in detail verbally and via the Participant Information Sheet (see Appendix B). The discussion was arranged in a more relaxed and informal way than for the first focus group, with the participants being asked from the beginning to talk about their personal, religious and social life before and after joining the Liqo of the PKS. As they started

to express their feelings and views, I then made sure to let the discussion flow as much as possible without making any unnecessary interruptions.

I asked the participants at the beginning to try to talk straightforwardly on the topic, and reminded them of this during the discussion were possible. A small number of the participants expressed their opinions on the media coverage of the PKS or on certain election issues relating to the PKS, before sharing their experiences and perceptions of their weekly Liqo. They highlighted that the Liqo of the PKS had transformed their perspectives on Islam and its practice within their society and, accordingly, had transformed the way that they behave (see Chapters 4, 5 and 6).

The maturity of participants, both in terms of their involvement in the Liqo and their academic experience came through in their discussion of the dakwah practice of the PKS through their subjective opinions and experiences. I made an audio recording of the whole discussion, including the presentation and question-and-answer sessions.⁹³

Methodological and practical issues both emerged during the data collection using the methods above, and I learnt two key lessons. Firstly, it is difficult to control the data given by respondents during fieldwork, particularly data collected through observation and discussion. However, I could not judge whether some data was insignificant or irrelevant to my research during the data collection, as relevant data was sometimes only revealed during the analysis stage. Thus, what I classified as significant during the analysis was sometimes different from my assumptions about what would be significant. Secondly, I learnt that it is hard to stick to schedules in

93 Like the recordings of the interviews, this recording was transcribed and later coded and analysed based mainly upon my key research themes (see Section 3.5).

this type of research, as the influence that the participants and the field site have on undertaking the research cannot be accurately predicted. Nevertheless, the schedule was still manageable when I restricted the interviews to a maximum of two per day, leaving it more flexible by having a good interval between the two interviews, which also allowed for the fact that working in the very busy and hot climate of Jakarta was very tiring.