Individual interviews

Individual interviews were conducted with the teachers, students and principals at the different schools, as well as with the school facilitators. Individual interviews are one of the main forms of data collection in qualitative research. They are a flexible and adaptable way of exploring issues with individuals (Legard, Keegan, & Ward, 2003; Robson, 2011). They can be regarded as a “conversation”, but the difference is that the aim of a qualitative interview is to purposefully construct knowledge about the social world through interacting with people. In this process, the

113

researcher is not a vehicle for transmitting knowledge but is rather a participant in co-creating knowledge and meaning (Legard, Keegan & Ward, 2003).

I also conducted face-to-face interviews with selected students as I wanted to explore their experiences with the HPS approach without them being influenced by others, as might have happened in the FGDs. I was able to probe for more information when they were not

forthcoming, and draw on data generated through the student FGDs and through my own experience with the project. In face-to-face interviews, it is possible to adapt the line of inquiry, probe for more depth if necessary, and clarify certain points from the perspective of both the interviewer and interviewee (Robson, 2011) especially if the phenomenon is complex, like HPS. Another advantage of the face-to-face interviews was that I could pick up on non-verbal cues and adapt the interview accordingly if I suspected that a student was not comfortable with the line of questioning or with the way a question was asked.

In addition, Kvale (2007, p. 14) posits that:

A well-conducted research interview may be a rare and enriching experience for the subject, who may obtain new insights into his or her life situation. The interaction may also be anxiety-provoking and evoke defence mechanisms in the interviewee as well as in the interviewer.

For example, in one interview, I noticed how uncomfortable the student was initially and discovered that the lead teacher who had recruited him had not briefed him sufficiently. He admitted to me that he was anxious, thinking that he was going to be tested on HPS. However, once I had explained the purpose of the research and the interview, he relaxed. In fact, the interview allowed him to reflect on his personal growth since the start of his involvement with HPS.

In qualitative research, interviews can be structured, semi-structured or unstructured. Using an interview guide, I chose to conduct semi-structured interviews as I wanted certain questions answered – such as what the facilitators and barriers were to HPS implementation, without being directive. Instead, I probed further if answers were not forthcoming. A semi-structured interview uses an interview guide that lists the topics to be covered, with some questions and probes that are not set in stone but rather depend on the flow of the interview, which will be different from

114

interview to interview. I wanted my interviews to be more of a conversation than an

interrogation, and therefore structured interviews were not suitable. A structured interview has questions that are predetermined and usually in a set order, although the questions can be open- ended – a characteristic that was also not suited for this study. In this type of interview, the interviewer lets the conversation develop freely where there is a general interest in a particular issue but there are no particular questions that need to be answered (Robson, 2011).

Individual interviews were also conducted with the school facilitators, and these took place when and where it was most convenient for them. The first one took place in my office, the second one at my home, and the third at the school facilitator’s home. Although all three interviews were in different locations, there was no difference in the way that the participants responded in that they spoke freely about their experiences and perceptions. They were relaxed and open to the

questions, which I attributed to our close working relationship on the project and their interest in the research being similar to the purpose of my research.

All interviews lasted approximately one hour. All the interviews with the teachers, students and principals took place at the respective schools except for one interview with a lead HPS teacher. This interview took place in my office as the teacher was on campus at the time and therefore it was convenient for both of us. All the interviews at the schools took place after school hours except for three – one with an HPS teacher, one with a VP, and one with a principal – which took place during school hours. However, there was no difference in the way that the participants responded or how relaxed they were. Only one lead teacher did not seem to be comfortable but, from my experience of working with her, I knew she was juggling many things at the same time, which was typical of her personality.

An interview guide was designed but, after some initial general questions, I did not follow it strictly and let the conversation flow in the direction that the interviewee was taking as

digressions can also lead to interesting and sometimes unexpected knowledge (Dicicco-Bloom & Crabtree, 2006), thus broadening the scope of my inquiry. However, when I felt that the

interview was moving off the topic I would steer the conversation back to the topic again. As the  

115

interviews progressed and I became more comfortable with my ability to gather the information that was necessary for my research, I relied less and less on the guide.

4.6.3 Observations

Data were also generated through observations, the main purpose being triangulation with other data collected in this study. Gibson and Brown (2009) posit that, as the data for the observation is being generated, the researcher has to consider the significance of that data for the research. This can be done by comparing that data to other data collected for the research.

I specifically observed actual interventions that took place; the physical surroundings of the school; different relationships and interactions in the schools generally; and the way the schools functioned. In addition, I sat in on all the UWC team’s meetings, and was present for various HPS activities, all of which provided opportunities for observations. I also observed meetings between the school facilitators and the HPS committee at two of the schools. As recommended by Neuman (1997), I endeavoured to pay attention to what was going on at the schools through careful observation in order to capture the physical surroundings and also the “core of social life” (Neuman, 1997, p. 361). I observed the people, their actions and interactions (Gibson & Brown, 2009) not only in the schools but outside the schools as well, when opportunities arose, such as at the student leadership camps.

I made notes of my observations after each data collection episode. Apart from describing what I had observed, I also reflected on the reasons behind my observations. This data enhanced my understanding of the contextual factors that influenced HPS implementation. Ultimately “why things happened as they did” became more explicit.

4.6.4 Documentary review

Documentary review was an additional method used for data collection. Documents can be useful sources of information for qualitative research (Kelly, 2006) and this aspect was

particularly useful for verifying the data that was generated by the other methods that were used in this study (Gibson & Brown, 2009). Information was gathered from the minutes of the UWC

116

team meetings (including reflections on activities); workshop notes; school facilitators’ notes; HPS committee meetings; and school improvement plans. Keeping the research objectives in mind, the documentary review encompassed the start-up process; resultant structures; plans; and interventions that occurred subsequent to the introduction of the project. The data collected through the documentary review aided in the description of the HPS activities as the operational aspects of the project were all documented. I regarded this as important as I realised that the participants could not possibly remember the details of everything that had transpired over the preceding two and a half years. The notes from the UWC team were particularly useful during the analysis process as a form of triangulation with the team’s FGDs and the school facilitators’ interviews.