Interview Instruments

The interview method was preferred for the specific purpose of the researcher obtaining research relevant information from participants through face-to-face verbal interaction with individuals or groups. Kvale (1996) classifies the research interview as a specific professional form of conversational technique of getting information from participants. According to McMillan and Schumacher (1997), interviews are essentially vocal questionnaires that differ from other forms of inquiry in that they involve direct interaction between the interviewer and interviewee. In this study, the interview instruments were designed, pilot tested and administered by the researcher. Two

interview methods chosen for this research were the focus group and the semi-structured in-depth which are discussed in the next sections.

(i) Focus group interviews. The focus group method was chosen in this study

because it allows an in-depth exploration of a specific theme or topic so that meaning is jointly constructed by a carefully chosen small group (Bryman 2001). Usually the small group is purposively chosen because of their knowledge of the situation. According to Morgan ( 1 998), focus group interviews can provide more dynamic interactions and stimulating discussions between the researcher and group members and among group members than structured or semi-structured interviews. The technique allows

Chapter Five: Research design 87 remodelling of multifaceted interpretations of a phenomenon as participants probe each other for holding certain views. As Bryman (2001) argues:

Focus groups reflect the processes through which meaning is constructed in everyday life and to that extent, can be regarded as more naturalistic . . . it offers the researcher the opportunity to study the ways in which individuals make sense of a phenomenon and construct meaning around it (p. 338).

The researcher relaxes and passes control to the participants so that they freely bring out issues, challenging and revising each other's viewpoints. The present study employs the focus group technique for its ability to construct group knowledge and bring out

multifaceted interpretations of a phenomenon.

Morgan ( 1 998) suggests that the typical group size for focus group interviews should be 6 to 10 participants. Morgan, however, advises researchers to approach this issue with caution due to participants who do not turn up on the interview day and suggests that conscious over-recruiting would be a strategy worthy considering. When the topic is "involving, controversial or complex and when the gleaning of participants' personal accounts is a major goal", Morgan (1998, p. 75) however, suggests smaller groups of only three participants. In support, Fenton, Bryman and Deacon (1998), see a possibility of participants in very large groups forming a wall of silence over an issue they may know little about than small groups would react in a similar situation.

In this study and to minimize the negative effects of participants who do not turn up on the interview day, eight students per group of girls taking and not taking design and technology subjects would be randomly selected to participate in the focus groups. Since design and technology teachers, guidance and counselling teachers and girls' families groups were not likely to be big enough to have random sampling done, all members present would be asked to participate in the focus group interviews lasting approximately one hour.

The focus group interview schedules for girls taking and not taking design and technology subjects and that for parents had seven questions each while the teachers', principals' and education officers' interview schedules had nine questions each meant to give answers to questions two and three of the study'S questions. Pilot testing of the focus group questions was conducted on 28th November 2002 in Palmerston North, New Zealand with the five migrant Zimbabwean girls in year ten and eleven at high school who had been involved in the pilot testing of the student questionnaire. No problems in terms of set time and understanding of the questions were encountered and the

participants recommended that the focus group questions be used as they were. Table 5. 1 shows how the questions were matched to answer study questions.

Chapter Five: Research design 88

Table 5.1

How interview and questionnaire questions were matched to answer study questions Research question number Focus group questions and discussion themes

2. Reasons for design and - Influences on girls' subject selection (all questions in technology subjects appendices xxiii-xxvi, questions 3-9 in appendix xxii) choices by fourth form - School's role in subject selection (questions 2 and 7 in girls.

3. Reasons for fourth form girls' achievement or lack of achievement in design and technology subjects.

D&T = Design and technology

appendix xxiii; questions 2 and 4 in appendices xxiii and xxiv; question 4 in appendix xxvi).

- Career information and source (questions 2 and 7 in appendix xxiii; question 2 in appendix xxiv and xxv; question 7 in appendix xxvi).

- Effect of culture on subject choices (question 1 in appendices xxiv, xxv and xxvi).

- Why fewer girls take D&T subjects (all questions). - Perceptions of D&T subjects (question 3 in appendices

xxiii and xxvi; question 6 in appendices xxiv and xxv). - Problems faced by girls in D&T subjects (question 4 in appendix xxiii; question 8 in appendices xxiv and xxv) - Perceptions about girls taking engineering (question 4

in appendix xxiii; question 6 in appendices xxiv and xxv; question 3 in appendix xxvi).

- Effects of Ministry policies on D&T intake (question 9 in appendicesxxiv and xxv)

- Perceptions of D&T subjects (question 3 in appendices xxiii and xxvi; question 6 in appendices xxiv and xxv). - Perceptions about girls taking engineering (question 4

in appendix xxiii; question 6 in appendices xxiv and xxv; question 3 in appendix xxvi).

- Problems faced by girls in D&T subjects (question 4 in appendix xxiii; question 8 in appendices xxiv and xxv) - Why girls perform lowly in D&T subjects (all

questions)

- Effect of culture on subject achievement (question 1 in appendices xxiv, xxv and xxvi; question 2, 6, 8 and 9 in appendix xxii

Chapter Five: Research design 89

(ii) In-depth semi-structured interviews. Bryman (200 1 ) and Merriam ( 1 998) posit that unstructured and semi-structured interview questions are extremely prominent

data gathering methods in case studies as they generate more information than closed or structured ones. Questions on the semi-structured interview schedules serve as basic conversation tools for use in guiding the interview discussion so that the focus of the research is not lost. However, there is greater flexibility in the way the questions are asked and responded to as compared to structured interviews. The questions may not be asked following the order and wording in the schedule and responses allow explanations of phenomena understanding, events occurrence, patterns and their relationships and forms of behaviour (Bryman, 200 1 ) . Probes for evidence, elaboration, clarification,

attention and completion are employed now and then to elicit more supportive information and encourage participants to volunteer deeper meaning to detail when ambiguous responses to questions are given. Rubin and Rubin ( 1 995) argue that probing

is necessary to gain the necessary depth and dependability of the interview.

One of the most important skills that a researcher should develop is being able to establish rapport and trust with the respondents as this affects how much information the respondents are free to reveal (Bryman, 200 1 ). He suggests that to gain rapport and trust, the researcher's attitude should not be judgmental during the interview but to show that shelhe fully believed and appreciated the respondent's contributions and worth in a non­ hierarchical relationship. De Vaus ( 1 995) perceives that the most worthwhile activity for the researcher during in-depth interviews is to pay attention to meaning of messages spoken than mere words in the response.

Semi-structured interviewing was employed in this study for individual

respondents, including school principals and education officers (appendix xxv), on whom the focus group interview was not appropriate to use. Questions one, three and six in appendices xxiv and xxv were influenced by the need to understand the effects of gender on roles males and females played in Zimbabwean society across cultures as theorized in chapter three. Questions two, three, four, five, six, seven and eight opened up to variables in and out of the classroom affecting girls' choices of and achievement in design and technology subjects. Question nine was informed by the need to find how policy decisions by Ministry as theorized in chapter two, three and four have affected fourth form girls' decisions for taking or not taking design and technology subjects. Classroom observation was the next data collection method used in this study and it is discussed in the next section.

Chapter Five: Research design 90

5.3.3 Observation

Mertens ( 1 998) points out that qualitative researchers employ observation to record people's behaviours and activities as they naturally occur in the organisational setting. He maintains that observation usually offsets the gap between what participants may state in interviews and questionnaires with their actual behaviour. In this research, observation enabled me to see things first hand that participants themselves may not have been aware of or that they were unwilling to discuss. Observation aimed to uncover and add valuable information that the questionnaire and interviews could not obtain in order to answer research questions three and four.

Adler and Adler ( 1 985) split observation into three parts: participant, peripheral and complete. Participant observation involves the researcher as part of the group being studied, participating fully in the group activities to gain an insider perspective of the phenomenon under investigation. Adler and Adler, however, argue that complete participation in the core activities of the group may not be possible for the researcher when shelhe is engaged in short periods of time in the social setting as was the case with me in this study. In such instances peripheral observation is appropriate for the researcher to be part of the group only to the extent of understanding activities going on and

forming an accurate picture to answer research questions. I employed peripheral

observation because of the short period of time I had in each school (two weeks) and my partial involvement in the social group being studied. No specific observation schedule was used as the aim was to record as much detail on classroom behaviours and develop narrative accounts of the behaviour.

Two technical graphics lessons each lasting for two periods of 40 minutes at Riverdale and at Gemston high schools were observed. The criterion for choosing the classes for observation was determined by the gender mix of students at fourth form level in that particular subject. On the 1 9th January 2003 students at Gemston high school were observed learning and interacting in a lesson on the construction of polygons in technical graphics and design. At Riverdale high school students were observed learning and interacting in a lesson on the design process on the 6th March 2003 . I was able to see events as they occurred in mixed girls' and boys' technical graphics and design classrooms such as the physical environment, teacher-student and student-student interactions. I had the chance to observe two staff meetings in progress at Mari

Government group B and at Gemston Government group A school. Extensive notes and diagrams were used to record activities taking place and information transcription was done soon after the observation for continuous analysis.

Chapter Five: Research design