Interview method

Through the semi-structured interview, the researcher has asked some predetermined questions and, at the same time, allowed the participants an opportunity to explore other areas that they may have thought relevant (Hinchey, 2008). Radnor (1994: 59)

identified the interview as ‘a two-person conversation initiated by the interviewer for the specific purpose of obtaining research-relevant information’. It is a critical method, which allows the researcher to understand other individuals’ beliefs, attitudes and experiences with their own language and words rather than the words of the researcher (Rubin and Rubin, 2012). In this regard, the interview is seen the best method of investigating interviewees’ opinions and attitudes (Kvale, 1996).

The literature shows that various types and ways of interview can be used in educational research based on the research questions, sample size and type of data required. There are three main sorts of interview: structured, semi-structured, and unstructured (Cohen et al., 2007). In terms of the design of the interview questions, the structured interview question has fixed wording and has been previously prepared. A structured interview is useful when looking for particular information, and usually it is used by quantitative researchers. In the semi-structured interview, questions can be modified and more explanations given by participants. This type is usually used in qualitative studies to get deeper understanding of responses. The unstructured interview, which can be informal, where the interviewer has a broad area or subject of interest, the dialogue can be allowed to build up within this area (Cohen et al., 2007). In this research, semi- structured interviews are used because this type is more flexible and less structured, where the interviewer has a general idea about how he wants the interview to go, and what should come out of it. According to Merriam (2001), in the semi-structured interviews the researcher prepares the questions to guide the interview by exploring the issues or topics that are listed beforehand. At the same time, there is scope for the researcher to introduce new questions into the conversation that had not been considered earlier, which arise during the course of the interview (Hitchcock and Hughes, 1995).

Additionally, semi-structured interviews were used because they allowed for a comprehensive account from the participants about their perceptions and the underlying factors which they think need to be changed or adjusted, in order for the inclusive education process to work well. In this research, such rich data represents very useful feedback for those developing learning infrastructures, such as, facilities, equipment, school staff training courses and general school environment (Cohen et al., 2007).

More specifically, using semi-structured interviews allowed a) capturing of general and specific information about participants’ understanding about inclusive education and how students with deafness learn; b) participants’ attitudes towards inclusive education; c) exploring their perspectives about factors that influence inclusive education for deaf students; d) the participants a voice with a certain degree of freedom to talk about what is centrally significant to them within the designed framework of the research; e) the researcher to ‘get inside’ the perspectives of the interviewees and to generate hypotheses from such perspectives and understand what they think is important in their own situation; and f) the researcher to keep an open mind and remain open to ideas or new research questions that would be encountered and that would not have been expected (Radnor, 1994; Merriam, 2001; Cohen et al., 2007).

6.6.1.1 Focusing on the Interview Questions

The themes in the interviews were related to the research questions and objectives of the study. This was achieved by using a sequential study design in stage one, which included exploratory focus-group interviews and the pilot interviews (Yin, 2009). The researcher ensured that interview questions were not too specific, to allow participants to give further information and details related to answering the research questions. The researcher used language that was understandable by the interviewees (Bryman, 2008). Interview questions were without bias, where questions with ‘how’ were used instead of ‘why’, to avoid interviewees’ being defensive about their actions (Yin, 2009).

Additionally, issues related to basic concepts of interview technique, ways of designing an interview investigation, and interview analysis were considered (Kvale, 1996). Two criteria were followed in the development of the interview questions in this stage a) a review of related literature on inclusive educational research (Avramidis et al., 2000; Cambra and Silvestre, 2003; Bunch and Valeo, 2004; Hung and Paul, 2006) and b) a review of issues that emerged and were discovered from the early stage of exploratory focus-groups in the current research. Hence, the interview questions were designed as follows. They were:

 Left open so that the subjects’ answers would not be affected by the researcher’s bias and to encourage the subjects to talk freely regarding their own knowledge and experience.

In connection with the research objectives and questions, three interview schedules (one for school principals, one for teachers, and one for parents) were constructed. The main interview questions guide (see appendix B) consisted of three major areas, as explained below:

1. Understanding of inclusive education for deaf students.

In this first question, school principals, teachers and parents of deaf students were asked about their knowledge and understanding of inclusive education, deaf education, inclusion of deaf students in general school, and their experience in deaf education.

2. Attitudes towards inclusive education for deaf students.

This area of interview has focused on beliefs of school principals, teachers and parents of deaf students towards inclusive education generally. There were more special questions concerning their perceptions about inclusive education of deaf students in general school/classroom. The participants were asked about their viewpoints in relation to advantages and disadvantages of inclusive education.

3. Factors that influence inclusive education.

The participants – school principals, teachers and parents of deaf students – were asked to provide information about what underlying factors influence inclusive education of deaf students and how they overcome any barriers.