Interview: Semi-structured interview

Throughout this study, my desire was to use methods of data collection that would address my research question. In order to collect in-depth insights from my respondents, I adopted the semi-structured interview format as one of my methods for data collection. Semi-structured interview includes using specific and pre-determined questions during the interview. Adopting a qualitative semi-structured interview gave me some advantages: firstly, it gave me the opportunity to probe and expand on the responses of interviewees. Secondly, I discovered my respondents’ priorities and frame of reference unlike in a structured interview. It gave the respondents more freedom to answer the questions, and also gave me more freedom to probe the respondents’

119 experiences (Hayes 2000). Also, as the sequence of the questions was not the same for all groups/respondents, the semi-structured interview gave the interviewees and the researcher the opportunity of pursuing issues of interest I may not have been aware of (Cohen et al, 2000, Hitchcock et al, 1989). I understood that my primary task in interviewing was to understand the interviewee. I regarded words from my respondents as words from experts and also that these words contain the potential to discovering the respondents view on my research topic (Bogdan 1998). Before each student interview, I arrived at the venue a few minutes early in order to make sure it was a welcoming one and to make ready to start a small conversation with the respondent(s) as a way of creating an atmosphere conducive to a forthcoming interview. I reminded my respondents of the purpose of the study and

promised my respondents that what they were to say would be treated confidentially. However, with regard to the focus group interview, I explained the extent of the confidentiality their views would receive: I promised them that I would not tell their school authorities what we discussed. I asked for their permission to tape-record interviews.

Throughout these interviews, I aimed to listen carefully, to be supportive, and to show interest, understanding and respect for respondents’ perceptions. This behaviour helped the respondents to feel at ease and to share their views with me (Bogdan et al, 1998). I asked for clarifications when the respondent’s view was unclear to me by simply saying: could you explain further? I also tried to avoid ‘yes’ and ‘no’ questions because such answers do not give good explanations of a topic. I reasoned that I needed to be flexible

120 with the respondents especially with the focus groups in order to allow any respondent who wanted to talk, to have the opportunity to do so.

Furthermore, during the interview, I encouraged respondents to explain in detail through body language and a variety of expressions: good eye contact, nodding of my head, ‘ok’, ‘mm’, ‘right’ and showing the respondents that I was taking them seriously. My interview questions for all groups were designed to explore the four major parts of my topic: (i) teaching and learning in the school (ii) examination malpractice (iii) consulting students on schooling and (iv) involving students in preventing examination malpractice.

(a) Focus group

In my desire for a variety of opinions and in-depth perceptions of students on the research topic, I considered a focus group interview a viable qualitative research method for this study. This decision was informed by the suggestion of Goodwin et al, (1996) that interviewing young people in groups would be more fruitful than a one-to-one interview. Young people would feel more comfortable in the company of peers and this will ensure a richer discussion.

Furthermore, my choice of a focus group was influenced by some factors: by using a focus group interview, I created an informative dialogue among my respondents aimed at addressing my research question. The comfortable environment that was created by the focus group interview gave me the opportunity to elicit a range of views, attitudes, feelings and perceptions from my respondents who all share similar experiences in school (Anderson 1998). Also, my respondents have the opportunity to compare their opinions with those of other students and to clarify their perceptions, thereby providing a

121 deeper and more insightful discussion on the topic. Data that I collected from focus group interviews became the collective view of students on my topic as opposed to one-to-one interviews (Denscombe 2003). As Anderson

(1998:200) puts it, “focus group elicits a unique type of in-depth qualitative data which could not be obtained as efficiently any other way”.

Seven focus group interviews were held in the three schools. These interviews were held on different days in each school. Each interview was also held on the 2nd and 3rd day of data collection in each school. Before each focus group interview, I collected the consent forms. I had eight members in each of the three focus groups in St. Monica. I had seven interviewees in each of the two focus groups in St. Albert made up of eight girls and six boys. In St. Alphonsus, I had eight members in each of the two focus groups. The focus group interview in St. Monica was held in the examination hall. In St. Albert, it was held under a mango tree and in St. Alphonsus, it was held in the reception area. However, these areas were conducive to discussion and allowed for the tape-recording of interviews. Permissions were obtained for their use. Each interview lasted about 1hour and 20 minutes. I decided to hold the focus group interview before interviewing the teachers so that some of the issues raised by students about their particular schools could be discussed with their teachers.

(b) Interview: Principals

The principals of the three schools were interviewed on the first day of the data collection. The three principals were interviewed in their offices and each interview lasted for approximately 1 hour. They signed the consent forms.

122 Two of the principals were males while that of St. Monica was female. All of them have been principals for more than seven years. The three interviews were tape-recorded. Field notes were taken during interviews with the principals.

(c) Interview: Teachers

Interviews with the nine teachers from the three schools were held in their schools. I made sure that each teacher chose the time and day for their interview. All the teachers signed the consent forms. One of the teachers was already studying for her doctorate and had stopped temporarily owing to family problems; the other three have got their masters degrees. These teachers had all been teaching for more than five years.

Before the interview, I briefly informed each teacher as to the purpose of the research and reassured them regarding confidentiality of their views (Bogdan

et al, 1998). Teachers from Sts. Monica and Alphonsus were interviewed in

their staff rooms. These staff rooms were conducive at this time for tape- recording because the teachers had informed their colleagues about the interview. The interview with the teachers in St. Albert was held in a quiet place under a mango tree. Some issues that had been raised in student focus groups were further explored during the teacher interviews; for example poor facilities and teacher truancy. Each of the interviews lasted for about 1hour and they were tape-recorded. Field notes were taken during each teacher interview.

123

3.8.3 Observation

I observed the process of weekly consultation of students in each school twice. Observing consultation in these schools as it is normally held would give me first hand information on the topics usually discussed and on the climate of the discussion. My role as a researcher was to be a complete

observer, whereby, I was physically detached from the activities and social

interactions of students (Anderson 1998). On my first observation of

consultation, I was introduced to students as a research student by their form teachers. Students were reminded of my research topic and how I intended to collect the data: field notes and tape-recording the interview. During these first visits to the schools, discussions centred more on the behaviour of some students, family issues and classroom problems. Thus, there was no

discussion about examination malpractice, and discussions on teaching and learning was few. I agreed with form teachers to use examination malpractice and teaching and learning as the topic for the next consultation.

On my second visit to these schools, form teachers introduced the topic for the day and students were invited to discuss the topic: how it affects them, why some engage in it and how to prevent it in their schools. I took field notes and tape-recorded students’ perceptions of the topic. What students said in each school is seen in chapters 4-5. Thus, consulting was conducted by form teachers but I was there to record events and to take notes. After each

consultation, I requested 14 students to be interviewed on the effects of the discussion on them. Students had been previously informed on the stages of consulting: discussion and interview. These students were interviewed in focus groups of seven students in a group. Six focus groups were interviewed

124 in the three schools. Discussions during the focus group interviews centred on three areas: how they felt during consultation, the effects of consulting on them and the benefits of their participation and consulting them on

examination malpractice. I tape-recorded these focus group interviews. Students manifested a grasp of the topic and their understanding of the topic showed that discussions on examination malpractice are couched in their experiences of teaching, learning and schooling in their schools.

3.8.4 Documents

None of these schools had a web site, newsletter, record of examination malpractices, documents on consulting students or a policy handbook. I collected a summary of the examination results of candidates for WASSCE examinations in all secondary schools from 2002 – 2006 from the WAEC office. These documents contained details of examination results and examination malpractices by candidates in all states of Nigeria from 2002 – 2006. I paid to receive these documents. I also collected books written by the office of examination ethics project in conjunction with the federal ministry of education on examination malpractice in Nigeria. These documents were informative and they showed the views of Nigerians on examination malpractice and the extent to which it has affected Nigerian education.