Interviewing

Critical research demands I am aware, as an outsider, of the power of western discourse to subjugate indigenous viewpoints through the influence to define (L. Smith, 1999). This potential trap is a key reason I decided to co-construct my ideas with informants. Even then, informants may feel obligated to provide answers that fit prevailing western

development theory. For example, informants may assume economic growth answers are expected because “capitalism has been naturalized as commonsense reality” (Kincheloe & McLaren, 2002, p. 125). I countered this tendency by reminding myself not to put my own views, or mainstream views, at the centre of discussions instead having an absolute focus on drawing out their views. I achieved this by demonstrating a genuine interest in

Mangaian culture; this process alerted informants to my respect for their culture.

Facilitation of a culturally positive interview environment made it possible for Mangaians to express Mangaian thinking, ideas and knowledge about SD and ESD.

Data was collected predominantly by use of one on one semi-structured interviews as it encourages informants to share their views, beliefs, insights, hopes and values. It is possible to delve into ‘why” without offending or being overly demanding. The advantage of semi- structured interviews over surveys is that it was possible to draw out thick descriptions of ideologies, hidden or emerging, that have been masked by the prevailing hegemony. Reflexivity fits neatly with the use of semi-structured interviews, as follow up questions are

rephrased to take account of unexpected initial responses, allowing the researcher to probe deeper into the views and issues at hand (Bell, 2005).

Focus group interviews were also used in some cases to obtain information that is socially constructed rather than individually constructed (Berg, 2001). One on one semi-structured interviews complemented focus group interviews. If focus group interviews alone were used to collect data, some individual views may have been subjugated by the prevailing dominant political or social ethos of the group. One on one interviews mitigated this possibility by allowing personal values and views to be presented in relative privacy. In effect, measures were taken to seek out the voice of those whose ideas, opinions and values may not ordinarily be expressed; this is an example of how Chambers (1983) describes “putting the last first” (p. 168). By comparing and contrasting the results of one on one and group interviews, the data was triangulated to ensure data validity.

4.5.1 Numbers of interviews and sampling strategy

To ensure validity, sufficient data must be collected within each embedded unit of a case study (Berg, 2001; Tomal, 2005). Initial sampling across the embedded units of analysis was based on an empirical strategy where people were selected for their representativeness (Schwandt, 2001). The embedded units of analysis formed part of a matrix to ensure views were heard from all sectors of the community.

The actual number of interviews were as follows:

x Teachers 10;

x Students 12;

x Parents 15; and

x Community 30

Of the community interviews, a few were very brief, aimed at obtaining historical

information rather than thinking about SD and ESD. Some of the community interviews were not used in the final write up as they articulated viewpoints already expressed by other informants. Actual interviews were numbered in sequential order from one to one hundred and fifteen. Many interview participants were interviewed more than once so were assigned two to three interview numbers. This technique assisted in providing further anonymity where it was requested. Participants requesting anonymity were labelled in one of four categories only; those being teacher, student, parent or community member. The number

of interviews was sufficient to establish any patterned responses that might emerge, as well as providing the scope for diverse views to be revealed.

Previous informants referred new participants with similar or opposing views in a technique called snowballing, or networking, whereby informants put me in touch with other significant contacts (Schneider, Elliott, LoBiondo-Wood, & Haber, 2003). People were often referred to by previous informants because of the particular views or knowledge they hold, a selection process Schwandt (2001) regarded as sensible. I was directed towards the aronga mana (traditional leaders), ta’unga (wise people) or the tumu korero (oral tradition specialist) in deference to their mana as holders of specialised Mangaian knowledge. Glesne (2006) argues that selecting informants purposefully helps uncover both patterned

responses and diverse views.

In undertaking further measures to overcome bias, I went and lived in two of the three villages and visited the third village whenever possible. I made sure I interviewed Mangaians who spoke little English by having a translator accompany me. I interviewed women, where perhaps it may be perceived socially inappropriate to interview them one on one, by having my wife accompany me to the interviews during my second research period. Matrix selection of informants ensured wide ranges of views were canvassed. In summary, these varied methods coalesced in an attempt to overcome Chambers (1983) description of 6 potential research biases, those being spatial, operational, personal, diplomatic and professional, the aim being as Chambers describes it “putting the last first” (p. 168). 4.5.2 Interviewing techniques

Brockington and Sullivan (2003) state that qualitative research “seeks to understand the world through interacting with, empathising with, and interpreting the actions and perceptions of its actors” (p. 57). Before and during interviews, I focused on building credibility, trust, and developing a rapport with research participants as Glesne (2006) believes these factors generate quality information. I achieved this by co-constructing data, being a good listener and remaining adaptive and flexible. Interviews were indepth without being threatening. Questions focused on the how, rather than the why to begin with, were less accusatory (Anae et al., 2001). Research participants were given a copy of my research information sheet in either Cook Islands Maori, see appendix 5, or English, see appendix 6. Participants were also given a Participant Consent Form, see appendix 7 and the option to

opt out of the interview. Interestingly nobody opted out, with everyone keen to offer their opinions on SD, ESD and schooling on Mangaia.

I decided to retain the integrity of the Mangaian worldviews by using Mangaian language quotes accompanied by English translations in the final thesis. This highlights the co- constructed nature of my findings and the overarching partnership approach to my study as it has “the effect of retaining the cultural nuances and integrity of the views expressed” (Anae et al., 2001, p. 43). Informants were, where possible, encouraged to review final notes and quotes to ensure accuracy, especially of translated material. Key informants were asked to review pertinent draft chapters as suggested by Yin (Yin, 2009). Cross-cultural review of findings was a focus of my third and final visit in August 2014.

4.5.3 Interviewing students

Critical research demands all stakeholder viewpoints are canvassed so we can view the world anew (Kincheloe & McLaren, 2002). Students are important stakeholders in their own education. Inclusion of student voice in the case study ensures the research is truly participatory and ultimately empowering for students as the intended beneficiaries of current ESD practice and, importantly, any future transformative change.

From a procedural point of view, I followed the guidelines set down by Massey University for student interviews. Students were first asked if they wanted to participate in an

interview and given the option to decline. If agreeable, students were asked to sign the consent form, see appendix 8. The Principal suggested some students who might be shy were better to be interviewed in small groups, which was arranged. Before the interviews took place, parents were asked to give their consent, see appendix 9. I then went beyond these minimum requirements, drawing upon my nine years teaching in the Pacific and twenty-two years teaching experience to build productive working relationships with the students. Finally, as Loveridge (2010) suggests when interviewing students I listened carefully to my advisory group and the senior management at Mangaia School to learn about, and determine, the specific cultural protocols I needed to follow when interviewing students on Mangaia.