One to One interviews

Interviews of permanently excluded pupils: Permission was obtained to interview the

pupils at the pupil referral unit, the rationale for choosing the sample chosen was explained earlier, and the interviews commenced in January 2011. Three hours were set aside each Monday morning, with two or three being taken out of a lesson and interviewed each day, depending on the fullness of the pupils’ answers. Semi-structured interviews were used, for the reasons described previously. Despite speaking to the whole school of staff and pupils in an assembly the author ran through at the start of each interview all the details previously mentioned, and was always very clear this was a voluntary process and they did not have to take part and could return to their lesson if they wished.

The author had interviewed many people in his role as a police officer and was aware of the need to create a relaxed atmosphere in order to get the best results and was also aware of conditions suggested by Taylor and Brogden. These conditions were accommodated by arranging to complete the interviews in the head teacher’s office, which meant there were no interruptions, except for on a couple of occasions where they took place in another office due

179

to the head teacher needing his office. The author was aware of the diverse ethnic backgrounds of the young people to be interviewed and the need, in order to ensure people were at their ease, to consider any cultural differences. For example eye contact, silence and seating position, where in some cultures the first two would be considered rude and the latter would be considered rude if the interviewer sat with their feet towards the interviewee.

An interview guide is suggested and the author used the questionnaire answered in the schools for this process, with supplementary questions being asked when required. The interviews lasted between forty minutes to an hour and a half depending on the level of engagement of the young person and the need to ask supplementary questions. Despite the suggestion by Bucher et.al. (1956) about the amount of information that may be lost writing down the response of subjects as opposed to other methods, this was the method chosen to record subjects responses.

There was an initial intention to use a voice recorder to record all questions and answers that could be played back later to ensure accuracy. The first couple of interviewee’s were asked if they were happy with this method of recording information and they replied they were. However at the first break clarification was sought on this with the first interviewee and he expressed his concern with what would happen to the tapes. Questioning of others revealed the majority shared this concern. The author was mindful of his role within society at that time and did not want to cause the young people undue stress, or indeed risk information being corrupted by use of the voice recorder. There was an awareness that this was not the best method to record information but the benefits of accurate information were outweighed by the possible anxiety caused to the young people and also the possibility they would not answer questions in full due to the presence of the recorder. Although a note taker would have helped with ensuring accurate recording of information, and a member of the YEP could have been used to do this, the option was rejected. This was discussed with a few of the young people at the exclusion unit and they felt two people in a small room interviewing them would have been intimidating, and hence the option was rejected.

Clarification was sought with each interviewee at the start of the interview that they were happy for their answers to be written down, and they were briefed not to be put off if anything was or wasn’t written down after any particular question. To try and ensure accurate recording of information, clarification was regularly sought with the interviewee about what

180

they had said, and whether it had been correctly understood. After the interview to try and check if the note taking or the interview process itself had effected or inhibited the interviewee, conversation was continued to gauge if there was a similar or different response, and no change was noted. After the interview, to ensure as much information as possible was recorded, the interview was generally transcribed the same day, and for the few where this was not possible it was always done no later than the day following the interview.

Interview of ex-gang members: To try and gain an insight into the particular issues

associated with gang membership, another group of people, although subsequently only two people, were interviewed one to one, and these men were two ex-gang members. The two men interviewed are both now in their twenties but had started offending from an early age. Both of the young men interviewed are paid employees of the youth charity co-founded by the author called YEP. Therefore it was important to ensure ethical rigour and prevent allegations that either had given answers simply as they believed it was what the author wanted to hear. The earlier comments of Coleman were noted concerning the inequality between generations and also in positions of authority (Coleman et. al. 2004, p234). All the concerns of ethical issues noted earlier and applied to the interview of the young people in the exclusion unit were also applied when interviewing these two young men. The only real difference was location of the interviews which took place in the charity base, but again the concerns relating to conditions for the interview were applied. Both of these men were interviewed when the majority of other research had been completed, and they were therefore also questioned regarding some of the apparent emerging findings from this research, with which they agreed, and some of their responses are reflected in the findings.

Interview of Youth Magistrates: As part of his role, the author sat on a liaison group with

the youth court magistrates and YOS staff and again it was apparent there was a lack of knowledge in the group about what was the most effective intervention for the magistrates and YOS to use in terms of affecting behaviour. To try and gain an insight into the thought processes of magistrates serving in the youth court as to why they administered a particular intervention to a particular individual two of them were interviewed in an attempt to make the new youth referral order as effective as possible. Both were white males of approximately sixty years of age who had many years of experience in the youth court. They were interviewed in their homes where the premium interview conditions could be obtained and

181

both were briefed as the young people had been prior to the interviews. Both gave similar accounts of their rationale for making decisions. Due to time constraints no further magistrates were interviewed despite several offering to do so. Interviews of some YOS managers and also a very limited number of YOS clients did occur, which provided limited findings in this area. Again a much fuller separate review of the referral order process will be completed, separate to this thesis as a piece of post-doctoral research.

Interview of Teachers: After the first years data had been analysed and as part of the review

process to ensure the quality of the questions and good validity, three teachers responsible for behaviour at the schools assisting with the thesis were interviewed. One was male and two female and all had responsibility for behaviour at schools 1, 2 and 3. Although all were very familiar with the rationale and workings of the thesis, all were given a limited briefing and also reminder that their participation was voluntary prior to the interviews, which occurred in their office at their respective schools. They were asked about what young people said about life in general in terms of behaviour and specifically what schools did to try and positively affect behaviour. As the first year’s data had now been analysed they were also asked about the initial findings to see if there was anything that they found not representative of their own experiences, which interestingly they did not. No other teachers were interviewed partly out of practical time issues and partly for reasons of validity as the thesis was primarily trying to establish what young people thought.