Phase 1: Interviews

4.6.2.1 Qualitative interviews

My reason for interviewing the same participants who had completed the questionnaire was to fill in the gaps left by the responses to the questions in the questionnaire, as well as to obtain clarity on those issues that were not properly addressed in the questionnaire.

From the literature, Gay and Airasian (2003:209-210) concur with Gubrium and Holstein (2002:83) that qualitative interviewing is based in conversation, with the emphasis on the researcher asking questions and listening, and the participants answering. These authors all maintain that interviews can explore and probe participants‟ responses to gather more in-depth data about their experiences and feelings. They further state that the purpose of most qualitative interviewing is to derive interpretations, not facts or laws, from the participants‟ responses.

Likewise, Creswell (2009:181) and Bogdan and Knopp-Biklen (2007:103) contend that in qualitative interviewing, the researcher conducts face-to-face interviews or engages in focus group interviews, with six to eight interviewees in each group. These authors further claim that the interview is used to gather descriptive data in the

121

participant‟s own words so that the researcher can develop insight into how participants interpret a certain phenomena.

4.6.2.2 Different types of individual interviews

Gibson and Brown (2009:86-90), Robson (2002:270-271) and Vanderstoep and Johnston (2009:224-225) agree on the three different types of interviews, namely structured, semi-structured and unstructured interviews; which have characteristics as listed under the different headings below.

4.6.2.2.1 Structured interviews

The structured interview has predetermined questions with fixed wording, usually in a pre-set order. The structured interview is written with probes, transitions and follow- up questions. Researchers use their research interests and knowledge of the topic to decide the exact areas into which they are going to enquire. Once the interviews have been conducted, an analysis is undertaken around the themes represented in the question topics.

4.6.2.2.2 Semi-structured interviews

Semi-structured interviews involve specifying the key themes of the interviews, which are in turn formulated as key questions. The wording of questions can be changed, particular questions that seem inappropriate can be omitted, or additional ones included. Interviewers are also free to probe the research participants for more information on particular points.

4.6.2.2.3 Unstructured interviews

Unstructured interviews involve asking questions without any or with very little pre- definition of the topical concerns of the interview. It allows the researcher to go with the flow and pose impromptu questions as the interview progresses. Informal interviews, because of their lack of structure, typically take more time to conduct and

122

more time to analyse (Gibson & Brown, 2009:86-90; Vanderstoep & Johnston, 2009:224-225; Robson, 2002:270-271 &).

Based on the examples cited in the literature studied, the interview type I settled for was the semi-structured interview, as this type of interview allowed me to explore issues that were not necessarily included in the interview schedule, in order to pursue findings and directions that would enhance the data collected. The interview guide is included as Appendix 6(a).

4.6.2.2.4 Procedures of conducting individual interviews in study

Prior to holding the actual interviews, I arranged a time and venue suitable to him/her with each of the twelve participants. I also double-checked with them a day or two before the scheduled date to confirm their availability. The schedule for the individual interviews is included as Appendix 6(b).

On the day of the interview, I saw to it that I reached the venue early, and ensured that my voice recorder was in good working order. Before each interview, I again asked each participant whether he/she was comfortable with the interview being recorded. Nobody objected to their interview being recorded.

All twelve participants were interviewed. Only three interviews had to be rescheduled, due to the three participants having other school or personal commitments that clashed with the date and time of their respective interviews. Three of the interviews took place in an office at my workplace, whilst the other nine were all held at the participants‟ respective schools. Most of the interviews were held after school, as I made it clear that ethical considerations dictated that I would not impose on participants‟ time during their normal teaching hours.

In most cases, the venues in which the interviews were held, were conducive to conducting interviews, with the exception of the venues at one or two schools. In these cases, due to the limitations of the infrastructure of the specific school, we were often interrupted by someone wanting to use the office we occupied, doors slamming or telephones ringing and/or the intercom system being used to make

123

announcements. This, however, was not insurmountable and we were able to conduct the interview in privacy after some time.

A very positive aspect was the attitude of all twelve participants. Everyone was very eager to participate in these interviews and responded candidly, often offering much more information than what was requested from them. This augured well for the ensuing focus group interviews I had to schedule with the participants. After each interview, I sincerely thanked each participant, ensuring him/her of my sincere appreciation of the time and energy they put into these interviews. After having completed each of the twelve interviews, I made a summary of each individual interview and, finally, a summary of all the interviews, in an effort to find distinct commonalities and glaring discrepancies, if any. This also allowed me to determine the gaps as to what information was still needed to answer the research questions.

In the next sub-section, focus group interviews as data collection methods used as part of the investigation will be discussed in detail.

4.6.2.3 Focus group interviews

In an effort to fill the gaps identified after having summarised the individual interviews, I elected to do focus group interviews with the same participants. This was necessary in order to obtain the information needed to answer the research questions.

King and Horrocks (2010:65-71), who cite Morgan (1997), and Vanderstoep and Johnston (2009:235-238), citing Krueger (1994), as well as Drew and Raymond and Weinberg (2006:50-52), Basit (2010:104-105), Denscombe (2007:179) and Gomm (2008:226-229) all share the same view on focus group interviews, which have been summarised as follows:

• It can be regarded as a “research technique which collects data through group interaction on a topic determined by the researcher”.

• The aim is to facilitate interactive discussion and the sharing and understanding of views.

124

• The group consists of anything between four and twelve participants. • The interaction between the participants provides the researchers with the

required data.

• This interaction helps the researcher to understand the reasoning behind the views and opinions expressed by the participants.

• The focus group interview is usually recorded and the data are transcribed and then analysed using techniques suitable for qualitative data.

• It is a cost-effective way of gathering data from a number of people.

• The benefit of the interaction between participants is that it exposes the reasoning and underlying logic used by participants.

• Focus group interviews are best regarded as falling within the scope of qualitative interviewing.

4.6.2.4 Procedures of conducting focus group interviews in study

The focus group interviews were scheduled with the twelve participants divided into two groups of six each and the interviews were held at a venue where there was no possibility of any interference or disturbance. The time was set for the end of the school day, in order not to interfere with the participants‟ teaching time.

A day or two before the interview, I contacted each participant individually in order to ensure maximum participation. However, on Day One, two participants cancelled due to unforeseen school commitments. I elected to continue with the other four participants, as time was of the essence and I had no guarantee that they would all be available on an alternative date.

On Day Two, again only four of the six participants were available, due to another important meeting for schools being held at the same time. I again decided to continue with the four participants, as everyone‟s busy schedules made it very difficult to find an alternative date and time suitable to all.

Both interviews proved to be very fruitful, as all participants participated actively and were all very vocal in their responses to the questions put to them. I allowed for each and every participant to respond to every single question, as I wanted the responses

125

to be all-inclusive, in order to form a better conception of how the different schools and persons engaged with the CPD of educators. The interview schedule is included as Appendix 7(b).

The questions posed during the focus group interviews centred around those issues in the individual interviews identified as needing more probing and more clarification from the various participants. It also allowed me to get a more general idea of how the participants felt about certain key aspects of educators‟ CPD and what could be done to motivate them to become more involved in their own CPD.

Both focus group interviews were recorded, with the permission from participants. After each interview, I played the interview individually and then made a combined summary. After having summarised both interviews, I made a general summary of the two interviews, with the view of looking for similarities, as well as differences in the two groups‟ responses to specific questions. This served to give me an overall picture of how the participants viewed the implementation of educators‟ CPD, and specifically the role of the individual educator through involvement in his/her own CPD, with the aim of increasing his/her professional confidence.