Pilot study

Once the interview schedule had been developed, I felt that it would be useful to pilot it with one participant to ensure that the content of the schedule could be understood and to obtain their views or comments. I also felt that conducting a pilot study would provide me with the opportunity to practise using the schedule and test the recording device.

One participant volunteered to take part in the pilot study. This participant was an experienced social worker who had dealt with a number of cases where he had to

75

decide whether to place siblings together or apart in foster care or adoptive placements.

This pilot study led to minor changes being made to both of the vignettes. The first vignette was amended to make the scenario more ambiguous. It was felt that ambiguity was desirable so as not to lead the participants to respond in a particular way. Two paragraphs were removed: the first gave additional background information which the social worker felt was ‘too negative’. The second was removed as it was felt that it provided unnecessary information.

The second vignette was also amended to make it more ambiguous. The social worker who took part in the pilot study felt that the scenario described in this vignette was ‘too positive’. An additional sentence was added to this vignette that suggested that there were some negative aspects of the sibling relationship described.

No changes were made to the questions in the interview schedule, as the social worker felt that they were easy to understand and he was able to answer them. A final question was added which asked the participants if there were any further comments or reflections that they would like to make on their decision-making. This was included as it was felt that it would be helpful to provide them with the opportunity to comment on things that they might not have initially thought of when answering the questions.

76 5.7.4 Recruitment

Participants were invited to take part in this study via a convenience sampling method, whereby the ‘nearest and most convenient’ (p.265, Robson, 2002) persons were invited to take part. This approach was felt to be appropriate, as within case study design, sampling techniques are unimportant (Thomas, 2011), with the focus being simply on selecting participants that will allow you to study the object of the case study (social workers’ decision-making) in depth. In this way, purposeful sampling, such as the convenience sampling method chose here, is appropriate (Bryman, 2008). By sampling social workers in this way, I aimed to get a sample that would be representative of the population of social workers within the LA.

An email advertisement was sent to all of the social workers within the LA who had been involved in decision-making regarding the placement of siblings within the last six months. This time frame was included, so that their reflections on their decision- making were relatively recent. These social workers had been identified by a senior member of their team who assisted me with the recruitment of participants.

A copy of the recruitment advertisement is included in Appendix 4 of this volume.

The social workers who expressed an interest in taking part in an interview were contacted with a provisional date and time for when the interview would be held. These were flexible and were altered if the social worker was unable to attend on their designated day or time.

77 5.7.5 Sample

Seven social workers expressed an interest in taking part and were given an interview slot. However, one social worker did not turn up to the designated interview slot and did not respond to follow-up contact to attempt to re-arrange the interview. In total, six social workers were interviewed as part of the research.

Three of the social workers were employed within the Looked After Children’s Team, meaning that they worked solely with children in foster care, residential or adoptive placements. The other three social workers were employed within one of the LA’s three social care ‘Locality Teams’ who work with Looked After Children, but also have a wider remit and work with ‘Child in Need’ and ‘Child Protection’ cases. All had been involved in decision-making regarding the placement of siblings.

This sample of social workers could be considered to be a small sample. However, it is important to note that not all social workers within the LA had been involved in decision-making regarding the placement of siblings, and so would not have been eligible to take part. Similarly, many of the social workers may have felt that they were unable to give their time to take part in the research, as the LA is reported to be under-staffed in terms of social workers, so their caseloads are likely to be high. Finally, a small sample does not reduce the validity of the findings from the research, as it is with the social workers’ decision-making processes within this LA with which the study is concerned. The selection of social workers within this study may not be representative of all social workers, but will provide an insight into the decision-

78

making of social workers within this LA, which is what the case study design aims to explore (Thomas, 2011).