Qualitative research techniques were used throughout the study. According to Punch ‘qualitative research covers a number of techniques- but principally observation, interviewing and document analysis’ (1986:11). This form of in-depth research according to Collis and Hussey involved ‘examining and
reflecting on perceptions in order to gain an understanding of social and human activities’ (2003:13). This use of qualitative methods contrasts primarily,
although not exclusively, with the quantitative approach, which would focus on statistical evidence and analysis. It is generally perceived that quantitative analysis is largely limited to objective criteria as it ‘concentrates on measuring phenomena’. ‘Quantitative forms of inquiry’ according to Layder ‘are used most commonly to present ‘macro’ or ‘large scale aspects of social organisation’
(1993:117).
However, in order to understand the highly diverse and complex nature of people’s experiences and behaviours in these particular contexts, the
qualitative style of inquiry offers a more in-depth approach than the statistical based quantitative method of inquiry. The use of qualitative inquiry has enabled me to understand and present different perspectives relating to how and why process of policies and initiatives affect people’s lives and how people influence them in return. The aim has therefore been to capture a multi-dimensional and
multi-faceted perspective through deep rather than a merely broad set of research approaches. As Patton argues ‘qualitative data can yield deeper understanding and also political action’. Most fundamentally it provided a basis for flexible exploration as ‘the researcher is able to capture the points of view of other people without predetermining those points of view’ (2003:20).
Qualitative analysis was therefore chosen as the main method of analysis. This offered the opportunity to explore the changing social patterns, identities and concepts to be critically analysed within the fluid social settings in which government decisions and Third Sector interventions have taken place. It involved data collected through interviews and fieldwork observations, which are described in more detail later in the chapter.
It was decided through a process of deliberation in conjunction with the research partners, that participant observations alongside interviewing would form a central part of the data collection. The purpose of which would be to generate data from first-hand experiences of an observer in relation to learners.
The research involved semi- participative, rather than totally participative methods and therefore involved an ambiguous outsider/ insider perspective (which is explored later in the chapter). This brought both opportunities for an alternative perspective to insider’s viewpoints, as well as some tensions.
Blackburn suggests that the outsider researcher role ‘act(s) as a catalyst for local people to cohort with the information and analysis they generate’ (1998:92).
The study research drew on elements of participatory action research, in that in in some instances this process has allowed other participants as part of the wider organisation and sector to reflect on their own longer-term goals. This could be perceived as drawing on elements of what has been described as participatory reflection and action otherwise known as PRA. Blackburn et al outline the underlying conditions for participation if it is to have positive long-term and empowering outcomes on those that in this case the research aims to effect:
‘Participation has little meaning unless we, and particularly those in power allows others to ‘take part’, to set agendas, take decisions,
manage and control resources. To allow the other means to show him and her trust. People who feel trusted also gain independence; more than just participate in their own development, they make it’ (1998:6).
It is these ideals that were aspired to throughout the research process and reflect the ‘Take Part cluster’s’ fundamental principles. The research aimed to enable and empower participants, as well as highlight underlying inequalities.
However, as the researcher it was essential to recognise that the framework of the research and that decisions regarding content inclusion were ultimately my responsibility. Ultimately, the participants’ ability to influence agendas and decisions was limited, particularly where interaction with them was restricted by time and context. Therefore I acknowledge that the balance of power has remained in favour of the researcher, even where all attempts have been made to include and empower participants through the research process.
Through regular participation within community groups and classes, within the WEA South Wales descriptive and interpretive field notes were produced in order to provide evidence and a concrete basis to critically analyse the work of the charity and government. This took place within a process which could be described as ‘emergent design flexibility’ which involved ‘openness to adapting inquiry as understanding deepens and situations change’ Patton (2003:40). This was an essential element of the research, as political, socio-economic
constraints and situations change, a flexible and open approach was essential.
A more static approach to research that involved community groups and politicians would have posed a higher level of risk to its completion, as well as more fundamentally lacking the ability to reflect upon the changing world. Rock agrees that ‘social life is both ‘incremental’ and ‘progressive’. Therefore if people’s social lives are constantly changing, we must participate in this and record our experiences of these transformations, their effects on people, as well as their interpretations. He goes on to pronounce that ‘knowledge comes from experience of understanding of detailed or meticulous inquiries through which we generate our understandings’ Rock (2004:148).
Overall it was necessary as part of this process to ensure that the data collected was coupled with a wider and deeper analysis of diverse historical documentary materials, accounts from long serving members and data from the Third Sector at large. Thus it included examining previous research that has been
undertaken by various government and Third Sector bodies including the Communities First programme (discussed more fully in chapter 4). This has placed the research within its wider historical as well as socio-political context.
Sue Jones recognised ‘a central part of the theoretical framework a researcher brings to preparing for and indeed analysing in-depth interviews must be awareness of the factors which effect the data their interviewees
provide’(1985:49). Therefore outlining underlying socio-political, historical and cultural factors has been central to producing a critical analysis of government policies set out in chapters 3, 4 and 5, as well in the case study of the WEA.