Quantitative questionnaire

A questionnaire is one of the most popular research methods which ‘people are asked to respond to the same set of questions in a predetermined order’ (Gray, 2004: 187). Questionnaires have been widely used in social research (Robson, 2011). As with other research tools, a questionnaire should be used with the consideration of whether it fits the research aim (Gray, 2004). In particular, a questionnaire is

useful when research needs to obtain answers from the bigger numbers of

respondents who are literate and needs to get the straightforward information from identical questions in a fairly open atmosphere, which allows honest answers to be obtained (Denscombe, 2010). Cohen et al (2000: 247) classified the types of questionnaire as structured, semi-structured and unstructured. On the one hand, the larger scale of questionnaire tends to be more ‘structured, closed and numerical’. On the other hand the smaller size questionnaire tends to ‘less structured, open and word-based’. A good questionnaire even draws on precise information with the cooperation of respondents, with convincing measures for the research questions (Robson, 2011).

A questionnaire should be designed carefully, because once it is distributed, there is no more opportunity to modify (Denscombe, 2010). Broadly, the researchers can get the information about facts such as ‘age, sex, marital status or number of children’ and opinions such as ‘attitudes, views, beliefs, preferences’ from the respondents (Denscombe, 2010: 157). How researchers make ‘respondents understand what you (a researcher) want to from them, and are happy to give it to you (a researcher)’ are key points for researchers (Robson, 2011: 253).

The questions for the questionnaire should be created based on the aim of the research itself and the research questions (Robson, 2011). In addition, the desirable questions are the questions which the respondents are willing to answer while they use their own knowledge, information, experience and opinions (Denscombe, 2010). On the other hand, prejudicial, uncertain, assumptive, hypothetical and leading questions should be avoided (Arksey & Knight, 1999). There are open and closed questions in a questionnaire. According to Denscombe (2010) open questions which

normally start with ‘how’ and ‘what’ tend to reveal well the respondents’ rich and complicated points of views. However, they require the respondents’ endeavour, and might serve to diminish their willingness to be involved in the research. In addition, analysing the answers of open question is not simple, and is time consuming (Gray, 2004). Meanwhile closed questions which can be answered ‘yes/no’ or ‘true/false’ provide data which can be readily analysed, but the richness of responses can be restricted with pre-coded form (Gray, 2004).

In this research, the questionnaire was used to gather current opinions in the first stage, before looking into future oriented issues, such as inquiries as to whether educational staff might accept drama and story to make a stimulating curriculum in individual schools of Korea and whether they think students will like learning through drama and story. Before talking about the future, it seems essential to ask first what the educational staff know about drama and adopting drama and story for educational purpose, what the stimulating curriculum means for them, what the they see as the speciality of current new national curriculum are and whether they think there is room for drama and story in the new national curriculum. These issues were readdressed to school teachers and head teachers through the questionnaire. The participant class teacher questionnaire, meanwhile, was used to get the five teachers’ overall views quickly after observing the whole workshop and before having the final interviews with them. However the questionnaire was not used to understand children’s thinking. Instead, a quantitative checklist was used for children. The details will be given in sub-section 3.3.2.

questionnaire data were also collected from school teachers who attended the regular meeting of a drama and theatre education organisation K. Clearly, the teachers ware interested in drama, and had greater experience of drama work than the teachers of school A and B. The head teacher questionnaire was conducted via email after the field work. I got head teacher questionnaires from three head teachers from school A and B, and from a head teacher of a different school who was very interested in the educational effect of drama. The data were analysed both separately and as a whole. The class teacher questionnaire were intended to reduce interview time. Through the questionnaire result, I quickly ascertained what each class teacher thought, and based on the result, I was able to organise more effective interview time.

The school teacher and head teacher questionnaires were given as a semi- structured questionnaire, and the class teacher questionnaire was structured. I collected thirty eight questionnaires from school teachers and three questionnaires from head teachers, as well as the questionnaires from the five participant class teachers. This was on a fairly small scale. I selected a semi-structured questionnaire form for school teachers and for head teachers which was suitable for a small scale survey. In addition, I believe that closed and open questions found in semi-structured questionnaire enable respondents to respond easily, and provide the researcher with rich responses. A structured class teacher questionnaire played a supporting role for the class teacher interview.

When I designed the questionnaire, I took particular care to pose only vital and non-repeated questions, giving due consideration to whether the respondents could answer easily or not. For closed questions, a five point likert scale was adopted. In the first part of the questionnaire, brief background information about the purpose

of the study, why and for what the questionnaire was needed, confidentiality and thanks were allocated. For school teacher and head teacher questionnaires closed questions were put before open questions and a space for statement. After answering the closed questions, the respondents had the opportunity to detail their thinking and opinions via open questions and a space for statement. After collecting the

questionnaire data, each answer was coded. The answers to the open questions were then categorised for analysis.

3.4.1.1. School teacher questionnaire

Listening to school teachers’ opinions about adopting drama and story for national curriculum may be seen as an essential stage in this study. I particularly wanted to listen to teachers’ opinions about the current situation, in which they might have limited information about drama. The gathered data may be seen as useful in showing school teachers’ understanding about drama and the direction of new national curriculum. The school teacher questionnaire was designed in six parts and was gathered from teachers in the two school who were not involved in my workshops. After the background information of the research, the first part started with the respondents’ personal information gathering, such as age, sex, length of teaching career and which year group had been in charge since the new national curriculum was introduced. The specialities and side effects of the new national curriculum, the changes at the schools before and after the introduction of the new national curriculum and their personal judgements were asked about in the second part. In the third part, their personal beliefs about what is fun and effective class and

personal teaching style were collected, and this was followed by asking about personal impressions and thinking about adopting drama and story. The fifth part was designed for comments about the issues which had been dealt with in previous parts. The sixth part was only for teachers who had taught year one and two

curriculum. Current year one and two curriculums have contained integrated subjects format under the new national curriculum system. The teachers were asked about their own know-how to teach year one and two integrated subjects and opinions about adopting drama and story through open questions. (see Appendix 3: School Teacher Questionnaire) Although there was a separate space for comments, other parts ended with a space for statements or open questions. I thought that while the respondents answered closed questions they might want to explain more. Thus, I put the closed questions in advance, and then a space for statements or open questions at the end of each part. The questions about curriculum, their own teaching style and educational philosophy can be familiar questions for school teachers. So they were positioned in advance before the questions about drama. I hoped to naturally draw the respondents’ cooperation from the accessible start. A total of thirty eight school teacher questionnaires were collected; twenty five from school A, eight from school B, and a further five from the regular meeting of organisation K.

The main point of the fourth part of the questionnaire was to ask about school teachers’ impressions about adopting drama, under the anticipation they might not have clear understanding about it. However, some school teachers’ understanding was rather poorer than my expectation. I kept using the term ‘drama’ in the

questionnaire form. I considered that school teachers would not limit the meaning of drama to only TV drama. However I found several comments which show that some

teachers regarded the term ‘drama’ as a synonym of ‘TV soap-opera or drama series’. I should have added the information about the extended meaning of drama before starting this part. One of the researchers’ tasks is to eliminate complex and vague terms (Robson, 2011). The language of the question should be chosen carefully for respondents’ clear understanding (Robson, 2011). This turned out to be a mistake, but at the same time, it does indicate that some school teachers’ understanding of drama is limited in Korea.

3.4.1.2. Head teacher questionnaire

At the beginning of the research I did not realise the necessity of listening to the head teachers’ opinions, because I very much focused on only the basic and fundamental unit of local primary education, classroom. I thought teachers and students are the most pivotal figures of primary education of Korea. However I missed the point that school is an organisation, and there are regulations and operation systems. If I wanted to know whether drama and story were to be welcomed at local schools of Korea, what head teachers thought about was to be important as well. After the field work I realised this, so tried to do the questionnaire survey via email. I collected the data from head teachers of school A and B. As they had welcomed me to run the workshop, they cooperated in completing the

questionnaire. I also obtained data from a head teacher who was interested in the educational power of drama. She had held an interest in drama for learning for a long time, having attended many drama workshops and organised training programmes

for school teachers in Korea. She took it upon herself to act as the president of an association for drama and theatre education in Korea.

At the beginning of the head teacher questionnaire there was brief

background information about the research like a school teacher questionnaire. Then, some questions were asked regarding personal careers, such as how long and where they were working. The questions about what they think about adopting drama for curriculum teaching were asked in closed question form, and open question form and spaces for statements were used to gain their personal opinions on how the direction of the new national curriculum could keep to the original intentions in individual schools of Korea. I also asked what they thought about the integrated curriculum being organised through drama and story and whether they would have special programmes to reveal distinctive features of their own individual schools, which is one of the recommendations of the new national curriculum. (see Appendix 4: Head Teacher Questionnaire)

3.4.1.3. Class teacher questionnaire

The class teacher structured questionnaire was not initially planned. I wished to collect data from class teachers via interviews only. However, on occasions it was not possible to have enough time for interview because the teachers were always busy at school. I felt that it was necessary to adopt a supporting research tool to reduce the interview time. I eventually decided to adopt the questionnaire to support the interview data before having the final interview. It was a very simple structured questionnaire, with only six closed questions asking about their personal evaluations

of the workshops and whether they wished to adopt drama for their teaching. (see Appendix 3: Class Teacher Questionnaire) Although it was in simple form, it was effectively helpful to reduce interview time and to move directly to the detailed questions. On the last day of the workshop I gave the questionnaire form to the class teachers and collected them before having the interview. The class teachers had enough time to complete it. Before starting the interview, I thus gained a broad understanding of ‘what’ they thought. With this information, I was able to start the interview with ‘why’ they thought that.