Questionnaire Distribution

The questionnaires were distributed in the following ways:

• Via the Parents Association at Mary Help of Christians GNS, Navan Rd., Dublin 7.

42

• Via the Parents Association at Dublin 7 Educate Together NS, Fitzwilliam Place North, Dublin 7.

• Online via both of the above associations

• Online via an extended network of Dublin-based respondents.

The questionnaires represented the first tranche of primary research and were distributed electronically and in hard copy at a suburban school and an inner-city school.

The schools were chosen in order to obtain a socially representative sample. The two schools represent a cross-section of modern Dublin society with both schools being populated by an extensive social mix comprising all elements of accepted social classes:

Figure 2: Social Class Source: National Readership Survey

Uncharacteristically, the inner-city school used in this study represents a larger middle-class cohort than the suburban school used. Both schools have a healthy mix of children of nationals attending. Furthermore, one school is a non-denominational school and the other has a Roman Catholic ethos. These two differing types of institute were chosen to offer the widest possible range of respondents. The broadly representative segment available at these two schools were chosen as exemplars of current societal dynamics in the capital city and as such to provide data that could be extrapolated to represent a larger population. This tranche of data was underpinned by a further online distribution of the questionnaire to a network of Dublin-based respondents.

43

The target was two hundred viable samples and the methods chosen for distribution were selected to maximise effectiveness of distribution and collection.

It was felt that these approaches would deliver the best possible mix of the community, young/old married/single, Irish/non Irish.

In total 187 surveys were collected but only 157 were deemed viable.

See Appendix 1- Copy of questionnaire.

3.5 Interviews

“Standardised schedule interview: this is useful when the people being interviewed are homogeneous and tend to share the same characteristics and outlooks” (Kane, 1985, p.63).

The usefulness of this kind of interview was bolstered by the further use of a semi-structured interview method which will, “manage to address both the need for comparable responses-that is the same questions being asked of each interviewee-and the need for the interview to be developed by the conversation between interviewer and interviewee”(Wisker, 2008, p.194-5).

The second tranche of the research is represented by semi-structured interviews. The questionnaire had included a final question regarding willingness and availability for interview and the subjects interviewed were all chosen from the group who indicated a willingness to aid the research project further. Over fifty people volunteered to be interviewed and participate further in the study which represents a very healthy percentage of the overall cohort but practicalities dictated that only ten were selected for further research. Ten was chosen as being both a manageable figure and also as it represents a little over 6% of the final survey. The data that ten interviews would yield could be extrapolated to make findings based on a much larger group.

The interviews were structured to be as relaxing for the interviewees as possible and conducted in quiet yet public places. The locations for the interviews were chosen to suit the interviewees and were for the most part in the lobby of a large Dublin hotel and in private residences.

44

The interview sessions were recorded using Sony IC Recorder model #ICD- PX312/PX312F.

Oppenheim (1992) observes that there are two types of interviews:

a) Exploratory interviews;

b) Standardised interviews.

He further states that the purpose of standardised interviews is essentially data collection.

Oppenheim also underlines the need for the interviewer to establish a ‘rapport’ with the respondent. He describes this as an:

“Elusive quality which ‘keeps the respondent motivated and interested in answering the questions truthfully’” (Oppenheim, 1992, p.89).

The semi-structured interviews contained open and closed questions and where possible interviewees were allowed to speak as much as possible and freely in order that more data could be collected. This was to ensure that the interviewee made their point in answering the questions. On occasion the interviewer changed the wording of a question and the sequence in order to facilitate a natural flow of conversation.

All respondents were offered confidentiality/ anonymity for the interviews. In practice most were unconcerned with anonymity however the author decided to grant anonymity. This is due to the highly personal nature of any research surrounding personal income and domestic budgets. One guideline followed was:

“Will the study involve more than a minimal invasion of privacy…?” (Wisker, 2008, p.90).

It was essential to achieve a balance of ‘good data’ and respect the privacy of the interviewees and respondents. This process is inherently fraught with difficulties and as with all ethical matters it required an honest and open approach. This was achieved by offering all contributors confidentiality guarantees

The use of the semi-structured method of interviewing allows each respondent to answer the same question, thus allowing metrics to be applied and data to be extracted

45

and compared and contrasted to other respondents. The semi-structured method also allowed the freedom for each interviewee to get their point across to the interviewer.