Questionnaires

I used two questionnaires to obtain information about the children’s responses to the literature we were studying; the first was specifically designed for the parents of the participants and the second was completed by the children themselves. A copy of both questionnaires can be found in Appendix III and Appendix IV. Questionnaire is an efficient way of collecting data: it can be completed by many people in a short time and the analysis of answers to closed questions is straightforward, helping the researcher to see patterns of response (Opie, 2004:95; Gillham, 2000:5-8). However, there are five significant disadvantages in using questionnaires: the quality of the data can be variable; the return rate might be low; respondents might have literacy problems that lead to incorrect interpretation of the questions, questions that have been misinterpreted cannot be corrected. Fifthly, and perhaps most significantly, Bell (1999:14) argues that the most important limitation of the questionnaire is that it is always difficult to know the reasons behind the answers of respondents, and yet it is the reasons themselves that are of greater interest to the researcher. Open-ended questions yield more data, but are difficult to analyse. These weaknesses are taken into account in my questionnaire design and in my interpretation of the findings.

For the children’s questionnaire (please see Appendix III), I had to select vocabulary and terminology very carefully to suit the children’s literacy ability and experience. For this reason, I used some familiar symbols, such as a happy face, and a sad face, as options for answering some questions. Closed questions in the children’s questionnaire are followed by an invitation to give the reasons for answering in a particular way. The return rate for the children’s questionnaire was 94%, the attendance rate for that day (33 copies out of 35 were received). This children’s questionnaire was completed in class by participants with my help to avoid misunderstanding of questions. I read out each question with the children to help them complete the questionnaire.

For the parental questionnaire (please see Appendix IV), the language used is jargon free and can be understood by adults. The parental questionnaire was

taken home by the young children and I asked for it to be returned in five days; 100% were received (35 copies out of 35). This questionnaire was designed for parents of the participants to evaluate the teaching and learning process in relation to two topics (Separation and Loss, and War), to make suggestions for further teaching on the topic of Earthquake, to understand parents’ viewpoints about teaching sensitive and traumatic issues to young children through picture books, and to help me understand how the children were responding to this project through interaction with other family members at home.

The reasons for using the children’s questionnaire in this study were to evaluate the teaching materials and methods employed and to give the children an opportunity for self-assessment. In this research, it is the children who are at the heart of the whole project and it is they who can provide a far more complete account of their learning and reflection on it than I or anyone else (Scott, 2000:107). The 24 questions in the questionnaire consisted of personal reading background questions and questions relating to the sensitive and traumatic issues in the texts.

The children’s questionnaire was designed in Mandarin and since it was designed for young children, the phoneme for each Mandarin character was displayed alongside the particular character in order to help the children to spell out the characters themselves. The questionnaire both comprised a mixture of open ended questions (such as: Which activities you enjoy the most? Please explain.) and closed questions (such as: How much did you enjoy the activities we did?). To the former, respondents were asked to respond in words, phrases or extended comments. Open ended questions allow “respondents unlimited choices... [and] provides a more accurate sense of what respondents are actually thinking” (Johnson, 2002: 67). Closed questions offered multiple choice options and respondents had to tick the appropriate box(es) provided.

ended questions and one was a closed question. These seven questions asked parents about their child’s experience of the stories and topics introduced in class, their own perspectives on teaching these sensitive issues and whether they had noticed any behavioural change in their child since the topics and stories were introduced.

Oppenheim (1992:47) emphasises the importance of piloting questionnaires. He claims that,

Questionnaires do not emerge fully-fledged; they have to be created or adapted, fashioned and developed to maturity… Piloting can help not only with the wording of questions but also with procedural matters such as the design of the letter of introduction, the ordering of question sequences and the reduction of non-response rates.

Both the parental questionnaire and the children’s questionnaire were piloted before they were actually used. Initially, the parental questionnaire was piloted by primary school teachers in Taiwan (N=2). The questionnaire was piloted before it was actually used by a group of Mandarin-speaking students from Taiwan (N=3) who were studying in the English Language Teaching Department at the University of Warwick. These students were already primary school teachers in Taiwan and their background knowledge made them a most suitable group for piloting the questionnaire. However, though their feedback was valuable, Sapsford and Jupp (1996:103) remind us that pilot questionnaires need to represent to the main sample or population to be studied,

For it to work effectively the pilot sample must be representative of the variety of individuals which the main study is intended to cover. Pilot investigations do not need to represent, in the statistical sense, the correct proportions of different types of individuals in the population because the purpose is not to estimate the true proportions of such types but to cover the entire range of replies which might be given to any of the possible questions in the first draft of the questionnaire.

For this reason, I then piloted the children’s questionnaire with a group of young Taiwanese children (N=4) aged seven and eight to ensure that the questions were relevant, the wording clear, and the meaning unambiguous. The parental questionnaire was piloted by a group of parents (N=3) in Taiwan, with an educational background from secondary school to postgraduate school to ensure that the questions were clear. Changes to the questionnaire were made after the second pilot.

In the children’s questionnaire, all twenty-four pilot questions were completed and answered by the aforementioned groups. Feedback from the piloted questionnaire suggested the following:

Only one question needed rewording, since there was no need for the explanation of mother tongue.

Q2. (Before piloting):你 ㄋㄧ ˇ的 ˙ ㄉ ㄜ 母 ㄇ ㄨ ˇ語 ㄩ ˇ (最 ㄗ ㄨ ㄟ ˋ早 ㄗ ㄠ ˇ在ㄗㄞ ˋ家 ㄐ ㄧ ㄚ 用 ㄩ ㄥ ˋ來 ㄌㄞ ˊ聽 ㄊ ㄧ ㄥ 、說 ㄕ ㄨ ㄛ 的 ˙ ㄉ ㄜ 語ㄩ ˇ 言 ㄧㄢ ˊ)是 ㄕ ˋ 什 ㄕㄜ ˊ麼 ˙ ㄇ ㄛ ?

(What is your mother tongue? (The language you first used when listening and speaking at home)

Q2. (After):你 ㄋㄧ ˇ的 ˙ ㄉ ㄜ 母 ㄇ ㄨ ˇ語ㄩ ˇ 是 ㄕ ˋ 什 ㄕㄜ ˊ麼 ˙ ㄇ ㄛ ?

(What is your mother tongue?)

For the parental questionnaire, all seven pilot questions were answered by the two groups mentioned above. The term of ‘child’ (小 朋 友 ) in the questionnaire was changed to ‘baby’ (寶 貝 ) in Mandarin after piloting because the classroom teacher used the word ‘baby’ with parents. Other feedback from the piloted questionnaire suggested the following changes:

Three questions on the parental questionnaire needed rewording, two of them to use more informal terms and the other to simplify response:

Q 2. (Before piloting):以您的論點而言, 請問您覺得小朋友對這些故事有

(From your point of view, may I ask if you think your child is interested in these stories?)

Q 2. (After piloting):以您的論點而言, 您覺得寶貝對這些故事有興趣嗎?

(From your point of view, do you think your baby is interested in these stories?)

Q 4. (Before piloting): 請問您們會覺得跟小朋友談論這些議題合不合適?

請試說明之。(May I ask if you think it is appropriate to discuss these issues with children? Please explain the reason.)

Q 4. (After piloting):以您的論點而言, 跟寶貝談論這些議題合不合適?

(From your point of view, is it appropriate to discuss these issues with babies?)

Q 6. (Before piloting): 活 動 結 束 之 際 , 您 們 對 整 個 活 動 設 計 的 滿 意 度？ (Now that your child has completed two-thirds of the project, are you satisfied with what has happened so far?)

Q 6. (After piloting): 活動結束之際, 請勾選您對整個活動設計滿意

度.(Now that your child has completed two-thirds of the project, please tick you satisfaction with what has happened so far?)

I modified the final version of the questionnaire after I got feedback from both pilot groups. The final version of children’s questionnaire (see Appendix III) was given to the participants, who completed part A and part B (questions 1-9) to elicit their personal background details and reading experiences at the beginning of this project. The children were then asked to complete part C and part D (questions 10-24) to reveal their reading interests and in particular the way they interacted with picture books. They were also asked to evaluate the whole teaching project at the end of my time in school. The parental questionnaire was taken home for parents of participants to complete before the third topic (Earthquake) was taught.