This section outlines the qualitative research interview and precedes an account of how I set up and carried out the group interview (4.11). It is followed in 4.13 by an account of the individual interviews. The research tool involved in both was the in-depth semi-structured interview, which Rossman and Rallis (1998:124) identify as ‘the hallmark of qualitative research’.
Interviewing is one of several research methods that may be used in qualitative research and is a central feature in AR. As a dialogic process, interviewing should be regarded as a means of both data generation and data collection. One implication of the interview is the point made by Baker (1997) that questions, instead of being seen as a means of obtaining data, are themselves an integral part of the data. This is linked to the concept of interviews as co-constructed texts between the interviewer and interviewee, in
which interviewer turns and questions guide the ‘data’ that the interviewee ‘provides’ on such dimensions as relevance, focus and causal relations.
I chose interviewing as the central method for data generation. This was due firstly to the congenial atmosphere of the IYTE writing unit, as well as the ease with which it was possible to arrange for follow-up member-validation of transcripts. The section below deals with the methodology of interviewing in two main parts. It firstly looks at interviewing procedures and techniques, then after a brief introduction it outlines matters for consideration when interviews for this study were being set up, and explains question types, questioning strategies and degrees of directiveness.
It is important to emphasise here that since the interviews took place in real time, care was required both when setting things up and during the event. Opportunities in the group interview arose for gaining in-depth insights that, after analysing the transcript, I realised were lost perhaps due to a lack of concentration as the conversation moved onto areas I felt were of less significance to the study. A major advantage of interviewing was that since it was recorded and followed up with a transcript, revisiting and re-experiencing the talk was fully possible. This enabled the possibility of a follow-up individual interviews to probe identified but previously missed topics.
4.8.1 Setting up the group interview
Working through a checklist of points was vital when setting up the group interview. Preliminary questions concerned exactly who the interviewees
should be, how many there should be, and whether they should be interviewed in an order that best served my research aim. Although I scanned the list, no particular order other than a group interview suggested itself. I felt it would be unwise, though, to select interviewees that were either over- reticent or domineering, while currently over-busy teachers were also excluded.
4.8.2 Interviewees
At the outset, I invited six teachers at IYTE, a convenience sample, to participate in the interview phase of the investigative study. One later declined and thus the number was reduced to five. All names are real; pseudonyms were offered but not requested. The teachers were: Nihat and Ömer (male) along with Medine, Eylem and Devrim (female). Nihat and Ömer were both students at doctoral level and thus had experience of research matters; each also had experience of teaching EAP writing at IYTE. Medine, an experienced teacher of EAP writing, had recently completed her Master’s in ELT. Eylem had five years’ experience of EAP writing. Devrim was relatively new to teaching EAP writing.
It is interesting to note here one of the problems of a long-term study such as this. Due to their own doctoral thesis time constraints, both Ömer and Nihat had to leave this study for a short but key period. Medine left for maternity leave, while Eylem married and followed her husband to work in Istanbul. This aspect of the study is further discussed in chapter thirteen, which illustrates possible limitations of AR studies. On reflection, at this point in the study I was
not sensitive to the ethics involved in gaining permission from students prior to their participation in the study. Appendix J indicates how prior to Stage Two conferencing I explained to students what their involvement in this study would mean. I later also requested permission from all students involved in this study for their full names to appear in the final version of this thesis. This letter appears in Appendix M.
4.8.3 Interview considerations
A key consideration at this point was when and where to carry out the group interview. Of global concern was giving myself sufficient time to set up and fit the interview into my research schedule, while of local concern was the time and energy interviewees had available in their working week. I had to consider whether they could all make it for a punctual start at the appointed time. From the options that were available, a quiet but familiar nearby room was used. I asked potential interviewees to let me know the most suitable day and time for them to take part in the interview and chose accordingly. Interviewees were made aware beforehand of the approximate length of the interview and how much time prior to and post the interview they would be asked to wait. They were also made aware that the interview would be in group format with the possibility of individual interviews only briefly mentioned. At a later date all present at the group interview agreed to participate in individual interviews.
4.8.4 Reasons for group interview format
I felt that as all participants were colleagues, a group interview with less inhibiting circumstances would offer the possibility for generation of rich data
by bringing up themes and bouncing ideas off each other. It may be argued that such an interview format may be inhibiting for interviewees who perhaps find it hard to compete for the floor during the discussion, and that persons with domineering natures would take charge of proceedings. Further analysis of the transcript indicated the floor had in fact been dominated, and that reticent teachers who may have had more to contribute had been prevented from doing so by one of the participants. Another advantage of my follow-up individual interviews was that points not covered with all interviewees due to such members were returned to and further probed.
4.8.5 Research ethics
Ethical considerations need to be observed at each stage of carrying out research. Unwary participants may not initially consider the possible harm their comments may cause themselves or others. The ethics of recording the research interview are further dealt with in 4.9. At this point conditions of data recording, confidentiality, editing and data dissemination were clearly established. In a letter soliciting participation in this study I emphasised that any comments made by interviewees which they felt might be misconstrued could be deleted from the transcript after the interview was over. I pointed out initially that data would be read only by my supervisor and used by myself for later analysis of emerging research topics. On discovering it later, I informed participants that a second supervisor and later upgrade panel members at Warwick University would also read the work, and that the research would become a document available for public reading. Neither at this point nor later did interviewees show concern over these matters.
4.8.6 Permission and technical matters
To interview participants and for a room to be made available in which to do so, I obtained permission in writing from IYTE authorities beforehand. A preliminary check with the authorities was made to see that no other meetings that may have clashed were scheduled for the intended interviewing time and date. A final check of these details was carried out the day before and on the day of the interviews. Appendices A-C demonstrate how I obtained permission to set up and carry out the group interview in an ethically suitable manner. I prepared my interviewer’s list of questions and points to cover in advance with main and subsidiary questions and interview points clearly laid out. Other matters addressed before the group interview concerned the efficiency of recording equipment, which at the time appeared unproblematic; 4.9.3 outlines how it was perhaps unwise to assume so.
4.8.7 Developing an interview guide
It is unwise to interview without consideration of what the aim of the interview is, or what it is setting out to achieve. The key research question concerned discovering how teachers of writing in IYTE provided feedback on students’ essay writing, and all further considerations in my guide revolved around this. Consideration was given to the construction, and placement in the interview, of the key questions I was seeking answers to. Where possible, the interview was based around main and subsidiary questions that were also linked to main and subsidiary topics. As my research aim in the investigative study was to locate current attitudes to feedback, this was inserted in the middle of my interview with carefully-constructed and increasingly focused back-up
questions. I felt it was important not to over-emphasise the ‘big questions’ or those which I believed may have led to a too-tightly structured interview.
It is important to see things from the point of view of those being interviewed. Interviewees throughout this study were attending out of goodwill and possibly had better things to do; overlong questions might not elicit informative responses and therefore I adopted a gentler approach. To ‘warm up’ the interviewee, and put them at ease, a suitable ‘grand tour’ question was inserted, such as that suggested by Spradley (1979), i.e. “Talk me through a typical writing lesson” and “Could you explain to me..?”. Richards (2003) suggests that, after planning a list of questions and analysing it from the point of view of the interviewees, a pilot interview be carried out and, on the basis of this, any necessary changes should be made. Finding participants for a group pilot interview was, I felt, going to add to the logistical load when setting things up. Pilot interviews are perhaps more advisable for individual interviews than for group ones, yet because individual interviews in this study were based on specific questions relating to the earlier group interview described above, I felt they would be unsuitable.
4.8.8 Summary of interview preparation
I made details and conditions apparent to interviewees, and all were expected to turn up. Goodwill and courtesy were uppermost in my mind at all times during data generation via the interview since interviewees stand to gain little and, if they feel their dignity or reputation is being compromised, they need only walk away. It should be noted too that as interviewees may change their
minds, it is best to carry out the interview as soon as possible. After a week of setting things up, immediately prior to recording the group interview, one of my carefully chosen interviewees (one who had also taken me a while to persuade to attend) informed me only minutes before we began that she could not attend due to family reasons. Although displeased, I could only accept this. Inwardly I had to bear in mind that her assistance may have been required later in the study; as things turned out it was not. The presence of other participants suggested they did not feel they were obliged to attend, but still did so.
4.8.9 Reflections on group interview preparation
After this, my first experience of interviewing in this study, I felt that given the possibility to repeat the event I would do things very differently. Having devoted time and energy to getting permission for it, then setting up the group interview and writing an interview guide, I struggled to deal with what I had imagined would be the formalities of finding the key to the room in which we were to record and also to find two suitable audio-cassette recorders. Two copies were made in case one failed to function correctly. On reflection, I had overlooked the fact that audio-cassette players in my institution were only used for that purpose; hardly any had recording functions. This resulted in hunting around at the last minute. Audio-tapes on which to record were bought only an hour before the interview. As a sound-check had not been carried out in the recording room, key parts of my taped interview proved to be either partially or totally inaudible. A simple sound check would have led me to firstly realise the weakness of the recording equipment and secondly to
invite interviewees to sit much nearer the internal microphone. Both would have caused less anxiety when transcribing the discussion.
Problems experienced during the group interview led me to make different arrangements for the individual interviews (4.13). As a result of problems with audio-recording I firstly borrowed a digital voice recorder (4.9.3) then invested in a digital voice-recorder which I used in a problem-free manner for all interviews carried out in Stage Two conferencing.