Research methods: the search for the right techniques and tools

I believed that participatory techniques would entail the maximum involvement of young people, mutual trust and an open forum for debate. Activities were divided to address three different age groups of the participants; those at primary level, those at secondary school and teacher trainees at the local teacher training college. I found that an effective way of carrying out research with young people is to combine traditional research methods used with adults with techniques considered more suitable for use with children.46 Thus they are not patronised by using only special ‘child-friendly’ techniques. For example, Hart (1997) believes that collective drawing to describe environment can be empowering for young people, but it should not be assumed that drawings are a simple ‘natural’ method to use with children, as this depends on their actual and perceived ability to draw. As I found in Mozambique, children felt they lacked drawing and painting abilities, which was closely related to their lack of this kind of practice. Since most of them came from rather poor families and lived in a poor area, only a few children had access to television, books and magazines and other visual images. Restricted contact with visual imagery limits the range of visual images that children produce (Bradley, 1995). All this required reflective thinking from me in order to recognise the disadvantages and opportunities of the methods I wanted to use in my research with the young people. In the following section I explore the process of finding the right techniques, their application and the implications for my changing role in different types of activities.

Debates

In the outset of my fieldwork, after the preliminary visits to the local secondary school, I decided to start with debates in two different classes. I made this choice for two reasons; on                                                                                                                

74 one hand the majority of the students expressed their interest in participating in the research activities and on the other I thought of using this opportunity as an initiation process to get a general idea of the challenging issues facing local youth. I used the issues emerging from the debates as discussion points at focus group meetings and workshops later in the research. The debates were an open forum to make it possible for all the students to voice their personal opinions. While I probed where I needed more information or directed the dialogue to themes of concern, it was the participants who did most of the talking while I listened. Sometimes I chose only to listen and observe the dynamics among the students. I did not want to impose any ideas or views, especially in the preliminary stage of my research:

The debate was very interesting. I backed out from the circle and observed the discussion. Some students were very engaged and they took the discussion seriously while others made provoking comments and laughed. Some of the students looked much younger than others

(…) I noticed a couple of girls and boys who didn’t take active part in the discussions. (Debate, Beira: 02/09/09)

Sessions with seventh graders

As the debates with the secondary school students appeared to be successful I decided to use the same technique with the primary school students. As in the secondary school, the classes were large, with over 70 students, yet I never experienced all the students being present. The teachers could not give me any clear explanation for this. I observed, however, that there were more students attending lessons shortly before the exams, for revision.

To start with I spent several weeks observing lessons in Educação Moral e Cívica (Moral and Civic Education) before I started to interact with the class. After the first few meetings with the seventh graders I noted that the students seemed to be withdrawn. I had the feeling that they were not used to discussion, especially not with an adult and not on sensitive topics such as sexual and reproductive health. I kept asking myself: ‘How do I give them a voice, and

how do I engage them in the research process?’ The students seemed to be missing the

culture of communication (Christensen, 1999) in the structured classroom situation. When I observed them outside the classroom they behaved without restraint and communicated with each other freely. This led me to think that teacher-centred learning in the classroom did not encourage conversation about sensitive topics. I also knew that culturally children are not expected to talk with adults about certain issues. I assumed that they had probably never met an adult who was prepared to communicate on a peer level, honestly and confidentially, and were therefore unfamiliar with opportunities to share their thoughts or be listened to. I was

not sure where to start. I thought: ‘If they don’t talk with adults at school and at home, why

should they talk to me? How do I initiate this relation in the best way?’ I shared my doubts

with one of the teachers, who showed me a different perspective: ‘They don’t know you, yet

they know you’re different: you talk with them, you listen to them (…) they treat you as a friend’ (Fieldnotes, Beira: 10/09/09).

In the following sessions I used the opportunity presented by the fact that the class was working on issues of adolescence to indicate that I was interested in discussing issues that adolescents might face, and especially sensitive issues. The teacher seemed pleased not to have to go into depth on the topic himself: ‘Such a great opportunity to use your knowledge

about gender abuse (…) and you can also advise those children on these difficult issues’

(Fieldnotes, Beira: 10/09/09). I was surprised, because in my earlier observations I had found him engaging in the lessons. I wondered whether he saw it as an opportunity to take some time off, or whether he was generously concerned about issues the students might have wanted to discuss. ‘He was smiling and quickly packing his papers away (…) ’I think you’re

going to have really good experience with this group of children’, he said’ (Fieldnotes, Beira:

10/09/09). After a couple of sessions he just handed in the register to me and stayed in the teachers’ room doing administrative work while I was doing activities with the students. In a way I was happy about this because I observed that the students felt more relaxed when he was not in the room. They were less embarrassed and more open to talk freely about the issues that concerned them.

Today’s session was much better; the students seemed to be much more relaxed and more talkative. I wonder whether it was because the teaching situation changed more into a debate; or was it because the teacher wasn’t there? By now, they should also know me and feel at ease. It could be the combination of many things (…) I wish we could have changed the setup in the classroom though, to make the situation even less ‘school-like’.

(Fieldnotes, Beira: 14/09/09)

The next step was to introduce a device in the form of a question box to help the students to open up. They could drop questions about any personal issue related to sexuality, reproductive health, sexual behaviour, abuse, feelings, love, etc. into the box. The questions were anonymous, with only the writer’s gender indicated, and varied from anatomical/medical, such as: ‘How does a girl “catch” pregnancy?’ ‘Why are my breasts

small?’ ‘What do I do when I get my first menstrual period?’ Other queries related to sexual

76 I assumed that the questions the students asked were closely related to how they viewed and understood their social and cultural world. I felt that this was the ideal starting point for focus group discussions with them.

Additionally I decided to arrange a session with a doctor as I did not feel I could address certain medical matters. I contacted a young doctor from the local hospital, Dr Carlos, who agreed to facilitate ‘Ask a Doctor’ sessions with his female friend, Dr Louisa (see Figure 3.3 and 3.4). The students were divided into female and male groups at the beginning of the session and later amalgamated for more general issues. These sessions were organised prior to the focus group discussion to make sure that everybody had basic knowledge of the sexuality issues. Interestingly, despite the fact that the sessions were outside the school setting and the students were encouraged to use the facilitators’ names, they persisted in referring to me as ‘teacher’ and to the doctors as ‘doctor’. They remained aware of our different status, positions and identities.

Figure 3.3 Students writing questions Figure 3.4 ‘Ask a Doctor’ session

At this point in the course of my research I become conscious that my role had been changing from research to facilitator to teacher accordingly to the different activities. While adopting different roles I needed to reflect on the action I was initiating and to consider the next steps. As the intention with action is that one person improves their work for their own benefit and the benefit of others, I felt that the situation required my review of the aims of my study and a re-examination of my methodological approach in order to ensure the research was progressing.

I felt we had exhausted the issues with the seventh graders …. as they had started to repeat the same topics …. I thought it was time to get back to the community in order to approach

adults once more to discuss the issues highlighted by the students. (Fieldnotes: Beira,

04/03/09)

I believed that increasing my self-reflection would influence the research process and help me think of new avenues into my research. I thought that I could use participant observation and issues from the sessions to work in depth at another level through focus group discussions with adults from the local community and youths.

Focus group discussions

I conducted focus group discussions with members of the local community, students of the local primary and secondary schools and teacher trainees from the teacher training college. The focus group discussions covered different topics, most of which addressed the issues that had emerged during the secondary school student debates.

Organising focus group discussions with youths was much easier than gathering a group of adults, who were usually busy with housework or taking care of their machamba (cultivation plot). The discussions with adults were carried out at the administrative community points after I negotiated and got permission from the community leaders.

As mentioned above, the question box was used as a starting point for the discussions. This approach allowed the students to initiate and direct the dialogue and to be actively involved in the participatory process (Hart, 1997). The activities usually took place after lessons when we could use an empty classroom, or in a hut in the schoolyard, except for the focus group discussions with teacher trainees where the conditions provided by the institute ensured space for discretion and confidentiality. I conducted single- and mixed-gender group discussions to explore different participant views as well as the power relations among them. This way of arranging the groups also allowed me to observe how girls and boys behaved accordingly. The students chose the subject for discussion from the questions taken from the box. During the focus group discussions the issues regarded as important by the participants were put up on a ‘problem wall’. In this way the participants could relate them to their own lives and discuss problems they had encountered and why these problems occurred. For example, ‘My

uncle keeps coming into my room’. The problem: the uncle has authority over his niece. The discussion: does he have the right to exert his authority?’ (Fieldnotes, Beira: 10/09/09).

In the beginning my role was primarily that of observer. I listened rather than spoke, letting the students participate as they wished. All along I was also interested in capturing their

78 interactions and the different power relations in the groups. It was easy to observe the different levels of development among the students, especially among the seventh graders, and they themselves were clearly aware of these differences. For example, some of the male students were more outspoken than others, and tried to ridicule the shyer boys:

Researcher: What are the possible consequences of sexual abuse? Boy 1: Pregnancy!!!! [shouting loudly]

Boy 2: Oh he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. He isn’t even an adolescent yet. [The