Theme 1: Analysis of the prevalence trends based on identified primary need: children and young people 5-16 years in Sunderland (2013-2017).
Theme 2: Analysis of the prevalence of identified primary need: children and young people 5-16 years based on school year and Key Stage in Sunderland (2017). Theme 3: Analysis of the prevalence of primary SEND classification: Statement of SEN,
EHC plan and SEN Support in Sunderland (2017).
Theme 4: Analysis of national data compared to Sunderland City Council data based on primary type of need identified in children and young people 5-16 years (2016).
Theme 5: Analysis of Early Years data (reception year) by primary type of need and Good Level of Development in Sunderland (2014 – 2017).
Theme 6: Analysis of interviews with the NHS and CCG.
Theme 7: Analysis of the prevalence of Autism Spectrum Disorder in the City of Sunderland (3-16 years) (2017).
Theme 8: Analysis of high needs funding.
Theme 9: Analysis of the primary need of children missing from education in Sunderland.
Theme 10: Analysis of the primary need of children and young people in a Pupil Referral Unit (PRU).
8.3 The research approach
The research team approached this study from a social constructivist viewpoint. This approach centres on the idea that people play an active part in their own meaning-making and in the co-construction of knowledge in social interaction through dialogue (Vygotsky, 1978). This process of meaning making and knowledge construction is strongly influenced by
In this study, the qualitative data collected from participants is influenced by the social culture of the organisations in which they work (Fosnot, 2005). This also results in the researchers approaching this study from an interpretivist paradigm. The interpretivist approach emphasises the importance of social interaction as the basis of knowledge- building. From this perspective the individual and society are regarded as inseparable entities (O’Donoghue, 2007).
8.4 Research methods
The researcher team employed a mixed-method approach, involving both quantitative, qualitative data collection and analysis. Detailed descriptions of the methods undertaken in this study are given in the remainder of this section. Basit (2010) argues that the researcher should choose between qualitative or quantitative methods; however, Thomas (2013) draws attention to the need for a researcher to decide how the specific form of inquiry lends itself to the research question. As Higbee, Arendale and Lundell, 2005, p. 12 stated ‘Qualitative research complements the more generalizable data that are gained through quantitative measures.’ With the requirements of the Council in consideration this research project included both quantitative and qualitative methods.
8.5 Qualitative methods
Semi-structured interviews were undertaken by one member of the research team, with two purposively sampled participants in this study. Denscombe (2010) defines purposive sampling as: ‘the researcher deliberately selects particular cases because they are seen as instances that are likely to produce the most valuable data’ (p.17). Consequently, both participants were sampled for involvement in this study because it was deemed by the researchers and the Council that these participants would yield the most relevant data for analysis in meeting the aims of this research. One participant was an employee of the National Health Service (NHS) in Sunderland, employed as a Consultant Paediatrician; the other participant was an employee of the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) as a Joint Commissioning Officer.
Cohen et al. (2013) described interviews as a move from seeing humans as data to more of a social situation where an interchange of views can occur. Thomas (2013) agrees and adds that interviews enable the researcher to have face-to-face contact with the participants which will inevitably make them react in a different way to, for example, a questionnaire. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken due to the need to investigate the values, beliefs and motives behind individuals’ experiences, in fully exploring the research questions of this study (Foddy, 1993). All interviews were undertaken inside the offices of the two participants. This was deemed to be conducive to effective data collection as, ‘people talk more freely on their own ground’ (Gillham, 2000, p.9). Exact locations of the individual interviews were chosen based on the availability of rooms at the time of the interview.
Wengraf (2001) argues that the greatest advantage of semi-structured interviewing as a research method is the flexibility. The relatively unstructured interview protocol enables both the researcher and the participant to exert control over the direction of the interview. Not only does this encourage interviewees to follow their interests within the parameters of the issues explored, but it also urges the participants to share their stories and extend their answers, due to the supportive culture that flexibility provides (Keats, 2000).
When conducting interviews, the researcher undertakes the role of the research
instrument. Therefore, the researcher’s ‘biases, angers, fears and enthusiasms influence questioning style and how what is heard is interpreted’ (Rubin and Rubin, 2004, p.12). This is recognised as a limitation of the research undertaken, however, the lead researcher who conducted these interviews did exercise self-reflexivity during data collection and data analysis, to reduce the bias that her personal values and beliefs may have presented.
Whilst it is widely accepted that interviewing produces rich data (Gillham, 2000; Siedman, 1998; Wengraf, 2001), the time consuming nature should not be ignored. Semi- structured
Additionally, a transcriber was employed to undertake the transcription of the interviews. This also prevented any researcher bias during the transcription process.
The questions were designed to gather information about the intended outcomes across four themes, as agreed by the researchers and Sunderland City Council:
• Criteria and pathways - diagnosis
• Effectiveness of multi-agency involvement • Joint commissioning provision
• Data sharing protocols to inform strategic decision across the local area • The possibility of joint data base to inform decision making
Costa (1994) advocates the use of open-ended questions that require a recall of thinking and hypothesising. ‘Would/if kinds of questions cause the brain to dream, visualize, evaluate, speculate, and imagine. Those two little words carry great power.’ (p. 111). In light of this the interview questions were designed to be open-ended (appendix 1 and 2). Arksey and Knight (1999), McNiff (2013) and Thomas (2013) suggest that semi-structured interviews adopt a more open ended approach which allows researchers to follow up responses thus gaining greater insight into the topic being discussed. There were opportunities given in both interviews to elaborate on answers and to give additional clarification.
Prior to the interviews commencing the questions were discussed and approved, no modifications were required as it was agreed the questions were straightforward. As Fulcher and Scott (1999) suggested, ‘unless the question is carefully worded, there will be scope for ambiguity and misunderstanding on the part of the respondents. As a result the answers that they give may be difficult to interpret’ (p.77). The interviewer ensured that the questions were clear and that the participants felt at ease answering them. The justification for qualitative data was that it would examine the judgements or feelings of people key to multi agency working within Sunderland City Council (Verma, 1999).