4.6.1 Sampling Strategy
Sampling is the process of selecting a portion of the population to represent an entire population (Diamantopoulos & Schlegelmilch, 2000). There are two broad categories of sampling strategies, namely, probability sampling and non-probability sampling. Probability sampling refers to a situation where every unit of study in the population has an equal chance of being selected (Thyer, 2010:41), and non-probability sampling, as the name suggests, does not give study units equal probability of selection. In this study, non-probability purposive sampling was used to select the research participants. The non-probability approach allowed the researcher to handpick the sample according
76
to the nature of the research problem and the phenomenon under study (Marlow,
2011). Sharma (2017:751) adds that, “Purposive sampling represents a group of
different non-probability sampling techniques. Also known as judgmental, selective or subjective sampling, purposive sampling relies on the judgment of the researcher when it comes to selecting the units (e.g., people, cases/organisation, events, and pieces of data) that are to be studied.” The main goal of purposive sampling is to focus on characteristics of a population that are of interest, which will best enable answering the research questions.
4.6.2 Sample size
For the quantitative component of the study, 52 school learners from grades 8 to 12 at Taurus Secondary School were selected. This school had a total population of 751 learners. This school was chosen because residents of the area were considered to be economically disadvantaged. Many lived in extreme poverty due to high unemployment rates and social problems that include drugs, alcohol, gambling, teenage pregnancy,
gangsterism and violence (Marimuthu, 2014). The qualitative componentof the sample
included twelve school learners from grades 8 to 12, six educators, the principal, the head of department of Life Orientation, and seven parents of the learners from Taurus Secondary School in Chatsworth. The 52 learners who were included in the sample were learners who were willing to participate in the study. Many of the learners’ parents/guardians did not give informed consent for the learners to take part in the study. The 12 learners who were included in the qualitative study were part of the 52 learners who took part. The seven parents, on the other hand, were not necessarily linked to any of the learners in the study.
4.7
Data collection methods
4.7.1 Gaining Access
For ethical purposes it is essential to obtain permission at a certain site and to ensure that participants are aware of what is happening, and that the researcher is granted access into an organisation (Marshall & Rossman, 2006). For the purpose of this study,
77
the research site Taurus Secondary School (pseudonym) was visited. Initially a meeting was set up with the principal to seek permission to conduct interviews and focus group discussions with the learners and educators (please see Appendix B). The purpose and the objectives of the study were explained, whereupon permission was granted. A letter of permission from the school was received (please see Appendix C). Once access was obtained the principal and head of department for Life Orientation (LO) provided the researcher with a list of potential learners to participate in the study.
4.7.2 Interviews
Interviews can be defined as a, “…qualitative research technique that involves
conducting intensive individual interviews with a small number of respondents to explore their perspectives on a particular idea, program, or situation” (Boyce & Neale, 2006:3). They are advantageous where little is known about the phenomenon under study or where individual insights are required from individuals. They are also advantageous because sensitive topics that would otherwise be difficult to explore in a group discussion can be explored, thus providing a ‘deeper’ understanding of the phenomenon under study (Silverman, 2000:8). Patton (2002) has described an
interview as, “…open-ended questions and probes yielding in-depth responses about
people’s experiences, perceptions, opinions, feelings, and knowledge.” The interview
process is also advantageous as it can, “…elicit people’s own views and descriptions
and have the benefit of uncovering issues or concerns that have not been anticipated by the researcher” (Pope, Van Royen & Baker, 2002:148).
The use of in-depth semi-structured interviews was most appropriate in this study since it allowed the researcher to explore learner resilience to school violence. Such interviews were conducted with 12 learners from grade 8-12, six educators, the head of department for LO, the principal, and seven parents.
The interviews were approximately 30 minutes in length with learners and learner parents and approximately 90 minutes in length with educators, principal and the LO head of department. Furthermore, in order to afford privacy, the interviews were
78
conducted in a vacant classroom within the school. The interviews were audio- recorded which allowed the researcher to capture the entire interview in transcribed documents. The participants were all fluent in the English language, therefore all interviews were conducted in English. The audio recordings were transcribed verbatim. The transcriptions allowed the conversation about school violence at schools to be transformed into text for interpretation and analysis.
4.7.3 Focus Group Discussions
Focus groups are useful in generating a rich understanding of participants' experiences and beliefs (Morgan, 1998). Patton (2002) pointed out that a focus group is a primary means of collecting qualitative data. In essence, focus groups are interviews conducted with groups of individuals and allow participants to interact freely to build on one another’s conversations and ideas. The information gathered is group generated. According to Denscombe (2007:115), “[A] focus group consists of a small group of people, usually between six and nine in number, who are brought together by a trained moderator (the researcher) to explore attitudes and perceptions, feelings and ideas
about a topic”. Casey & Krueger (2000:11) also maintain that focus groups provide…
“…a more natural environment than that of individual interview because participants are influencing and influenced by others – just as they are in real life”.
In this study the focus group consisted of six educators. The focus group was one hour in duration and took place in the staff room after school hours. The participants were asked to sign a consent form before starting the discussion agreeing to be part of the discussion. This method was chosen instead of interviews because it allowed for a discussion of the different opinions rather than just questions and answers.
4.7.4 Collection of quantitative data
Quantitative data were collected using the R-MATS questionnaire administered to 52 learners. Learners were given the questionnaire to fill during their break time. The questionnaire took no more than seven minutes to complete.
79