Semi-Structured Interviews

Though the previous section focused on explaining the contribution of the questionnaire to investigate EAP views and perceptions about curriculum issues, this instrument is limited in its length and depth of responses to further investigate the research phenomenon (Muijs, 2011, p. 39). This is why the research investigation will depend on the use of semi-structured interviews as the primary qualitative method which will uncover deeper understandings on curriculum issues as perceived by EAP practitioners in CAS colleges in Oman. The interview schedule consisted of 23 questions categorized according to the main research questions (see Appendix 2).

The research oriented interview was defined by Cannell and Kahn (as cited in Radnor, 1994, p. 13) as ‘a two-person conversation initiated by the interviewer for the purpose of obtaining research-relevant information.’ This particular definition provides a general understanding of interviewing as a qualitative method as it highlights the aspect of ‘research-relevant information.’ This can be manifested

121

through the nature of interviewing as an instrument which requires the content of the interview to be oriented towards providing deep answers to the main research questions.

Radnor (1994) further explains that the significance of interviewing as a research tool lies in enabling the interpretive researcher to recognize, sort and distinguish ‘the subtleties of meaning’ and the multiple realities which have emerged during this interactive process. This aspect of interaction is quite important to our understanding of the interviewing process because it is through this interaction between the researcher and the researched that the truth about human actions and experiences can be illuminated. Interviewing can be seen as an interactive platform where ‘people feel more capable of improving their practices and relationships one with the other in the pedagogical context’ (Radnor, 1994, p. 10).

In the context of the current research, there will be more emphasis directed to the multiple perceptions and perspectives of the research participants in order to bring about a better understanding on the nature of EAP curriculum challenges at our colleges. This is why interviewing is viewed as the most adequate qualitative instrument as it will reveal to the interpretive researcher, the participants’ feelings, intentions, meanings, and thoughts on the topic being investigated. This research instrument can be seen as the most appropriate manifestation of participants’ inner thoughts and world views. However, this interactive meaning-making process should also account for the researcher’s thoughts and interpretations since it is through his/her eyes information is gathered, filtered and social reality is being constructed.

There are many types of interviewing techniques which can be used in qualitative research such as structured standardized interviews, semi-structured interviews and unstructured interviews. The current research will make use of the semi- structured interviews due to their advantages for the nature of this research investigation. One reason why this particular interviewing technique was selected is because of its flexibility and its adaptive nature. Robson (2002) discussed how semi-structured interviews require the use of predetermined questions which

122

allows the interviewer the freedom to modify the order of the questions according to what he or she finds most appropriate. The interviewer can change the wording of the questions, give further explanations on their content, and omit or add new ones.

Another important reason why this interviewing style is selected as a primary method is because of its compatibility with the epistemological orientations of this research. Conducting semi-structured interviews will allow the emergence of the subjective meaning-making process which is emblematic of interpretive research. Semi-structured interviews rely on the use of pre-determined questions which are designed by the researcher. Therefore, the researcher can take the lead in this form of interviewing as the professional conversation will be focused on answering the main research questions. Lichtman (2014, p. 255) argued ‘the issue of power dynamics can make a participant feel vulnerable.’ Though, considering such issue is quite necessary for the interviewer, we need to come to the realization that the act of interpretive qualitative interviewing is subjective by nature. This truth has become widely accepted in qualitative research which sees the researcher as ‘the instrument through which data is gathered, retrieved, and reported’ (Lichtman, 2014, p. 255). It was further highlighted by Esterberg (2002) how using semi- structured interviews does conform to the explorative nature of this social investigation. This is because semi-structured interviews are targeted to allow the participants to articulate their opinions and thoughts in their own words.

The identification of the interview participants will depend on the use of purposeful sampling which requires deciding on a certain criterion. The criterion used in selecting the participants in this qualitative phase of the research is that they must all be EAP teachers who have developed a sufficient knowledge of EAP courses and therefore can reflect on the EAP curriculum challenges at the colleges. Before the data collection stage, the researcher established communication with EAP level-coordinators and they all cooperated by providing the researcher with the necessary information. During the Fall Semester 2015 which was concurrent with the data collection stage, new teachers were recruited and assigned to teach EAP

123

courses. My intention was to limit participants by including only teachers who have developed an awareness of the EAP curriculum and its existing challenges and are willing to take part in the study. The decision to select participants who taught EAP courses for at least two semesters was so they could give their views and voice their concerns openly on the problematic areas of EAP curriculum at the colleges. Four expatriate teachers and six Omani teachers were selected from each college based on their teaching experiences of teaching EAP courses. Though the majority of teaching staff members at CAS colleges are expatriates, only few have developed a full awareness of the nature of EAP courses and therefore were selected to participate in the interviews. This is due to the nature of their employment contracts which in most cases are not secure and also because many expat teachers do not stay for a long time in their teaching positions as many regularly seek better employment opportunities.

The study consisted of 20 semi-structured interviews for which ten participants were selected from College of Sohar and ten other participants selected from College of Rustaq. The emergent nature of interpretive research allowed the researcher to include more participants whenever he or she felt the collected data was not sufficient. The researcher intended to increase the quality of the collected data by approaching the intended participants individually in order to obtain the consent of those who have more experience in teaching EAP courses and willing to take part in the research investigation.

With regards to the location of the interviews, the researcher made further arrangements with the Learning Resource Centers in both Colleges to allocate a quiet and convenient room to conduct the interviews. Intended participants were provided the flexibility to specify the time which best suited their circumstances. The interview questions were prepared and piloted among a group of EAP teachers from various CAS colleges. Necessary modifications were made by the researcher to refine the interview questions and prepare the interview schedule. To ensure the quality of the interview, 5 interviews were conducted to pilot the

124

interview questions. This piloting stage helped the researcher in improving the following aspects of the interview schedule:

The piloting stage revealed a very important aspect to the researcher which is the significance of using probing statements in the situations where the participants provide short answers that did not seem sufficient to answer the research questions. The piloting stage provided a good preparation for the researcher through the use of various probing techniques to extract more elaborate accounts from the participants on the main issues investigated in the interview.

This piloting stage also helped in further refining some of the interview questions which were not clearly comprehended by the participants in the piloting stage. Some interview items were restated to enhance the clarity of the interview and to ensure that the participants are fully aware of the main constructs of the interviewing process.

A special recording device was used by the researcher and the participants were informed on this and their consent was sought prior to conducting the interviews. The recorded sound files were securely transferred from the recording device to the researcher’s personal computer.

In his depiction of the interviewing process, Kvale (2015, p. 20) stated interviewing is ‘a knowledge-producing activity’ which is characterized by its inter-subjectivity. It is during this inter-subjective social practice, the researcher and researched construct the truth about the investigated social phenomenon.

The practice of research interviewing as highlighted by Kvale (2015) not only requires the cultivation of conversation skills but it also requires that the researcher should be capable of handling this sort of professional conversation so that it will be directed to the production of knowledge. To maintain a friendly atmosphere, the researcher attempted to make the interview sounds like a daily life conversation with fellow colleagues about a theme of a mutual interest. The first two minutes before the interview started were used to have a short informal

125

talk with the participants after which the researcher introduced a briefing for the participants so that they can become fully aware about what the researcher wants to know.