Semi-structured Interviews

The third investigative tool that was used in this study was interviews. Interviews are essential sources in qualitative study because well informed interviewees can provide important insights into the process under study (Yin, 2009). Interviews also are necessary in qualitative study as it enables the researcher to enter into the participants’ perspective and experiences, and make sense of their world (Hatch, 2002; Patton, 2002). Because of their interactive nature, interviews have many advantages over other types of data collection strategies (Best & Kahn, 1998). Interviews can obtain unique information or interpretation held by the person interviewed. They are particularly useful to ascertain participants’ views, feelings, perceptions, and retrospective accounts of events (Rossman & Rallis, 2011), since these cannot be directly observed (Merriam, 2009; Patton, 2002). Bogdan and Biklen (2003) further indicate that “good interviews produce rich data filled with words that reveal the respondents’ perspectives” (p. 104).

74

Of the three types of interviews: structured, semi-structured, and unstructured (Fontana & Frey, 2005), this study employed semi structured interviews because these allowed the researcher to control the direction of the interviews and to have more opportunities to acquire extensive follow-up responses (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003; McDonough & McDonough, 2014). Semi-structured-interviews allowed more sufficient flexibility for the researcher to uncover the different perspectives of participants than structured interviews. Thus, semi-structured interviews allowed for flexibility while also providing

“comparable data across subjects” (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003, p. 104).

A semi-structured interview usually begins with open-ended questions followed by prompts and probes (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003; Gillham, 2005). In the current study, the semi-structured interviews were carried out in Bahasa Indonesia employed open-ended questions that were organized into three categories: characteristics of good quality PD, the relationship between participation in PD/TSGs and teacher self-efficacy, and teachers’ perception of the importance of self-efficacy on their teaching practice (see Appendix I). The use of the three categories helped the researcher to find out details of

the participants’ perceptions and experiences about PD and TSG activities. These

categories also allowed the researcher to investigate the relationship between participation in PD/TSGs and their self-efficacy, and their perceptions of the effect of self-efficacy on their teaching practice. These three categories are related to the questions in the open-ended questions in the questionnaires. This was done to double-

check and expand on what the participants’ stated in the questionnaires and what they

informed of in the semi-structured interviews.

3.6.3.1Semi-structured interview pilot

The pilot for the semi-structured interviews was conducted with three senior secondary EFL teachers in District A. All three teachers were not involved as participants in this study. Information Sheets and Participation Consent Forms were given to them. A time and place to conduct the pilot was set that was mutually convenient. Each teacher was asked for permission to record the interviews to get a picture of the recording procedure and the length of the interview process. Each teacher was asked for suggestion/advice in

75 relation to the questions in the interviews. The feedback was used to develop the questions in the final interview protocol.

3.6.3.2Conducting semi-structured interviews

The interviews were conducted from 10th December 2013 to 24th December 2013. The main questions that were asked in the interviews were given to the participants a week before the actual interviews. This enabled the participants to have sufficient time to read and understand the questions, which were written in Bahasa Indonesia.

Prior to the interviews, the participants were once again informed about the study and their rights as participants, in addition to the earlier written information. Once agreed, they were invited to sign the Consent Form (see Appendix F). As all interviews were audio recorded, the participants were also reminded about the recording and their right to stop it at any time. In addition to audio recording, the researcher also took notes during the interviews to highlight some important points made by participants.

All the participants were interviewed once. They were interviewed individually at times and venues convenient to them. They could choose to be interviewed in English or Bahasa (Indonesian language) to provide them choice of expressing their ideas. All the participants chose to be interviewed in Bahasa. The interview questions focused on teacher self-efficacy, PD/TSGs, and the effect of PD/TSGs on teacher self-efficacy (see Appendix I). In particular, participants were asked about PD/TSG activities they attended, and their perceptions of the effects of these activities on their self-efficacy and their practice. In addition, although there were some predetermined questions, the researcher could still probe and follow up on unanticipated comments from participants (Seidman, 2006). Each interviews lasted no more than one hour.

Once an interview was transcribed, the transcript was returned to each participant for member checking which allowed them an opportunity to read through their transcriptions before and after the researcher translated them into English. Participant checking is important as a way to avoid any misunderstanding or misinterpretation of

76

transcription and did not request any changes. A summary of the interview process can be seen in Appendix K.