Specific data collection methods used in this study

This section discusses the data collection methods that were applied in qualitative research and specific methods that were used in the present study.

A variety of data collection methods can be used in qualitative research, including interviews, conversations, observation, focus group interviews and review of documents. Henning et al (2004: 5) elaborate on categories of data collection: “In qualitative studies the analytical instrument is largely the researcher”. This means the researcher should be well versed with qualitative methods. Henning et al (ibid) provide three categorises of data gathering in qualitative research: observation, artefacts and document studies as well as interviewing. Henning et al (2004: 19) show that there has been a shift away from positivism to ‘interpretivism’. She elaborates that in the past the studies were mostly descriptive, trying to present the reality of participants from their own views while today it is assumed that knowledge is constructed not only by observable phenomena, but also by descriptions of people’s intuitions, beliefs, values, reasons, meaning-making and self-understanding. Methodological implications include unstructured observations, open interviews and idiographic descriptions (ibid: 20).

Neill (2003:2) groups qualitative data collection into three main types: interactive interviewing where people are asked to verbally describe their experiences of phenomena, written descriptions by participants where people are asked to write descriptions of their experiences of phenomenon and observation.

Hancock (1998:9) maintains that qualitative approaches to data collection usually involve direct interaction with individuals on a one to one basis or in a group setting. The benefits of using these approaches include richness of data and deeper insight into the phenomena under study. Specifically this study employed the following four methods:

Observation

In this study, observation was applied to obtain information about the behaviour of reform implementers. Techniques for collecting data through observations included written description of day-to-day activities undertaken by different stakeholders, including their work environment.

Observation is defined as descriptive observations of verbal and non-verbal behaviour (Neill, 2003:2). However, it is argued that not all qualitative data collection approaches require direct interaction with people (Hancock, 1998:11). Observation also serves as a technique for verifying or nullifying information provided in face-to-face encounters.

In this study the observation was done using an observation schedule (See Appendix H). The observation was made two schools. The head teacher was observed the whole day to confirm the extent of his/her involvement in academic and non-academic activities. Furthermore, the observation made in the school was intended to confirm the information obtained during the interview with the head teacher, teachers and students

Structured interviews

Interviews can be highly structured, semi structured or unstructured. Structured interviews consist of the interviewer asking each respondent the same questions in the same way (Henning et al, 2004: 59). Structured interviews were preferred in this study because they are easier to prepare and manage while at the same time providing detailed information on the problems raised.

Hancock (1998: 10) argues that the interview schedule should not be too tightly structured to enable the phenomena under investigation to be explored in breadth or depth. Structured interviews are said to work well when the interviewer has already identified a number of aspects he wants to be sure of addressing. The structured interviews together with field notes

were used to obtain information on the areas of focus in this study. (See Appendices C, D and E).

Focus group interviews (FGI)

This method is useful in obtaining in-depth qualitative information about groups’ perceptions, attitudes and experiences on a defined topic. Focus group interviews are also used to discover what users want from the system, their thoughts and preferences (Nielsen, 1997). Hancock (1998: 10) argues that group interactions among participants have the potential for greater insights to be developed. There are several characteristics of focus groups that make them meaningful. These include:

• One group is not enough for any study. At least three focus groups can be convened. There is no upper limit on the number of focus groups interviews that could be held although this will be limited by resources.

• The members of the group should have something in common, characteristics, which is important to the topic of investigation.

In this study seven focus group interviews were used (see Table 5.1) to collect qualitative information on participant’s feelings, perceptions and opinions as regards educational change in primary education sub-sector in Tanzania.

Documentation

Tellis (1997: 7) define documents as communications between parties in the study the researcher being a vicarious observer. He observes that to avoid being misled by documents, the researcher needs to know that not all documents are reliable in order to be careful with misleading documents.

Documents could be letters, memoranda, agendas, administrative documents, newspaper articles, or any document that is germane to the investigation. The documents serve to corroborate the evidence from other sources. Documents can also be useful for making references about events. Hancock (1997: 13) admits that there is a wide range of written

materials that can produce qualitative information. These include policy documents, mission statements, annual reports, minutes of meetings, notice boards and so forth. He asserts that written materials are particularly useful in trying to understand the philosophy of an organisation as may be required in action research and case studies.

In this study the following documents were reviewed: policy documents on primary education, guidelines and procedures on PEDP implementation, as well as implementation reports of primary education reform. The documentary review was used to obtain information on the primary education change management process and implementation status.