After completing Reader 6 and undertaking further research into the use of inquiry tools in an educational setting, I have trialled a survey with my SIG, in addition to completing a trial interview over Skype with Lisa. I also completed an observation, but my critical reflections are included in my reflective journal. I was unable to trial a focus group, therefore I have had to consider the advantages and disadvantages of this tool a little differently.
Surveys and Questionnaires
I would like to collect student voice and opinion as part of my inquiry. I used reader 6 to inform my thinking on questionnaires, as I did not know a great deal about this topic. Through Reader 6, I found it interesting that questionnaire can them be followed up with interviews. Reader 6 also stated that questionnaires could produce quantitative data if the sample was representational of the organisation. I have realised through my Module 2 work that taking a representational sample would not be realistic in the 12 week time limit, so therefore I was not sure whether I could still use a survey as a research method. I decided to conduct more research into this.
I found Bell (2014) very useful for increasing my knowledge about questionnaires. When devising a questionnaire, Bell (2014) outlines the different types of questions used in surveys: verbal/open, list, category, ranking, quantity, grid and scale. I then tried to use as many of these in my trial survey to see which question type best suited my purpose. In particular, I found Bell's (2014) section on 'Piloting the questionnaire' extremely useful; especially the list of questions to ask pilot volunteers after they have completed the survey. I incorporated these questions in the feedback on my SIG and this greatly helped me when trying to improve my survey. Bell (2014) also states that, 'Opportunity samples of this kind are generally acceptable as long as the make up of the sample is clearly stated and the limitations of the data are realized' (p. 150). Therefore, if I did use a nonrepresentational sample in my inquiry, this would be acceptable as long as I noted the limitations of this in my data analysis.
As a pilot tool, I created a survey on Survey Monkey designed for students to use, for my SIG trial. I understood that the survey wasn't relevant to my SIG members themselves, but as many of them are teachers they would understand how students would fill the survey out, still making it a valuable trial.
Advantages:
Using a survey to gather data of student voice is less time consuming than interviews. My SIG said that my pilot survey could be completed within 5 minutes. It is also easier to organise completion of surveys within a 12 week inquiry time. As an example, I could take three laptops into a class and ask students to rotate until the whole class has completed the survey through a web based program like Survey Monkey; the quantitative data is produced for you, making the data analysis much easier.
As I could not trial my survey with students, I also looked at educational research books to see what literature has been written about the advantages of students surveys. Menter et al. (2011) stated that questionnaires give shy students every opportunity to voice their opinions, as well as allowing all respondents to read every question on the questionnaire before answering, something that can not be done in an interview or focus group. Burton & Bartlett (2005) add that as students attend school everyday they become a 'captive audience' so surveys are easy to distribute and collect. Furthermore, they posit that questions can be read aloud to students who need extra support (Burton & Bartlett, 2005). With ethical considerations in mind, both Menter et al. and Burton & Bartlett (2005) add that questionnaires make anonymity easier within the research process.
Disadvantages:
I found it very difficult to design an appropriate, unbiased questionnaire that students would understand and be able to complete easily. My research topic is 'engagement', a term that the majority of students would not understand. As Bell (2014) states, students may not be able to complete the survey that includes vocabulary that they do not understand. I decided to use works such as 'enjoy' and 'like' in my survey, but no I think these are too ambiguous and leading. Students may misinterpret questions and therefore not be able to answer them, in turn not allowing me to collect the right data for my inquiry. I feel a focus group or interview may be more appropriate to discuss why students like/enjoy or dislike/don't enjoy topics because questions that they do not understand can be explained to them. Although I included open questions with response boxes, i didn't feel I had any real depth in the answers I received, this was particularly evident when respondents gave one work or short answers (as many students are likely to do so that they can complete the questionnaire quickly). I am unsure that surveys will be able to provide the depth of qualitative data I would like, enabling me to find out more about what students think is engaging in the classroom.
Burton & Bartlett (2005) argue that questionnaires in education rely on the good will of te students to answer all of the questions sensibly and appropriately - something that does not always happen. Students may rush to finish questionnaires without giving any real thought about the questions they are asked. Both Menter et al. (2011) and Burton & Bartlett (2005) identify that it is very difficult to have any in depth answers that will help the research to answer their research question, something that I found through my own trial.
Interview
I wanted to increase my knowledge of classroom engagement through speaking to experienced practitioners in my place of work to find out their opinions and views about 'engagement' in their subject areas, as well as the strategies that use in their classrooms. At first, I thought conducting interviews would be a fairly simple process. However, Reader 6 identifies that interviews need careful consideration, particularly when deciding whether to construct a structures, semi structure or open interview. Reader 6 also recognised that before creating questions, it is important to consider what data you need to complete the research and whether an interview is the most appropriate way to collect your desired information.
Again I used Bell (2014) to increase my understanding of interviews and to highlight areas that I needed to consider before trialling this tool. Bell (2014) states that even after written consent has been provided by the participant, it is vital that a verbal 'overview' is given to the participant before beginning the interview. This should include an explanation of where the information will be used. When recording interviews, Bell (2014) recognises that the research can't assume that all participants ill give consent for their interview to be audio recorded, so it is important to check this before the interview takes place in the verbal 'covering letter'.
I conducted a trial interview over Skype with Lisa on Module 2 of the BAPP course. We organised a time over email that suited us both and used a video call to try out our devised interview questions. After my research into Bell (2014), I decided to try a semi-structured interview, where I devised a set of questions to ask, but I allowed time to add any additional questions that I thought were appropriate from the answers that the participants gave. Before trialling my questions, I created a draft consent letter and form, as well as a verbal 'covering sheet' to read to Lisa before the interview (Bell, 2014), including a questioning whether the participant was willing to have the interview audio recorded.
Advantages:
One of the main advantages of using an interview is that the researcher is able to gather data from specific questions to give specific answers, allowing the researcher to address their research question in detail (Bell, 2014). I found that by asking Lisa specific questions about engagement, I was able to get detailed answers that would help me to answer my inquiry questions. I also found a semi-structured interview allowed me to ask questions that were not necessarily part of my planned questions. For example, Lisa said that students who were good at subjects were more engaged in lessons. I was then able to follow this up (Bell, 2014) by asking, 'So do you think engagement is linked with being good or feeling good about a subject?' The answer Lisa gave was really interesting ad relevant to my inquiry and it is something I would not have thought about if i had not asked her this question. However, after our trial interview, I feel I need to allow myself more time to reflect on the responses given by the interviewee before deciding whether to move on to the next 'structured' question or to follow this up with an 'unstructured' question, and not rush through the interview.
Another positive of using an interview as an inquiry tool is that respondents may feel more able to share their honest views and opinions that they wouldn't necessarily share in a focus group situation involving other members of staff. Moreover, it will be easier to organise a one-to-one interview with a staff member than coordinating available times for staff to attend a focus group within my place of work. Importantly, as I work in an school, I will be able to arrange face-to-face interviews with staff on the Academy premises either during the working day or after school, so this causes far less disruption than having to organise an interview over Skype/phone, as a result this will make the interview process more personal.
Disadvantages:
It took several emails to organise the trial interview with Lisa, and further emails to outline what we wanted to achieve in trialling this tool. This showed me that interviews can be time consuming and difficult to organise (Bell, 2014). It would take a considerable amount of time to ask for an interview, receive a response, send a consent letter and form, have this returned and then organise and conduct the interview. Furthermore, out trial interview was organised on a shared good will. This would be one the challenges os using interviews in an educational setting, as staff are extremely busy, so although they may want to help, realistically they may not have the time to do this in their busy working days. Another disadvantages is that bias will ultimately try and 'creep in' to interviews because the interviewer will have opinions too, so it is even more important to ensure that self-discipline and critical thinking are used to eliminate bias from any interview (Bell, 2014). As part of my semi-structured interview, I used follow up questions to ask Lisa about specific things that I thought were worth exploring; although I ensured that there were no biases in my pre-planned questions, I felt some of my own biases started to influence the 'unstructured' follow up questions. This is something I really need to address before conducting the interviews in my Module 3 inquiry.
In terms of timescale, transcribing and making notes on interviews is a very time consuming process (Bell, 2014). Lisa agreed to have her interview audio recorded. but listening to the whole interview and pausing to select the quotes I wanted to use made this part of data collection very time consuming. Furthermore, Lisa did not have a Dictaphone to record her interview and she said that this made it difficult to write down exact quotes that were of interest. If a participant is unwilling to have their interview recorded, I will need to think I will will record the interview accurately, as making detailed notes is not easily achievable during an interview (Bell, 2014).
Focus Groups
I had considered using focus groups to gather information on student voice, similarly to both interviews and questionnaire. Yet, I had disregarded focus groups as an inquiry tool for my inquiry because I believed that students would not want to share their true opinions about subjects in front of a group and a gatekeeper. However, through reading Reader 6 , I understood that focus groups create a different dynamic to interviews, particularly due to the fact that the interviewer can create a supportive group atmosphere. Although focus groups may be harder to organise, manage and transcribe after the event has taken place, I wanted to research the possibilities of using a focus group in existing educational research literature.
I was unable to trial a focus group with my SIG, as this was unrealistic to ask members to participate in a focus group at a time that suited everyone. It was also unethical to trial a focus group in the Academy without parental permission and approval from the ethics board. Therefore, it was even more crucial for my own learning to conduct research into how focus groups are used in educational setting.
Advantages:
Cohen, Manion & Morrison (2011) identify that one of the benifits of focus groups are tht, 'Children differ from adults in cognitive and linguistic development, attention and concentration span, ability to recall, life experience, what they consider to be important, status and power' (p. 433). As a result, focus group could be more appropraite that individual interviews, as it is less intimidating and actaully, 'encourages interaction between the group rather than simply a response to an adults questions (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2011, p. 433).
Another source of literature that I found extremely useful for informing my thinking about focus group was Hennessy & Heary (2005) 'Exploring Children's view through focus groups'. Hennessy & Heary (2005) state that there had been an increase in the use of focus groups in education research over the last decade. They make a notable argument that, 'focus groups create a safe peer environment and replicate the type of small group setting that children are familiar with from their classroom work' (Hennessy & Heary, 2005, p 237). This statement showed me that a significant advantage of focus groups is that students will be more comfortable in this type of setting, as it is something they take part in on a day-to-day basis, unlike a one-to-one interview. This changed my thinking about the possibility of using a focus group within my own inquiry. Hennessy & Hear (2005) also posit that focus groups are particularly effective with groups that know each other well, as this creates a less intimidating environment, where students can discuss important issues. Within my workplace, this could be a particular advantage because classes of students know each other well, so this provides a perfect opportunity to create that supportive environment.
Disadvantages:
Organising a focus group can be very difficult. As mentioned before, the logistics of organising a focus group with my SIG proved unsuccessful. Therefore, I need to carefully consider if I will realistically be able to organise a focus group where every student participant can attend and, importantly, the gatekeeper can attend, which could be difficult in a busy school setting.
Cohen, Manion & Morrison (2011) ascertain that as children have lesson control over their own lives that adults, it is even more crucial that the interviewer creates a supportive atmosphere, so that the students feel comfortable in a focus group setting. This could be a particular problem with younger students in KS3 of the school if the are involved (with parental permission) in my inquiry. Furthermore, the authors state that individual interviews are more appropriate for discussing issues that my be considered sensitive with adolescents, something that should be considered before using this in my inquiry.
Hennessy & Heary (2005) have identified
a variety of problems with focus groups with children, many of which need
careful planning and consideration from the researcher. As an example, Hennessy
& Heary (2005) state that the characters and personalities of the children
within the group will have a huge impact on the group dynamic. Furthermore,
‘there is always the possibility that intimidation within the group may inhibit
some of the individuals from making a contribution’, therefore, ‘an
individual’s expressed opinion may be influenced by a desire to fit in with
other group members’ (Hennessy & Heary, 2005, p. 239). This may then result
in shy children not wanting to speak in front of the group. In this case Bell
(2014, p 167) suggests using questions such as ‘Is that what everyone thinks?’
or ‘Does everyone agree with xyz?’ to involve shy participants. This technique
requires practice to enable the interviewer to judge whether intervention in
the group is needed, which could be a disadvantage in my inquiry as I may not
have time to practice and perfect this technique.
Hennessy & Heary (2005) also argue that,
in additional to the carefully balancing of personality, the gender of the
participants should be considered with great importance, stating that, ‘large
age discrepancies are likely to create an imbalance within the group in terms
of needs and abilities and, as a result, may upset the group dynamic’ (p. 241).
I need to ensure that I select an appropriate group of students to take part,
so that there are no detrimental effects to the participants themselves or the
inquiry results.
Both literature sources note that a skillful
researcher is needed to ensure a successful focus group. The researcher should
monitor the stress levels of every participant to ensure no harm is caused by
the focus group process, including not exceeding a 1 hour time limit for
children between the ages of 10-14 (Hennessy & Heary, 2005). After the
focus group has taken place, the interviewer should remind participants that
they are not to disclose any information shared within the focus group to
anyone outside of the group(Hennessy & Heary, 2005).
Even after completing this research, I would
like to ‘trial’ a focus group at the beginning of my Module 3 work when I have
received ethical approval from the board, to really see whether a focus group
would be appropriate for my inquiry project.
Conclusions
Overall, I think that trialing the research
methodology has been a really valuable learning experience for me. When I
started this process, I believe I was quite naïve in thinking that creating,
trialing and selecting research tools would be a simple process. I think the
most challenging part of this process was incorporating everything I had
learned from ethical considerations (creating consent letters and forms) into
questions in the surveys, interviews and focus groups that would be considered
none bias (ethical research). I also found it difficult to trial tools with my
SIG and then try to consider how these tools would need adapting in my inquiry
within an educational setting, especially where students are involved.
I have now come to the following conclusions
about each research tool:
- Survey/Questionnaire – I don’t feel there is any real
depth in answers. It would be challenging to try and define the term
‘engagement’ to students in a survey; therefore they will be ill-equipped to
answer the questions effectively.
- Interview – I believe that I would get
real depth of answers from experienced practitioners and I think this would be
the only way that I could realistically gather the data I need to answer part
of my research inquiry. I will need to consider how to create none bias
unstructured questions and how to give myself time to think clearly during an
interview.
- Focus group – From my research, it seems
that this tool is much more suitable for younger students in education, however
the student selection would need careful consideration. I want to speak in more
depth to staff in the school about the reality of holding a focus group in
terms of gatekeepers and organisation. Would like to trial this method when I
have been given ethical approval from the board at the beginning of my inquiry
to ensure this method is appropriate.
- Observation – My critical reflections on
this inquiry tool have formed part of my reflective journal.
Bibliography
Bell,
J. (2014) Doing your Research Project: a guide for first-time researchers 6th
Edition. England: Open University Press.
Menter,
I., Elliot, D., Hulm, M., Ewin, J. & Lowden, K. (2011) A Guide to
Practitioner Research in Education. London: Safe Publications Ltd.
Burton,
D. & Bartlett, S (2005) Practitioner Research for Teachers. London: Paul
Chapman Publishing.
Hennessy,
E. & Heary, C. (2005) ‘Exploring children’s views though focus groups’
Green, S. & Hogan, D (2005) Researching
Children’s Experience: Methods and Approaches London: Sage. pp. 236-252.
Cohen,
L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011) Research Methods in Education 7th
Edition. Oxon: Routledge.
