4.2.2 The semi-structured interview
Lichtman (2010:13) asserts that ‘[t]here is not just one way of doing qualitative research’. The semi-structured interview is nonetheless the most favoured method for studies in educational research (Basit, 2010:103). The reason is that it permits the interviewer to ‘obtain more data and greater clarity’ (Borg and Gall, 1989:446). The semi-structured interview is furthermore considered as reasonably objective and it is also considered as the ‘most appropriate for interview studies in education’ (Borg and Gall, 1989:452), which makes it suitable for the purpose of collecting data for this thesis.
4.3 Selection of subjects
The informants for this thesis were eight randomly selected 6th grade teachers. Although a larger sample would have provided more data and to a greater extent prevented a biased sample (Borg and Gall, 1989:445), time limitations did not permit this.
The schools were randomly selected within the county of Rogaland, although an effort was made to include schools from different regional areas within the county. This effort was made in an attempt to ensure to a large extent as possible that the sample was representative of both urban and rural areas. However, a side effect of including smaller schools from rural areas was that there in some schools was only one teacher teaching English at the 6th grade level. Hence, in these cases there was no process of selection of one among several teachers.
In the remaining cases the headmasters were initially approached. Each school was informed that the subjects’ identities and the identities of their workplaces would be anonymised in the thesis. Once the eight respective headmasters had consented, possible subjects were randomly selected, where feasible, and subsequently approached. The eight subjects consented after having been approached by each school’s respective headmaster.
4.4 Design of the study
For reasons mentioned in section 4.2.1, the semi-structured interview appeared to be suitable for the purpose of collecting data for this thesis. The interviewer followed an interview guide to ensure that the subjects were asked a common set of questions, which would help prevent the risk of a biased sample (see Appendix 1).
In terms of the timeframe of the interviews, the aim was to limit each interview to approximately one hour. A longer interview might have stretched the subjects’ concentration, and/or the subjects’ patience with the interview situation. An interview lasting for over an hour would also have produced too large quantities of data to analyse within the time restrictions of this thesis.
45 4.4.1 The piloting process
The interview was piloted twice to ensure that it was of a suitable length, and to ensure that the questions were unambiguous. The number of pilot interviews was, in accordance with Basit (2010:71-2), regarded to be sufficient for the present study. Neither of the subjects included in the pilot study were part of the actual study.
The piloting process was assumed to be of importance in detecting if any of the questions in the interview guide might be perceived by the subjects as leading, 43 and in revealing if the questions appeared to be comprehensible and clear to both subjects and the interviewer. In addition, the pilot study offered an opportunity to test technical facilities, such as lap top and recording devices.
The pilot interviews revealed no problems regarding comprehension or any of the questions being leading. It additionally revealed that the length of the interview was well within the stipulated time frame of one hour. The time spent on each pilot interview moreover allowed the subjects to ask questions and/or reflect on the interview questions, while not significantly exceeding the time frame. Hence, no alterations were made to the original interview before doing the eight interviews that would provide the actual data.
4.4.2 Applicability of the pilot interviews
Despite the positive outcome of the pilot interviews, the actual interviews themselves revealed that one of the questions in the interview guide was not as comprehensible to the subjects as predicted. The question in focus, question 4 in the ‘Beliefs and attitudes’-section (‘What do you think about the importance of reading skills compared to oral/written skills?’), seemed unclear to the subjects. However, this did not prove to be a major obstacle, as the subjects immediately understood the question once they was offered further explanation from the interviewer.
4.4.3 Structure of the interviews
To help ensure perception of the interview as logical and clear, it was divided into five sections (see Appendix1):
1. Background, e.g.
• ‘For how long have you been teaching English?’
43 A leading question could for example be one that initially refers to research evidence about a classroom practice, and thereafter asks what the subject thinks about this practice. Other examples may be starting a question with phrases such as ‘I suppose your attitude to this is …’, or ‘I believe this to be likely, to what extent do you agree?’.
46
• ‘What qualifications do you have?’
The inclusion of this section was regarded as relevant because it has been asserted that
‘cognition not only shapes what teachers do but ... in turn [is] shaped by the experiences teachers accumulate’ (Borg, 2003:95). Hence, asking the teachers background questions, such as questions about their level of pedagogical training, the extent of their teaching experience, and questions about their formal education in English was considered as necessary in order to be able to evaluate their cognitions as precisely as possible.
2. Materials, e.g.
• ‘What texts do you use in the classroom?’
• ‘Who decides what materials you can have/use in your school?’
The intention of the materials section was to find out about materials that the teachers employed in their teaching of EFL reading, and to what extent they may partake in decisions about what materials to purchase and use in their schools.
3. Practices, e.g.
• ‘What do you think has influenced your teaching practices?’
• ‘How would you normally go through a text in class?’
The purpose of this section was to find out about the teachers’ practices when working with texts, and what their attitudes and beliefs relating to a selection of practices were. This section also allowed for probing about the teachers’ attitudes and beliefs towards the National test.
4. Beliefs and attitudes, e.g.
• ‘What are your attitudes towards using the textbook?’
• ‘What do you consider to be important when selecting texts for a class?’
The aim of this section was to obtain data from the teachers about their reflections relating to what constitutes appropriate materials and practices in the EFL classroom.
5. Resources, e.g.
• ‘Are you familiar with the European Language Portfolio?’
• ‘Have you received any information about how to implement the curriculum?’
47 The purpose of this last section of the interview was to probe about the subjects’ attitudes towards the LK06 curriculum, and about their familiarity with a selection of teaching resources.