Interviews

The purpose of the qualitative research interview is to understand the world from the subjects point of view, to unfold the meaning of people’s experiences, to uncover their lived world prior to scientific explanations (Kvale 1996), by listening to the

interviewee make use of their own concepts and terms (Jacobs 1987). An interview is not a substitute for observation, but another tool of research to gather information.

Observing thoughts, feelings and intentions, or earlier behaviour is quite difficult, or impossible, therefore it is necessary to make use of additional methods.

An interview is a conversation between two unequal partners, that has a structure and an agenda set by the interviewer. Therefore, it is the interviewer’s task to make sure the quality of the interview is good.

Patton (1980 p. 197) describes three varieties in qualitative interviewing:

• The informal conversational interview

• The general interview guide approach

• The standardised open-ended interview

He distinguishes between the three variations by the extent to which the questioned are prepared. The informal conversational interview is loose in shape and questions are generated by the ongoing conversation. The general interview guide approach has a set of themes or topics that the interviewer wants the conversation to be about.

It is a checklist with relevant issues that the researcher expects the interviewees to talk about. The standardised open-ended interview consists of a tight form, where every single interviewee will be asked the same well-prepared questions (followed by a well organised line). In such an interview you reduce the flexibility and spontaneity, but you gain data that are systematic, thorough, comparable and are therefore easier to administrate when entering back home.

During my time in the field I used the first and the third varieties. I used the former on several occasions, especially when visiting the unit or in the period before or after school. In my every day life I also used these varieties. When living in another culture you will often be in a situation where you lack information. To me, the fastest and the smartest way to gain it, is to spend time interacting with other people, through the use of an informal conversational interview.

A situation from my fieldwork:

Sitting on the pier with my sunburned feet in the water, consuming a split coconut to go, while conversing with an earlier Rastafarian about his heydays, does not give me information about what happens in a classroom at school. On the other hand, it may help me to understand how I should interpret a classroom observation or how I should behave and talk or formulate my sentences during my coming interviews.

When planning the interviews with the learners, the facilitators and the adult educational officer, I thought the general interview guide approach would suit my research best. However, I realised some time before my interviews that I felt insecure and became afraid of not doing it properly. For a period I considered other options, but I concluded it was better to gain some information by using a determined and standardised interview, than taking the risk of loosing information by not succeeding in use the general interview guide.

Another argument was built from the experience of talking with the participants.

When talking about school related matters I found it hard to hold a conversation going, especially with the learners. I therefore felt more confident using a determined and standardised interview. At one point I asked myself if it was necessary to do the interview one-on-one and it made me consider focus groups, or even written

questionnaires. The learners had limited reading- and writing skills, but a fair

understanding of the spoken language, so I found it best to choose a one-on-one oral presentation with the possibility for corrections and explanations.

I spent lot of time preparing my questions, and I pilot tested them on a neighbouring girl before I started. I knew that her feedback would help me to reconsider questions and use more familiar words and formulations, which in turn would strengthen the quality of my interviews. In the first three or four interviews I was insecure and uneasy, but later I became more confident and I realised that many of my questions did not invite a conversation, but rather short and fast answers. After interviewing the learners I altered the questions for the facilitators, and found it to be an improvement.

In my final interview with the AEO I felt I had improved my interview skills when being more relaxed, focused, and determined.

All of the interviews, except with the AEO (at the unit), were done in the hallway at school during class. I used a recorder and took notes during all my interviews and when returning back home, I transcribed them, spending endless time in front of the computer. I had to create a transcribing template, and I decided to write it as my respondents spoke. Doing this brought me back in time and I recognised the smiles, the smells, and even the participants clothing.

In the analysis process of the interviews, I started to code my material, later I sorted it, before I organised it into concepts and categories that arose from the material.

During this process I closely followed Robert S. Weiss’ (1995) advice in Learning from Strangers, The Art and Method of Qualitative Interview Studies. He “guided” me through my data, by breaking it down into small parts and quotes, before building it up again (together with the analyses from the observations) by developing main categories, concepts and questions that made me able to find my way through an overwhelming amount of information.