Education Research Network for West and Central Africa

(ERNWACA)

Mobile Task Team (MTT) West

Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA)

Excerpts from Guides on

Qualitative Research

Bamako, 2006 Electronic version available at www.rocare.org/SmallGrants_QualitativeResearchGuide.pdf.

- 2 -

CONTENTS PREFACE .................................................................................................................................. 4 INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 5 WHAT IS QUALITATIVE RESEARCH?................................................................................ 6 I – INTERVIEWS ...................................................................................................................... 7

1.1 - In-depth interviews ........................................................................................................ 7 1.2 - Unstructured interviews ................................................................................................. 8 1.3 - Semi-structured interviews ............................................................................................ 8 1.4 - Interview techniques ...................................................................................................... 9

II –FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS...................................................................................... 11

2.1 - What is a focus group discussion? ............................................................................... 11 2.2 - Aim of focus groups..................................................................................................... 11 2.3 - Composition of groups and analysing data by group................................................... 12 2.4 - Strengths of focus groups............................................................................................. 12 2.5 - Weaknesses of focus groups ........................................................................................ 12 2.6 - Managing a focus group............................................................................................... 13 2.7 - Other group interview techniques ................................................................................ 13 2.8 - Diads and triads............................................................................................................ 14

III – PARTICIPTORY RESEARCH ....................................................................................... 14

3.1 - Action research ............................................................................................................ 15 3.2 - Free listing ................................................................................................................... 15 3.3 - Pile sorts....................................................................................................................... 16 3.4 - Participatory visualisation method............................................................................... 16 3.5 - Rating scales ................................................................................................................ 16 3.6 - Rank order methods (complete and partial)................................................................. 17 3.7 - Mapping and modelling ............................................................................................... 18 3.8 - Timelines...................................................................................................................... 18 3.9 - Observations ................................................................................................................ 18 3.10 - Formative Research ................................................................................................... 19 3.11 - Terminology used in different participatory research approaches............................. 20

IV – DATA ANALYSIS STAGE............................................................................................ 21 V – QUALITATIVE RESARCH DATA ANALYSIS SOFTWARE ..................................... 21 VI – SCIENTIFIC WRITING: OUTLINE OF A REPORT.................................................... 22 ANNEX A: Summary of data collection methods ................................................................... 23 ANNEX B: Types of questions................................................................................................ 26 ANNEX C: Conducting discussion groups.............................................................................. 28 ANNEX D: Web sites on participatory research ..................................................................... 34 ANNEX E: Bibliography ......................................................................................................... 35 ANNEX F: Data Analysis with MaxQDA............................................................................... 37

- 3 -

The excerpts which make up this guide were compiled and organised by Mamadou Kani Konaté and Abdoulaye Sidibé

of the Center for Support to Research and Training (CAREF), Bamako, Mali

- 4 -

PREFACE This document has been compiled from various guides and manuals on qualitative research. Its aim is to bring together in one document complimentary techniques developed by various authors on conducting qualitative research. Rather than concentrate on just one specific aspect, it encompasses several approaches and methods used in different disciplines of qualitative inquiry. Consequently, it tries (where possible) to provide key information necessary for conducting successful qualitative research. With this mind, it should be seen as a working tool and not a theoretical paper on qualitative research. This guide was developed in the context of a research on the impact of HIV/AIDS on education systems by the Education Research Network for West and Central Africa (ERNWACA). At various meetings, ERNWACA member countries expressed the need to strengthen research capacities in the area of qualitative research methodology and analysis. In partnership with the International Institute for Educational Planning (IIPE-UNESCO, Paris), ERNWACA conducted a literature review of policies and research for the period 1993-2002 in seven of the network’s member countries. The results were disseminated at a regional workshop held in Bamako, Mali in 2004. The results of this project can be consulted in the workshop report entitled Education research response to HIV/AIDS on in West and Central Africa. In 2005, ERNWACA organised a training workshop on qualitative research methodology and analysis in Burkina Faso for twelve of its members representing seven ERNWACA countries. The workshop was organised in partnership with IIEP, the Association for the Development of Education in Africa (ADEA), Mobile Task Team West (MTT, financed by USAID), the Ministry for Basic Education and Literacy of Burkina Faso (MEBA), and the University of Ouagadougou. This training workshop contributed to strengthening the research capacities of several researchers especially in the writing of national case studies on the contribution of non formal education in preventing HIV/AIDS – research conducted with the UNESCO Institute for Education (UIE Hamburg) in 2005-2006. The following guide is a result of the training workshop and of the continuing collaboration between ERNWACA and MTT West. We would like to thank SARA/AED/USAID, WFP and Patricia Hudelson for documents from which several sections were included here. This guide is an evolving document and will hopefully benefit from the experiences of African researchers. You are therefore invited to send your comments and suggestions as well as proposed amendments and additions to info@rocare.org.

- 5 -

INTRODUCTION Qualitative research makes use of various investigative methods and techniques and can be used in most social science disciplines and in many different types of research. Its applications are constantly being expanded and diversified. The use of information originating from qualitative research has led to the development of software programmes which in turn have made it possible to manage larger and larger data sets. Being able to manage images and sounds has opened many new avenues which are still being explored. Hopefully this will lead to a complexity and depth of analysis not possible before. Given that many books, manuals and software programmes are available, this guide groups and presents the key elements of these documents and gives the reader an overview of many methods and techniques. For example, the introductory section on MaxQDA will give novice users a chance to try out this qualitative data analysis software. Comparing two types of research There are many differences between qualitative and qualitative research. One of the strengths of qualitative research is that it is exploratory and flexible. For example, the results of qualitative inquiry using open questions allow programmers and planners to have information on the characteristics of the study population through the use of pre-determined questions. The methodology is flexible enough to allow researchers to ask different questions in different ways, and to modify the questions and the data collection instruments if the importance of a subject was underestimated at the outset of the research. The main differences between qualitative and quantitative research are: Qualitative research

• Can only orient, cannot be extrapolated for the general population; • Aim: to investigate and study; • Open-ended questions without pre-determined responses; • Relatively unstructured discussion; • Small number of people, large quantity of detailed information; • Interpretative – how and why?

Quantitative research

• Conclusive, can be extrapolated for the general population; • Aim: to measure and evaluate; • Mainly composed of closed questions with pre-determined responses; • Structured survey; • Large number of people, limited number of questions; • Produces numeric data that can be easily aggregated; • Statistics – what and how much/many?

- 6 -

WHAT IS QUALITATIVE RESEARCH? Qualitative research is a widely used set of investigative techniques. It gives an idea of people’s behaviours and perceptions and allows researchers to study their opinions on a particular topic in more depth than is possible with a quantitative survey. It generates ideas and hypotheses which can show how a problem is perceived by the target population and can define options linked to this problem. This technique is often used in the pre-testing of concepts. Group discussions and individual in-depth interviews are the techniques most often used in qualitative inquiry. Qualitative research is based on semi-structured or unstructured interviews. The moderator or interviewer works with a discussion or interview guide especially prepared for the research subject. Compared to the investigative techniques used in surveys, qualitative research is not based on closed questionnaires. Indeed, the researcher has a certain leeway to adapt the discussion guide or the interview guide according to the responses and the individual experiences of the participants. The researcher can also eliminate those questions which do not generate useful information or add questions where useful. Qualitative research can be characterised by an approach which aims to describe and analyse the culture and behaviours of human beings from the point of view of those being studied. Consequently, it looks at knowledge in a holistic way and in the social context in which the research is being conducted. Social life is viewed as a series of linked events, described in such a way to reflect everyday life. Qualitative research uses a flexible and interactive approach. Figure 1: Iterative qualitative research process

adapted from Crabtree, B.F. and Miller, W.L., editors (1992). Doing qualitative Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, p.xv

Aims and objectives &

research questions

Use of results to design

or improve policies,

programmes and practice

Study design &

sampling

Data

analysis

Data

Collection

- 7 -

Qualitative research does not generate statistics and cannot be extrapolated for the general population, given that the sample is neither representative nor random. It is for this reason that qualitative data are not conclusive in terms of statistics and should not be used for percentages or statistics as in a quantitative approach. The value of qualitative research, however, should not be underestimated. Based on information and ideas provided by informants, a qualified moderator or interviewer can obtain detailed information through the use of probing techniques. Quantitative research, on the other hand, relies on a systematic approach of collecting and analysing information obtained from a sample of the population in order to provide statistics – generally in the form of percentages. The most commonly used methods for data collection in qualitative research are:

• Unstructured interviews; • Semi-structured or structured interviews; • Group interviews; • Observation methods; • Ethnographic decision-tree modelling and social network analysis.

I – INTERVIEWS While conducting qualitative research it is necessary to use a manual or guide. This allows researchers to focus their attention on the key questions central to the subject under investigation. The manual should be tested before being used in the field to collect and analyse data. The pre-testing phase also allows the researchers to decide on the optimal size of the sample for each stage of the research. 1.1 - In-depth interviews This technique is generally used with participants who have experience of a particular situation and who can make contributions to the research being undertaken. Usually, a trained interviewer uses a list of open-ended questions. Interviews generally last between 15 and 40 minutes, sometimes longer depending on the participants’ interest in the subject. This technique allows the researcher to obtain detailed descriptions of individual experiences. For certain studies, it is more appropriate to use an individual interview rather than a group interview. Consider the following:

• The subject is too personal or sensitive to be discussed in a group; • The opinion of a participant risks being influenced by other members of the group; • It is important to know what people know about a subject and what they do not know.

In a group situation, well informed participants can prevent those who are less well informed from expressing themselves. This prevents the researcher from exploring areas of ignorance or erroneous perceptions;

• Logistical problems make organising a group session impossible; the participants are geographically dispersed and time and travel costs prohibitive;

• Participant confidentiality is imperative; • The participants belong to different or competing organisations and may be hesitant

about expressing their ideas in a group setting; • It is important to question participants in a specific setting.

- 8 -

1.2 - Unstructured interviews Unstructured interviewing is the most widely used method of data collection in cultural anthropology. In this approach to interviewing the researcher has an idea in mind of the topics to be covered, and may use a topic list as a reminder, but there is minimal control over the order in which the topics are covered, and over the respondents’ answers. In unstructured interviewing, neither the specific questions to be asked nor the range or type of possible answers are pre-defined. Unstructured interviewing is informal and conversational, and the aim is to get the informants to “open up” and to let them express themselves in their own terms. The key to successful unstructured interviews is learning how to probe effectively – that is, to stimulate an informant to produce more information without injecting the researcher’s words, ideas or concepts into the conversation.

1.2.1 Strengths of unstructured interviews The main strength of an informal conversation approach to interviewing is that it allows the interviewer to be responsive to individual differences and situational characteristics. Unstructured interviews are especially useful in situations where the researcher has a lot of time to interview informants on many separate occasions. This style of interviewing builds well on observations, and can help to discover relevant questions and their appropriate wording for semi-structured interviews and questionnaires. 1.2.2 Weaknesses of unstructured interviews Because there is no set format for conducting conversational interviews, each interview tends to be unique. This makes it difficult to systemise and analyse the data. It may take several conversations before obtaining a similar set of information from each informant. 1.3 - Semi-structured interviews The aim of semi-structured interviews is to obtain points of view, reflections and observations of people who have:

• specialised knowledge; • a particular status or position; • information that the researcher cannot obtain elsewhere.

This type of interview uses an interview guide. It is a written list of questions or themes which must be covered during the interview. The order and formulation of the questions, however, can vary from one participant to another. If the interviewer wants to further investigate certain themes and subjects, the guide contains clear instructions on the main questions and themes to probe. Semi-structured interviews may be of the following types. 1.3.1 Depth/focussed interviews Depth interviews, in contrast with more exploratory interviews, intensively investigate a particular topic. The purpose of a depth or focussed interview is to gain as complete and detailed an understanding of the topic as possible. Depth interviews involve semi-structured interview guides, and assume enough prior exploration of the topic to know what the relevant questions are that relate to the topic to be investigated.

- 9 -

1.3.2 Case studies The purpose of case studies is to collect comprehensive, systematic and in-depth information about particular cases of interest. A case can be a person, an event, a programme, an organisation, a time period or a community. The case study attempts to describe the unit in depth and detail, in context, and holistically. Case studies are particularly useful when the researcher needs to understand particular people, problems or situations in great depth, and when information-rich cases can be found which provide great insight into the phenomenon in question. 1.3.3 Life histories Life histories (personal biographies) are usually collected over a series of many, lengthy interviews (usually both unstructured and semi-structured). Life histories are often collected and presented in order to relate abstractions and ethnographic description to the lives of individuals. Life histories are prone to being unrepresentative, because the people who are willing to recount their life histories to researchers are often atypical of their communities. Nonetheless, life histories can be useful for examining general values, points of cultural interest, and perceptions of social relationships. It is probably best to use life histories as explanatory and illustrative materials in connection with other kinds of data that have been collected in a more representative manner. 1.3.4 Strengths of semi-structured interviews The use of an interview guide means that the interviewer has decided how best to use the time available for the interview. This is particularly useful in projects dealing with people who are used to efficient use of their time and may not be willing to spend their time in open-ended, everyday conversation with the researcher. Interview guides help to show that you are clear about what you want from the interview, and are still flexible enough to allow both the researcher and informant the freedom to follow new leads. Also, because the same core list of questions are asked of each respondent, the data from these interviews is easier to systematise. 1.3.5 Weaknesses of semi-structured interviews Developing an interview guide requires sufficient time to explore the topic of interest beforehand in order to know the relevant questions or topics to be covered. 1.3.6 Structured or systematic interviews In structured interviews all the participants are asked the same questions. 1.4 - Interview techniques To avoid making mistakes during an interview the interviewer should:

• Explain who commissioned the research and its aim; • Explain why it is in interest of the participant to answer the questions; • Make it clear that the information given will remain anonymous; • Remain in control of the interview; • Keep promises.

Do not be too nice during an interview; a good interview is more like a discussion than a question and answer session. It is through argumentation that an interviewer may obtain interesting information relating to hypotheses. Be careful not to go too far. An interview that finishes in an argument is worthless; after a lively debate, calm things down by asking less emotive questions. The amount of emotion that can be safely introduced largely depends on the character of the respondent.

- 10 -

If you feel that the respondent is holding back information, you can, with the help of a few simple techniques, get them to open up. A - Silence

Silence makes us very uncomfortable during a discussion. Generally the last person to speak feels responsible for the silence.

The technique: Stop talking when the respondent has finished answering your question. Let the silence take hold. If you are observant, you will notice that after two or three seconds, the respondent starts to look worried. After a silence of ten seconds, he/she will continue answering your question.

Example

Q: Do you visit your parents much?

A: Yes

Q: (………),

A: well, during the school holidays

Q: (……………),

A: and once during the school year.

B - Mirroring

Repeating what someone has just said is very irritating. Generally, one of the participants in the conversation may repeat exactly the same thing, but it is highly unlikely that a third participant will do so.

The technique: Ask a question. The respondent answers. You reaffirm his/her response.

Example

Q: Where were you born?

A: In Ségou….

Q: Ah! You were born in Ségou …

A: Yes, 35 years ago! C - Verbal markers

We all use verbal signs to indicate when we are about to stop talking, such as falling intonation or certain words that indicate the end of a sentence. The listener generally expresses interest by nodding his or her head and/or saying “oh,” “uh huh,” etc.

The technique: When the respondent gives signs that he or she is about to stop talking, nod your head and say “oh” or “uh huh.”

- 11 -

Example

Q: Apart from the Komo, are there any other groups of associations in your village?

A: Yes, there are a lot in N’domo,

Q: Hmmm...

A: we know about Terriya,

Q: Hmm

A: and Nama. It goes without saying that the researcher should always be polite and respect the religion and customs of the respondents. If you are asked a question that you do not want to answer then say so. You should always take your respondents seriously because for them answering your questions is a serious business. II –FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS

2.1 - What is a focus group discussion? A focus group discussion (FGD) is:

• a method of qualitative research; • a situational method; • a multi-dimensional communication process.

A focus group is an organised discussion – though structured in a flexible way – of between 6 and 12 participants. It usually lasts one or two hours and provides the opportunity for all the respondents to participate and to give their opinions. Dominant and submissive relationships which develop within the group, as well as side conversations, can be controlled. Smaller groups and those with a narrower range of characteristics tend to be more coherent and interactive. Focus groups differ from informal group discussions in a number of aspects. First, specific, pre-determined criteria are used for recruiting focus group participants. Second, the topics to be discussed are decided beforehand, and the moderator uses a pre-determined list of open-ended questions arranged in a natural and logical sequence. The moderator may even memorise the questions beforehand. Finally, focus groups rely on discussion between participants about the topics presented, and group members may influence each other by responding to ideas and comments that arise during the discussion. There is no pressure on the moderator, however, to have the group reach consensus. Focus group discussions are not always easy to conduct and require planning and training. 2.2 - Aim of focus groups Focus groups are used to:

• gain understanding of the subject being researched; • provide an accurate picture of the subject’s experience of reality;

- 12 -

• evaluate and analyse needs; • formulate interventions; • test new ideas or programmes; • improve existing programmes; • obtain a wide range of information on a given topic in order to develop more

structured questionnaires; • inform policies.

These types of discussions allow the researcher to identify where participants’ points of view converge and diverge, and to investigate the whys and wherefores of certain phenomena. 2.3 - Composition of groups and analysing data by group Focus groups should be composed of homogeneous members of the target population. It is a good idea to form groups of respondents who are similar in terms of social class, age, level of knowledge, cultural/ethnic characteristics and sex (in addition to any other variables you may identify). This will create an environment where participants are comfortable with each other and feel free to express their opinions. Data should be analysed by group. This also allows for the results of different types of groups to be compared. It should be noted that the two paragraphs above describe what should happen in an ideal situation. The experience of the authors of this document in organising focus group discussions in various West African countries has been varied. In most cases, your experience will be different from what has been described above. Despite careful planning on the composition of the group, various cultural factors can influence group dynamics such as who gets to speak, etc. 2.4 - Strengths of focus groups The advantage of focus groups over individual interviews is that the comments of one participant can generate comments from other participants. Ideas and opinions can be developed and explored more so than in individual interviews. These types of discussions can be very productive. Researchers and interviewers can benefit from the ideas generated in these discussions. In a short amount of time, a large quantity of information can be collected – often more quickly and at less cost than via individual interviews. Focus groups are useful for obtaining preliminary information about beliefs, ideas, opinions, attitudes and behaviours in a community. They are particularly helpful in identifying pertinent and appropriate questions for individual interviews (semi-structured or structured). 2.5 - Weaknesses of focus groups Some weaknesses of focus group discussions are:

• The researcher has less control over the flow of discussion in the group discussion as compared to the individual interview;

• Focus groups cannot tell you about the frequency or distribution of beliefs in a population;

• Results are harder to analyse than for individual interviews. Participants’ comments must be interpreted within the particular social environment created by the focus

- 13 -

group (a discussion among strangers in a neutral place), and care must be taken to avoid lifting comments out of context or out of sequence;

• Because the amount of response time required for any given question is increased by having discussion among participants, the number of questions that can be addressed is smaller than in individual interviews;

• Facilitating and conducting a focus group interview requires considerable skill. It is important to know how to manage the interview so that one or two people do not dominate, and all participants are able to share their views.

Once the discussions are over, the analysis of the information can be long and costly. Very often, the researcher will have to listen to the tape recordings of the discussions again, transcribe the comments, code and analyse them etc. All of these steps are lengthy and require specific skills. 2.6 - Managing a focus group An experienced moderator will be in control of the group; less experienced moderators are often afraid of losing control and this anxiety will manifest itself in several ways:

• Asking questions that show that the moderator already knows the answer; • Asking questions in a mechanical way; • Asking a question without giving the participants a chance to respond to the previous

one; • Interrupting when it is not necessary or not giving the participants a chance to finish

what they were saying; • Jumping to conclusions – the moderator makes deductions that are not based on what

the participants have said; • Giving advice to participants about what they should do; • Changing the subject too quickly and not giving participants enough time to express

themselves before moving on. Another problem with focus groups is the consensus effect. Depending on the composition of groups, certain participants may have a tendency to adopt the opinions of the group leader, which makes the data generated in the focus group useless. An experienced moderator can avoid this. Annex C gives information on specific techniques to avoid these types of problems. 2.7 - Other group interview techniques Not all group interviews are focus groups. As we have seen, focus groups are special types of interviews where the researcher has control over the purpose, size, and composition of the group and the procedures governing the discussion. Other less formal but equally useful group discussions exist. For example, interviewers can conduct discussions with naturally pre-existing groups such as families or teachers or students. These discussions can take place in a cafe or at a women’s health centre, for example. In these types of interviews, the researcher has less control over the sample size, group composition, etc., but the context is more natural. Non-focus group discussions often involve unstructured or semi-structured interviewing techniques.

- 14 -

Other techniques resemble those employed in standard discussion groups and vary according to the number of participants and/or the length of the discussion. 2.8 – Dyads and triads For several years now, researchers have been interviewing dyads (groups of two participants) and triads (groups of three participants). Smaller groups allow the moderator to avoid an individual’s response being influenced by the group, a problem often encountered in larger groups. Many qualitative research specialists highlight the value of these techniques (including individual interviews) when it comes to testing out creative concepts. Dyads and triads can replace traditional focus group discussions by making optimal use of research budgets where many segments of the target population have to be interviewed. They can also replace one-on-one interviews and, in this way, save time. These smaller groups are particularly useful with children and adolescents as age range can be restricted and turbulent behaviour minimised. These methods facilitate the collection of information on questions, products and services when carried out by a qualified moderator. Small group interviews can last from 30 minutes to a whole day depending on the needs and type of research being conducted. III – PARTICIPTORY RESEARCH

Many participatory data collection techniques exist that require group members to work together on a specified task. Participatory methods are particularly useful for action-based projects; researchers work with community members to identify appropriate intervention strategies. Participatory research uses approaches and methods that help guarantee the validity of data by examining research questions through multiple methods, e.g. triangulation. Participatory methods can also create a sense of ownership of the data by the community and are directly linked to carrying out actions. In response to the absence of action in traditional research, specialists in participatory research have developed approaches that include:

• Giving priority to behaviours and attitudes that encourage real collaboration between community members and “external experts.” These behaviours include respecting local capacities and knowledge, willingness of external experts to let local populations be in charge of the process, and understanding of the flexibility and informal character of the use of these methods.

• These methods allow community members to actively participate in the data collection process. Some of these methods use local materials (sticks, beads, pots, beans, etc.) provided by the community, which can then be placed on the ground. It should also be noted that even in non-literate communities large pieces of paper and marker pens can be used.

- 15 -

3.1 - Action research Action research, as defined by Stephen Kemmis and R. McTaggart (1992), has the essential feature of “trying out ideas in practice as a means of improvement and increasing knowledge about the curriculum, teaching and learning.” The concept of action research has its origins in the work of social psychologist Kurt Lewin. He developed and applied it in post-WWII America in a variety of group contexts, including integrated social housing; equalization of opportunities for employment; the cause and cure of prejudice in children; the socialisation of street gangs; and the training of youth leaders. Action research is a participatory activity which encourages collaboration between researchers, practitioners and beneficiaries (subjects) of research. As a participatory activity, action research brings these stakeholders together to work towards the improvement of their own educational system – in the case of education research. It provides a way of thinking systematically and implementing critically informed actions where improvements are thought to be possible. Effects of the actions taken are monitored and evaluated so the system may continually be improved. Action research is ongoing and does not end, as conventional research often does, after the presentation of the research report. As a spiral process, action research develops through the self-reflective spiral of planning, action (implementing), observing, reflecting and then re-planning, further implementation, observation and reflecting … and so the process continues. Action research keeps the professional researcher and other stakeholders constantly interacting in a dynamic process. Action research thus brings together theory and practice, in contrast to conventional educational research which separates them. Theory without practice is empty; practice without theory is blind (Kwame Nkrumah, 1966). 3.2 - Free listing The purpose of conducting free lists is to help isolate and define relevant themes. Free listing questions simply ask respondents to list as many items they can think of in a particular domain. For example, in interviews with mothers about their children’s most recent illnesses, several mothers have mentioned fever. You would like to know if mothers recognise and have names for different kinds of fevers. In order to determine whether “kinds of fevers” is a meaningful theme for these mothers, you might ask: “Several mothers have told me that their children had a fever. Are there different types of fevers?”

Practice Can you, reader, imagine a specific education-related context in which this technique could be used?

Strengths of free listing

Free listing is a useful first step in all research involving the definition of new domains. It is the best way to ensure that the concepts and domain are culturally relevant. Participants have little difficulty with this technique. Weaknesses of free listing

Researchers need to be familiar with the culture and language of the respondents in order to identify appropriate domain names to start the listing process.

- 16 -

3.3 - Pile sorts Pile sorting is a technique aimed at studying the relations among items within a domain (which have been identified through free listing or some other method). It is useful for discovering informants’ perceptions of the similarities and differences among items and to look at intercultural variation in how informants define domains.

Practice Use local materials to quantify the importance given to each aspect of the subject being studied. This is followed by the composition and recomposition of piles until group consensus is finally reached. Strengths of pile sorts

They can be done using large numbers of items, and are easy to administer.

Weaknesses of pile sorts

Unless items are pictures or actual stimuli, they cannot be used with non-literate informants. Simple hand analysis (i.e. non-computerised) of pile sort data is possible. Computerised analysis is faster, but requires knowledge of an appropriate software programme. 3.4 - Visualisation in Participatory Programs This method consists in presenting a situation or a question and then asking participants to write their responses on a card. All the participants’ cards are posted on a board or taped to a wall for all to see. The ensuing discussions can validate, modify, seek consensus, etc. for the different responses on each card. See URL in Annex D for more information on this method. 3.5 - Rating scales Rating scales are a very popular technique for questionnaire data collection in the social sciences. Scales can be created for any number of concepts or attributes, and items can be rated on a single conceptual scale or each may be rated on a series of scales representing a variety of concepts or attributes. Scales can be presented numerically or graphically: Example

“Circle the number that corresponds to the level of severity you would associate with

HIV/AIDS”

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (from least to most severe) or

“Mark an ‘x’ on the line below indicating how you would rate HIV/AIDS in terms of severity” Mild Severe Another approach, which can be used with non-literate respondents, is to use cards or some other visual stimuli (actual foods or medicines, for example), and ask the informants to place the objects in piles according to some pre-defined rating criteria. For example, if you are interested in rating a number of illnesses according to their perceived severity, you might decide to use a 3-level rating system (very serious, moderately serious, not very serious at all),

- 17 -

and say to informants: “I’m going to say the name of an illness and I would like you to tell me whether the illness is serious, moderately serious, or not very serious at all.”

Practice

Can you, reader, envisage a use for this technique in a specific context of education research? Advantages of rating scales

Rating scales are easy to administer. As the informant rates each illness, the researcher places the corresponding card or object in the appropriate pile. Such visual stimuli make the task more fun for the informants and allow them to consider the relationship among items and to change their rating if necessary.

Weaknesses of rating scales

Rating scales can be extremely sensitive to response bias (the propensity of individuals to always use one end of the scale or a narrow range in the middle of the scale). This can make it difficult to compare data between respondents. 3.6 - Rank order methods (complete and partial) Rank order methods require informants to rank items (i.e. from most to least) in terms of a specific characteristic, for example, illness in terms of severity. Below are the two most common methods for rank ordering items:

• Complete rank ordering methods usually require that informants be literate, and involve presenting respondents with a list of items which they are asked to order from “most” to “least” on some attribute by putting numbers next to each item. Another method is to present each informant with visual stimuli or a stack of cards on which item names are written, and ask them to order the items or cards from “most” to “least” (“best” to “worst”, or whatever the attribute of interest is).

• Partial rank ordering pairs each item with each of the other items (for a total of n [n-1] / 2 pairs). These pairs of items are presented to respondents, who are asked to indicate which is “more” or “less” (“best” or “worst”, “most preferred” or “least preferred”, etc.). This technique is also called a paired comparison. A rank ordering is obtained by summing the number of times each item was chosen.

Strengths of rank ordering methods The complete rank ordering technique produces a great deal of information in a short amount of time. The method is ideal for studying differences among individuals. Paired comparisons are probably the most reliable method to use with non-literates when the number of items is small. Weaknesses of rank order methods The complete rank ordering technique can be tedious for non-literate respondents. For paired comparisons, pre-testing is crucial for identifying the maximum number of pairs that informants will tolerate. Some researchers have found that even as few as 15 pairs (6 items) can become tedious.

- 18 -

3.7 - Mapping and modelling In this technique, a group of individuals from the study population are asked to draw or build maps and models of their community, using locally available materials (including sticks, stones, grass, wood, bits of paper, leaves, sand, etc.). Maps or models can be constructed by different groups (men, women, young, old, poor, wealthy, etc.) working together to represent their particular viewpoints and interests. Both the process of building the map and the final product facilitate the identification and exploration of topics of interest. There are many different types of maps and models that can be created:

• Resource maps that represent public service coverage areas, villages, forests, fields, farms, gardens, etc.;

• Maps that illustrate different residential areas of a village; • Social maps which illustrate wealth rankings and household assets; • Health maps in which the health and welfare status of family members is marked on or

by each house using various types of markers. For example, it might indicate where malnourished children or TB patients are located;

• Topical maps, which might show the soil quality of various fields, the location of water sources or irrigated fields, etc.

3.8 - Timelines In this technique, group members are asked to recall local events and develop a community history which includes approximate dates. Timelines are especially useful for facilitating discussion about changes that have occurred over time (changes in health, crop output, environmental conditions, etc.). 3.9 - Observations Interviews provide information about people’s beliefs, attitudes, values and reported behaviour. Observations provide information about actual behaviour. Direct observation of behaviour is useful because some behaviour involves habitual routines of which people may hardly be aware. In such cases, observation can reveal more information than other data collection methods. Direct observation also allows the researcher to put behaviour into context, and thereby better understand it. In research, observations can only be used as a reliable and unbiased source of information to the degree to which they are focussed and systematic. The researcher should be explicit about what he or she wants to know, learn and understand, and how observations are to be collected and recorded. Observations can be made either of people’s actual behaviours, or observations can be made of signs or indicators of behaviour. Sometimes behaviour would be impossible to observe directly, and researchers must settle for observing indicators of that behaviour. Observations can either be unobtrusive and non-reactive, or obvious and reactive. Unobtrusive observation, whereby people are observed without their knowing it, can involve serious ethical dilemmas.

- 19 -

3.10 - Formative Research Research currently informs policy formulation in the education sector. Good policies however are futile if they are not effectively implemented. Formative research can help improve policy implementation. Formative research is a highly participatory process-oriented assessment tool and can be adapted for macro-analysis of complex processes, to support systemic change. It draws on case study approaches and uses qualitative research methods. It promotes dialogue and develops human and institutional capacity. Formative research can help improve educational practices. It entails seeking answers to such questions as:

� What is working? � What needs to be improved? � How can it be improved?

Figure 2: The Interactive process between program implementation and formative research

Figure 2: from K.Touré for ADEA Working Group on Education Sector Analysis, 2003 Tornes and Feldman argue that a main challenge for any reform or change process is to make the various levels involved in the process communicate and relate to each other in ways that help meet the goals of the change in question, i.e. education reform. They propose that the formative model is well-suited to cope with the challenges of accompanying and supporting a sector-wide approach in which the focus in on comprehensive processes. Integrated into the change process from the outset, formative research employs a longitudinal, systems approach to gathering data and communicating with the various groups of stakeholders during the reform. Unlike action research there is no assumption in the formative research model that practice must be redefined in line with research findings with the researchers playing an active part in initiating new practice. Formative research produces findings to be used along with other sources of information, and this implies that research-based knowledge is not seen as superior to or more true than the knowledge of policy makers, practitioners and other stakeholders. Through formative evaluation, actors gain information and skills necessary to adapt program plans to account for new factors and realities encountered during initial stages of implementation.

- 20 -

Figure 3: Relations among actors of the formative research process

Figure 3: adapted from Feldberg, Karen

3.11 - Terminology used in different participatory research approaches Certain terms and acronyms are used to talk about participatory methods and processes. These include: 3.11.1 Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) In RRA a multi-disciplinary team of researchers spend between 4 and 8 days in a community and involve all its members in all aspects of the data collection. Generally, an RRA study produces a report which summarises the results. Although this type of research is more participatory than traditional research methods, many practitioners have reservations as the participation is an isolated event. 3.11.2 Participatory Action Research (PAR) PAR methods such as diagrams and timelines are the same as in RRA. The objective of PAR is to make the community responsible and not just in the data collection stage. The vision is long-term in PAR and allows the community to analyze its own problems, define priorities and design a plan to solve these problems. In PAR the role of “experts” from outside is to coordinate the process and offer technical assistance where necessary and in response to needs expressed by the community. In PAR it is up to the community to direct the process; if RRA is a discrete, short-term process, PAR on the other hand has much wider scope and can last for several years. 3.11.3 Participatory Learning and Action This relatively new designation is becoming increasingly popular. Here, the accent is on actions to be taken based on the results, rather than considering data collection as an end in itself. This ever-growing set of participatory methodologies and approaches integrates data collection techniques such as RRA and PAR but also other activities which strengthen and perpetuate local populations’ participation and control.

Key questions / topics

MINISTRY is executing agent

ADVISORY GROUP

on formative research process

RESEACH TEAM

Coordinating Research Institute

- 21 -

IV – DATA ANALYSIS STAGE

Most books on qualitative research do not give much detailed guidance on the analysis stage. Many factors can determine the analytical approach, e.g. the subject of the study, the methodology, the objectives of the study, the experience of the researcher, and so on. In L’approche phénoménologique en recherche, Deschamps defines four important stages for analysing qualitative data. Once the data has been collected and transcribed, the researcher proceeds to the stages of phenomenological reduction which consist in the following (Deschamps, 1993): 1) Extrapolate general meaning from the description The researcher scans the material a few times to familiarise him/herself with the phenomena and get a sense of its meaning. 2) Recognise units of meaning emerging from the description The researcher divides the content of the verbatim into as many units as can be decoded at each thematic transition identified in the reading, from the perspective of the participant. The emerging units of meaning allow the researcher to link the (lived) experience to the concept (specific structure of the phenomenon being studied). The principal units of meaning represent the structure of the phenomenon. 3) Develop the content of units of meaning to acquire an in-depth understanding of the

material In this stage, the researcher deepens his/her understanding of the experience by translating the units of meaning into deeper units of understanding, by examining the content of the verbatim using his/her knowledge of the phenomenon being explored. The researcher presents the experience of each unit in his or her words and those of the participant, in order to gain further understanding. For example, it is possible to separate the analysed text into two columns. In the first column, units of meaning and the words of the participants are listed chronologically. In the second column the same units of meaning are re-examined to bring out more depths of meaning. Deeper units of meaning can be seen as the meeting point between the researcher and the experience. 4) Synthesise the findings of the units of meaning with respect to the phenomena under

consideration and describe the typical structure of the phenomena This is the last stage of phenomenological reduction. Here, the researcher must combine units of meaning and detailed units of meaning into a consistent and coherent description in the form of a synthesis. Each analysed account results in a logical description, faithfully representing the views of the participant. The researcher also synthesises, by means of a general description, the various accounts of the typical structure of the experience: going from a description towards the concept and finally to a higher level of generalisation. Phenomenological reduction allows the researcher to ask participants for their points of view, share the description of the specific experience with them, and obtain their impressions, thus leading the researcher to a deeper analysis. V – QUALITATIVE RESARCH DATA ANALYSIS SOFTWARE

Data analysis is becoming much easier with the development of qualitative data analysis software. Unlike word processing programmes, these can also analyse photographs and videos. Amongst the programmes most used by researchers (all disciplines) in the member

- 22 -

countries of ERNWACA are MaxQDA, NUD’IST, ATLAS ti, and ETHNOGRAPH. These software programmes facilitate data analysis for a relatively small financial layout. All of these programmes function in more or less the same way. What differentiates them is their flexibility in terms of functions such as memory capacity, how many files they can manage simultaneously, and which formats they can support. It is then a question of user preference. These qualitative data analysis software programmes will never be able to replace the work of the researcher and therefore you should not expect them to perform miracles! Several national ERNWACA research teams use MaxQDA in national and transnational research projects. See MaxQDA screens in Annex F. VI – SCIENTIFIC WRITING: OUTLINE OF A REPORT

Below is an example of how a final research report could be structured. 6.1 - Executive summary The executive summary should be no longer than two pages and should briefly describe the objectives of the study, give an overview of the study design and research site, and summarise the main findings and recommendations. 6.2 - Introduction and statement of purpose This section should clearly state the main objectives of the research as well as specific questions to be addressed. 6.3 - Description of the research site This section should include the selection criteria used for the site as well as background information on the study population (socio-economic, ethnic/linguistic, community and household characteristics, etc.).

6.4 - Methodology This section should describe in detail the overall study design as well as the sampling strategies (including sample size) and the method of data collection used. Justification for the particular research design and methods chosen should be given, and any problems that were encountered should be discussed. 6.5 - Results The results should include detailed responses to the research questions set out in the introduction. The results of all the relevant data collection activities should be drawn on to respond to each research question, triangulating to answer each question. 6.6 - Detailed discussion of conclusions and concrete recommendations for action In this section the report must make reference to the research objectives set out in the introduction. What relevance do the study results have for programme activities (service delivery, communication, etc.)? What recommendations can the researcher make concerning concrete actions to take, based on the study’s results? What additional research is required?

- 23 -

ANNEX A: Summary of data collection methods (Extract from Hudelson, Recherche qualitative pour les programmes de santé, Division de la santé mentale, OMS)

Data collection technique Characteristics Strengths Weaknesses

Unstructured interviews (conversation style)

Questions emerge from the immediate context and are asked in the natural course of things; there is no predetermination of question topics or wording.

Increases relevance of questions; questions can be matched to individuals and circumstances. Good for exploration of new topics.

Different information has to be collected from different people with different questions. Less systematic and comprehensive. Data organisation and analysis can be difficult.

Semi-structured interviews (with interview guide)

Topics to be covered are specified in advance, but the interviewer decides on the sequence and wording of the questions during the interview.

More systematic and comprehensive, but interviews still fairly conversational and situational.

Important topics may be inadvertently omitted. Interviewer flexibility in sequence and wording of questions can result in different responses from different perspectives, thus reducing comparability.

Standardised open-ended

interview

Exact wording and sequence of questions determined in advance. Worded so that responses are completely open-ended.

Increased comparability of responses; data complete for each respondent. Facilitates data organisation and analysis. Best once a fairly good understanding of the topic has been obtained.

Little flexibility in relating interview to particular individuals and circumstances; standardised wording of questions may constrain and limit naturalness and relevance of questions and answers.

Free listing Asks informants to name all items in an informant-defined domain.

Useful first step in all research involving definition of new domains. Helps ensure that concepts are culturally relevant.

Possible difficulties involved with finding appropriate generic terms to start the listing process. Sometimes list too sparse.

Pile sorts Participants sort cards or other elements according to their differences or similarities.

Helps to discover relations among items within a domain. Can be conducted using large numbers of items and are easy to administer.

Unless items are pictures or actual stimuli, pile sorts cannot be done with non-literates. Also not appropriate for all domains since not all have underlying taxonomic structure.

Triad Informants are asked to choose, for a set of 3 items, the one item that is the most different.

As with pile sorts, they help to discover relations among items within a domain. Easy to administer, can be used with non-literates.

Not practical for comparisons among large numbers of items.

Rating scales

Respondents are asked to rate items one-by-one according to a pre-designed scale that can be graphical or numerical.

Scales can be created for any number of concepts or attributes. They are easy to administer.

Requires literate informants or visual stimuli. Sensitive to response bias.

- 24 -

Data collection technique Characteristics Strengths Weaknesses

Rank order methods Informants are asked to rank 2 or more items in terms of a specific characteristic.

Very productive for the short time it takes to conduct. Good for studying individual differences. Paired comparisons are especially easy to administer and can be used with non-literates.

If there are many items it can become tedious for non-literates.

Focus Groups A semi-structured interviewing technique, which relies on discussion among participants.

Can produce a lot of information quickly. Good for identifying and exploring beliefs, attitudes and behaviours and for identifying relevant questions for individual interviews.

Provide no information abut frequency or distribution of beliefs or behaviours. Are difficult to conduct; require skilled moderators. Participants may influence each others’ responses so care must be taken in analysing results.

Group interviewing

techniques (non-focus groups)

A more formal, group interview technique, which tends to use pre-existing natural groups. Sometimes group members are asked to work together to complete a task, such as building a map of the community. The purpose is to get community actively involved in identifying and exploring topics of interest.

Good for rapport building, identifying and exploring community problems and priorities, raising awareness of local problems, involving people in identification of potential solutions. Fun and interesting for participants.

Less systematic than focus groups, so inter-group comparisons are difficult. Requires preparation, but perhaps less skilled group moderators than for focus groups. Raising awareness can lead to raised expectations – researchers should be careful not to create unfulfilled expectations.

Social network analysis

A set of methods for discovering and describing social structures and patterns of social interaction. Based on individual interviewing techniques and participant observation.

Can identify important social groups; provide information about value, meaning and boundaries of network relationships; describe network-related attributes of individuals in a population; describe the contacts and ties that relate individuals or groups to one another.

Some methods may require intensive long-term relationship building with informants. Other methods are lengthy and boring to administer. Data analysis is fairly sophisticated.

Participant observation

Not really a data collection technique, but rather an approach whereby the researcher becomes an active member of the culture under study. Involves mainly unstructured observation and unstructured interviewing.

Facilitates all other data collection activities by building rapport and reducing reactivity. Helps to formulate relevant questions. Good for understanding processes, events and relationships in their social context.

Can be time consuming. Requires that the researcher speak the local language very well and be a skilled observer and note taker.

- 25 -

Data collection technique Characteristics Strengths Weaknesses

Unstructured observation

Observer is outsider, non-participant. What is observed is only generally defined. Broadly focused, aim is to observe behaviour in holistic context.

Good for discovering unknown aspects of a problem. Allows for discovery of “surprises.” Good for understanding behaviours in their physical and social context.

Does not provide precise, repeatable measures of behaviour, and thus cannot be used to monitor changes in behaviour.

Structured observation

Observer is outsider, non-participant. Observes and records observations in a pre-determined manner.

Provides precise numerical data which are amenable to statistical analysis and can be repeated to monitor change over time.

The problem to be studied needs to be well-defined. Training of observers is intensive and time-consuming. Pre-determined structure of observations limits discovery of other potentially relevant behaviours.

Ethnographic decision-tree

modelling

Uses interviews and participant observation to elicit people’s own decision criteria. These are then combined in the form of a decision tree or flowchart. The model is then tested with separate sample of decision-makers.

Ethnographic decision-tree modelling shares the strengths and weaknesses of the qualitative data collection methods it draws on. It is a systematic means for understanding how people make decisions; good for gaining an understanding of observed behaviours and for predicting behaviour.

Modelling process can be difficult if researcher has no prior experience. Requires knowledge of computers for testing models.

- 26 -

ANNEX B: Types of questions Open-ended questions

These are questions which allow respondents to answer in their own words rather than choose answers from a pre-determined list. e.g. Q: What do you do in your free time?

A: …………………………………………………………………… The informant can give any answer and the researcher records the exact words of the informant. For an informant, this type of question is more satisfying than a closed question. However, these types of responses are extremely difficult to analyse; reading, coding and analysing over 200 different responses can represent an enormous amount of work.

Open question with pre-coded classification

e.g. Q: What do you do in your free time?

1. Soccer

2. Walks

3. Fishing

4. Read

5. Other………

Open question connected to classifications

e.g. Q: What is your income?

1. 0-----------100000

2. 100000----200000

3. 200000----300000

4. 300000----400000

5. 400000----500000

6. 500000----600000

7. 600000----700000

8. 700000----800000

9. 800000----900000

10. 900000---1000000 With this type of question it is very easy after the research to reduce the number of categories. e.g.

1. 0------------100000, Poor

2. 100000-----500000, Average

3. More than 500000, Rich

Open question, quantitative response required

Q: How old are you?

A: ………..

- 27 -

Closed questions Questions that have a pre-determined list of possible responses. The respondent must choose a response from the list. e.g. I heard you were having fun, do you:

- agree

- slightly agree

- have no opinion

- slightly disagree

- disagree

with this opinion? Selective questions

e.g. Q: Are you Muslim?

- Yes

- No

Q: If yes, how many times a day do you pray?

- Once

- Twice

- Other… Supplementary questions

These questions are used when the researcher wants a more in-depth response.

- 28 -

ANNEX C: Conducting discussion groups Characteristics of participants and management strategies Conducting discussion groups requires a certain savoir faire, given the different personalities with which the moderator will have to deal: ►►► The group that is in agreement: The members of the group agree with the majority. The danger here is that participants only give answers that agree with what others have said and therefore do not give their true opinions. This is problematic as it can be difficult to know whether they are simply following suit or genuinely agree with what has been said by other participants. Strategy: From the start of the session encourage those participants who have shown they are

not in agreement and show respect for differences of opinion.

►►► The apathetic group: This is typified by a general lack of enthusiasm and participation. This may be due to external factors. For example, the participants feel obliged to participate, are suspicious about the methods being used, or are unqualified to take part in this type of discussion. Apathy may also come from within the group. The group may be too big, rendering interactions invisible, or the group may be too organised and lacking in flexibility, contributing to a lack of spontaneity. Perhaps the moderator is too formal and intimidates the participants. Maybe the moderator is too relaxed and appears unprofessional. The pace may be too fast and does not give participants enough time to answer or too slow and participants get bored. Strategy: Organise the group carefully and in a realistic way to avoid external factors which

can cause apathy within the group. Recruit a competent and experienced moderator who will

be able to resolve many of the problems arising from within the group. Below are examples of

other methods which can help stimulate an apathetic group.

� If the topic does not seem interesting, you can generate enthusiasm by asking the group to treat the subject as a story and to create characters around the topic;

� If the subject seems to be too theoretical for the group or they do not feel concerned, you can use images of the subject/situation which will make it appear more real. If the

subject seems to be intimidating or too personal you can encourage the participants to

express themselves using projective techniques;

� In certain cases, participation can be more dynamic if the moderator confronts the participants;

� From time to time take a break. This allows the participants to move about and talk among themselves, often what is said will be discussed publicly later on. This also gives

the moderator a chance to consult his/her team.

►►► The leader: This person starts the conversation, defends his/her position, tries to influence the others and wants to have the last word. Strategy: Do not make eye contact with the dominant participant or turn away from them. Use

the names of the other participants. If necessary, politely tell the dominant participant that

although their ideas are interesting you would also like to hear what the other participants

have to say.

►►► The counter leader: This person takes a position opposite to that of the leader and tries to influence the others. ►►► The associated leader: This person supports the opinions of the leader and looks for acknowledgement.

- 29 -

►►► The associated counter leader: This person supports the opinions of the counter leader and looks for acknowledgement. ►►► The outsider: This person sidetracks the conversation and does not respect the implicit rules of the group. They will try to attract attention but are often put in their place by the rest of the group. ►►► The consensus seeker: This person seeks consensus, is measured, tries to negotiate between the leader and counter leader, gets the group thinking and takes it to a deeper level of reflection. ►►► The passive: This person may lack confidence, is afraid of being put down by the group or does not want to join in and prefers to be an observer. This person hesitates to speak and is generally shy and anxious in group situations. Strategy: Use eye contact with this person to show that you are interested in what they have to

say. Closely observe the passive participant to see when they are ready to speak. If necessary

ask a simple and neutral question to encourage a direct response. If they become too uneasy,

come back to them later on. ►►► Expert participants: This is a particular kind of domination. Even if this person is not trying to dominate the group, the others will look to them and be reluctant to give their own opinions. Strategy: Find out if the participant is a real expert or a pseudo expert; if they are a real

expert, remind them that all comments are important and that other people have to contribute

or you can ask them to wait until the others have spoken before they give their opinion. It can

also be useful to say, “I know Mawdo is probably already aware of this ….” If the person is a

pseudo expert ask the other members of the group to comment on his/her answers. You may

have to be firm and challenge them to reply as long as the group will tolerate this. ►►► The verbal participant: This person talks on and on without ever making a point, they are probably nervous or compulsive. Strategy: Be more directive, use probing questions that require specific responses. Bring the

participant back to the subject under discussion or politely interrupt them by reminding them

that time is limited and you have a lot of subjects to cover. Be diplomatic. ►►► The sidetracked participant: This person make comments which have nothing to do with the topic being discussed and can sidetrack the rest of the group. This may be because they do not know the topic, they are nervous or they have not been listening. Strategy: Try to ask the question again or paraphrase it. You can also come back to the

question later. ►►► The participant who gives incomplete answers: This person gives partial responses or says things like, “I don’t know.” Their attitude is usually due to a lack of confidence or nerves. Strategy: Try to build rapport at the very start of the discussion so that this attitude does not

continue throughout the session. Try to ask questions in different ways to obtain more specific

information. Try probing techniques.

►►► The confused participant: This person seems to be confused and to not understand; they communicate this verbally and non-verbally. Strategy: Acknowledge the fact by saying “you seem confused.” Try to reformulate the

question or give an example. Try asking the question later on in the session.

- 30 -

►►► The overly-enthusiastic participant: This participant is enthusiastic and positive in all their responses. They want to be liked and want to tell you what they think you want to hear. Strategy: Remind the participant what was said in the introductory remarks – that you want to

hear positive and negative opinions. Try playing the devil’s advocate: “I’ve heard people say

the exact opposite.” Or use the third person technique: “How do you think people you know

would react?” ►►► The negative participant: This person only gives negative responses; they may be using the interview to offload years of frustration and anger. They may have decided not to give you any information or positive reactions. Strategy: Be careful and try not to be on the defensive. Try to disarm the participant by openly

acknowledging their hostility: “That seems to make you angry. That’s good because I’m

interested in knowing what you really think.” As in the previous example you can play the

devil’s advocate or use the third person technique. ►►► The hostile participant: This participant personally attacks you verbally. Strategy: Again you must be careful, try to disarm the participant by openly acknowledging the

situation. Do not be defensive. Try a few moments of silence; it’s up to the participant to

explain why they attacked you. ►►► The troublesome participant: This person upsets the discussion by saying, for example, that another participant’s ideas are wrong or that the moderator’s questions are stupid. Strategy: Try to get the discussion back on track as soon as possible, ask the other participants

to comment on what has just been said, although this can be risky if the comments upset or

embarrassed someone. Try presenting another point of view: “That’s interesting but I’ve heard

other people say….” In this way, you give the other participants a chance to take sides and

continue the discussion.

►►► The questioning participant: This person continues to ask the facilitator to give their opinion. Strategy: Use your lack of experience or expertise on the subject not to answer. If this is not the case you can say, “Of course I have an opinion like everyone, but our aim today is to find

out what you think.” If necessary offer to give your opinion after the session has finished. You

can also try to find out why the participant is so interested in your opinion. Try to ask the

entire group.

Conducting a focus group discussion Below are key aspects which you must take into consideration when planning a focus group. Three types of people are necessary to conduct a focus group:

• Recruiters find and invite the participants; • Moderators conduct the discussion; • Note takers list the topics under discussion, take notes of the participants’ reactions and

make sure that the discussion is properly tape-recorded. They can also help in transcribing the discussion.

Where possible a focus group should be conducted by someone who is familiar with the technique and who knows the target population and culture. If skilled professionals are not available, it is imperative to organise several practice sessions where moderators can be trained to:

• Introduce the themes under discussion; • Gain participants’ confidence; • Ensure the participation of everyone in the group;

- 31 -

• Facilitate discussion among group members; • Control the pace of the discussion; • Be aware of non-verbal communication.

Note takers should be trained to do the following:

• Help the moderator note down general information about the participants; • Observe and note the group dynamics and other subtle reactions and interactions which

may be useful during the analysis stage; • Devise a system to identify all the participants and to attribute their remarks (e.g.

number or letter) as well as making a seating plan. Role of moderator The person conducting the group plays a key role:

• They must manage the group’s dynamics and put the participants at ease within ten minutes;

• They must follow the interview guide and make sure that the discussions follow the identified themes;

• They must ask questions which reveal the personal experiences of the participants; • They must avoid what is called group contamination. Below are some tips for avoiding

this: o Identify the consensus seeker as soon as possible and allow them to speak each time

they want; o Allow everyone to speak but do not be afraid of asking the leader and counter leader

to be quiet if they are monopolising the discussion; o Get the shy and passive participants to contribute; o Make use of the caricature effect (this consists in exaggerating the position of the

participants to bring them to a more nuanced position) to reposition the group and to avoid extreme opinions. See example below:

Participants: “In the past we respected our elders and children obeyed their

parents, there were values which guided us.”

Moderator: “If I understand, you are saying that there were only good things about the past.”

o Use the STOP to give the group time to cool off. Example: Participants: The discussion is about polygamy. Certain participants accuse another of not being a real man because he is only talking about the negative aspects of it. Moderator: Use the STOP. Summarize what has been said and restart the debate with a new question reminding the participants to be calm and to respect different points of view.

Location The choice of location should be somewhere private and where the participants feel comfortable.

• Choose somewhere where it is easy to hear everyone speak; • Choose somewhere comfortable; • Choose somewhere neutral; • Choose somewhere easy to get to.

- 32 -

Time needed for a focus group In general, a focus group lasts between an hour and two hours. An hour and a half is considered to be ideal, longer than this and participants can start to feel tired. The length will depend on the outcome of the discussion and how interested the participants are in the subject. It is advisable to prepare for one hour but tell your participants that the session may be a little longer. A short debriefing (15 minutes) involving all participants should immediately follow each session. Then, a full report is given to the whole research team. This step could bring the total time up to two hours. In total you will need from between two and four hours to conduct a focus group discussion. Starting a focus group session Welcome the participants, thank them for coming and introduce the research team. If you are working with an interpreter, make sure that the moderator’s welcome is translated directly to the participants. This gives them the feeling of being involved in the session from the start.

• Explain the team’s work. Give an overview of the project but without revealing the exact nature of the questions;

• Explain the role of the different people in the team; • Explain why the participants were chosen. Underline the importance of their

contribution to the study and the community; • Make sure the participants have understood that all their contributions will remain

confidential; • If you are using a tape recorder, explain that it is only to have an accurate record of

what was said; • Explain how the focus group will work and the basic rules:

o A focus group centres on certain questions; o A session lasts about an hour rand a half; o Because it is necessary to have interpretation or a tape recording (if it is the case), it

is important that only one person speaks at a time; o Sometimes it may be necessary for the observer or the note taker to check a point

with the moderator(s); while this is happening participants are asked to be patient. • Try to keep the conversation in the group and avoid side conversations which can upset

the group: “We are interested in hearing everyone’s point of view. Everything you have to say is

important to us. Try to let everyone in the group have their say. Because we have a lot

to talk about in an hour sometimes we will have to move on to the next question before

we have completely finished the subject being discussed. Vague comments don’t give us

useful information so we may ask you to clarify your point. For example, if you say ‘I

agree’ you will be asked to explain why. If you say ‘it’s difficult’ you will be asked to

say what is difficult.”

• Ask the participants in the group to introduce themselves; • Ask if here are any questions; • Start the session with a question that puts the participants at ease. It may be something

that shows that the participants have something in common and that they can speak openly. It may be a very simple question that is easy to answer and that will help to create a relaxed atmosphere in the group.

During the interview The moderator should act and observe:

� Listen to the discussions; � Avoid asking personal questions;

- 33 -

� Take advantage of pauses in the discussion, wait a few moments to see if someone will continue speaking, if not ask, “Does anyone have anything else to add?”;

� Use closed questions if you want short precise answers; � Use probing questions after open questions to see how the participants will respond; � Avoid loaded questions or those which give too much information and that lead the

participants to believe that their response is correct/incorrect; � If a participant makes an observation based on a myth or misconception ask, “Can you

explain that?”;

� Do not let participants interrupt each other or let two people speak at the same time; � Make sure everyone in the group contributes; � Favour those participants who have not yet contributed to the discussion.

Observation means keeping your distance from what is happening. To do this you must:

� Observe the non-verbal communication of the participants; � Analyse the group dynamics; � Find ways to avoid group contamination (get everyone to contribute). Keep the

discussion real and not ideal (caricature effect); � Use strategies (the STOP) to allow participants to cool off and continue in a more

rational way. The moderator should be present but not join in discussions.

� Be warm and attentive and listen to everyone without exception; � Animate the discussion without taking a position; � Never give your personal point of view and remain neutral at all times; � Answer all questions concerning the content of the discussion; � Avoid showing that you agree or disagree with the participants through non-verbal

communication; � Avoid being rigid and authoritative; � Remain flexible but make sure you achieve your objectives; � Make sure the participants have a positive and rewarding experience!

At the end of a focus group session Thank the participants and where possible offer some refreshments. If you have to conduct several focus groups, make sure you leave 30 minutes between each session. This will allow the interviewer and the note taker to get together immediately after the session to check that all important observations were properly recorded. It also provides the opportunity to talk about any problems and make any necessary modifications for the next session.

- 34 -

ANNEX D: Web sites on participatory research Note: These pages may be subject to modification and certain sites or pages may cease to exist. www.aquadev.org www.aquadev.org/fr/download/AQUADEV_marp_pipo.pdf (75p.) This site is one of the most informative in terms of Active Participatory Research (APR). See the section on Publications for documents on APR as used in Niger. Also, the second URL links to a document (in French) on APR in the region of Louga in Senegal. www.icra-edu.org Many links here from International Centre for development oriented Research in Agriculture (ICRA) on learning action research and other participatory techniques. http://portals.wi.wur.nl/ppme/ See PPM&E Resource Portal for information on Participatory Planning Monitoring & Evaluation: Managing and Learning for Impact in Rural Development; Rapid Rural Appraisal; etc. www.fao.org/sd/seaga/index_em.htm www.fao.org/sd/seaga/downloads/en/leafleten.pdf Guide to applying socioeconomic and gender analysis (SEAGA). www.inter-reseaux.org (in French) Network mainly concerned with rural people’s training. Directory of organisations with information on development. Dissemination of participatory methods. www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/hygiene/envsan/phastep/en/ The World Health Organisation site has information on a particular technique known as PHAST. The PHAST approach helps people feel more confident about themselves and their ability to take action and make improvements in their communities. Feelings of empowerment and personal growth are as important as the physical changes, such as cleaning up the environment or building latrines. The guide has seven steps. The first five help take the community group through the process of developing a plan to prevent diarrhoeal diseases by improving water supply, hygiene behaviours and sanitation. The sixth and seventh steps involve monitoring and evaluation. www.unhabitat.org/cdrom/governance/html/yellop29.htm Here you can download a document on Objective Oriented Project Planning – "Ziel-Orientierte Projekt Planung" or ZOPP – a planning tool used by the GTZ to actively involve stakeholders. www.unssc.org/web1/services/downloads/VIPP%20UNICEF%20Bangladesh.pdf (168p.) Information on Visualisation in Participatory Programs (VIPP). Annex prepared by Raoul Koné and Cynthia Aka of ERNWACA-Côte d’Ivoire and edited by Djénéba

Traoré of ERNWACA-Mali.

- 35 -

ANNEX E: Bibliography Agar, Michael H. Speaking of Ethnography. Qualitative Research Methods, vol. 2.

Agyeman, D.K. (2003). The Case for Action Research in Education in Africa. ERNWACA, Accra, Ghana.

AIDSCAP. Comment conduire des pré-tests efficaces. USAID, s.d.

Angers, Maurice (1996). Initiation pratique à la méthodologie des sciences humaines. Les Editions CEC, Anjou, Québec, Canada.

Atkinson, Robert. The Live Story Interview. Qualitative Research Methods, vol. 44.

Bernard, H. Russel (1995). Research Methods in Anthropology, second edition Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Altamira Press.

Bih, Emile (2003). Développer l’importance du partenariat chercheur-praticien. ROCARE, Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire.

Campbell, Oona; Cleland, John; Collumbien, Martine (1999). Social Science Methods for Research on Reproductive Health. World Health Organization.

Carr-Hill, Roy; Katabaro, Kamugisha, Joviter. The Impact of HIV/AIDS on Education and Institutionalizing Preventive Education.

Chevrier, Jacques (1994). La recherche en éducation comme source de changement. Les Editions Logiques, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Dawson, Susan; Manderson, Leonore; Tallo, Veronica L. Le Manuel des Groupes Focaux. PNUD/Banque Mondiale/OMS, s.d.

Enda Graf Sahel (1996). Ancrages des recherches populaires. Dakar, Sénégal.

Eymard-Simonian Chantal. La recherche en soins infirmiers : quelles méthodes ? Dossier la Recherche Soins Formation Pédagogie Encadrement, Nº28 – 4ème trimestre, 1998.

Feldberg, Karen; Tornes, K. (2002). Sector Wide Approach Programmes in the Development of the Education Sector: From Project to Process and Partnership. Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, Oslo, Norway.

Foly, Ayele Antoinette; Laffitte Alain. Animation Féminine dans des communautés villageoises du Moyen Chari.

Gauthier, Benoît (1990). Recherche sociale : de la problématique à la collecte des données. Presses de l’Université du Québec.

Government of Malawi, Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, November 2003. The Impact of HIV/AIDS on the Education Sector in Malawi, Study 1: Examining Policy, Leadership and Advocacy Responses in the Education Sector. The Malawi Research Team.

Grawitz, Madeleine, 11ème édition 2001, Méthodes des sciences sociales. Dalloz.

Guide à l’usage des auteurs (1994). Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal.

Higginbotham, Nick; Briceno-Leon, Roberto; Johnson, Nancy A. (2001). Applying Health Social Science: Best practice in the developing World. Zed Books.

Hubertman, A. Michael; Miles, Matthew B. Analyse des données qualitatives, Recueil de nouvelles méthodes.

Kelly, Michael J. (2000). Planifier l’Education dans le contexte du VIH/SIDA. UNESCO.

Kemmis, Stephen; Robin McTaggart (1992). The Action Research Planner. Deakin University Press, Victoria, Australia.

- 36 -

Krueger, Richard A. (1994). Focus groups, second Edition, A Practical Guide for Applied Research. Sage Publications.

Laffitte, Alain; Roumy, Sœur Marie (1980). L’Enquête participative : application au secteur artisanal de la zone Nylon de Douala en République Unie du Cameroun, IPD – IV – n°1.

Lessard-Hébert, Michelle (1997) Recherche-action en milieu éducatif. Editions Nouvelles, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Muchielli, Roger (1982). L’analyse de contenu des documents et des communications à l’usage des animateurs et des responsables (4è éd.). Les Éditions ESF.

Ndione, Emmanuel Seyni, et al. (1991). Réinventer le présent : quelques jalons pour l’action. Editions Enda Graf Sahel, Dakar, Sénégal.

Obanya, Pai; Paulin Hountondji (2005). Informing Education Policy Development through Formative Research. White paper for ADEA Working Group on Education Sector Analysis (WGESA), Paris, France.

Ogburn, Liisa; Barrows, Amy. Impact of Family Planning on Women’s Lives Cooperative Agreement USAID/CCP-3060-A-00-3021-00, Women’s Studies Project, Family Health International, s.d.

Ogbum, Liisa; Barrows, Amy. Qualitative Research Methods. Family Health International, s.d.

Poisson, Yves (1991). La recherche qualitative en éducation. Presses de l’Université du Québec, Sillery, Québec, Canada.

Pourtois, Jean-Pierre; Desmet Huguette (1997). Épistémologie et instrumentation en sciences humaines. Édition Mardaga, 2ème édition.

ROCARE (2005). Atelier sur la méthodologie d’analyse des données qualitatives sur l’impact du VIH/SIDA dans le secteur de l’éducation. Bamako, Mali. www.rocare.org/RapportAtelierVih_Ouaga2005-07-25.pdf.

SARA, Recherche qualitative pour les programmes de santé. Manuel de formation pour la recherche qualitative, OMS, s.d.

Savoie-Zajc, Lorraine (1993). Les modèles de changement planifié en éducation. Les éditions LOGIQUES, Montréal, Québec, Canada.

Silvernman, David (2000). Doing Qualitative Research: A practical Handbook. Sage Publications.

Stake, Robert E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research. SAGE Publications.

Tornes, Kristen (2003). A Model for Formative Research, based on experiences from the cooperation between Norwegian and Nepalese ministries of education, Report to NORAD, Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research, 24p.

Ulin, Priscilla R.; Robinson; Elisabeth T; Tolley, Elizabeth E. (2002). Qualitative Methods: A field Guide for Applied Research in Sexual and Reproductive Health. Family Health International.

Van de Belt, Hans (1973). Méthodologie de la Recherche socio-économique, UNESCO.

Winch, Peter; Wagman, Jennifer; Malouin, Rebecca A. (2000). Qualitative Research for Improved Health Programs: A Guide to manuals for Qualitative and Participatory Research on Child Health Nutrition, USAID.

Workshop Report, November 1998. Towards Improved Monitoring and Evaluation of HIV Prevention, AIDS care and STD control programs, USAID, Nairobi, Kenya.

- 37 -

ANNEX F: Data Analysis with MaxQDA Data analysis with MaxQDA follows these basic steps: FIRST SCREEN OF MAXQDA

CHOICE OF FOLDER AND DOCUMENT NAME

- 38 -

TEXT GROUPS

IMPORTING PRE-STRUCTURED OR PRE-CODED TEXTS

- 39 -

IMPORTING TEXTS

RESULTS OF IMPORTING TEXT

- 40 -

ACTIVATING A DOCUMENT IN THE TEXT BROWSER

DEVELOPING AND ATTRIBUTING CODES

- 41 -

EXPORTING CODED SEGMENTS TO WORD

EXPORT WINDOW

- 42 -

VERBATIM EXPORTED TO WORD DOCUMENT