Arquitectura y componentes

As the research required a large sample from a specific and very time restricted target population (mainstream secondary school teachers without a dedicated pastoral care role), it was appropriate to use convenience sampling. Convenience sampling can be very useful for situations where you need to reach a targeted sample quickly and conveniently and where sampling for proportionality is not the primary concern. The sample was acquired directly through schools rather than through alternative means such as internet questionnaires via online forums etc. It was felt this would help ensure that the target sample criteria were adhered to and would help to ensure a better response rate.

3.9.1 Consent for participation

Gatekeeper permission was sought from each headteacher prior to requesting teachers within their schools to participate. The headteachers of 125 secondary schools in South

74

Wales were contacted via email (these constituted all of the state maintained secondary schools within South Wales). Emails contained a brief introduction and an attached letter outlining the research proposal and an explanation of how ethical issues would be dealt with (Appendix 2). Five schools out of those contacted responded to this initial email, and these were contacted via telephone by the researcher immediately. A second round of emails were sent out a fortnight later seeking for any further interest, a further four schools responded and were contacted immediately via telephone. In addition to those schools who were recruited via email, a further five schools were recruited separately by the researcher through professional contacts.

Teacher consent was sought immediately prior to questionnaire completion. The ‘opt in style’ consent form (Appendix 3), which allowed for anonymity, constituted the front page of the questionnaire. The consent form outlined the nature and professional affiliations of the research, right to withdraw and anonymity procedures. Due to anonymity procedures, participants were informed that once they had submitted the questionnaire they could not request for it to be omitted from the study as it would be impossible to identify. Teachers were required to tick two check boxes in order for their questionnaire to be included within the study, these were: “I understand that this questionnaire is to be completed only by secondary school teachers who do not have a designated role within their schools core pastoral care system (e.g. head of year, SENCo, pastoral care co-ordinator)” and “I understand that by completing the questionnaire and handing it in to the researcher, I am aware of the points made above and I am consenting to my participation in the research”. This served the dual purpose of gaining informed consent and ensuring eligibility for participation.

Debriefing forms were provided after questionnaire completion (Appendix 4). These provided further details regarding the aims of the research and relevant references for the participant’s information. In line with the British Psychological Society’s Code of Conduct (BPS, 2006), details of the researcher’s professional affiliates were provided.

75 3.9.2 Data collection

Data were collected during the second half of the school summer term, 2011. Dependent on the wishes of the gatekeeper, data collection took one of three forms: administration by the researcher during a staff meeting organised by the school (n=1); administration by a member of school personnel during a staff meeting organised by school (i.e. deputy headteacher, SENCo, teacher) (n=10), opportunistic administration by the researcher to staff within the school’s staffroom (n=3). Table 3.2 provides details of methods and collections and response rates within respective schools. As can be seen, responses from individual schools ranged from 4 to 33.

Table 3.2: Methods of data collection and response rates for individual schools

Method of Data Collection Response Rate Response Percentage (%)

School 1 Researcher in staff room 16 7

School 2 Deputy head during staff meeting 27 13

School 3 Researcher in staff room 4 2

School 4 Deputy head during staff meeting 33 16

School 5 Teacher during staff meeting 16 7

School 6 Headteacher during staff meeting 21 10

School 7 Researcher in staff room 16 7

School 8 Deputy head during staff meeting 20 9

School 9 Teacher during staff meeting 11 5

School 10 Teacher during staff meeting 8 4

School 11 Deputy Head during staff meeting 12 5

School 12 Researcher during staff meeting 10 5

School 13 Teacher during staff meeting 5 2

School 14 Teacher during staff meeting 18 8

Total 217 100

If the gatekeeper’s preference was to administer the questionnaire themselves (or via an appointed member of staff), the researcher visited them beforehand to discuss the principles of the research, anonymity procedures and to answer any questions. The researcher then arranged a date to collect the completed questionnaires from the school.

76

Questionnaires were numbered purely to keep track of response rates from individual schools. Questionnaires were administered to participants with a blank envelope attached so that they could be returned anonymously. Sealed envelopes were returned to either the appointed member of school personnel or the researcher, dependent on the method of data collection, and debrief forms provided. Completion of the questionnaire took approximately ten minutes.

3.9.3 Ethical issues

Prior to commencing research, it is necessary to evaluate the benefits of the study (such as advances in theory or increased understanding) against any possible negative consequences incurred in undertaking the research such as exposing individuals to unnecessary stress or diminished self-esteem (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2005). Therefore ethical issues raised by the current research were given careful consideration prior to commencing.

Approval was sought and gained from the Cardiff University School of Psychology Ethics Committee before any element of the research was carried out (Appendices 5, 6 & 7). Particular focus was given to confidentiality and anonymity procedures which are important factors in gaining reliable responses when ascertaining opinions regarding socially or professionally sensitive topics (Paulhus, 1991). It was decided that questionnaires, consent forms, and therefore the identity of participants would remain completely anonymous. Furthermore, participating schools were assigned a number and anonymised once data collection was complete: until this point schools’ participation was confidential.