The questionnaire is a useful instrument and it is generally widely used. It offers the potential for generating numerical data, as well as more qualitative insights into the participants’ experiences and attitudes (Cohen et al., 2011; Clough and Nutbrown, 2012; Creswell, 2013) without the presence of the researcher. De Leeuw and Hox (1988) stated that this could be regarded as a disadvantage because it relies on the respondent to read and answer the questions without the assistance and explanation of the researcher, however piloting can ensure the questionnaire will yield the kinds of data that are needed, and I found that, data generated by the questionnaire were fruitful and contributed to answering my research questions. I decided to use self- completion questionnaires alongside interviewing, in order to generate views from a larger sample and increase its robustness (Reams and Twale, 2008; Denscombe, 2008). Questionnaires were distributed to teachers to obtain a better overview of the phenomenon of inclusion.
Cohen et al. (2011) stated that if a questionnaire is distributed to a large sample, the questions should be closed and structured, whilst a smaller target sample can include open-ended questions, this for manageability of data. In my study, the questionnaire was distributed to two hundred and twenty-two
94 teachers, from three different schools selected from the original sample of six - one each from the North, Central and South areas of Malta. Following Cohen et al. (2011), given the size of the sample, I designed closed and multiple- choice questions which were similar in content to the interview questions, to allow for comparison and generate more perspectives on the issues. I designed a very short questionnaire which required only a tick to answer in order to maximise the response rate. As Lynn (2003) notes, the main drawback of participation in a questionnaire is the amount of time it takes to finish it. Lynn (2003) advises against including open questions, which could take longer to answer if a closed question would provide the equivalent information. I followed this advice and kept it as short as possible, whilst still being meaningful and only included necessary questions, but also left space for any comments that respondents wished to record. This proved to be a good strategy because forty-nine teachers left valuable comments, therefore, I think that the fact that the questionnaire was short and did not take much of their time, made them willing to offer more, by writing a comment. In piloting, I discovered that the questionnaire took 3 minutes to complete. I gave the teachers two weeks to return the questionnaire.
Cohen et al. (2011) suggest that highly structured, closed questions are useful to generate frequencies and they can be answered, coded and analysed more quickly than open text. Conversely, structured and close-ended questions may prevent the participants from any remarks or explanations and therefore only the issues identified by the research are given importance (Oppenheim, 1992). However, by leaving an opportunity to comment (but not a question requiring participants to answer) at the end of the questionnaire proved fruitful. In the multiple-choice questions, I gave a statement together with a number of answers and the teachers were asked to choose the answer (or answers) according to their views. A copy of the questionnaire is to be found in Appendix 4. Cohen et al. (2011) emphasised that in the multiple-choice questions, it is important to include all the possible answers that enable the respondent to present his/her views.
95 Possible answers to dichotomous questions were: agree, disagree and perhaps. Whilst dichotomous questions usually offer two possible responses, yes and no, or, agree and disagree, I felt that polarisation of views was not always helpful so I included the choice of ‘perhaps’ in order to see where there was uncertainty around particular issues in inclusion.
The questionnaire consisted of the following questions and possible responses:
1) As a teacher, I agree that students with diverse needs should be included in class: (Please select one)
o Agree o Disagree o Perhaps
2) As a teacher, I find it difficult to include and cater for: (You can tick more than one)
o Dyslexic students
o Students with mild autism o Students with severe autism o Low ability students
o Gifted students
o Students with physical disabilities o None of the above
3) In order to cater for every learner’s needs, I use different strategies in class together with various resources: (Please tick one)
o Agree o Disagree o Perhaps
4) I share ideas and difficulties with my colleagues: (Please tick one) o Agree
96 o Perhaps
If you agree, please skip to question number 6.
5) I do not agree to share ideas and difficulties with my colleagues because: o I simply do not want to share my resources and feelings.
o I feel afraid to share my ideas and difficulties.
6) When I was a student teacher I had good training in the field of inclusion: (Please tick one)
o Agree o Disagree o Perhaps
7) I feel the need of further training in inclusion: (Please tick one) o Agree
o Disagree o Perhaps
A participant information sheet was also attached to the questionnaire where the purpose of the study was explained and as I stated earlier, I included blank space in the paper, where I asked them whether they wished to add any further comments. Furthermore, whilst thanking them, I asked them to return the questionnaire within two weeks. Through these questions, I wanted first and foremost to get an overview of their perception of inclusion, what makes them feel challenged in class, whether or not they use various methodologies in class, whether they share resources with their colleagues and I also wanted to know their opinion about pre-service training and continuous professional development. Data from the questionnaire responses contributed to my research third sub-question, where I wished to investigate what further developments are needed to develop more inclusive schools.
97