CONCLUSIONES Y RECOMENDACIONES

In order to understand in greater depth students’ thinking about values and how this developed through the course (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2011), I designed a series of three, semi-structured interviews (see Table 5, p107 and Table 6, p108) to track the six students in Group B through the two modules I taught them. I interviewed each student three times: prior to teaching them Advocacy, in between teaching the two modules and at the end of teaching Informal Education, resulting in 18 interviews. Through this process, I aimed to track students’:

• development in thinking about values;

• development in their ability to articulate what they understand by values;

• awareness of what their own values were and to what extent they were able to reflect on them;

• awareness of what had influenced/informed their development of these values and how consciously they had constructed and owned their value-base;

• developing knowledge about the values of youth work and where they had drawn these ‘professional’ values from;

• ability to engage in reflection and critical dialogue about the values of youth work and their own values and the interplay between the two;

• capacity for professional wisdom in the way they were able to think about complex situations in their own work and the work of others;

For each stage of interviews, I sought to create a friendly and informal atmosphere, to reduce participants’ fear of judgement, and to increase trust and openness (Cohen, Manion & Morrison, 2011:421-2). I devised a semi-structured interview guide, used a flexible, open- ended and discursive approach in the interviews with the participants, allowing for exploration of meanings and intentions. The interview structure framed the topic of the interview clearly for participants, focusing responses around the topic of values to generate data relevant to the research question. However, in keeping with a qualitative approach to research, I encouraged rich and detailed answers, giving space for longer answers, allowing participants time to think and working with the topics and answers participants considered important to tell me. The use of follow-up or ‘exploratory’ questions helped elicit more detailed answers from students, enabling their meaning to be explored in greater depth. I aimed to work through the guide questions in order, but this did not always make sense in the context of the interview and what participants had already said in answer to previous questions, so I worked with what participants discussed and what felt most appropriate in the moment and sought to ensure we had covered all the questions by the end of the interview (Bryman, 2008:438; Radnor, 1994:17).

A similar set of ‘framing questions’ were used at each stage of the interview process to track changes in response, although the first interview also included questions about the students, including basics about themselves and what motivated them to get involved in youth and community work, a question to elicit information about their values.

Pilot Interview

A pilot interview with a willing student from Group A revealed a number of issues in the interview schedule, enabling me to refine it and prepare and ask questions in a way that was more helpful to the participants and more useful for the research. For example, the question ‘tell me about yourself’ was too general, and did not give the interviewee enough of a framework to understand the information I was seeking. I addressed this in the interviews proper by writing broad areas of interest on a card, to which participants could refer.

Much consideration was given to how and where in the schedule to ask the question, ‘how would you describe what ‘values’ are?’. The pilot interviewee reported finding this question challenging, despite giving what I considered was a solid response. However, reflection at the end of the interview revealed why this was. Earlier in the interview, I had asked the student about his personal values, and had then, at his request, outlined what I meant by

values – he admitted he had simply referred back to my definition in his answer! This was important learning for me. Despite being cautious about beginning with what might seem like an ‘exam test’ question with a ‘correct’ response, I chose to ask the question ‘How would you describe what ‘values’ are?’ before other questions on values: and, if it was appropriate, to recognise the abstract and challenging nature of the question, in order to minimise the idea of a ‘correct’ response. This approach also enabled me to explore whether students became more comfortable and confident in answering this question in successive interviews.

As a result of the pilot interviews, I also decided to make basic notes during the interview as prompts for myself of anything I might want to explore more fully within the interview.

Stage 1 Interviews

I interviewed the six students of Group B prior to teaching them Advocacy. I aimed to put the participants at their ease in this interview, particularly in the light of my role as ‘lecturer’ and of the nature of the early question about ‘values’, which might possibly appear like a test. I felt a more relaxed atmosphere would better enable participants to talk freely and give detailed answers to questions. After general introductions and administration, the Stage 1 interviews began by asking students for a brief ‘pen picture’ of the themselves, followed by their ‘youth work story’ (see the first question in Table 5.). I wrote these brief bullet points on a card, outlining the ‘basic’ information I was looking for: the students had the card to refer to as they answered the question, giving them a clearer guide as to the information I sought, whilst also encouraging space to talk in some depth about their journey into youth work. This elicited rich data about what motivated students to become involved in youth work in the first place and what guided their decisions as to the course they chose and their work placement, revealing something of their starting value base. From there, I asked participants the ‘core’ interview questions about values, as outlined in Table 5.

Typically, each answer involved a number of clarifications and exploratory questions to ensure I had correctly understood participants’ meanings. Occasionally students gave answers to one question that were relevant to another, particularly when they used their practice to explain their personal values.

Table 5: Flexible Question Schedule for Stage 1 Interviews Key Theme Exploratory Question

Student’s ‘Pen Picture’ and Youth

Work ‘Story’

Please introduce yourself including the following information; • name, age, gender, ethnicity

• how long in youth work?

• youth work experience, where and what? • why the NTC course?

• where you work now – why there?

• what motivated you to get involved in youth work? • anything else you think is important to you?

What are Values? What do you understand by the term values – how would you define

or describe what values are?

Personal Values What values, beliefs, ideas or principles are important to you in living

your life? (where are these from? influences? changes?)

Youth Work Values What do you think are the core professional values in youth work? (principles/ commitments? what does that mean to you? Can you give me an example?)

Connection between Personal

and Professional Values

When you think about your personal values and the professional values of youth work, how you feel they fit together? (do you feel they sit comfortably together, do you feel any points of tension or conflict?)

Values-in-Action Can you tell me about a piece of work or a situation you were in as a

youth worker where you were particularly aware of drawing on values to help you think and act?

Values-in-Theory Please can you read through this youth work scenario and tell me

what you think about it and the values involved.

Stage 2 and 3 Interviews

I interviewed the same students before teaching them Informal Education, in September 2010 and then after their exams / end of term in June 2011 (or in the case of two participants, November 2011). Each interview began with re-connecting, a general catch up and research administration. This was followed in Interview 2 by asking a process question about the interviews: how students felt the relationship that was now established between us as lecturer and student (through the first Advocacy module) would impact the research process and vice versa. I also asked this question at the end of the third interview, as a reflection on the whole process. This teacher/researcher and student/participant dynamic is explored further below in Section 4.6 on ethics and reflexivity.

In both the Stage 2 and 3 interviews (see Table 6), students were asked to reflect on what had changed for them since our last interview, in their life / work / placement situations and also whether there had been any ‘significant learning moments’ that stood out to them. I then followed the same schedule as for the Stage 1 interviews. After each answer, I showed the participants a summary of their answers from the previous (Stage 1 and 2) interview(s) and I asked them to use these to reflect on their understanding of their development. This produced some very interesting material about student perceptions of their learning and change over time.

In the final Stage 3 interview, I asked the participants to reflect on the whole research, particularly on the impact of my dual roles as teacher / researcher, and on the process of reviewing a ‘previous snapshot’ of themselves, through reflecting on the previous answers they had given. I also asked students to offer any feedback they wanted to about the course, and the Advocacy module in particular, thinking about what had been helpful and where they might like to suggest changes. These questions are listed at the end of Table 6.

Table 6: Flexible Question Schedule for Stage 2 and 3 Interviews Key Theme Exploratory Question

STAGE 2 ONLY Reflection on Interview Process

How do you feel about this interview now that we have an established relationship as student / lecturer? Do you think this dynamic affects how you might respond as a research participant?

STAGES 2 and 3 Core Research Questions

Changes Since Last Interview

a) Thinking back to the last interview, has anything changed for you in your practical circumstances that you consider important?

b) Thinking about your time in college and placement, do any particular points of learning stand out to you? Has anything

changed for you? Eg. any ‘light-bulb’ moments, particular readings, theory or incidents which have stayed with you? Can you explain and how they have influenced you / your practice?

What are Values? a) What do you understand by the term values – how would you define or describe what values are?

b) This is how you described values in the previous (two) interview(s). What are your thoughts/reflections on your previous answer? If you think there is a difference, what is different and why?

Personal Values a) What are your personal values? beliefs, ideas or principles that are important to you in living your life? Are you aware of any changes from previous interviews? If so, what has changed and why?

on your previous answer? If you think there is a difference, what is different and why?

Youth Work Values

a) What are the core professional values in youth work? (principles/ commitments? what does that mean to you? Can you give me an example?)

b) This is what you said previously. What are your thoughts/reflections on your previous answer? If you think there is a difference, what is different and why?

Connection between Personal and

Professional Values

a) When you think about your personal values and the professional values of youth work, how you feel they fit together? (do you feel they sit comfortably together, do you feel any points of tension or conflict?) Is this any different to how you have felt previously? b) This is what you said previously. What are your thoughts/reflections

on your previous answer? If you think there is a difference, what is different and why?

Values-in-Action a) Can you tell me about a piece of work or a situation you were in as a youth worker where you were particularly aware of drawing on values to help you think and act?

b) In your previous interview(s) you talked about this / these situations. What are your thoughts on these now?

Values-in-Theory a) Here is the youth work scenario we looked at last time. Please can you read through it again to remind yourself and tell me what you think about it, the values involved and what you might do now, were you in this situation?

b) This is what you said previously. What are your thoughts/reflections on your previous answer? If you think there is a difference in how you would think / act about this, what is different and why?

Stage 3 ONLY Additional Questions at the end of Stage 3 Interview

Reflection on Developmental

Journey

Thinking back to the start of your youth work training, in what ways do you think you have developed and how has this development occurred?

What helped? What do you think were helpful elements of the Youth Ministry Course?

Particularly in helping you develop your professional values? Eg. modules, specific teaching and learning strategies?

Research Process What are your reflections on the overall process of these interviews? Do you think my dual role of both lecturer and researcher impacted the research process – and if so, how?