Pacientes incluidos

migrant children in Ireland?”: a justification

This was a qualitative, grounded theory study that explored the experiences of African migrant children in Ireland. The research question was answered through data collected by observations, focus group discussions and one-to-one semi-structured interviews’ method and analysed by use of grounded theory method.

Answering this research question ‘What are the experiences of African migrant children in Ireland?” addressed by this study entailed in-depth data analysis of qualitative data. Qualitative research method techniques in general are tedious, time consuming, and dependent on the skills and sensitivities of the analyst. This renders the users of this technique susceptible to under-analysing and also to methodological muddling (Wells, 1995). When misapplied, an interpretative approach can lead to intellectual imperialism whereby the participant’s views or voice is masked over by the interpretation of the researcher. As a novice researcher, I deemed it important to adhere to good application of qualitative methodology in an attempt to reach at the best understandings on the subject under study but also to offer an opportunity to demonstrate trustworthiness and rigour of work in regard to coherence and logic, showing systematic work, ethical integrity and relevance which are all central concepts of quality research (Ballinger, 2006; Finlay, 2003; Lincoln and Guba, 1985). The attraction of grounded theory method

in particular, Strauss & Corbin (1994) form of grounded theory, was due to its well laid out systematic and rigorous guidelines on data collection and analyzing techniques.

Grounded theory analysis was developed by Glaser and Strauss in the 1960s during their collaboration on a qualitative inquiry into dying in hospitals (Glaser and Strauss, 1965, 1967, 1968; Strauss and Glaser, 1970). The method places emphasis on everyday interactions between people due to its symbolic interactionist foundations (Cooley 1864-1929; Mead 1863-1931). Symbolic interactionalism views individuals as purposeful in their actions and acting and reacting to environmental cues, objects & others according to the meaning these hold for them (Schwandt, 1994). Methodologically, grounded theory requires the researcher to enter the worlds of those under study in order to observe the actor’s environment and the interactions and interpretations that occur. My position as a migrant who shared migration experiences with the study population, as an African who shared cultural meanings of experiences with the study population, and as a resident in the area of study had a good fit with the research method and this acted as a deciding factor in choosing grounded theory method.

Glaser (2002) states that the purpose of grounded theory is to identify and explain an ongoing behaviour in which people engage-in whereby participants’ perspectives are explored not from a descriptive or interpretive approach, but with an aim to raising these perspectives to a conceptual level (Glaser, 2002). He sees the role of the researcher as one of discovering and processing the substantive phenomenon under study. This objective positioning of the researcher in his view is an attempt at privileging participants’ main concern over the professional concerns of the researcher (Glaser, 2002). Charmaz (2003, 2006) is critical of this stance that purport to discover

latent patterns of behaviour within the data. As an epistemological stance, her proffered constructivist grounded theory asserts that individuals’ construct reality as they assign meaning to the world around them. The implication is that it is not possible to measure or capture an objective truth through research enquiry. Strauss parted ways with Glazer and diverged towards a subjectivist & transactional epistemology. Strauss & Corbin (1989) acknowledged that the researcher, his or her knowledge, hypothesis formulation, data analysis and even the analyst themselves are all crucially significant interacts in the research process (Strauss & Corbin, 1994). In their view, doing analysis is in fact, making interpretations and these interpretation must be based on “multiple perspectives” which being embedded in the historical moment are always only provisional (Strauss & Corbin, 1994, p.280). This claim can be linked to pragmatism, whereby current truth, meaning and knowledge are viewed as tentative and as changing over time since organisms are constantly adapting to new situations and environments (James, 1995). Strauss and Corbin (1994) form of grounded theory was therefore deemed more aligned to the pragmatic stance guiding the current study. Within the context of the pragmatic stance that guided the current research, I deemed the observation method as key at the exploratory stage of the study whereby observed common patterns of experiences could guide the grounded theory study methodology in terms of identifying key concepts to be followed. In addition, by being familiar and open to African/Western well-being concepts and theories, I judged that I was open to plausible interpretations of observed behaviour from either perspective or in recognising emergent unfamiliar concepts, and this would guide the study methodology going forward. However, I was aware that observation as a data collection method had limitations such as difficulty in determining the exact cause of behaviour in some instances, particularly in view of the heterogeneity of the African cultural group. Also,

the possibility of observer bias where observers see what they expect to see or record the most eye catching behaviours which may not be necessarily the most relevant behaviour (Goodwin, 2004).Hancock (1998) has proposed that observation method is best used alongside other methods that involve asking people why they act or think as they do so as to provide clues about motivations behind actions. Therefore, focus group and one-to-one interviews’ forms of data collection were also used. Focus group discussions with mothers proved useful in exploring diverse people’s experiences and explanations given to the experiences. There was also an added advantage of using focus group discussions in that the data collection method encourages participants to talk to one another, commenting on each other’s experiences and points of view (Kitzinger, 1995). Key aspects of experiences highlighted in focus group discussions were followed up in one-to-one semi-structured interviews. The interview method is consistent with patterns of oral history in most African traditions and was therefore well suited as a data collection method. The interview participants showed keen interest in the research topic and actively engaged in in-depth discussions on particular experiences of the study population. The one-to-one interview method also allowed the necessary researcher-researched trust and familiarity to develop in order to build on data collected and to further elicit rich and culturally meaningful data. The semi-structured nature of interviews facilitated the flow of participants’ expressions, but at the same time, allowed the researcher an amount of control over the thematic structure of the interviews. It also gave leeway to the respondent(s) to elaborate or air related issues to the subject under discussion that may not even have been raised by the interviewer.

4.4.1.1. Methods

(i). Participants. 26 participants took part in the study (African mothers, N=14; African children, N=10; African fathers, N=2).

A summary of social-demographic variables of study participants is given in table 2. Table 2

Summary of socio-demographic characteristics of participants (N=26)

Characteristics NIBC IBC RC Mothers Fathers

Number 4 4 2 14 2

Age 13-17 13 - 18 17 & 18 Between

25-58 Between 30-45 Sex: Female Sex: Male 2 2 2 2 1 1 14 2 Country of Origin Kenya Somali Nigeria Ivory Coast Kenya Zimbabwe Nigeria Cameroon Ivory Coast Uganda Kenya Uganda Nigeria Ghana Cameroon Ivory Coast Zimbabwe South Africa Congo Cameroon Nigeria

Note. NIBC = Non-Irish Born Children, IBC = Irish Born Children, RC = Reunited children

Participating African children were sampled from categories of children born in Ireland, those who relocated to Ireland with parent(s)/guardian(s) and reunited children who had been separated from their parent(s)/guardian(s).

Purposeful sampling of participants was undertaken. Two schools in cork were chosen for observation due to the convenience afforded by the fact that I had children in each of the schools and therefore observations could be made during routine day-to-day school runs and in course of other school related activities. Two African hair dressing salons and two ethnic shops in cork were also chosen because these venues served as place of business as well as social networking venues and therefore availed opportunities to observe behaviour during varied activities and events in these venues. Two African dominated churches in cork were also chosen because they had a huge following of African ethnicities, had varied church activities each day of the week inclusive of children and youth group meetings, choirs and events, evening prayer meetings, healing ceremonies and very contemporary worship services. These two churches therefore offered opportunities to observe a wide range of activities, age groups, and across within group African ethnicities. African social and cultural events such as church ceremonies, birthday parties, naming ceremonies, weddings and death rituals were chosen because as a member of the African ethnic group, I was able to gain access to these events.

Within grounded theory method, there is no set sample size, nor are limits set on the number of participants or data sources, just sampling for saturation and completeness, which results in an ideational sample as opposed to a representative sample (Straus & Corbin 1990). The goal of theoretical sampling is not to capture a representative view of all possible variations, but to gain a deeper understanding of analysed cases so as to

facilitate the development of the analytical frame (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Informal focus group discussions were held with African migrant mothers so as to get a general idea of how they perceived their children to be doing in their day-to-day activities and practices. Focus group discussion participants were recruited conveniently on the basis of accessibility through different gateways such as my social networks, ethnic community networks, churches, youth groups, African shops and salons. The mothers reported that teenage Irish born African children were perceived to be doing well in their day-to-day activities at school and neighbourhoods but to constantly question parental authority and/or home practices often resulting in parental/child conflicts. School going children who relocated with their parents or guardians (4 ≤ 13) were perceived to have experienced difficulties adjusting in schools and in some cases, in neighbourhoods but to be more compliant with parental authority and/or home practices. Children who were reunited with parents or guardians in their teenage years after long separations (mainly 14+) were reported to have experienced difficulties at school, neighbourhoods and even at home. Sampling was therefore purposive whereby participants were selected based on the potential contribution of participants. Sampling started with mothers (sampled those with children born here, both young and older kids, those who relocated with children both young (pre-school) and at an older age (school – going). Guided by the literature and emerging findings from focus group discussions with mothers, purposeful sampling of children born in Ireland, those who relocated while young (< 4yrs), relocated while older (4<13) and relocated in teenage years (14+) was undertaken. The sampling frame incorporated a gender consideration in regard to African migrant children by including fathers to compensate for neglect of father’s voices in studies on experiences of migrant children and families in the literature. The fathers interviewed were purposefully sampled among the social networks of mothers’

who had participated in focus group discussions. There is a great deal of work on migrant children in Irish schools and therefore this study did not focus on school teachers’. The goal of theoretical sampling is not to capture a representative view of all possible variations, but to gain a deeper understanding of analysed cases so as to facilitate the development of the analytical frame (Glaser & Strauss, 1967).

Sampling for interview participants was coherent with the general guidelines of grounded theory, which tend to be within the range of twenty to fifty participants (Creswell, 1998; Morse, 1994). Skudol-Wilson & Ambler-Hutchinson (1996) propose that an interview sample size of twelve be the minimum requirement for any GT study. Riley (1996) notes from the literature that most studies achieve saturation between 8-24 interviews depending on the topic of focus.

Spradley (1979: p. 25-26) lists the qualities of an excellent participant as those who are experts in the experience under investigation, willing to participate, have the time to share the necessary information, are reflective, willing and able to speak articulately. I took these guidelines into consideration while recruiting participants.

(ii). Materials. Information sheet and consent forms; schedule of observation field notes, a field diary, focus group and one-to-one interview schedules.

The information sheet contained a brief outline of the aims and justifications of the present study and explained to participants why they were being invited to take part. It also contained the information describing what they would be required to do if they decided to participate. This included the types of data to be collected, confidentiality and anonymity conditions associated with the data, how the data will be used and planned outcomes, and potential benefits of the research.

The consent form contained information on willingness to participate and right to withdraw from the study at any time if they so desired, time commitment expected from participants, and my name and contact details.

The schedule of observation field notes laid out the focus of the observations such as: how children behaved at home, with peers (ethnic and non-ethnic), with adults (ethnic and non-ethnic), with authority figures (ethnic & non-ethnic), how they related and interacted with others in social cultural activities and events inclusive of how they dressed, language(s) spoken, food/drinks and forms of entertainment preferences.

A field diary was used to record field notes and detailed date of observations, time, event/activity and length of observation (in time units).

Focus-group discussion schedule. The schedule was really unstructured. It laid out the topic to be discussed by mothers ‘how their children are doing at home, in their schools and in their community (including African ethnic community settings’. This gave leeway to African mothers to angle in on matters that they perceived to be of concern to them in regard to children’s experiences in Ireland or prior to migrating. This way, participants had leeway to zone in on themes that were of concern to them, elaborate or relate them to other issues on the subject under discussion. Probes such as: what is difficult here for you and your children (home, school, outside); what do you and/or your children like about being here; and what is different here from what you are used to at home were also included in the schedule. Other probes included were do you find any difference in experiences between boys and girls? and do you find any difference in experiences between older and younger children? and/or between children born in Ireland and those who migrated with parents or reunited with families?

fathers was really semi-structured. The children/youth interviewed were asked to talk about life at home, in school, in their neighbourhood, after school activities, and any activities that they engage in on weekends and school holidays. Probes included in the schedule were mainly on: what they liked about being in Ireland & what they did not like; what they liked at home and what they did not like; what they liked at school and what they did not like; what they liked about their neighbourhood and what they did not like. Other questions asked children to talk about relations with family members and friends here, back home and elsewhere abroad and about their peers at school and in their neighbourhoods. The same line of interview questioning was used with the African fathers interviewed but with a focus on their parenting roles, family structures and routines and ways in which these compared to home setting’s family dynamics. Probes were focussed on parent/child relationships and/or father’s perspective on child’s behaviour at home, school, in their neighbourhood, in ethnic community networks and structures and in regard to social relationships that the child was engaged in.

(iii). Procedure. Study I data collection was undertaken in Cork county over a six- month period in 2009.

Multi-sited field observations. I was able to gain access to a lot of social and cultural events such as church ceremonies, birthday parties, naming ceremonies, weddings and death rituals where I was able to approach the setting smoothly with minimal disruptions. Also as a parent of school going children, I could make observations during school runs and in school events and record and analyse the behaviour of participants as they related and interacted with others in these settings. At special functions, where I attended in the capacity of an invited guest, I made it known to other attendees that I was attending in the capacity of an invited guest like the rest of them but also in the capacity of a researcher undertaking research on the experiences of African migrant

children. I had some ideas as to what to observe but some ideas changed over the observation period. I kept a notepad in my bag at all times to record observations as they were ongoing or immediately afterwards depending on context of observations and writing logistics. Field notes were written as closely as possible in time to when events were observed to ensure that details are not lost to memory. I adhered to guidelines provided in the literature on minimising biases such as familiarising myself with social and cultural practices of within-group events and activities in order to gain perspective (Hancock, 1998). I often asked questions or elaboration or explanations when confronted with unfamiliar practices or meanings, particularly in view of the heterogeneity of the African cultural group.

Focus-group discussions. I carried out two focus group discussions with African migrant mothers (8 & 6). Both focus group discussions were held in venues that were mutually agreed between the researchers and the study participants. At the beginning of the interview, I presented to focus group participants an information sheet explaining the nature of the study and a statement of informed consent. I talked the participants through the information contained in the sheet after which they signed the consent forms. The focus group schedule was really unstructured in-order to give leeway to the African mothers to zone in on matters that they perceived to be key factors in shaping the experiences of their children. I recorded the focus group discussion, with consent of the participants. The first focus group discussion lasted one and a half hours, while the second one lasted one hour. There was a proper debriefing after each session. No arising matters of concern were identified.